"Keating" v. "Ayers"

Keating mug shot - 1990 Ayers mug shot - 1968

There have been four recent talking points between the campaigns, two on each side. Specifically, "Keating" and "Erratic" have been leveled by Obama against McCain. McCain has leveled "Ayers" and "Inexperience" against Obama. Although, Obama's camp has not hammered away as much on Keating as I would have thought they would. Also, in the last debate when Ayers was brought up it would have been easy for Obama to go to Keating, Rick Davis or William Timmons. Obama did not. Probably because a campaign won't go that negative unless it has to, usually when it's losing. I understand that there other talking points like on the economy, McCain=Bush, Obama=tax spend liberal, ect. But those are boring. I wanted to take a look at these specific talking points' effectiveness. By effectiveness I mean who is gaining traction, if any, in the polls by hammering at these talking points.

Williams Ayers is a 60's and 70's radical, domestic terrorist that bombed federal buildings. Obama served on a board, by invitation, for an organization founded by a conservative Republican, on six occasions Ayers advised the board on education issues. One incident is hammered on by the McCain camp. Namely, Obama attended a gathering at Ayers' house where then State Senator Alice Palmer told those there that she was stepping down and Obama was going to run for her seat. This was not the first such gathering that Palmer organized to introduce Obama around and it was not the last. A New York Times article does a good job of exploring the relationship.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html

Obama's camp has since said that Obama did not know Ayers' background until after they had first met. Obama does not consult Ayers for advice. Obama was a pre-teen when Ayers was committing criminal acts. Obama has denounced those crimes.

McCain was friends with Keating. McCain and Keating would vacation together, with their families. When Keating's sham Savings & Loan was being investigated one the first peopled Keating called to try to call off regulators was McCain.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/06/fact-check-did-mccain-intervene-on-behalf-of-charles-keating/

Keating cost his customers their money and contributed to the cost to U.S. taxpayers, about 125 billion dollars to bail out S&L's in the early 1990's. McCain was a U.S. Senator when this occurred. Lack of oversight and regulation is what allowed Keating to commit his crimes. Until the latest financial crisis McCain was for deregulation.

Obama says McCain is erratic. I think erratic is code for a hothead. Who looked more "presidential" during first week of the economic crisis? McCain first said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong, then nine days later called the economic situation the worst since the Great Depression, "suspended" his campaign ("suspended" is in quotes because commercials continued to run and his surrogates still went on all the talking heads shows), called on (demanded) that the President call a bipartisan meeting including himself and Obama (a meeting that amounted to nothing more than a photo op for McCain since he apparently said and asked almost nothing), flew to Washington to grandstand and took credit for a bailout that did not pass. Obama told people to stay calm and only went to Washington after Bush requested his presence at the bipartisan meeting, during which, according to those that attended, Obama peppered Treasury Secretary Paulson with questions.

Here are some examples of McCain being "erratic", again, which I think is code for a short temper:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1976739/posts

McCain says Obama is inexperienced. Is experience everything? No, but it helps, kind of, sometimes. And not this time. McCain definitely has more experience. Just not all of it's good. See the above S&L scandal. Sometimes a candidate without a long track record is better suited for the political climate. Such is the case now with the economy doing so poorly. Clinton happened into the same good luck against H.W. Bush in 1992. Obama has come upon the scene when being the "inexperienced" candidate is good. Obama just took "inexperienced" and morphed it into "change". McCain tried to wrest the "change" mantra from Obama. But, that is hard for McCain to sell to independents and Reagan Democrats who have had at least a faint understanding that he's been around for a while.

End all be all for McCain is that he has not been able to gain any traction in the polls using these talking points, namely "Ayers" and "Inexperience". In fact, according to the polls Obama's lead has increased, especially in some key swing states. Again, that is if you trust the polls. Ultimately, it may not be so much that these talking points for McCain are absolutely without any teeth. It is more likely that they're overcome, over shadowed and overwhelmed by a political landscape dominated by the economy. And McCain has yet to be able to gain any traction on this economy shaped landscape.

The Return of The Angry - The Final Presidential Debate of 2008

What do you think "She Who Shall Not Be Named,"

thought of McCain's final debate performance?

And the winner is........Joe the Plumber!

McCain vs. Middle Class: McCain-3; Middle Class-0

McCain and Obama have had 3 presidential debates. I watched them. I don't recall McCain ever, ever uttering the phrase "middle-class". If I'm wrong let me know. By my count: McCain debates-3 , "Middle-Class" mentioned by McCain-0

If you consider middle-class anyone that makes $250,000.00 or less, that's a lot of people McCain did not address. Why? Please, someone let me know.

Side Notes:

McCain hurt himself, BADLY, when discussing the abortion issue. He said at some point that the states should regulate abortion and used the two handed "quote" hand sign to refer to the health of a mother.

I swear I heard McCain sighing off camera more than a of couple times. Not to mention the constant blinking and face making half way through it when he was on split screen. And he started looking angry about mid way through the debate.

During the debate McCain said, "I admire, so much, Senator Obama's eloquence and you really have to pay attention to words." So let's pay attention to Senator McCain's words shall we?

McCain said that "all" the people that come to his rallies are "patriotic". And that he has, "repudiated every time someone has been out of line, whether they have been part of [McCain's] campaign or not. And [McCain] will continue to do that. But the fact is that we need to absolutely not stand for the kind of things that have been going on, I haven't."

Has Senator McCain corrected his vice-presidential nominee, "She Who Shall Not Be Named," when she issues the rhetoric that Obama, "pals around with terrorists," plural, present tense? No. No, he has not repudiated that statement, at least not to date.

