The New Era Begins Today

The new era begins today. President Obama is said to be meeting with military leaders today on his first full day on the job. As I remember his campaign promises, one was to create a concrete withdrawal program for Iraq. That we should get out of there was said many times in many different ways. Now we'll see.

Other promises were about health care at home and the lessening of taxes for most Americans. But perhaps today's schedule at the White House is indicative of the priority. HuffPo writer Stephen Schlesinger wrote an interesting piece entitled, Obama and the Use of Force.

There were heartening echoes of the words and thoughts of several of our most distinguished presidents in President Obama's Inaugural address today. One I found most interesting was Obama's reference to "earlier generations" of Americans who faced down fascism and communism "not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions." Obama added: "They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please."

What do you think about that? Does it indicate a new direction for the United States of America? Could this mark the beginning of a return to the standards that were once synonymous with America? Or, are you concerned that this could be a grave mistake, that military might and world-policing is what is needed in these difficult times?

Please feel free to leave a comment.

I Love It When I'm Right

I predicted a landslide and tonight I read the headline in CNN "World Cheers Obama Landslide." I'm enjoying watching and listening to the different reactions.

On Weer'd Beard's site I read a wonderful post which should be a lesson to all those who did not vote for Obama. This post was as gracious as McCain's speech last night.

Now that the election is over I can only hope for the best. I knew this day might come so I've been thinking about this post for a little while. So here are Weer'ds Ground Rules for President Obama.

Precedent-Elect Obama has earned his title, and shall wear here, and hopefully everywhere. There will be no-more "Senator Obama" or "Mr. Obama", on January 20th he will officially be President Obama, until then it shall be "President-Elect Obama", and I might just shorten it for brevity.

Right on, Weer'd. Let's hope for the best.

I came across this story about an Obama supporter who got carried away with himself and then carried away by the police.

A Burlington man was so happy at the news that Barack Obama will be the next president that he fired a gun inside his home some 18 times, sending a hail of bullets into neighboring homes, according to the Burlington Police Department.

James G. Dewalt, 34, faces three counts of reckless endangerment in connection with the Tuesday night shooting.

There are lots of interesting angles on this one. I'll leave them to the readers to sort out.

Barack Obama by a Landslide

I just wanted to say it once more. I was already saying it in June. Today's the day. I think it's happening right now. The number of whites who just can't bring themselves to vote for Obama will be offset by the number of Republicans who just can't bring themselves to vote for McCain. The rest'll be history by tonight.

Is There Fear of a Black President?

The Mother Jones site ran a very interesting story yesterday written by James Ridgeway about the reaction some white folks are having to the ever-increasing prospect of a black president.

The prospect of an African American president is bringing the nation's white supremacists out of the shadows—and, along with them, some subtler versions of racialist populism. Both hearken back to another economically and socially turbulent time in the United States, in the early 1980s.

On the official David Duke website, the election of Barack Obama is referred to as a "wakeup call." Is that some kind of code word that the true extremists recognize? It's a frightening prospect to think that there may be a powder keg of of racial hatred just waiting to be ignited.

On Huffington Post, the article called Five Reasons Why the Obama Infomercial was Worth the Cost seems to smooth the waters a bit.

Let's be honest: the Obama infomercial was about comforting white Americans -- especially middle and working class white Americans. That said, it was arguably necessary and -- for what it was -- very effective.

Although only time will tell, it appears that the Obama infomercial accomplished exactly what it needed to do: soothing skittish white undecided voters without alienating current supporters.

What do you think? Is this a problem? Is there any possibility that small bands of fanatics armed with well-read copies of The Turner Diaries will rise up and wreak havoc?

Why Is McCain Silent on Guns?

Politico.com has a fascinating article about John McCain's having missed an important opportunity by not pushing the Second Amendment agenda.

Guns are a potent force in American politics. As I have pointed out before, had Al Gore won Tennessee, Arkansas or West Virginia — all winnable states — in 2000, he would not have had to win Florida, and he would have become president.

