As the election heads into its final four days, we're looking at a pretty good position for Obama. The McCain folks talk about how the race is tightening, and Drudge and Fox News cherry-pick the best poll results for the GOP, but thinks are looking pretty good.
The overall polling shows Obama up by about six points, which is slightly tighter than the 8 point lead he had last week.
Although the race has tightened slightly, there's no indication that McCain has done anything to fundamentally alter the dynamics of the race that have been in play since the economic downturn began. Voters appear to be voting on the basis of the economy, and they prefer Obama's approach to McCain's.
In terms of field operations, I've written about how impressed I've been with the Obama offices in PA- their efforts absolutely dwarf what we put together in Ft. Lauderdale for Gore in 2000. In response, McCain is actually cutting back GOTV from the 2004 Bush operation:
The vaunted, 72-hour plan that President Bush used to mobilize voters in 2000 and 2004 has been scaled back for McCain. He has spent half as much as Obama on staffing and has opened far fewer field offices. This week, a number of veteran GOP operatives who orchestrate door-to-door efforts to get voters to the polls were told they should not expect to receive plane tickets, rental cars or hotel rooms from the campaign.
Most importantly, Obama has many more paths to victory than McCain. If you take Obama's baseline as the Kerry states plus Iowa, (which are all pretty much polling in double digits for him), he can win the following ways: win any one of VA, OH, FL or NC; or pick up any two of CO, NM, NV or MO (although getting NM and NV would put him at 269 votes, which would throw the race to the House- a win, but a messy one). So essentially, McCain must win VA, OH, FL and NC (all states where the polls show him behind or tied), and must win 3 of 4 of CO, NM, NV or MO. Even if McCain were somehow able to win PA, which is looking pretty unlikely, Obama could still win by picking up 3 or 4 of those 8 states.
Although I'm feeling (knock on wood) confident, that doesn't mean that this is a foregone conclusion. Obama's GOTV model requires volunteers to knock on millions of doors and make millions of calls in the next four days. I'm leaving for Philadelphia tomorrow morning to put my legal skills (such as they are) to work doing voter protection, and trying to sneak in some time knocking on doors. I also hope to duck out on Monday afternoon to do my favorite thing in politics- roadside visibility (e.g.- waving signs) during rush hour the day before an election.
I'll be doing my best to post on what's happening in Philly, and I have friends and colleagues who will be campaigning in Scranton, Louisiana, Ohio and Virginia- so I'll get their on-the-ground scoops as well. I'd love to post information from any of my readers during the next couple days. The word from ground-level is often better informed than what you can find in the press.
3.5 days until the polls open...
Friday, October 31, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Security Theater
Jeff Goldberg shows what a joke airport security is, and the extent to which it's entirely designed to make us feel like we're secure, while not in fact doing much at all to stop terrorists:
As I stood in the bathroom, ripping up boarding passes, waiting for the social network of male bathroom users to report my suspicious behavior, I decided to make myself as nervous as possible. I would try to pass through security with no ID, a fake boarding pass, and an Osama bin Laden T-shirt under my coat. I splashed water on my face to mimic sweat, put on a coat (it was a summer day), hid my driver’s license, and approached security with a bogus boarding pass that Schneier had made for me. I told the document checker at security that I had lost my identification but was hoping I would still be able to make my flight. He said I’d have to speak to a supervisor. The supervisor arrived; he looked smart, unfortunately. I was starting to get genuinely nervous, which I hoped would generate incriminating micro-expressions. “I can’t find my driver’s license,” I said. I showed him my fake boarding pass. “I need to get to Washington quickly,” I added. He asked me if I had any other identification. I showed him a credit card with my name on it, a library card, and a health-insurance card. “Nothing else?” he asked.
“No,” I said.
“You should really travel with a second picture ID, you know.”
“Yes, sir,” I said.
“All right, you can go,” he said, pointing me to the X-ray line. “But let this be a lesson for you.”
As I stood in the bathroom, ripping up boarding passes, waiting for the social network of male bathroom users to report my suspicious behavior, I decided to make myself as nervous as possible. I would try to pass through security with no ID, a fake boarding pass, and an Osama bin Laden T-shirt under my coat. I splashed water on my face to mimic sweat, put on a coat (it was a summer day), hid my driver’s license, and approached security with a bogus boarding pass that Schneier had made for me. I told the document checker at security that I had lost my identification but was hoping I would still be able to make my flight. He said I’d have to speak to a supervisor. The supervisor arrived; he looked smart, unfortunately. I was starting to get genuinely nervous, which I hoped would generate incriminating micro-expressions. “I can’t find my driver’s license,” I said. I showed him my fake boarding pass. “I need to get to Washington quickly,” I added. He asked me if I had any other identification. I showed him a credit card with my name on it, a library card, and a health-insurance card. “Nothing else?” he asked.
“No,” I said.
“You should really travel with a second picture ID, you know.”
“Yes, sir,” I said.
“All right, you can go,” he said, pointing me to the X-ray line. “But let this be a lesson for you.”
Obama variety half-hour, reviewed
All in all I thought Obama's infomercial last night was pretty successful. To the extent that McCain's "spread the wealth" mantra is coded language for the idea that Obama is going to take white folks money and give it to welfare queens, this ad was a great prophylactic.
Focusing on people who are being hurt by the economic downturn- not because they're lazy or ignorant or made foolish choices- but through bad luck or because their part of the economy isn't working right any longer, makes it clear who the beneficiaries of any "wealth spreading" would be. The people highlighted last night were folks who worked hard and did their best, but were being let down by their health, the economy, or their employers. I think for anyone who watched last night, it's a tough sell to think that redistributing a bit of wealth from somebody making $250k to these folks is something to be afraid of.
Focusing on people who are being hurt by the economic downturn- not because they're lazy or ignorant or made foolish choices- but through bad luck or because their part of the economy isn't working right any longer, makes it clear who the beneficiaries of any "wealth spreading" would be. The people highlighted last night were folks who worked hard and did their best, but were being let down by their health, the economy, or their employers. I think for anyone who watched last night, it's a tough sell to think that redistributing a bit of wealth from somebody making $250k to these folks is something to be afraid of.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Murtha wants $50
I just received the following email from John Murtha's campaign:
Dear Friends,
After decades of fighting for this country and our troops, I am up against the right-wing attack machine again. Because of my work to end the Iraq war, they have thrown hundreds of thousands of dollars behind my opponent, who lives in Virginia with his family, not in my district in Pennsylvania. Now, I am suddenly being outspent 3 to 1. They are up to the same old tricks, "swiftboating" me again as they did two years ago. So I am asking people who have stood with me on Iraq to stand with me again to stop them in their tracks. Can you chip in $50 for me and a few other candidates at the link below?
Maybe it's because of the work he did to end the Iraq war... but maybe it's because he keeps going on TV and calling the voters in his district rednecks and racists...
Dear Friends,
After decades of fighting for this country and our troops, I am up against the right-wing attack machine again. Because of my work to end the Iraq war, they have thrown hundreds of thousands of dollars behind my opponent, who lives in Virginia with his family, not in my district in Pennsylvania. Now, I am suddenly being outspent 3 to 1. They are up to the same old tricks, "swiftboating" me again as they did two years ago. So I am asking people who have stood with me on Iraq to stand with me again to stop them in their tracks. Can you chip in $50 for me and a few other candidates at the link below?
Maybe it's because of the work he did to end the Iraq war... but maybe it's because he keeps going on TV and calling the voters in his district rednecks and racists...
Obama variety half-hour
Tonight at 8 we've got a half hour of "Barack Obama: American Stories" ("all new" NBC helpfully explains), which supplants the usual Wednesday 8:00 lineup of Bones, Knight Rider and The New Adventures old Christine.
I haven't watched any of these shows and thus can't really comment on whether their fans will be upset that their TV watching schedules are being disrupted. I could imagine a die-hard Bones fan settling in to watch her show, and then being somewhat annoyed that it's been bumped for an Obama commercial. I'm interested to see what Obama does with the time to make any negatives from the show-bumps worth it. One of my colleagues suggests a sports montage with inspirational music, since everyone loves a sports montage. I think maybe a half-hour preview of the Harry Potter movie that was scheduled for this Christmas and then got moved back to next summer, if "brought to you by Barack Obama" would be a big winner.
I haven't watched any of these shows and thus can't really comment on whether their fans will be upset that their TV watching schedules are being disrupted. I could imagine a die-hard Bones fan settling in to watch her show, and then being somewhat annoyed that it's been bumped for an Obama commercial. I'm interested to see what Obama does with the time to make any negatives from the show-bumps worth it. One of my colleagues suggests a sports montage with inspirational music, since everyone loves a sports montage. I think maybe a half-hour preview of the Harry Potter movie that was scheduled for this Christmas and then got moved back to next summer, if "brought to you by Barack Obama" would be a big winner.
"His Choice"
Obama is up with a new ad that directly raises, for the first time, the problems with McCain's Palin pick:
I think this is a pretty hard-hitting ad, and using McCain's own words makes it even more so. But really, is it wise to make this kind of move with less than a week left? It seems like Obama basically needs to keep making the points he's making, get the GOTV operation in gear, and run out the clock. This ad feels a little risky... not sure how many people need this point directly made to them (as the media's done a pretty good job of making it) and runs the risk of a backlash. These guys usually have good instincts, but I'm not sure about this.
I think this is a pretty hard-hitting ad, and using McCain's own words makes it even more so. But really, is it wise to make this kind of move with less than a week left? It seems like Obama basically needs to keep making the points he's making, get the GOTV operation in gear, and run out the clock. This ad feels a little risky... not sure how many people need this point directly made to them (as the media's done a pretty good job of making it) and runs the risk of a backlash. These guys usually have good instincts, but I'm not sure about this.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Team of Mavericks has some teamwork issues
From Rob Draper at GQ:
On the other hand, it had to be hard for Sarah Palin—who has achieved all she’s achieved with a highly personal touch—to take all this ridicule under an enforced gag order. After being introduced to the world as one of the “Team of Mavericks,” she’s admonished not to be one. She’s being called out by some McCainites for not cleaving to all of the senator’s positions. The Republicans who fawned over her superstar looks are now shocked—shocked!—to learn that her much-admired wardrobe has been purchased with RNC funds. I’ve heard from one well-placed source that McCain has snubbed her on one long bus ride aboard the Straight Talk Express, to the embarrassment of those sitting nearby. It has surely been implied to the governor that she should be eternally grateful to have been plucked from obscurity. And yet the high water mark of John McCain’s campaign for the presidency unquestionably began on September 3, when Palin gave her nomination speech.
Seriously, he snubbed her on the bus? Well, at least the campaign is graduating from the nursery school of "Joe the Plumber" and "Tito the Builder" into middle school...
On the other hand, it had to be hard for Sarah Palin—who has achieved all she’s achieved with a highly personal touch—to take all this ridicule under an enforced gag order. After being introduced to the world as one of the “Team of Mavericks,” she’s admonished not to be one. She’s being called out by some McCainites for not cleaving to all of the senator’s positions. The Republicans who fawned over her superstar looks are now shocked—shocked!—to learn that her much-admired wardrobe has been purchased with RNC funds. I’ve heard from one well-placed source that McCain has snubbed her on one long bus ride aboard the Straight Talk Express, to the embarrassment of those sitting nearby. It has surely been implied to the governor that she should be eternally grateful to have been plucked from obscurity. And yet the high water mark of John McCain’s campaign for the presidency unquestionably began on September 3, when Palin gave her nomination speech.
Seriously, he snubbed her on the bus? Well, at least the campaign is graduating from the nursery school of "Joe the Plumber" and "Tito the Builder" into middle school...
Barkley 2014
Charles Barkley has declared his candidacy for the governorship of Alabama in... 2014? Maybe I'm missing something, but that seems like a bit of a wait. Bob Riley, the current governor, is up for re-election in 2010 (if Alabama governors can run for a 3rd term). So presumably Barkley plans to run against a 4th term Riley, or whoever beats Riley?
Why the race would be worth following?
He added that his native state could only improve. "We are number 48 in everything and Arkansas and Mississippi aren't going anywhere," Barkley said.
Why the race would be worth following?
He added that his native state could only improve. "We are number 48 in everything and Arkansas and Mississippi aren't going anywhere," Barkley said.
Monday, October 27, 2008
And the show has reached a new low (pt. 2)
Mitch McConnell's campaign is apparently filing charges of petty larceny against his Democratic opponent, Bruce Lunsford, after Lunsford confiscated a small tape recorder that a McConnell staffer hid in Lunsford's podium during a recent debate in an attempt to record any soto voce comments made by the Democrat.
Progressive Conservatives
David Brooks' op-ed piece this weekend on McCain's failure to reach out to the centrists is required reading for anyone interested in American politics. Ignoring Brooks' assertions that McCain would be an "outstanding president," there is a succint summary of a centrist governing philosophy that can really drive the Democrats (and the nation) forward, and is steeped in pragmatism:
There are two major political parties in America, but there are at least three major political tendencies. The first is orthodox liberalism, a belief in using government to maximize equality. The second is free-market conservatism, the belief in limiting government to maximize freedom.
But there is a third tendency, which floats between. It is for using limited but energetic government to enhance social mobility. This tendency began with Alexander Hamilton, who created a vibrant national economy so more people could rise and succeed. It matured with Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War Republicans, who created the Land Grant College Act and the Homestead Act to give people the tools to pursue their ambitions. It continued with Theodore Roosevelt, who busted the trusts to give more Americans a square deal.
This is a governing philosophy that understands that our duty to each other is to make sure that everyone is at roughly the same starting line, not that everybody has to finish at the same place. It understands that we can't let children lose their opportunity in life because of the failures of their parents.
I think Brooks and I might part ways on the level of government activity necessary to enhance social mobility, particularly with regard to the kind of investments we need in education to put kids from poor families on the same footing starting out in life as those from more wealthy families. Ultimately the more the country coalesces around this kind of governing philosophy (and leaves fights over "spreading the wealth" and "welfare queens" back in the '80s), the better off we'll all be.
Hat tip to TS on Facebook for bringing the piece to my attention.
There are two major political parties in America, but there are at least three major political tendencies. The first is orthodox liberalism, a belief in using government to maximize equality. The second is free-market conservatism, the belief in limiting government to maximize freedom.
But there is a third tendency, which floats between. It is for using limited but energetic government to enhance social mobility. This tendency began with Alexander Hamilton, who created a vibrant national economy so more people could rise and succeed. It matured with Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War Republicans, who created the Land Grant College Act and the Homestead Act to give people the tools to pursue their ambitions. It continued with Theodore Roosevelt, who busted the trusts to give more Americans a square deal.
This is a governing philosophy that understands that our duty to each other is to make sure that everyone is at roughly the same starting line, not that everybody has to finish at the same place. It understands that we can't let children lose their opportunity in life because of the failures of their parents.
I think Brooks and I might part ways on the level of government activity necessary to enhance social mobility, particularly with regard to the kind of investments we need in education to put kids from poor families on the same footing starting out in life as those from more wealthy families. Ultimately the more the country coalesces around this kind of governing philosophy (and leaves fights over "spreading the wealth" and "welfare queens" back in the '80s), the better off we'll all be.
Hat tip to TS on Facebook for bringing the piece to my attention.
Joe the Congressional Candidate
Briefing Room reports that Sam "Joe the Plumber" Wurzelbacher is mulling a run for congress in 2010, and already has up right-wing talk radiatrix Laura Ingraham volunteering to do his PR. The depressing thing is that, after seeing the general congressional bafflement at the economic crisis, electing somebody who doesn't know the difference between net and gross income probably would not seriously decrease the overall economic competency of the House.
Syria
The AP is reporting that over the weekend US forces launched an attack into Syria using Army Helicopters:
"We are taking matters into our own hands," the official told The Associated Press in Washington, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivity of cross-border raids.
The attack came just days after the commander of U.S. forces in western Iraq said American troops were redoubling efforts to secure the Syrian border, which he called an "uncontrolled" gateway for fighters entering Iraq
A Syrian government statement said the helicopters attacked the Sukkariyeh Farm near the town of Abu Kamal, five miles inside the Syrian border. Four helicopters attacked a civilian building under construction shortly before sundown and fired on workers inside, the statement said.
The government said civilians were among the dead, including four children.
A resident of the nearby village of Hwijeh said some of the helicopters landed and troops exited the aircraft and fired on a building. He said the aircraft flew along the Euphrates River into the area of farms and several brick factories. The witness spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information.
Now I realize the Syrian government is totally perfidious and is trying to use this attack to make us look bad, and that government is the source of the news about the dead civilians and children.
On the other hand, we're going to need Syrian government cooperation as part of some kind of regional concert to keep the situation in Iraq reasonably contained as we draw down troops, and this sort of attack isn't helpful. I understand that we want to protect our troops in Iraq, and stem the flow of foreign fighters and materiel into the war zone, but I have to imagine there are better ways to go about it than this.
I don't see why we couldn't have predator drones or a geosynched satellite keep an eye on the farm that we targeted, and then hit the fighters when they crossed into Iraq, thus not having to actually fire weapons in Syria. I'm by no means a soveriegnty absolutist- I have no problem with targetting bin Laden in tribal areas of Pakistan, because that's where he's holed up. On the other hand, breaching sovereignty carries a cost, and if we knew that bin Laden was routinely crossing into Afghanistan probably the thing to do would be to wait until he gets out of Pakistan to hit him. Unless there were significant caches of arms at the targeted Syrian farm, or some reason that the farm itself needed to be destroyed, why not just wait until the guys we actually want to kill (and we want to kill them because they're going into Iraq) actually go into Iraq?
"We are taking matters into our own hands," the official told The Associated Press in Washington, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the political sensitivity of cross-border raids.
The attack came just days after the commander of U.S. forces in western Iraq said American troops were redoubling efforts to secure the Syrian border, which he called an "uncontrolled" gateway for fighters entering Iraq
A Syrian government statement said the helicopters attacked the Sukkariyeh Farm near the town of Abu Kamal, five miles inside the Syrian border. Four helicopters attacked a civilian building under construction shortly before sundown and fired on workers inside, the statement said.
The government said civilians were among the dead, including four children.
A resident of the nearby village of Hwijeh said some of the helicopters landed and troops exited the aircraft and fired on a building. He said the aircraft flew along the Euphrates River into the area of farms and several brick factories. The witness spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information.
Now I realize the Syrian government is totally perfidious and is trying to use this attack to make us look bad, and that government is the source of the news about the dead civilians and children.
On the other hand, we're going to need Syrian government cooperation as part of some kind of regional concert to keep the situation in Iraq reasonably contained as we draw down troops, and this sort of attack isn't helpful. I understand that we want to protect our troops in Iraq, and stem the flow of foreign fighters and materiel into the war zone, but I have to imagine there are better ways to go about it than this.
I don't see why we couldn't have predator drones or a geosynched satellite keep an eye on the farm that we targeted, and then hit the fighters when they crossed into Iraq, thus not having to actually fire weapons in Syria. I'm by no means a soveriegnty absolutist- I have no problem with targetting bin Laden in tribal areas of Pakistan, because that's where he's holed up. On the other hand, breaching sovereignty carries a cost, and if we knew that bin Laden was routinely crossing into Afghanistan probably the thing to do would be to wait until he gets out of Pakistan to hit him. Unless there were significant caches of arms at the targeted Syrian farm, or some reason that the farm itself needed to be destroyed, why not just wait until the guys we actually want to kill (and we want to kill them because they're going into Iraq) actually go into Iraq?
"I'm going to test them"
From the Chicago Tribune:
McCain, meanwhile, seized on remarks by Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, about the possibility an international crisis if the junior senator is elected, as the world tests him, just as John F. Kennedy was tested by the Cuban missile crisis.
"They may want to test Sen. Obama. I've been tested," McCain said. "I'm going to test them. They're not going to test me. The next president won't have time to get used to the office."
McCain isn't really making sense here. Presumably the sentence "the next president won't have time to get used to the office" applies equally to both McCain and Obama, as to my knowledge McCain has not spent any time as President.
And what does he mean by "I'm going to test them"? He's going to test the world's patience by starting another unilateral war?
McCain, meanwhile, seized on remarks by Obama's running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, about the possibility an international crisis if the junior senator is elected, as the world tests him, just as John F. Kennedy was tested by the Cuban missile crisis.
"They may want to test Sen. Obama. I've been tested," McCain said. "I'm going to test them. They're not going to test me. The next president won't have time to get used to the office."
McCain isn't really making sense here. Presumably the sentence "the next president won't have time to get used to the office" applies equally to both McCain and Obama, as to my knowledge McCain has not spent any time as President.
And what does he mean by "I'm going to test them"? He's going to test the world's patience by starting another unilateral war?
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Lieberman on Palin
While campaigning in Connecticut, Lieberman was asked if he thought Palin was prepared to be president. His answer (via Halperin):
"thank God she's not going to have to be president from day one. McCain's going to be alive and well."
"thank God she's not going to have to be president from day one. McCain's going to be alive and well."
This does not inspire a lot of confidence...
First personally observed election screw-up of the cycle- the New York City Board of Elections yesterday sent me two absentee ballots.
I imagine that if I were to fill them both out and send them in that somebody would probably disregard the second one... but if the responsibility for disregarding the second is in the hands of the same folks who are supposed to make sure that only one ballot gets sent out in the first place...
Friday, October 24, 2008
VP Choices
A friend writes:
I was thinking about who the worst VP nominations were in history. Seen as an early test of a nominated candidate's likely governance, VPs have rarely been make-or-break. However, some have stood out as horrible. A VP nominee's job is to get the candidate elected. In my lifetime, I came up with a few who failed miserably, but first, Sarah Palin.
It is hard to know right now whether she helps or hurts McCain. Certainly, from my vantage point, she is an atrocious choice. But if McCain loses as expected, I don't think it is because of her. I think McCain would have lost anyway, and the worst she did was increase the margin in a few states. McCain threw deep on third and long with a minute six, and it was an interception. It happens. Could have been the hero, doesn't make him a goat. If McCain wins, Palin might be the best pick ever. He trailed without her, and she clearly lit up the base. If somehow that translates into a victory, she can take credit for being herself, and he can take credit for picking her.
There's still a difference between a good throw on third and long and a lousy one. McCain failed to adequately vet her, and things like the troopergate scandal and her dismal knowledge of non-Alaska policy should have been dug up beforehand. To twist the analogy a bit, the Palin pick was perhaps an interception because McCain threw off his back foot and failed to read the coverage.
The third worst might be Ferraro. Mondale didn't have a chance against Reagan in 1984, but she didn't help at all. I have a soft spot for her because of her Pepsi commercials, but her husband's troubles were such an issue that the ticket didn't even carry New York.
The second worst VP choice in my lifetime is probably Tom Eagleton. He was unfairly railroaded for going through electroshock therapy, but hey, McGovern should have known it would be a problem and not put him in the spotlight. I'm not sure McGovern could have won anyway (incumbent president, Watergate handicap), but Eagleton made sure that any hope was completely doused.
Easily the worst choice in my lifetime was Martin Stockdale. Perot had persuaded people he was real, just quirky. People wanted to believe in him. But when that doddering old man wandered out on stage, Perot was immediately and permanently suspect as batshit crazy. I'm not sure Perot really could have won with a different choice, but it became impossible with Stockdale.
I was 12 when Perot ran the first time, and my parents are pretty dyed-in-the-wool dems, so I largely absorbed their belief that Perot was a nut. I actually remember watching the Stockdale debate and wondering how Perot was able to convince an admiral to run with him...
I was thinking about who the worst VP nominations were in history. Seen as an early test of a nominated candidate's likely governance, VPs have rarely been make-or-break. However, some have stood out as horrible. A VP nominee's job is to get the candidate elected. In my lifetime, I came up with a few who failed miserably, but first, Sarah Palin.