But Gore lost all three states, and guns had a lot to do with it. Gun owners simply didn’t believe Gore when he said he was not going to take their guns away. (They did believe Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996 when he said the same thing, but Clinton sold his “Bubba” image effectively and was far more trusted in small-town and rural America.)

The article makes a convincing argument for the benefits of a Republican campaign using the gun control issue to its benefit, but it doesn't offer much to explain McCain's not doing so.

What do you think could explain it? I was thinking the reason is it's not that important in the big picture, but those examples about Gore tell a different story.

What's your opinion?

Obama's 30-minute Ad

CNN reports on the 30-minute TV ad run by the Obama campaign.

Sen. Barack Obama's 30-minute TV ad, which ran simultaneously on broadcast and cable networks at 8 p.m. ET Wednesday, is muscle-flexing that has little precedent, a campaign advertising expert said.

"It's evidence, if you needed any, that the Obama campaign has more money than there is ad time left to buy," said Evan Tracey, director of the Campaign Media Analysis Group. "This is flexing the muscles."

I guess flexing the muscles is OK. It made me think that Barack is doing exactly what he advised his supporters to do after the last debate, not to rest on their laurels, not to count their chickens before they're hatched, etc. He's raised a lot of money and he's using it.

In the ad, McCain and the Republicans are not even mentioned; making a complete departure from the negative campaigning that had gotten a bit too prevalent.

One thing I found confusing is that ABC initially refused to accept the ad, and after negotiating an agreement, Obama's folks had made other arrangements. Meanwhile, Fox, not only took the business, but actually had the World Series game delayed to accommodate the Obama ad. Did I miss something?

The IMAO site has a humorous take on the latest Obama news.

Wassup?

This one's going around the internet. It's funny, poignant, appropiate.



Hat tip Jon Talpin via Marc Cooper

Candidates Roasting Each Other

On the wonderful site Donklephant there's an article called A Night for Laughs.

The Alfred E. Smith Dinner in NYC is one of those things you look forward to hearing about every year because, for one night at least, politicians can just throw out some zingers and the only thing you’ll hear from their opponents are laughs.

I found these speeches absolutely hysterical. After all the super seriousness of the three debates, after all the finger pointing about negative advertising, what a relief to just laugh. I think the candidates themselves must have felt it too, or perhaps especially.

Bruce Springsteen and Billy Joel in Concert for Obama

The Rocky Mountain News (via talkleft.com) reports that a fundraising concert took place led by two of the biggest names in music.

Obama also offered a new explanation for his decision to seek the White House.

"I was sitting offstage with (his wife) Michelle, and I ... said, 'Honey, the reason I'm running for president is I can't be Bruce Springsteen. I can't be Billy Joel,'" Obama said.

Much of the talk was about not getting overconfident. The CNN report is all about the warnings Obama has issued to his supporters.

Sen. Barack Obama cautioned supporters Thursday against becoming complacent during the final days leading up to the election, noting he lost the New Hampshire primary despite a lead in the polls.

What's your opinion? Is it possible for the "Democrats to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory" again? I'm sticking with my original prediction: Obama by a landslide.

The Old Double Standard - Revised and Edited

When posting this one last week, I had misread the original article I'd linked to. I thought Sarah Palin had made the quotes herself, but Graham was very clear. His point was that she is guilty be association with Joe Vogler, Founder of The Alaska Independence Party, who really did say them.

I'm absolutely embarrassed about this, but at least now I understand what you commenters were talking about.

I'd like to extend my sincerest apologies to Sarah Palin, first of all, and to anyone else who noticed and minded. Even though I want this to be entertainment and not journalism, what I wrote was unacceptable and won't require all that much research to avoid in the future.

*********************************************

On the wonderfully informative site called The Cognoscenti, Graham asks a very pointed question.

Why does Sarah Palin get a free pass?