It is hard to know right now whether she helps or hurts McCain. Certainly, from my vantage point, she is an atrocious choice. But if McCain loses as expected, I don't think it is because of her. I think McCain would have lost anyway, and the worst she did was increase the margin in a few states. McCain threw deep on third and long with a minute six, and it was an interception. It happens. Could have been the hero, doesn't make him a goat. If McCain wins, Palin might be the best pick ever. He trailed without her, and she clearly lit up the base. If somehow that translates into a victory, she can take credit for being herself, and he can take credit for picking her.
There's still a difference between a good throw on third and long and a lousy one. McCain failed to adequately vet her, and things like the troopergate scandal and her dismal knowledge of non-Alaska policy should have been dug up beforehand. To twist the analogy a bit, the Palin pick was perhaps an interception because McCain threw off his back foot and failed to read the coverage.
The third worst might be Ferraro. Mondale didn't have a chance against Reagan in 1984, but she didn't help at all. I have a soft spot for her because of her Pepsi commercials, but her husband's troubles were such an issue that the ticket didn't even carry New York.
The second worst VP choice in my lifetime is probably Tom Eagleton. He was unfairly railroaded for going through electroshock therapy, but hey, McGovern should have known it would be a problem and not put him in the spotlight. I'm not sure McGovern could have won anyway (incumbent president, Watergate handicap), but Eagleton made sure that any hope was completely doused.
Easily the worst choice in my lifetime was Martin Stockdale. Perot had persuaded people he was real, just quirky. People wanted to believe in him. But when that doddering old man wandered out on stage, Perot was immediately and permanently suspect as batshit crazy. I'm not sure Perot really could have won with a different choice, but it became impossible with Stockdale.
I was 12 when Perot ran the first time, and my parents are pretty dyed-in-the-wool dems, so I largely absorbed their belief that Perot was a nut. I actually remember watching the Stockdale debate and wondering how Perot was able to convince an admiral to run with him...
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Clearly an arugula-eating, pointy-headed elitist
Obama meets with ESPN's Rick Reilly for some fantasy football:
Then Sunday came. Man, did he get lucky. The guys he made us choose—Brees and Portis—went nuts. The guys I wanted, not so much. We finished 32,190th for the week. But wait! That put us in the 81.2 percentile, which means we beat four out of five teams!
Of course, he already knew. Because, like so many Americans, he was checking the fantasy stats all day, even while he was supposed to be prepping for his final debate. He e-mailed to say he wished he had followed my advice on Berrian (who smoked Marshall), but he was "pumped up" about our numbers.Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Real Americans have the RNC buy $150,000 in Clothes for them at Saks
Politico is reporting that the RNC has paid over $150k to outfit the Palin family in clothes, including:
bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.
The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.
The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.
A potential problem for Palin- this looks like it violates Federal law.
2 USC 439(a) deals with prohibited uses of campaign contributions by Federal Candidates (which includes candidates for VP). Subsection (b) of that section states the following:
(b) Prohibited use.
(1) In general. A contribution or donation described in subsection
(a) shall not be converted by any person to personal use.
(2) Conversion. For the purposes of paragraph (1), a contribution
or donation shall be considered to be converted to personal use if the contribution or amount is used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign or individual’s duties as a holder of Federal office, including—
(A) a home mortgage, rent, or utility payment;
(B) a clothing purchase;
(C) a noncampaign-related automobile expense;
(D) a country club membership;
(E) a vacation or other noncampaign-related trip;
(F) a household food item;
(G) a tuition payment;
(H) admission to a sporting event, concert, theater, or other form of entertainment not associated with an election campaign; and
(I) dues, fees, and other payments to a health club or recreational facility.
UPDATE:
(via Politico)
Campaign finance laws prohibit candidates from spending donor cash to their authorized personal campaign committee on costs “that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign,” including clothing, vacations and gym memberships.
But the law does not prohibit such expenditures by party committees, and Congress has killed legislation to expand the personal use ban to those and other types of political committees.
bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.
The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.
The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.
A potential problem for Palin- this looks like it violates Federal law.
2 USC 439(a) deals with prohibited uses of campaign contributions by Federal Candidates (which includes candidates for VP). Subsection (b) of that section states the following:
(b) Prohibited use.
(1) In general. A contribution or donation described in subsection
(a) shall not be converted by any person to personal use.
(2) Conversion. For the purposes of paragraph (1), a contribution
or donation shall be considered to be converted to personal use if the contribution or amount is used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign or individual’s duties as a holder of Federal office, including—
(A) a home mortgage, rent, or utility payment;
(B) a clothing purchase;
(C) a noncampaign-related automobile expense;
(D) a country club membership;
(E) a vacation or other noncampaign-related trip;
(F) a household food item;
(G) a tuition payment;
(H) admission to a sporting event, concert, theater, or other form of entertainment not associated with an election campaign; and
(I) dues, fees, and other payments to a health club or recreational facility.
UPDATE:
(via Politico)
Campaign finance laws prohibit candidates from spending donor cash to their authorized personal campaign committee on costs “that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign,” including clothing, vacations and gym memberships.
But the law does not prohibit such expenditures by party committees, and Congress has killed legislation to expand the personal use ban to those and other types of political committees.
It's important to read the job description BEFORE you apply
A couple years ago when I interviewed for a summer associate position at the New York office of a law firm called Linklaters. I had looked briefly on their website, and had noticed that they had a project finance practice. When I met with the partner with whom I was interviewing, he asked me what I liked about the firm, and I talked for about 10 minutes about how I was interested in project finance, and they had a great practice in that area, etc. etc. At the end of this, he stared at a spot on the wall slightly to the left of my head and told me that project finance was out of their DC office, and that they didn't do it at all in New York. Needless to say the rest of the interview was pretty short.
I was reminded of this when reading an item today describing how Sarah Palin answered a third-grader's question about what the Vice President does with the following:
That's something that Piper would ask me! ... [T]hey're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.
Now, if you went to the wikipedia site for "Vice President" you'd notice that it says that the VP "presides" over the Senate. However, you'd think that somebody actually running for VP would have read a little bit farther down the page to note that presiding over the senate is not actually at all the same as "being in charge" of the Senate.
You would also think that, given how much time Palin spends bashing Harry Reid she would have some idea of what it is that he does.
I was reminded of this when reading an item today describing how Sarah Palin answered a third-grader's question about what the Vice President does with the following:
That's something that Piper would ask me! ... [T]hey're in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.
Now, if you went to the wikipedia site for "Vice President" you'd notice that it says that the VP "presides" over the Senate. However, you'd think that somebody actually running for VP would have read a little bit farther down the page to note that presiding over the senate is not actually at all the same as "being in charge" of the Senate.
You would also think that, given how much time Palin spends bashing Harry Reid she would have some idea of what it is that he does.
More classy Republicans
More goodness from North Carolina (via Matt Yglesias)- Republican protesters line up to heckle folks who are lined up to vote early at a polling place.
North Carolina law, at § 163‑166.4, specifies a 25 to 50 foot buffer zone around the outside of a polling place where no electioneering activity can take place. Outside of that zone, there must be an area "where persons or groups of persons may distribute campaign literature, place political advertising, solicit votes, or otherwise engage in election‑related activity."
I wonder if the legislators drafting that section envisioned "election-related activity" to mean a big group of white people screaming at a line of black voters that their preferred candidate is a terrorist...
At what point does this cross the line into legitimate voter intimidation? Also, anybody want to take the over/under on how long it would take the police to bust up a large group of blacks hassling voters in a white area of North Carolina?
North Carolina law, at § 163‑166.4, specifies a 25 to 50 foot buffer zone around the outside of a polling place where no electioneering activity can take place. Outside of that zone, there must be an area "where persons or groups of persons may distribute campaign literature, place political advertising, solicit votes, or otherwise engage in election‑related activity."
I wonder if the legislators drafting that section envisioned "election-related activity" to mean a big group of white people screaming at a line of black voters that their preferred candidate is a terrorist...
At what point does this cross the line into legitimate voter intimidation? Also, anybody want to take the over/under on how long it would take the police to bust up a large group of blacks hassling voters in a white area of North Carolina?
Monday, October 20, 2008
Classy
Not content to hunt wolf cubs from airplanes, right-wing malcontents have decided to go after bears:
Maintenance workers reported about 7:45 a.m. finding a 75-pound bear cub dumped at the roundabout near the Catamount statute at the entrance to campus, said Tom Johnson, chief of university police. “It looked like it had been shot in the head as best we can tell. A couple of Obama campaign signs had been stapled together and stuck over its head,” Johnson said.
This is on top of recent reports that at an Obama rally in North Carolina, 30 cars had their tires slashed.
I remember this kind of ugliness from the 2000 recount. I was working in Ft. Lauderdale organizing volunteers for rallies and as observers for the recount, and on several occasions volunteers with whom I was working had their tires slashed. This kind of ugliness bred the "Brooks Brothers Mob" that shut down the counting in Miami over the Thanksgiving holiday. It's bad stuff. Can you imagine being a parent who brought a kid to a rally only to find your tires slashed? Or being a college freshman who finds a dead bear draped in the logo of the candidate you support? These actions hurt real people, and if anybody is tearing away the fabric of democracy, it's those who perpetrate, incite and condone actions like these.
Maintenance workers reported about 7:45 a.m. finding a 75-pound bear cub dumped at the roundabout near the Catamount statute at the entrance to campus, said Tom Johnson, chief of university police. “It looked like it had been shot in the head as best we can tell. A couple of Obama campaign signs had been stapled together and stuck over its head,” Johnson said.
This is on top of recent reports that at an Obama rally in North Carolina, 30 cars had their tires slashed.
I remember this kind of ugliness from the 2000 recount. I was working in Ft. Lauderdale organizing volunteers for rallies and as observers for the recount, and on several occasions volunteers with whom I was working had their tires slashed. This kind of ugliness bred the "Brooks Brothers Mob" that shut down the counting in Miami over the Thanksgiving holiday. It's bad stuff. Can you imagine being a parent who brought a kid to a rally only to find your tires slashed? Or being a college freshman who finds a dead bear draped in the logo of the candidate you support? These actions hurt real people, and if anybody is tearing away the fabric of democracy, it's those who perpetrate, incite and condone actions like these.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
"What if he is?"
Obama ran into some nasty and wildly uninformed folks at a diner in North Carolina today, including a Diana Fanning, who chanted "socialist, socialist socialist" at him when he entered. Fanning refused to shake his hand, and then demanded to know Obama's thoughts on a favorite trope of right-wing paranoia, the "North American Union:"
Fanning asked Obama about a North American union, and Obama responded: “Well, you know, I am opposed to it if it were happening. But it doesn’t seem to be actually be happening. The truth of the matter is there is no plans. I’ve talked to a lot of people, including folks down in Texas. There’s no plan to create a common government between Mexico, U.S. and Canada. That’s just not … that’s just not happening. I know some people have been hearing rumors about it. But as far as I can tell, that’s just not something that’s happening. We would never give up our sovereignty in that way. Any other questions?
In an interview, Fanning said, “I still think he’s a closet Muslim.”
Fanning must have missed Colin Powell's powerful words on this topic this morning:
And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president?
Fanning asked Obama about a North American union, and Obama responded: “Well, you know, I am opposed to it if it were happening. But it doesn’t seem to be actually be happening. The truth of the matter is there is no plans. I’ve talked to a lot of people, including folks down in Texas. There’s no plan to create a common government between Mexico, U.S. and Canada. That’s just not … that’s just not happening. I know some people have been hearing rumors about it. But as far as I can tell, that’s just not something that’s happening. We would never give up our sovereignty in that way. Any other questions?
In an interview, Fanning said, “I still think he’s a closet Muslim.”
Fanning must have missed Colin Powell's powerful words on this topic this morning:
And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president?
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Anti-American
While McCain and co. are busy attacking Obama for being "anti-American" because of his various associations (whose extreme views Obama has repudiated), McCain skates by untouched despite his close relation to Nixon-era felon G. Gordon Liddy. From the Chicago Tribune:
In 1998, Liddy's home was the site of a McCain fundraiser. Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 this year.
Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."
During the Nixon era, Liddy broke into the DNC office at the Watergate, planned to kidnap leftists in 1972 to keep them from disrupting the GOP convention, and planned (but never executed) the murder of a columnist critical of Nixon. More recently, Liddy gave instructions to right-wing extremists that they should shoot federal agents in the head, saying:
"Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of bitches."
These of course are obviously pro-American "principles and philosophies that keep our nation great," right?
In 1998, Liddy's home was the site of a McCain fundraiser. Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 this year.
Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."
During the Nixon era, Liddy broke into the DNC office at the Watergate, planned to kidnap leftists in 1972 to keep them from disrupting the GOP convention, and planned (but never executed) the murder of a columnist critical of Nixon. More recently, Liddy gave instructions to right-wing extremists that they should shoot federal agents in the head, saying:
"Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. ... Kill the sons of bitches."
These of course are obviously pro-American "principles and philosophies that keep our nation great," right?
Pro-America parts of America
Sarah Palin, yesterday in North Carolina:
"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation,"
As someone who apparently is the "worst of America," living in a "large city" with apparently lazy, non-patriotic, anti-Americans, I'll note that none of my relatives or friends has ever been part of a secessionist political party.
"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation,"
As someone who apparently is the "worst of America," living in a "large city" with apparently lazy, non-patriotic, anti-Americans, I'll note that none of my relatives or friends has ever been part of a secessionist political party.
The Freak Show starts
Fivethirtyeight.com reports on automated voter contact phonecalls ("robocalls") being employed in Western Pennsylvania:
Over in Indiana, PA and Northern Cambria, PA, volunteers fielded complaints of a massive wave of ugly robocalls both paid for by John McCain's campaign and those paid for by third parties. The third party call was interactive, and purported to be from Barack Obama himself. The call starts out reasonably, and then "Obama" asks what the listener thinks is the most important issue. Whatever the response, "Obama" then launches into a profane and crazed tirade using "n***er" and other shock language.
This is the Republican party descending into the worst of freakshow politics. Republicans like to talk about how Obama is anti-American, but what does it say about a party's view of America that it believes that Americans will fall for this kind of garbage?
Over in Indiana, PA and Northern Cambria, PA, volunteers fielded complaints of a massive wave of ugly robocalls both paid for by John McCain's campaign and those paid for by third parties. The third party call was interactive, and purported to be from Barack Obama himself. The call starts out reasonably, and then "Obama" asks what the listener thinks is the most important issue. Whatever the response, "Obama" then launches into a profane and crazed tirade using "n***er" and other shock language.
This is the Republican party descending into the worst of freakshow politics. Republicans like to talk about how Obama is anti-American, but what does it say about a party's view of America that it believes that Americans will fall for this kind of garbage?
Friday, October 17, 2008
Naval war with Iran
Robert Kagan writes about the difficulties in engaging Iranian naval forces in the Persian Gulf.
Many folks don't remember (I didn't until reading about it recently in Richard Clarke's Against All Enemies) that we fought a limited engagement against conventional Iranian naval forces between 1982 and 1987, when they were attacking Kuwaiti flagged ships carrying Iraqi oil. We beat them soundly, and they've learned some new tricks since then.
Iran now fields two navies, a conventional force and a naval arm of the Revolutionary Guards ("IRGCN"). The IRGCN has over 20,000 ideologically committed sailors who have been trained in asymmetrical warfare, including kamikaze style attacks. Tactics used by the IRGCN include swarming larger ships with small, quick-moving craft bearing rocket launchers and torpedoes, as well as packing such ships with explosives in order to ram larger craft. The Iranians also have extensive knowledge of the islands and coves in the Gulf, particularly those in the narrow Straits of Hormuz at the southern end of the gulf (check out the map to see how much Iranian territory there is surrounding the Gulf).
According to Kagan, recent simulated war games dealing with a battle between swarming small Iranian ships and a force of American ships ended with simulated losses for the US greater than those in any naval battle since Pearl Harbor.
The US Navy is developing a Littoral Combat Ship, a smaller, shallow-draft craft for use in narrow, shallow waters like the Persian gulf, but we're many years away from having enough of them to make much of a difference.
Full article is worth a read- and it's important to remember that, although our military is by far the best in the world, it's not always going to be the best at every type of combat in every single situation. The question is not whether we could eventually beat Iran in a naval war- of course we could. The problem is that in the short-term, our forces could take unacceptably high losses. A blind faith that our military is "the best in the world" should not overshadow the fact that our power in some cases is limited.
Maybe if my parents chaired the Senate Commerce Committee I could get cell reception when I visit them
My parents live in some kind of weird cell-phone dead zone, where nobody can ever get reception. It seems to be a pretty local phenomenon, because I can get a signal if I go upstairs into one of the bedrooms, or out to the driveway. On the other hand, if my parents chaired the Senare Commerce Committee this wouldn't be necessary because they'd be able to get Verizon (which to put a cellphone tower in the yard, like John McCain tried to do.
Ohio catastrophe averted
This morning the Supreme Court overturned a decision by an Ohio court that would have required the election department in Ohio to begin a massive program to provide local voting officials with information about voters whose information in their database doesn't match information in other state databases. To accomplish this would have been a massive undertaking- restructuring the state's voter database system- while early voting was already going on.
The initial decision had come in a case where the Ohio Republica Party had brought suit against the Secretary of State, and SCOTUS today ruled that the ORP had no standing to sue, which is consistent with all other interpretations of the Help America Vote Act ("HAVA"), under which the suit was brought, which have found that HAVA creates no right in individuals or political parties to sue. To have ruled otherwise would have allowed any political party to seek temporary restraining orders against elections officials, setting the stage for significant voter-suppression activities as folks tried to gum up election departments on the eve (or apparently even during) elections.
Text of the SCOTUS decision is here.
The initial decision had come in a case where the Ohio Republica Party had brought suit against the Secretary of State, and SCOTUS today ruled that the ORP had no standing to sue, which is consistent with all other interpretations of the Help America Vote Act ("HAVA"), under which the suit was brought, which have found that HAVA creates no right in individuals or political parties to sue. To have ruled otherwise would have allowed any political party to seek temporary restraining orders against elections officials, setting the stage for significant voter-suppression activities as folks tried to gum up election departments on the eve (or apparently even during) elections.
Text of the SCOTUS decision is here.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
"The Secret LIfe of Judges"
Any of my readers who are lawyers (and frankly anyone interested in government) should read this piece, by Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs of the 2nd Circuit. It's the best explanation I've read of the role lawyers and judges play in our society, and some of the problems with that role.
Preaching to the Corner
A couple of times last night McCain seemed to forget that he was making a pitch to 60 million viewers and began to talk in conservative jargon (some of it about 30 years old). I'm not sure that calling someone a "redistributionist" has the same punch now that it had in the 60s. I also have a hard time seeing how mocking "the health of the mother" is useful when McCain's trying to make up ground with independents. I realize that he's following a conservative argument that the "health of the mother" exception has been broadened to cover things like mental health, but that's a dispute raised in the comments section of FreeRepublic.com, not in your last chance to talk to a broad audience of voters.
Angry McCain
When you spend much of the debate making angry faces, you can expect that something like this will happen:
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Game, set, match
Although Tom Brokaw and co. will inevitably insist on calling this a draw, I think Obama won by miles. He looked like an adult- calm, collected, with an overwhelming grasp of the issues. McCain came off as alternately sulky and spastic.
Nobody cares if McCain's feelings were hurt by John Lewis's comments. He's an adult, a U.S. Senator, and a candidate for president. I think Obama very effectively pivoted to what's actually at stake- you could see the CNN dials go off the charts when he noted that he didn't mind getting attacked for the next 3 weeks, but Americans couldn't afford to have the candidates wasting their time on useless attacks.
After that exchange, McCain's performance went way downhill. It seemed that he was trying to cram in every attack and talking point into each exchange. Sometimes this lead to incomprehensible sections where he would string together various bits of his stump speech without connectors- "we must drill now... independence from foreign oil... reform... vouchers" I thought his discussion of the Columbian trade agreement to be particularly difficult to follow. I think I'm fairly well informed about these things, and for the life of me I could not figure out what McCain was talking about. I can't imagine that many independent voters were able to either.
I thought that McCain raised the Ayers issue in a very disjointed way, and that Obama fielded the question with aplomb. I think it will be pretty difficult for anyone in the legitimate media to say that "Obama hasn't answered questions about Ayers."
McCain clearly was having difficulty keeping control of his emotions, alternately making bizarre faces, sighing loudly into his microphone, and at times seeming like he was about to snap (as Rod Dreher said "McCain was two tics away from a vein-popping "You can't handle the truth!" Jack Nicholson moment")
McCain needed a knockout to get back into the game, and he wasn't even close.
19 days.
Nobody cares if McCain's feelings were hurt by John Lewis's comments. He's an adult, a U.S. Senator, and a candidate for president. I think Obama very effectively pivoted to what's actually at stake- you could see the CNN dials go off the charts when he noted that he didn't mind getting attacked for the next 3 weeks, but Americans couldn't afford to have the candidates wasting their time on useless attacks.
After that exchange, McCain's performance went way downhill. It seemed that he was trying to cram in every attack and talking point into each exchange. Sometimes this lead to incomprehensible sections where he would string together various bits of his stump speech without connectors- "we must drill now... independence from foreign oil... reform... vouchers" I thought his discussion of the Columbian trade agreement to be particularly difficult to follow. I think I'm fairly well informed about these things, and for the life of me I could not figure out what McCain was talking about. I can't imagine that many independent voters were able to either.
I thought that McCain raised the Ayers issue in a very disjointed way, and that Obama fielded the question with aplomb. I think it will be pretty difficult for anyone in the legitimate media to say that "Obama hasn't answered questions about Ayers."
McCain clearly was having difficulty keeping control of his emotions, alternately making bizarre faces, sighing loudly into his microphone, and at times seeming like he was about to snap (as Rod Dreher said "McCain was two tics away from a vein-popping "You can't handle the truth!" Jack Nicholson moment")
McCain needed a knockout to get back into the game, and he wasn't even close.
19 days.
In a corner
McCain seems to have backed himself into a corner with his pronouncement that he'll bring up Ayers at the debate tonight. To begin with, it's never a good idea to tell your opponent exactly how you plan to "whip his you-know-what." I also don't think that raising Ayers unassisted will be helpful to McCain.
If Bob Schieffer brings up Ayers, and Obama's response is hesitant or evasive, then McCain has an opening to go after him without much in the way of negative consequences. If McCain has to bring up Ayers himself, then he runs the risk of trying to distract people from a.) whatever question Schieffer actually asked him; and b.) the general problems with the economy, etc. Obama's got an almost fool-proof answer, quoting McCain's staffer who said that "when we talk about issues we lose." Now that Schieffer knows that McCain's going to bring up Ayers, what incentive does he have to put the issue out there?
If McCain doesn't go after Obama on Ayers, he'll have really let down his base, and he'll face more criticism of the "say it to my face" variety from the Obama camp.
If Bob Schieffer brings up Ayers, and Obama's response is hesitant or evasive, then McCain has an opening to go after him without much in the way of negative consequences. If McCain has to bring up Ayers himself, then he runs the risk of trying to distract people from a.) whatever question Schieffer actually asked him; and b.) the general problems with the economy, etc. Obama's got an almost fool-proof answer, quoting McCain's staffer who said that "when we talk about issues we lose." Now that Schieffer knows that McCain's going to bring up Ayers, what incentive does he have to put the issue out there?
If McCain doesn't go after Obama on Ayers, he'll have really let down his base, and he'll face more criticism of the "say it to my face" variety from the Obama camp.