This question is in reference to her membership in the Alaska Independence Party. I've read about this here and there, but frankly didn't pay much attention. But, while reading what Graham has to say about it, I realized there's a major double standard going on. Imagine if Obama had selected a VP running mate who had said the un-American things Sarah Palin has said? (here's where I went wrong) Do you think the Republican mud-slingers would have been so quiet about it? Examples:

"I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."

"And I won’t be buried under their damn flag. I’ll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.”

I'll answer my own question. If Joe Biden had ever said things like that, we would have been bombarded with it like there's no tomorrow. Look at what they've done with the Ayers business, the desperate, straw-clutching Republicans. The explanation is obvious. Obama must have instructed his advisors to try, as much as is possible in a presidential campaign, to maintain some dignity, to not stoop to using every low blow they could. And the reason for that is also obvious. He could afford to do it. He's the better candidate. People are ready for a change.

What do you think?

Barack Obama By a Landslide

I really know next to nothing about politics. This is due to the fact that I turned my back on it, figuratively speaking, after the Viet Nam period. Only about two years ago did I begin to get interested again, partly because I do read the news and feel the world is in terrible shape now, much worse than in the 70s, and partly because I heard Obama speak and thought he was the only credible sounding politician I'd ever heard.

I predicted Obama by a landslide. It was a bit tongue in cheek because of my near total ignorance on the subject. It was more wishful thinking than anything.

Today The Washington Post front page headline says Obama is 10 points ahead of McCain.

With just over three weeks until Election Day, the two presidential nominees appear to be on opposite trajectories, with Sen. Barack Obama gaining momentum and Sen. John McCain stalled or losing ground on a range of issues and personal traits, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

What's your opinion? Do you think this is exaggerated spinning on the part of a liberal newspaper?

The Old Double Standard

On the wonderfully informative site called The Cognoscenti, Graham asks a very pointed question.

Why does Sarah Palin get a free pass?

This question is in reference to her membership in the Alaska Independence Party. I've read about this here and there, but frankly didn't pay much attention. But, while reading what Graham has to say about it, I realized there's a major double standard going on. Imagine if Obama had selected a VP running mate who had said the un-American things Sarah Palin has said? Do you think the Republican mud-slingers would have been so quite about it? Examples:

"I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."

"And I won’t be buried under their damn flag. I’ll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.”

I'll answer my own question. If Joe Biden had ever said things like that, we would have been bombarded with it like there's no tomorrow. Look at what they've done with the Ayers business, the desperate, straw-clutching Republicans.

The explanation is obvious. Obama must have instructed his advisors to try, as much as is possible in a presidential campaign, to maintain some dignity, to not stoop to using every low blow they could. And the reason for that is also obvious. He could afford to do it. He's the better candidate. People are ready for a change.

What do you think?

The Second Debate - McCain vs. Obama

The New York Times provided a lengthy and what I believe is a comprehensive analysis of the debate. They highlighted 12 items for their veracity check, things like Health Care, Getting Bin Laden and Taxes. What I noticed is that gun control and capital punishment were not mentioned. If they made it into the debate at all, the New York Times considered 12 other things more important. That's interesting considering what we're always talking about on this blog.

What do you think about that? Does it perhaps mean that those two topics are really not as important as we seem to think? I suggested before that the reason some people like and support Palin for VP is because she's pro gun. Of course that was roundly denied. My point was that maybe the gun issue is not all that important in the big picture. But, what about all those claims that it's the 2nd Amendment that protects the 1st Amendment? I don't think I accept that, do you?

One thing I got a kick out of was that Obama's claim of lowering taxes for 95% was exaggerated. But at least it wasn't vague; otherwise it could not have been so precisely analyzed.

Mr. Obama said he is proposing a tax cut for “95 percent of Americans.” But the Tax Policy Center, a non-partisan organization, did some sophisticated modeling of both candidates’ tax proposals and concluded actually only 81 percent of tax filers would get a tax cut under Mr. Obama’s plan.

CNN had this report. And the Declarations of Pride site declares Obama the winner.

What's your opinion? Did Obama really win? Is it simply a case of momentum he's built up since Palin began fading away two weeks ago?