10,000
CNYEXPAT reached a milestone late last night- our ten thousandth visit. I started this blog about a month and a half ago as an outlet for my interest in politics and the election, and as a way to share interesting ideas or stories that I'd read with friends (instead of mass-emailing them links). The blog has taken off in a way I hadn't imagined, and now has folks all over the country who read it regularly (including somebody from Wasilla!) and even some international readers.
I'd like to thank everyone who takes time out of their day to read what I have to say, and especially to those who find it worthwhile enough to pass on to their friends. As the election winds up I'll be thinking about in what direction I should take this blog, so ideas from readers will be much appreciated.
I'd like to thank everyone who takes time out of their day to read what I have to say, and especially to those who find it worthwhile enough to pass on to their friends. As the election winds up I'll be thinking about in what direction I should take this blog, so ideas from readers will be much appreciated.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Christopher Buckley canned at The National Review
After endorsing Obama, Christopher Buckley, a conservative writer and son of National Review founder William F. Buckley, Jr., was fired from his father's magazine.
So, I have been effectively fatwahed (is that how you spell it?) by the conservative movement, and the magazine that my father founded must now distance itself from me. But then, conservatives have always had a bit of trouble with the concept of diversity. The GOP likes to say it’s a big-tent. Looks more like a yurt to me.
While I regret this development, I am not in mourning, for I no longer have any clear idea what, exactly, the modern conservative movement stands for. Eight years of “conservative†government has brought us a doubled national debt, ruinous expansion of entitlement programs, bridges to nowhere, poster boy Jack Abramoff and an ill-premised, ill-waged war conducted by politicians of breathtaking arrogance. As a sideshow, it brought us a truly obscene attempt at federal intervention in the Terry Schiavo case.
So, to paraphrase a real conservative, Ronald Reagan: I haven’t left the Republican Party. It left me.
So, I have been effectively fatwahed (is that how you spell it?) by the conservative movement, and the magazine that my father founded must now distance itself from me. But then, conservatives have always had a bit of trouble with the concept of diversity. The GOP likes to say it’s a big-tent. Looks more like a yurt to me.
While I regret this development, I am not in mourning, for I no longer have any clear idea what, exactly, the modern conservative movement stands for. Eight years of “conservative†government has brought us a doubled national debt, ruinous expansion of entitlement programs, bridges to nowhere, poster boy Jack Abramoff and an ill-premised, ill-waged war conducted by politicians of breathtaking arrogance. As a sideshow, it brought us a truly obscene attempt at federal intervention in the Terry Schiavo case.
So, to paraphrase a real conservative, Ronald Reagan: I haven’t left the Republican Party. It left me.
Palin and the Anchorage Daily News differ on the meaning of the Troopergate report
Take, for instance this passage:
Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."
Palin thinks this means she's been "vindicated," while the ADN says "In plain English, she did something "unlawful." She broke the state ethics law."
I realize she has some difficulty with English but this is pushing it.
Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."
Palin thinks this means she's been "vindicated," while the ADN says "In plain English, she did something "unlawful." She broke the state ethics law."
I realize she has some difficulty with English but this is pushing it.
Oh, the possibilities...
From Elapsed Time:
- In Development -
Scene 12
SARAH and family are seen packing the white Ford Explorer for the drive to Washington DC. SARAH wears a white parka with fur hood. She exudes confidence.
SARAH
(hurriedly)
Guys, we need to get going. Inauguration ceremony is in three days and we're going to need to drive all night.(counts family members to make sure everyone is present)Where's Piper? Piper!
PIPER
(Running)
Sorry mom, NookNook and I have something for you
(undersized eskimo appears from offcamera cradling a seal)
PIPER
I heard you and Dad talking about the Presidential Seal.
(seal barks and snorts in NookNook's arms)
SARAH
Aww, Piper.
(SARAH and PIPER hug)
Foolishness
Drudge, Foxnews and the Hannity Forums are abuzz this morning about a story in the Tampa/St. Pete news (link no longer working) that this summer ACORN submitted a voter registration form for "Mickey Mouse" this summer. A couple points on this (and the general allegations of "massive fraud" by ACORN)-
ACORN is required by law to turn in all voter registration forms it receives. This law makes sense, because otherwise it would be too easy to register voters and then throw out the forms from people who you think won't support your preferred candidate. ACORN has registered 1.3 million new voters by employing 13,000 registration workers. Clearly when dealing with those numbers, you're going to get some number of jerks who fill out bad forms, and cheating employees who fill out forms themselves instead of doing the hard work of actually registering voters. ACORN must, by law, turn in those forms- and in fact they try to flag the bad ones for registration officials.
The second point is that, even if the Mickey Mouse form gets turned in, no harm is done. In this specific case, problems in the form were noted by election officials, and Mickey wasn't registered. Even if election officials mistakenly put Mickey on the voter rolls, he's not going to fraudulently vote because he doesn't exist.
Even if the Obama campaign were operating a Boss Tweed style 1860s campaign, and picking up homeless people in a van and driving them around to vote under fraudulent names, my guess is that Mickey still doesn't get to vote. Polling places are typically staffed by the same non-nonsense middle-aged women who proctor college exams- and these people are not going to let Mickey Mouse vote. Imagine some homeless guy (trucked in by the campaign) stumbles up to the table- "Hmm... Mr. Mouse? No, sorry, I don't think that Main Street USA, Tomorrowland is in this election district."
In short, while it makes a great headline, submitting a registration form for Mickey Mouse is what the law courts call "harmless error" and the ball courts call "no blood no foul"- and anyone carrying the story who knows anything about elections should call this "story" what it is- foolishness.
ACORN is required by law to turn in all voter registration forms it receives. This law makes sense, because otherwise it would be too easy to register voters and then throw out the forms from people who you think won't support your preferred candidate. ACORN has registered 1.3 million new voters by employing 13,000 registration workers. Clearly when dealing with those numbers, you're going to get some number of jerks who fill out bad forms, and cheating employees who fill out forms themselves instead of doing the hard work of actually registering voters. ACORN must, by law, turn in those forms- and in fact they try to flag the bad ones for registration officials.
The second point is that, even if the Mickey Mouse form gets turned in, no harm is done. In this specific case, problems in the form were noted by election officials, and Mickey wasn't registered. Even if election officials mistakenly put Mickey on the voter rolls, he's not going to fraudulently vote because he doesn't exist.
Even if the Obama campaign were operating a Boss Tweed style 1860s campaign, and picking up homeless people in a van and driving them around to vote under fraudulent names, my guess is that Mickey still doesn't get to vote. Polling places are typically staffed by the same non-nonsense middle-aged women who proctor college exams- and these people are not going to let Mickey Mouse vote. Imagine some homeless guy (trucked in by the campaign) stumbles up to the table- "Hmm... Mr. Mouse? No, sorry, I don't think that Main Street USA, Tomorrowland is in this election district."
In short, while it makes a great headline, submitting a registration form for Mickey Mouse is what the law courts call "harmless error" and the ball courts call "no blood no foul"- and anyone carrying the story who knows anything about elections should call this "story" what it is- foolishness.
Perhaps this is why Obama's winning the youth vote
Because he's actively asking for it. Obama recently bought a block of advertising on Electronic Arts' Burnout Paradise, a racing game played online via XBox 360.
Things best not to say when your campaign is trying to prove it's not an angry mob:
Virginia State GOP Chair Jeffrey Fredericks invited Time's Karen Tumulty to observe a rally this weekend, and then apparently forgot that she was a reporter:
With so much at stake, and time running short, Frederick did not feel he had the luxury of subtlety. He climbed atop a folding chair to give 30 campaign volunteers who were about to go canvassing door to door their talking points — for instance, the connection between Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden: "Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon," he said. "That is scary." It is also not exactly true — though that distorted reference to Obama's controversial association with William Ayers, a former 60s radical, was enough to get the volunteers stoked. "And he won't salute the flag," one woman added, repeating another myth about Obama. She was quickly topped by a man who called out, "We don't even know where Senator Obama was really born." Actually, we do; it's Hawaii.
With so much at stake, and time running short, Frederick did not feel he had the luxury of subtlety. He climbed atop a folding chair to give 30 campaign volunteers who were about to go canvassing door to door their talking points — for instance, the connection between Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden: "Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon," he said. "That is scary." It is also not exactly true — though that distorted reference to Obama's controversial association with William Ayers, a former 60s radical, was enough to get the volunteers stoked. "And he won't salute the flag," one woman added, repeating another myth about Obama. She was quickly topped by a man who called out, "We don't even know where Senator Obama was really born." Actually, we do; it's Hawaii.
Monday, October 13, 2008
And the show has reached a new low
Jack Cashill, a conservative author well-known enough to make the folks at GOP house organ The National Review pay attention, has decided through careful "analysis" that Obama's book Dreams from My Father was written by... wait for it... Bill Ayers.
A sample of Cashill's reasoning:
I bought Bill Ayers' 2001 memoir, Fugitive Days, for reasons unrelated to this project. As I discovered, he writes surprisingly well and very much like "Obama." In fact, my first thought was that the two may have shared the same ghostwriter. Unlike Dreams, however, where the high style is intermittent, Fugitive Days is infused with the authorial voice in every sentence. What is more, when Ayers speaks, even off the cuff, he uses a cadence and vocabulary consistent with his memoir. One does not hear any of Dreams in Obama's casual speech.
Obama's memoir was published in June 1995. Earlier that year, Ayers helped Obama, then a junior lawyer at a minor law firm, get appointed chairman of the multi-million dollar Chicago Annenberg Challenge grant. In the fall of that same year, 1995, Ayers and his wife, Weatherwoman Bernardine Dohrn, helped blaze Obama's path to political power with a fundraiser in their Chicago home.
In short, Ayers had the means, the motive, the time, the place and the literary ability to jumpstart Obama's career. And, as Ayers had to know, a lovely memoir under Obama's belt made for a much better resume than an unfulfilled contract over his head.
I've been trying to think of something snarky to say about all this, but I think it speaks for itself.
A sample of Cashill's reasoning:
I bought Bill Ayers' 2001 memoir, Fugitive Days, for reasons unrelated to this project. As I discovered, he writes surprisingly well and very much like "Obama." In fact, my first thought was that the two may have shared the same ghostwriter. Unlike Dreams, however, where the high style is intermittent, Fugitive Days is infused with the authorial voice in every sentence. What is more, when Ayers speaks, even off the cuff, he uses a cadence and vocabulary consistent with his memoir. One does not hear any of Dreams in Obama's casual speech.
Obama's memoir was published in June 1995. Earlier that year, Ayers helped Obama, then a junior lawyer at a minor law firm, get appointed chairman of the multi-million dollar Chicago Annenberg Challenge grant. In the fall of that same year, 1995, Ayers and his wife, Weatherwoman Bernardine Dohrn, helped blaze Obama's path to political power with a fundraiser in their Chicago home.
In short, Ayers had the means, the motive, the time, the place and the literary ability to jumpstart Obama's career. And, as Ayers had to know, a lovely memoir under Obama's belt made for a much better resume than an unfulfilled contract over his head.
I've been trying to think of something snarky to say about all this, but I think it speaks for itself.
Anti-intellectualism
Interesting discussion on Slate's XX blog about Palin and anti-intellectualism, including the following post:
I don't doubt that there are some people who proudly call themselves anti-intellectual. I think most people who fall into the category, whether they'd call themselves that are not, are too consumed by everyday concerns—working hard, paying the bills, maybe raising kids or taking care of elderly parents, and trying to squeeze it all in before collapsing in a heap at the end of the day—to worry about the same things that elites do. And when they're tired or stressed out, they really don't like being told their views are worth less than someone else's.
I've become increasingly frustrated with the idea that people who aren't informed are simply too busy- too loaded down with work and dealing with kids and bills- to find the time to pay attention to what's going on, and that elites are people with loads of free time who sit around drinking lattes and reading the Essays of Montaigne. I'll posit that most folks are awfully busy, and that there are plenty of "elites" who work demanding, 80 hour a week jobs, have kids, etc. The difference, perhaps, is that some people choose to read the newspaper on the train and some people do the Jumble. Some people put the kids to bed and watch American Idol and others watch Nova or Charlie Rose. The newspaper and Nova are just as accesssible to the "Joe Six Packs" as they are to the "elites," so the question is where people put their priorities. I don't think it's at all problematic to think that perhaps the people who think that it's more important to be informed about science or government than to know what Perez Hilton said about Britney should be the ones running the show.
I don't doubt that there are some people who proudly call themselves anti-intellectual. I think most people who fall into the category, whether they'd call themselves that are not, are too consumed by everyday concerns—working hard, paying the bills, maybe raising kids or taking care of elderly parents, and trying to squeeze it all in before collapsing in a heap at the end of the day—to worry about the same things that elites do. And when they're tired or stressed out, they really don't like being told their views are worth less than someone else's.
I've become increasingly frustrated with the idea that people who aren't informed are simply too busy- too loaded down with work and dealing with kids and bills- to find the time to pay attention to what's going on, and that elites are people with loads of free time who sit around drinking lattes and reading the Essays of Montaigne. I'll posit that most folks are awfully busy, and that there are plenty of "elites" who work demanding, 80 hour a week jobs, have kids, etc. The difference, perhaps, is that some people choose to read the newspaper on the train and some people do the Jumble. Some people put the kids to bed and watch American Idol and others watch Nova or Charlie Rose. The newspaper and Nova are just as accesssible to the "Joe Six Packs" as they are to the "elites," so the question is where people put their priorities. I don't think it's at all problematic to think that perhaps the people who think that it's more important to be informed about science or government than to know what Perez Hilton said about Britney should be the ones running the show.
Palin gets booed at Flyers game
Sarah Palin was subject to a sustained minute of booing as she dropped the ceremonial first puck at a Flyers-Rangers game this weekend-
This clip has now been viewed by almost a million people, and the story was all over PA news. I'm not sure what the McCain people were thinking, sending her out there- Philly is hostile territory for Republicans (Kerry won the city with 81% of the vote), and Philly sports fans are evil- these people threw snowballs at Santa Claus.
This clip has now been viewed by almost a million people, and the story was all over PA news. I'm not sure what the McCain people were thinking, sending her out there- Philly is hostile territory for Republicans (Kerry won the city with 81% of the vote), and Philly sports fans are evil- these people threw snowballs at Santa Claus.
Canvassing PA
I spent Saturday canvassing voters in the town of Bensalem, in Bucks County, PA. Bensalem is about halfway between Trenton and Philly, and has both McMansiony developments and trailer parks. It was socioeconomically more diverse than Quakertown, PA (also in Bucks County), where I'd canvassed a few weeks ago, which was primarily retired working-class folks on fixed incomes. With that caveat, I'd say that the reaction this weekend was much more positive for Obama. There were far fewer Democrats still talking about Hillary, and many more independents and no-party folks and Republicans who were thinking about Obama. A number of people I spoke to specifically mentioned Palin as the reason they were voting for Obama. Many people were frustrated with the negative tone of the campaign, but appeared to attribute it more to McCain than to Obama.
Hitchens holds his nose and endorses Obama
From Slate
I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that "issue" I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity. Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the "experience" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke. One only wishes that the election could be over now and a proper and dignified verdict rendered, so as to spare democracy and civility the degradation to which they look like being subjected in the remaining days of a low, dishonest campaign.
I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that "issue" I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity. Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the "experience" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke. One only wishes that the election could be over now and a proper and dignified verdict rendered, so as to spare democracy and civility the degradation to which they look like being subjected in the remaining days of a low, dishonest campaign.
Friday, October 10, 2008
Way to go Upstate
Rensselaer county in upstate New York (near Albany) apparently put "Osama" instead of "Obama" on its ballots. People are questioning whether this was intentional, noting that the "s" and "b" keys are far apart on the keyboard.
I'll note that the spellcheck on my office version of Outlook tries to change "Obama" to "Osama," which perhaps is how this happened... and maybe something Microsoft ought to look into fixing at some point.
I'll note that the spellcheck on my office version of Outlook tries to change "Obama" to "Osama," which perhaps is how this happened... and maybe something Microsoft ought to look into fixing at some point.
Congratulations Connecticut
Connecticut joins CA and MA as a state where gays and lesbians can legally marry, after a 4-3 decision by the CT Supreme Court. I'm hoping that a Democratic takeover of the State Senate in New York would allow my state to join their ranks (and be the first to do so by legislation). Governor Paterson has long been friendly to gay rights, and enacting marriage rights would be a great accomplishment for him, but I fear that the budget situation in Albany is going to preclude any kind of movement on this topic for a while.
Another view on Bill Ayers
I don't at all condone Ayers' violent actions during the 1960s, or his apparent lack of contrition. But let's look at this from Obama's standpoint when he first met Ayers. The guy was a professor at the University of Illinois, served on nonprofit boards and worked with Mayor Daley (the son of the Mayor Daley whose policy beat the hell out of '60s radicals during the 1968 convention). I was forwarded the following email this morning, written by one of Ayers' neighbors, Jay Mulberry:
I know Bill Ayers. He lives about the same distance from meas he does from Barack Obama. He was my son's Little Leaguecoach; he was on the Local School Council of one of ourschools; he and his wife Bernadine have parties at each of mycollege reunions (Bernadine was in my class) and everyonecomes to them from community organizers to neocons. They makeit comfortable for us all.
I know Bill and Bernadine's lovely children. One played ballwith my son. Another is a foster child who came to them with many problemsbut who grew up to become a Rhodes Scholar. Ittook a lot of good parenting to go from there to here.
I know Bill as a serious educational leader. He is aprofessor of education at the University of Illinois and hewrites almost as much (and as fast) as I read. It's no secretthat he wants change in our schools; who doesn't. When I was aschool principal, I went to him for advice many times and gota lot from his suggestions. If you want to know where Billstands on education, read Teaching Toward Freedom, A Kind andJust Parent or To Teach: The Journey of a Teacher.
Hundreds of people in my neighborhood know Bill the way I do.We have talked with him on the street, in the gym, at PTAmeetings, on committees, at parties and in the grocery store.We know what he was 35 years ago -- more than half a lifeago. Today he is a good neighbor, a good parent and a friend.
Again, whatever you may think about Ayers' past, two things are very clear- 1.) this guy is no longer a terrorist, and 2.) nobody in his neighborhood thinks of him that way. I have to imagine that there are many Americans who have family, a friend or a neighbor who committed a crime, went to prison years ago, and now is part of the family or part of the community. Failing to shun those folks or spit on then as they walk by isn't "poor judgment"- for most people it's just good manners to not bring up regrettable incidents in the past, and to deal with somebody as they are.
I know Bill Ayers. He lives about the same distance from meas he does from Barack Obama. He was my son's Little Leaguecoach; he was on the Local School Council of one of ourschools; he and his wife Bernadine have parties at each of mycollege reunions (Bernadine was in my class) and everyonecomes to them from community organizers to neocons. They makeit comfortable for us all.
I know Bill and Bernadine's lovely children. One played ballwith my son. Another is a foster child who came to them with many problemsbut who grew up to become a Rhodes Scholar. Ittook a lot of good parenting to go from there to here.
I know Bill as a serious educational leader. He is aprofessor of education at the University of Illinois and hewrites almost as much (and as fast) as I read. It's no secretthat he wants change in our schools; who doesn't. When I was aschool principal, I went to him for advice many times and gota lot from his suggestions. If you want to know where Billstands on education, read Teaching Toward Freedom, A Kind andJust Parent or To Teach: The Journey of a Teacher.
Hundreds of people in my neighborhood know Bill the way I do.We have talked with him on the street, in the gym, at PTAmeetings, on committees, at parties and in the grocery store.We know what he was 35 years ago -- more than half a lifeago. Today he is a good neighbor, a good parent and a friend.
Again, whatever you may think about Ayers' past, two things are very clear- 1.) this guy is no longer a terrorist, and 2.) nobody in his neighborhood thinks of him that way. I have to imagine that there are many Americans who have family, a friend or a neighbor who committed a crime, went to prison years ago, and now is part of the family or part of the community. Failing to shun those folks or spit on then as they walk by isn't "poor judgment"- for most people it's just good manners to not bring up regrettable incidents in the past, and to deal with somebody as they are.
More on McCain's housing plan
Marc Ambinder looks at whether McCain's housing stabilization plan is legal under Section 101e of the recently enacted bailout plan:
Here's the key part...... "including by preventing the sale of a troubled asset to the Secretary at a higher price than what the seller paid to purchase the asset." Any loan that is not held by the originator, and the vast majority loans are not, would fall under this provision."
So -- if the bank gave you a 100 dollar loan.... and sold it for 80 bucks last year, and it's trading at 50 dollars now, the law prohibits the government from buying it at $100 -- face value -- because that would "unjustly enrich" the entity which purchased the mortgage from the bank.Under TARP, the government wouldn't be able to buy it for more than $80... which isn't face value. So if they buy it at face value, wouldn't they violate the law?
McCain himself, one week ago, praised TARP's taxpayer protection planks and his campaign has claimed credit for pressuring Congress to add them in.
Here's the key part...... "including by preventing the sale of a troubled asset to the Secretary at a higher price than what the seller paid to purchase the asset." Any loan that is not held by the originator, and the vast majority loans are not, would fall under this provision."
So -- if the bank gave you a 100 dollar loan.... and sold it for 80 bucks last year, and it's trading at 50 dollars now, the law prohibits the government from buying it at $100 -- face value -- because that would "unjustly enrich" the entity which purchased the mortgage from the bank.Under TARP, the government wouldn't be able to buy it for more than $80... which isn't face value. So if they buy it at face value, wouldn't they violate the law?
McCain himself, one week ago, praised TARP's taxpayer protection planks and his campaign has claimed credit for pressuring Congress to add them in.
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Say it to his face cntd.
Biden today:
“All of the things they said about Barack Obama in the TV, on the TV, at their rallies, and now on YouTube … John McCain could not bring himself to look Barack Obama in the eye and say the same things to him,” Biden said this morning. “In my neighborhood, when you’ve got something to say to a guy, you look him in the eye and you say it to him.”
“All of the things they said about Barack Obama in the TV, on the TV, at their rallies, and now on YouTube … John McCain could not bring himself to look Barack Obama in the eye and say the same things to him,” Biden said this morning. “In my neighborhood, when you’ve got something to say to a guy, you look him in the eye and you say it to him.”
This is rich
And by rich I mean beer-heiress rich: on the same day that Cindy McCain falsely accuses Obama of voting "not to fund my son when he was serving" in Iraq, she also claims that Obama is running the dirtiest campaign in history.
This is also the same week where 100% of McCain's ads nationwide were negative, while 2/3 of Obama's ads were positive or neutral.
This is also the same week where 100% of McCain's ads nationwide were negative, while 2/3 of Obama's ads were positive or neutral.
Department of Ridiculous Overstatement
Ron Rosenbaum rages about the dictatorial ambition of billionaires because Bloomberg wants to run for a third term:
And now Comandante Michael Bloomberg seeks to turn New York City into a banana republic. He wants to ignore two citywide votes for term limits—because (of course!) at the time they were passed, in the '90s, voters had not yet had the chance to contemplate the full grandeur of Michael Bloomberg. So far above the kind of mortal mayor the term limits were designed for that the ordinary rules shouldn't apply. So now, even though he's served the two terms the law allows, he wants to find a way to grant himself the power to run again.
The key here is that Bloomberg wants "the power to run again." Bloomberg isn't (like Rudy) asking to stay on an extra term- he wants to be an option for the people of New York to choose (or to choose to vote for somebody else). If they don't like it, it's pretty easy to pull the lever for the other guy. And it's not like he's overturning the term limit laws by fiat- he's asking the elected city council to change the rules. If folks don't like it, throw your councilmember out too. New York has no shortage of qualified and well-funded aspirants for higher office, and office-holders frequently face primary challenges. A situation where the mayor might get the elected legislature to vote to change term limit rules to allow him to run against a number of competent challengers is a pretty far cry from Hugo-Chavez land.