John McCain the Gambler

The New York Times has run an exposé over the last two days of John McCain's gambling ties . He has been involved in the intricate and ruthless business of casino gambling in America for decades both as a behind-the-scenes wheeler dealer and as a player.

(Big H/T to George)

As a two-time chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, Mr. McCain has done more than any other member of Congress to shape the laws governing America’s casinos, helping to transform the once-sleepy Indian gambling business into a $26-billion-a-year behemoth with 423 casinos across the country. He has won praise as a champion of economic development and self-governance on reservations.

Once the Native American Gambling Business grew to this extent, largely due to McCain's efforts, the Senator's patrons in Las Vegas began to be concerned.

In the spring of 2005, Mr. McCain announced he was planning a sweeping overhaul of Indian gambling laws, including limiting off-reservation casinos. His campaign said Las Vegas had nothing to do with it. In a 2005 interview with The Oregonian, Mr. McCain said that if Congress did not act, “soon every Indian tribe is going to have a casino in downtown, metropolitan areas.”

Carl Artman, who served as the Interior Department’s assistant secretary of Indian Affairs until May, said Mr. McCain pushed him to rewrite the off-reservation rules. “It became one of my top priorities because Senator McCain made it clear it was one of his top priorities,” he said.

The new guidelines were issued on Jan. 4. As a result, the casino applications of 11 tribes were rejected.

Besides being involved behind the scenes, John McCain himself is a high-stakes player. From Arizona, he was known to make weekend jaunts up to Vegas, about once a month, where he was wined and dined like any High Roller with influence in Washington.

Perhaps one of the unspoken implications of the NY Times piece is that the kind of person who gambles by playing Native American interests against those of Las Vegas, the kind of person who personally likes to throw the dice in high stakes crap shoots in casinos, would bring that "maverick" attitude into the White House, should he be elected president.

What do you think? Is taking weekend trips to Vegas to let your hair down incompatible with the Office of President? Is there something disonorable in representing Native American interests then changing teams and going to bat for Vegas? Do you think taking Sarah Palin on as a running mate was an example of reckless gambling? Is gambling a vice?

Please leave us your thoughts in a comment.

McCain Suspends Campaign to Fight for Country

Senator John McCain announced that he would suspend his campaign in order to work from Washington on the bailout plan. He suggested that Obama do the same and that their anxiously-awaited debate scheduled for tomorrow be postponed.

CNN reports on the summons to the White House Thursday of the two candidates.

"Now is a time to come together -- Democrats and Republicans -- in a spirit of cooperation for the sake of the American people,"

Now if that isn't the biggest bunch of nonsense I've ever heard, I don't know what is. After taking a nosedive in the polls, suddenly the Republican candidate pulls this trick. To me it's a transparent but plausible lie, which after the trouncing Obama gives him in the general election, will come very handy to save face for himself and the party. You see, for them nothing is more important than furthering the enmity between liberal and conservative, between Democrat and Republican. It's exactly the opposite of what he said.

The liberaltruthsayer said this: "What a maverick."


Over at The Podium the title of the post says it all: "BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT, BULLSHIT!!!"


In order to maintain my long-standing tradition of Fair and Balanced Reporting, on the site entitled Libertas 01, we find the predictable conservative spin. Many of the commenters weren't fooled though.

I'm sticking with my original prediction.


What do you think?

Sarah Palin and Amy Winehouse are Twins

The crack investigative team at mikeb302000 have uncovered this fascinating story. It seems the adorable twins were separated shortly after birth, raised on different continents and only reunited this week. Amy, the younger by two and a half minutes, was watching Fox News as part of her latest rehab treatment program when she recognized her twin on the screen. "It was more of a, like, visceral thing," said the beleaguered pop star. Sarah Palin, at first visibly shaken to learn that her biological mother had given her up for adoption before fleeing to the UK with her twin, rebounded quickly and issued the following statement: "The important thing here is that Amy and I are now reunited, which proves that our mother had international foreign policy experience as well as a pro-life philosophy. My running mate, who is don't forget, the only man in this campaign who ever fought for his country, has welcomed Amy and her entourage to join me and the entire Palin clan on the campaign trail."

McCain's Girl

A lot of people were surprised at John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as running mate. CNN Reports that the Alaska governor was not really on anyone's radar screen.

"She's got the grit, integrity, good sense and fierce devotion to the common good that is exactly what we need in Washington today," McCain said.

One of the obvious advantages to this choice is that the Republicans might pick up some of those Hillary Clinton supporters who, supposedly quite numerous, were not placated by Hillary's overtures to vote for Obama. But could those women actually bring themselves to vote for a staunchly pro-life ticket?

Gov. Palin shares John McCain's commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade.

It's certainly going to be interesting.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

McCain vs. Obama/Biden

Thanks to Real Clear Politics for the stats below. It's certainly clear that Obama's lead has shrunk since a little over a month ago when I last published the RCP stats.

Election 2008	Obama	McCain	Spread
RCP National Average	45.0	43.4	Obama +1.6
Favorable Ratings	+18.3	+16.2	Obama +2.1
Intrade Market Odds	62.1	36.6	-
Electoral College	Obama	McCain	Toss Ups
RCP Electoral Count	228	174	136
No Toss Up States	264	274	-
Battleground States	Obama	McCain	Spread
Ohio	44.7	45.7	McCain +1.0
Michigan	46.0	42.0	Obama +4.0
Minnesota	47.5	43.0	Obama +4.5
Colorado	45.3	45.8	McCain +0.5
Virginia	45.7	46.3	McCain +0.6
Florida	44.8	47.4	McCain +2.6

What I'm curious to see is what effect the selection of Joe Biden will have. Naturally the opinions of experts are mixed. Reid Wilson wrote a nice piece yesterday entitled, "Why Biden is the Perfect Pick."

Clearly, Biden's experience in Washington ensures that he cannot adopt the same outsider mantle Obama owns. But Obama's brand, like McCain's, is so strong on its own that it doesn't need to be augmented by further change. Instead, Obama had weaknesses and gaps to fill, and he chose a candidate who did just that.

CNN reports that in his first public appearance with Obama in Springfield, Senator Biden launched into an attack of McCain, a fairly predictable one I might add.

"John McCain ... served our country with extreme courage, and I know he wants to do right by America," he said of his Senate colleague and the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. "But the harsh truth is loud and clear: You can't change America when you supported George Bush's policies 95 percent of the time."

He also seized on a McCain comment from this week when he could not remember how many houses he owns and said McCain was out of touch with the "kitchen-table" issues that working families face.

I'm hoping that the stats produced by Real Clear Politics do not indicate an inexorable slide in Obama's formidable lead. And if they do, that the naming of Senator Joe Biden will mark a rejuvenation of what has been so far a very impressive campaign.

Barack Obama's Running Mate

The anticipation surrounding the choice of running mate has been incredible. The latest headline on CNN today is just that: more anticipation.

Most of this week's buzz has been around Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine.

If Obama decided to shock everybody and name Hillary Clinton, he'd recoup many, many votes which would otherwise be lost. Supposedly, millions of hard-core Hillary supporters won't vote for Obama unless she's on the ticket.

Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia would bring his important state along for the Obama ride to the White House.

Kaine also said he thinks that if Obama can take Virginia -- which hasn't voted for a Democratic president in 44 years -- then the senator from Illinois would win the White House.

I wondered if in addition to the understandable indecision associated with a choice like this, there isn't some theatrics involved. These last days it seems like this has been dragged out purposely, as if there were some benefit to prolonging the agony. Maybe the high-powered advisors behind the scenes have been masterfully manipulating the entire campaign in order to maximize voter interest. That wouldn't be such a bad thing.

What do you think?


UPDATE

CNN's Political Ticker Blog is really trying to increase the suspense.

Still no names, but man is it getting hot in this kitchen.

THE BIG UPDATE

It's Biden.