And now Comandante Michael Bloomberg seeks to turn New York City into a banana republic. He wants to ignore two citywide votes for term limits—because (of course!) at the time they were passed, in the '90s, voters had not yet had the chance to contemplate the full grandeur of Michael Bloomberg. So far above the kind of mortal mayor the term limits were designed for that the ordinary rules shouldn't apply. So now, even though he's served the two terms the law allows, he wants to find a way to grant himself the power to run again.
The key here is that Bloomberg wants "the power to run again." Bloomberg isn't (like Rudy) asking to stay on an extra term- he wants to be an option for the people of New York to choose (or to choose to vote for somebody else). If they don't like it, it's pretty easy to pull the lever for the other guy. And it's not like he's overturning the term limit laws by fiat- he's asking the elected city council to change the rules. If folks don't like it, throw your councilmember out too. New York has no shortage of qualified and well-funded aspirants for higher office, and office-holders frequently face primary challenges. A situation where the mayor might get the elected legislature to vote to change term limit rules to allow him to run against a number of competent challengers is a pretty far cry from Hugo-Chavez land.
"Why won't he say it to my face?"
Given McCain's self-image of heroism, Obama's light taunt about McCain not being willing to raise the Ayers issue during the debate will probably really get under McCain's skin...
Sowing the wind
Video of supporters from a McCain-Palin rally-
I find particularly classy the guy calling Obama a "commie faggot" in the second video... The GOP and its talk-radio allies are planting a dangerous amount of anger in a large chunk of the voters. I don't think it's going to pay off for them this election, but I'm very nervous about the ultimate effects of having a sizeable group of Americans who on January 20th think that their new president is a terrorist.
I find particularly classy the guy calling Obama a "commie faggot" in the second video... The GOP and its talk-radio allies are planting a dangerous amount of anger in a large chunk of the voters. I don't think it's going to pay off for them this election, but I'm very nervous about the ultimate effects of having a sizeable group of Americans who on January 20th think that their new president is a terrorist.
Moral Hazard
More on McCain's housing bailout plan from Ben Smith:
Details provided to reporters by senior adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin Wednesday morning make one thing clear: Taxpayers would directly pick up the tab for the difference in cost between a homeowner’s old, too-expensive mortgage and the cheaper one provided by the government.
This is something that congressional lawmakers, led by House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) specifically avoided when they crafted their own landmark housing bill, which became law July 31 and took effect Oct. 1.Congress’ bill – which Holtz-Eakin says provides at least part of the authority McCain would need to carry out his plan – provided a $300 billion program to help distressed borrowers refinance into cheaper Federal Housing Authority mortgages. But to participate, lenders and mortgage investors would have to reduce the mortgage principal, thus taking a loss on the loan.
Lawmakers argued that the “haircut” would protect taxpayers and mitigate against so-called “moral hazard” that government intervention would encourage lenders to believe they’ll always be rescued from their bad business decisions. To make sure homeowners didn’t get off scott free either, the law requires them to share any future profits from the resale of their homes with the government.“Clearly we face the trade off that we would in fact be taking the negative equity position and putting it on the taxpayers books instead of putting it on the private lenders books or the homeowners books,” Holtz-Eakin told Politico. “We think the balance of risk has shifted to the point where this is the way to go.”
Details provided to reporters by senior adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin Wednesday morning make one thing clear: Taxpayers would directly pick up the tab for the difference in cost between a homeowner’s old, too-expensive mortgage and the cheaper one provided by the government.
This is something that congressional lawmakers, led by House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) specifically avoided when they crafted their own landmark housing bill, which became law July 31 and took effect Oct. 1.Congress’ bill – which Holtz-Eakin says provides at least part of the authority McCain would need to carry out his plan – provided a $300 billion program to help distressed borrowers refinance into cheaper Federal Housing Authority mortgages. But to participate, lenders and mortgage investors would have to reduce the mortgage principal, thus taking a loss on the loan.
Lawmakers argued that the “haircut” would protect taxpayers and mitigate against so-called “moral hazard” that government intervention would encourage lenders to believe they’ll always be rescued from their bad business decisions. To make sure homeowners didn’t get off scott free either, the law requires them to share any future profits from the resale of their homes with the government.“Clearly we face the trade off that we would in fact be taking the negative equity position and putting it on the taxpayers books instead of putting it on the private lenders books or the homeowners books,” Holtz-Eakin told Politico. “We think the balance of risk has shifted to the point where this is the way to go.”
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
The ridiculousness of guilt by association
Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs takes on Sean Hannity about the politics of guilt-by-association- asking Hannity directly if he's an anti-semite for having on his show Andy Martin, an anti-semitic author and lawyer who, "in a New York bankruptcy case, he referred to a judge as a "crooked, slimy Jew, " filed a civil-rights lawsuit claiming Jewish bankruptcy judges and lawyers were conspiring to steal his property and asked a court to bar "any Jew from having anything to do with plaintiff's property."
Snap Poll numbers from the debate
From TNR:
But worse for McCain, I think, than any of these top numbers are some of the nuggets buried in last night's CNN poll (which had Obama up 54 - 30 overall). Those surveyed thought Obama was more intelligent than McCain by 57 - 25 and expressed himself more clearly by 60 - 30. Obama reversed a prior weakness as well, leading in the "stronger leader" category 54 - 43. McCain, for his part, prevailed in the categories you'd rather lose: "attacked more" (a whopping 63 - 17) and "more like a typical politician," which he took by 16 points.
But the real killer looks to be in the category that doomed the last two Democratic presidential nominees: likeability. Those polled by CNN found Obama more likeable by a devastating margin of 65 to 28 percent. I don't have comparable numbers from past races at my fingertips, but I think it's safe to say that no candidate who has been substantially less likeable on television than his opponent has won the presidency in over thirty years. Yes, of course, it's only one debate, and a lot could happen in the next few weeks. But that was a very bad night for John McCain.
But worse for McCain, I think, than any of these top numbers are some of the nuggets buried in last night's CNN poll (which had Obama up 54 - 30 overall). Those surveyed thought Obama was more intelligent than McCain by 57 - 25 and expressed himself more clearly by 60 - 30. Obama reversed a prior weakness as well, leading in the "stronger leader" category 54 - 43. McCain, for his part, prevailed in the categories you'd rather lose: "attacked more" (a whopping 63 - 17) and "more like a typical politician," which he took by 16 points.
But the real killer looks to be in the category that doomed the last two Democratic presidential nominees: likeability. Those polled by CNN found Obama more likeable by a devastating margin of 65 to 28 percent. I don't have comparable numbers from past races at my fingertips, but I think it's safe to say that no candidate who has been substantially less likeable on television than his opponent has won the presidency in over thirty years. Yes, of course, it's only one debate, and a lot could happen in the next few weeks. But that was a very bad night for John McCain.
Secret Plans
If McCain knows exactly how to get bin Laden, as he said over and over last night, why hasn't he passed on that information to the CIA or the military? Is it perhaps like Nixon's "Secret Plan" to end the war in Vietnam that was part of his campaign in 1968... and apparently wasn't deployed until 1973?
McCain's new rescue plan
McCain made a bizarre attempt to outflank Obama from the left on the bailout by suggesting that the government should directly buy shaky mortgages (instead of buying the various financial instruments derived from these mortgages). There a number of significant problems with this- the first being an enormous expansion of government bureaucracy, with 20% or so of home mortgages being owned by HUD or a similar bureaucracy, which would have to massively scale up very quickly in order to take on the task, and would lack the knowledge of local conditions that lenders on the ground in the affected communities have.
The second problem is articulated by Mark Steyn-
Will massive government intervention restore the health of the American property market? It’s not clear to me why the government needs to buy up all these mortgages. We talk of “keeping people in their homes”, but in what sense are they “their homes”? Many of these home “owners” obtained such ridiculous mortgages that they have minimal equity in them: Losing “their homes” is, in that sense, little more in cash terms than losing the security deposit on your rental apartment. Listening to all these proposed government interventions designed to stave off reality, I’d rather leave it to the market.
Matt Yglesias defends McCain's plan-
This situation is bad for all homeowners. You don’t want to be in the position of looking to sell your home in Miami order to take that new job in San Jose at a time when Miami is littered with foreclosed-on homes that nobody wants to buy because, hey, only so many people want to move to Miami.
Meanwhile, in the long run the situation rebalances. A bunch of people who bought homes they can’t afford lose their homes. And a bunch of homes whose occupants have been kicked out plummet in value. Suddenly the homes that people previously couldn’t afford are affordable, and everyone who was previously without a home winds up back in one, with houses having re-adjusted downward in value. There are so many people in the country and so many homes to occupy, so one way or another the great wheel of history will turn and people will wind up living in the houses. Mass rewriting of problematic mortgages will produce the same outcome as simply letting history run its course, but if done right it ought to get us to that outcome more smoothly (without, for example, producing a reverse-bubble in which housing prices fall too low) and with less inconvenience.
The fact here, though, is that having homes plummet in value isn't particularly bad in the short term- a low-value home isn't any worse to live in than a high value home. The majority of situations where homeowners need to sell their homes and pull the value out is when they're moving. But if home prices are depressed around the country, then the lower value pulled out of a current home should be enough to buy a depressed-price home somewhere else. Granted it would make it more difficult for people to use the equity on their homes as a credit card to buy other things, but in a macro sense that's fine because using home equity as a line of credit is part of what got us into this problem in the first place. In the meantime, folks whose home prices are depressed will get a break in their property taxes too- and for many retired folks who've been responsible and paid off their mortgages, their biggest fear is that they can't pay property taxes which had risen because of the spike in home values.
The second problem is articulated by Mark Steyn-
Will massive government intervention restore the health of the American property market? It’s not clear to me why the government needs to buy up all these mortgages. We talk of “keeping people in their homes”, but in what sense are they “their homes”? Many of these home “owners” obtained such ridiculous mortgages that they have minimal equity in them: Losing “their homes” is, in that sense, little more in cash terms than losing the security deposit on your rental apartment. Listening to all these proposed government interventions designed to stave off reality, I’d rather leave it to the market.
Matt Yglesias defends McCain's plan-
This situation is bad for all homeowners. You don’t want to be in the position of looking to sell your home in Miami order to take that new job in San Jose at a time when Miami is littered with foreclosed-on homes that nobody wants to buy because, hey, only so many people want to move to Miami.
Meanwhile, in the long run the situation rebalances. A bunch of people who bought homes they can’t afford lose their homes. And a bunch of homes whose occupants have been kicked out plummet in value. Suddenly the homes that people previously couldn’t afford are affordable, and everyone who was previously without a home winds up back in one, with houses having re-adjusted downward in value. There are so many people in the country and so many homes to occupy, so one way or another the great wheel of history will turn and people will wind up living in the houses. Mass rewriting of problematic mortgages will produce the same outcome as simply letting history run its course, but if done right it ought to get us to that outcome more smoothly (without, for example, producing a reverse-bubble in which housing prices fall too low) and with less inconvenience.
The fact here, though, is that having homes plummet in value isn't particularly bad in the short term- a low-value home isn't any worse to live in than a high value home. The majority of situations where homeowners need to sell their homes and pull the value out is when they're moving. But if home prices are depressed around the country, then the lower value pulled out of a current home should be enough to buy a depressed-price home somewhere else. Granted it would make it more difficult for people to use the equity on their homes as a credit card to buy other things, but in a macro sense that's fine because using home equity as a line of credit is part of what got us into this problem in the first place. In the meantime, folks whose home prices are depressed will get a break in their property taxes too- and for many retired folks who've been responsible and paid off their mortgages, their biggest fear is that they can't pay property taxes which had risen because of the spike in home values.
Monday, October 06, 2008
The "R. Kelly Ad"
Check out this ad, run by Democratic Challenger Jim Slattery in his Senate race against Republican Pat Roberts:
As Tim Gunn might point out, there's a "questionable taste level" going on here. I imagine this might engender some kind of serious backlash among moderate, non golden-shower-loving voters. A friend of mine tells me that Ned Lamont cut this ad in 2006 against Lieberman but opted not to use it... wise choice.
As Tim Gunn might point out, there's a "questionable taste level" going on here. I imagine this might engender some kind of serious backlash among moderate, non golden-shower-loving voters. A friend of mine tells me that Ned Lamont cut this ad in 2006 against Lieberman but opted not to use it... wise choice.
Voter Registration Deadline
Reminder for all readers living in Georgia, Florida, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia- today is the voter registration deadline for your states if you want to be able to vote in the presidential election. If you have friends living in any of these states- make sure that they're registered (particularly if they've moved recently). In most states you can google "ohio voter registration" (for whatever state you're in) and it will take you to a page where you can print out a form and mail it in today.
Nixon redux
Noam Scheiber at TNR gets Sarah Palin... his description of her ressentiment reminds me of a certain Whittier College alum... always bitter about the Eastern Elites, and always ready to stoop to whatever means necessary to pursue his vendetta.
The gloves come off
In response to repeated attacks over the weekend by McCain and Palin trying to link Obama to ex-Weatherman Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko, the Obama campaign is set to push a narrative reminding voters of McCain's role in the Keating Five scandal - starting with this site: http://www.keatingeconomics.com/
Frankly I'm surprised that Obama is owning this attack so publicly (see the "paid by obama for america" logo at the bottom of the Keating site. This seems like the kind of attack best left to a 527. That said, Obama's camp did warn the McCain folks months ago that if they went negative, Obama would go Keating.
Frankly I'm surprised that Obama is owning this attack so publicly (see the "paid by obama for america" logo at the bottom of the Keating site. This seems like the kind of attack best left to a 527. That said, Obama's camp did warn the McCain folks months ago that if they went negative, Obama would go Keating.
Sunday, October 05, 2008
While we're playing the negative association game...
The Chicago Post reports on McCain's good buddy G. Gordon Liddy:
Now a conservative radio talk-show host, Liddy spent more than 4 years in prison for his role in the 1972 Watergate burglary. That was just one element of what Liddy did, and proposed to do, in a secret White House effort to subvert the Constitution. Far from repudiating him, McCain has embraced him.
How close are McCain and Liddy? At least as close as Obama and Ayers appear to be. In 1998, Liddy's home was the site of a McCain fundraiser. Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 this year.
Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."
"At least as close?" I don't recall Obama ever saying that he was proud of Ayres of his principles. In fact, Obama's statement about Ayres was: Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous.
Now a conservative radio talk-show host, Liddy spent more than 4 years in prison for his role in the 1972 Watergate burglary. That was just one element of what Liddy did, and proposed to do, in a secret White House effort to subvert the Constitution. Far from repudiating him, McCain has embraced him.
How close are McCain and Liddy? At least as close as Obama and Ayers appear to be. In 1998, Liddy's home was the site of a McCain fundraiser. Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 this year.
Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."
"At least as close?" I don't recall Obama ever saying that he was proud of Ayres of his principles. In fact, Obama's statement about Ayres was: Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous.
Seeing America like You and I do
Palin yesterday on Obama (via Ambinder)
"There's been a lot of interest in what I read lately. Well, I was reading my copy of today's New York Times and I was really interested to read about Barack's friends from Chicago. Turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man who, according to The New York Times was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol.' These are the same guys who think patriotism is paying higher taxes. This is not a man who sees America as you and I do - as the greatest force for good in the world. This is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country. This, ladies and gentlemen, has nothing to do with the kind of change anyone can believe in - not my kids and not your kids. The only man who can take on Washington is John McCain."
Keep in mind that Palin is married to a guy who for a number of years belonged to a political party that wanted Alaska to secede from the United States... but I'm sure she sees America "like you and I do"
"There's been a lot of interest in what I read lately. Well, I was reading my copy of today's New York Times and I was really interested to read about Barack's friends from Chicago. Turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man who, according to The New York Times was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol.' These are the same guys who think patriotism is paying higher taxes. This is not a man who sees America as you and I do - as the greatest force for good in the world. This is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country. This, ladies and gentlemen, has nothing to do with the kind of change anyone can believe in - not my kids and not your kids. The only man who can take on Washington is John McCain."
Keep in mind that Palin is married to a guy who for a number of years belonged to a political party that wanted Alaska to secede from the United States... but I'm sure she sees America "like you and I do"
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Apologies
My apologies for the drop-off in posts over the past week. I'm preparing for a trial in my full-time job and consequently have a lot less down-time. Hopefully things will ease-off so I can pick back up with more posts in the coming weeks.
Friday, October 03, 2008
CA asks the Federal Government for emergency loan
This, and not the stock market, the Wall Street CEOs, or anything else, is why we need to pass some kind of rescue plan:
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, alarmed by the ongoing national financial crisis, warned Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson on Thursday that the state might need an emergency loan of as much as $7 billion from the federal government within weeks.The warning comes as California is close to running out of cash to fund day-to-day government operations and is unable to access routine short-term loans that it typically relies on to remain solvent.
The state of California is the biggest of several governments nationwide that are being locked out of the bond market by the global credit crunch. If the state is unable to access the cash, administration officials say, payments to schools and other government entities could quickly be suspended and state employees could be laid off.
Plans by several state and local governments to borrow in recent days have been upended by the credit freeze. New Mexico was forced to put off a $500-million bond sale, Massachusetts had to pull the plug halfway into a $400-million offering, and Maine is considering canceling road projects that were to be funded with bonds.California finance experts say they know of no time in recent history when the state has sought an emergency loan of this magnitude from the federal government. The only other such rescue was in 1975, they said, when the federal government lent New York City money to avoid bankruptcy.
California has over 350,000 state employees...
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, alarmed by the ongoing national financial crisis, warned Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson on Thursday that the state might need an emergency loan of as much as $7 billion from the federal government within weeks.The warning comes as California is close to running out of cash to fund day-to-day government operations and is unable to access routine short-term loans that it typically relies on to remain solvent.
The state of California is the biggest of several governments nationwide that are being locked out of the bond market by the global credit crunch. If the state is unable to access the cash, administration officials say, payments to schools and other government entities could quickly be suspended and state employees could be laid off.
Plans by several state and local governments to borrow in recent days have been upended by the credit freeze. New Mexico was forced to put off a $500-million bond sale, Massachusetts had to pull the plug halfway into a $400-million offering, and Maine is considering canceling road projects that were to be funded with bonds.California finance experts say they know of no time in recent history when the state has sought an emergency loan of this magnitude from the federal government. The only other such rescue was in 1975, they said, when the federal government lent New York City money to avoid bankruptcy.
California has over 350,000 state employees...
VP Debate wrap-up
So, despite thinking that General McClellan is leading our troops in cavalry charges against Johnny Reb in Afghanistan, Palin managed not to melt into a puddle of total incomprehensibility during the debate, which of course means that Tom Brokaw thinks she won.
My guess is that the best outcome for the McCain campaign is that some chunk of voters who only know Palin from SNL now think she's not a total joke... but I think that the folks who decided they weren't voting for McCain based on being scared of Palin aren't going to be so impressed that they'll change their minds. Probably this performance will keep some Republicans from despairing, which will be helpful for their volunteer efforts and RNC donations, in a "we live to fight another day" kinda way.
For Obama, this introduces Biden to voters who haven't been paying attention yet, and it may shore up some support in working-class white areas- some of the same folks who are excited to find out that Obama's mom was white, because they're now confident he's not a Muslim.
Ultimately, I think that it's not going to move the polls much at all. Neither of them said anything that's going to change the fundamentals of the race as they stand. Next up- town hall on Tuesday.
My guess is that the best outcome for the McCain campaign is that some chunk of voters who only know Palin from SNL now think she's not a total joke... but I think that the folks who decided they weren't voting for McCain based on being scared of Palin aren't going to be so impressed that they'll change their minds. Probably this performance will keep some Republicans from despairing, which will be helpful for their volunteer efforts and RNC donations, in a "we live to fight another day" kinda way.
For Obama, this introduces Biden to voters who haven't been paying attention yet, and it may shore up some support in working-class white areas- some of the same folks who are excited to find out that Obama's mom was white, because they're now confident he's not a Muslim.
Ultimately, I think that it's not going to move the polls much at all. Neither of them said anything that's going to change the fundamentals of the race as they stand. Next up- town hall on Tuesday.
VP Debate
Watching the debate I feel like Palin is like "Talking Leave-it-to-Beaver Barbie" with a little string in her back, and when you pull it she spouts some kind of homespun catchphrase like "doggone it" or "say it ain't so joe" or "you betcha" or "bless their hearts." She's like a human framed needlepoint. The (inevitably elitist) part of me that thinks that precise and intelligent usage of language is something to be admired retches a little bit listening to her.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
Expectations
Although I expect tonight's debate to be highly entertaining, we shouldn't expect that even the absolute destruction of one of the debaters by the other will have much effect on the campaign. The Quayle/Bentsen debate in 1988 was one of the most thorough drubbings in modern history ("I knew Jack Kennedy, I was a friend of Jack Kennedy, and you, Senator, are no Jack Kennedy"), and I'm sure we all remember eight years of prosperity under the Dukakis/Bentsen administration.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Excellent work, Congress
Via Dealbreaker-
The Senate is set to vote on the bailout bill at 9:30 tonight, which is now larded with various ridiculous tack-on requests, including the following at page 300-
A commenter at Dealbreaker noted:
Thank God Washington is finally listening to the middle class and repealing that draconian excise tax on wooden arrows, the kind commonly used by children.
As a concerned voter, I am very pleased that those fat cat professional bowmen will continue to pay their fair share of excise taxes on the types of arrows THEY use. I'm glad that our elected leaders have the courage to stand up to Big Archery.
Race, class and location
Ta-Nehisi Coates has an interesting post on class and race, commenting on an email he received from a physicial pointing out naming trends among lower-class whites (like "Naveah", or "heaven" spelled backwards):
But also pointed to something about the whole "black pathology" piece. We are always quick to assume that the black poor are somehow particularly dysfunctional, and not simply poor. I read and enjoyed Freakonomics and liked that chapter on "black names." But one wonders why folks don't study the impact of "white working class" names, or the difference in naming traditions amongst the black working class and the black middle classI've been banging this point home over and over, but I think the fact that the major centers of study, theorizing and writing (Manhattan and D.C.) just so happen to be in areas with large amounts of poor black people, almost no poor white (or even working class) white people, really colors the conversation.
But also pointed to something about the whole "black pathology" piece. We are always quick to assume that the black poor are somehow particularly dysfunctional, and not simply poor. I read and enjoyed Freakonomics and liked that chapter on "black names." But one wonders why folks don't study the impact of "white working class" names, or the difference in naming traditions amongst the black working class and the black middle classI've been banging this point home over and over, but I think the fact that the major centers of study, theorizing and writing (Manhattan and D.C.) just so happen to be in areas with large amounts of poor black people, almost no poor white (or even working class) white people, really colors the conversation.
Palin reads all magazines and newspapers
Couric: And when it comes to establishing your world view, I was curious, what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this to stay informed and to understand the world?
Palin: I've read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.
Couric: What, specifically?
Palin: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.
Couric: Can you name a few?
Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where it's kind of suggested, "wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?" Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.
All of them? If I were the editors of The Economist and Foreign Affairs, I'd be embarassed at how little Palin appears to benefit from "reading" their publications...
Palin: I've read most of them, again with a great appreciation for the press, for the media.
Couric: What, specifically?
Palin: Um, all of them, any of them that have been in front of me all these years.
Couric: Can you name a few?
Palin: I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news, too. Alaska isn't a foreign country, where it's kind of suggested, "wow, how could you keep in touch with what the rest of Washington, D.C., may be thinking when you live up there in Alaska?" Believe me, Alaska is like a microcosm of America.
All of them? If I were the editors of The Economist and Foreign Affairs, I'd be embarassed at how little Palin appears to benefit from "reading" their publications...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)