As for, "all," the people that attend his rallies being, "patriotic," does that include those that yell, "terrorist," "kill him," "off with his head," "treason," ect., at the mention of Obama? Are they, "patriotic" too? According to McCain, yes, they are all patriotic. Live by the rhetoric...

Second to lastly, McCain declares he's a "Federalist". Does he mean "Federalist" as in one of the founding fathers of our country that supported the ratification of our constitution like those that wrote the Federalist Papers and supported our first two presidents, Washington and Adams? Or Does he mean a "Federalist," like the Federalist Party founded by Alexander Hamilton in 1792 and lasted until roughly 1816, now defunct, that was formed to rival Thomas Jefferson and James Madison's Democratic-Republican Party? If he's been around that long he looks good for his age. What year are we in? 1787 or 2008? Again, live by the rhetoric...

Lastly, and kind of on a comical note, McCain said that Obama voted against Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer. One problem with that, Obama was not a U.S. Senator when Justice Breyer was confirmed in 1994.

Here's a link to a transcript of the debate: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/10/debate-transcri.html

more thoughts on the last debate

More Thoughts:

McCain stated early on that, "Americans are angry." Yes, if they attend your rallies they do seem very angry. It's just a question of at what or who.

According to McCain, Obama is for class warfare. Really? Since when? Based on what? Giving tax cuts to the middle class?

McCain says says tax rates for businesses are high. I don't think that's going to resonate with any middle-class voters, but with rich folk, it will, especially with Exxon making record profits for how many years in a row?

McCain again mentions the over-head projector. Again. OK, we get it. Obama got an over priced projector for his home state/town, no one cares.

McCain had a nice line about not being President Bush. Obama a took while to link him to President Bush, but did make the link eventually.

McCain did make eye contact with Obama. Good. Or is it? Especially when the he began sighing audibly when split screens started later in the debate.

Once the "negative campaigning" questions started McCain looked angry, and from there on started sighing audibly off screen.

Obama thinks Biden is qualified to be POTUS but, he doesn't mention "she who shall not be named (Palin) ," unless forced to; later on he is force talk about her and, is very cordial speaking about "she who shall not be named" without saying anything.

McCain says Palin is tough on reform. But what if she is POTUS? McCain never answers the question. He does say that he thinks Biden would not be so good.

Health care debate goes over most people's heads. But, McCain throws out some numbers, namely, the average health care cost for Americans is $5,800.00. McCain offers a $5,000.00 tax credit, whatever that means. Where does the other $800.00 comes from for the average American come from?

Education: It's a state/local thing, let's be honest. Not to say that it's not a problem that needs serious attention. More on this later.

No one looks good when they interupt someone else.

And twice McCain bagged on Dallas. He referenced Kennedy not being able to carry out debates with Goldwater because he was assasinated in, you guessed it, Dallas; debates, by the way, that Kennedy never agreed to. And the Cardinals beating the Cowboys this past Sunday. McCain, apparently doens't care for Dallas.

A Parable, Saying, and Quote Applicable to This Election

The Scorpian & the Frog

The scorpian would be the the Republicans and McCain swearing that this time their going to regulate big finance and industry; the frog would be the electorate believing the Republicans and McCain

http://allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html

Old Saying

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome."

It would arguably be insane to vote for a Republican again and expect anything different than the last 8 years.

Joke

Guy says, "hey, Doc, it hurts when I do this." Doctor says back, 'Then stop doing that."

Doing "this" would be voting for a Republican. If it eventually hurts when you do that, stop doing it.

PalinAsPresident.com

http://www.palinaspresident.com/

After you click on the above link and the page loads, move your mouse around and click on stuff.

Sidenote: If McCain brings up Ayers in tonight's debate does Obama find a way to somehow bring up Charles Keating and William Timmons?

McCain Campaign's Fake Pre-Debate Talking Points

Here's an interesting article from ABC describing how the Obama campaign accidentally released their pre-debate talking points. Since they've run such a smooth campaign so far is it fair for me to wonder if they ever do anything "accidentally" given the innocuous tone of the talking points?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/obama-flack-acc.html

What if, and this is only a what if, McCain's camp had accidentally released its pre-debate talking points? (that pre-supposes that they have pre-debate talking points, which I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't given how poorly the McCain campaign has been run) What might the McCain camp's pre-debate talking points consist of? Here's a guess:

1) Denounce negative tone of people at McCain campaign rallies in media interviews.

2) At rallies issue the "pals around with terrorists," line (make sure it's plural terrorists and present tense, people may yell, "terrorist," "kill him," "treason," "off with his head," ect., don't denounce such sentiment).

3) John McCain is the victim. (Don't worry if it doesn't make sense.)

4) The stock market recovered quite a bit of its losses from last week. See, the fundamentals of the economy are strong. Now it is the time to turn the page on the economy and talk about foreign affairs.

5) If they point out that the jobless rate, new jobs numbers, home sales, foreclosure rate and other key economic indicators are still bad respond with: we're still in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and John McCain is single handedly going to fix it. (Find McCain's accounting visor and his calculator)

6) Announce McCain is suspending campaign to focus on economic crisis again. (don't tell reporters it's to save money so the campaign can make it financially until Nov. 4; we'll still run web ads and tv ads we've paid for already)

7) Announce McCain is calling Letterman and canceling on him again for this Thursday and heading straight to Washington after the debate. (Then do interview with a real news person Thursday night nowhere near Washington.)

8) Obama-Ayers over and over again. (We don't care if the poll numbers are getting away from us. It's got to work eventually.)

9) Downplay McCain's ties to lobbyists

10) Palin is not running the campaign and is just offering suggestions. (will someone tell her to wait until 2012?)

11) Who is the real Barrack "Hussein" Obama? Emphasize "Hussein", even say it twice to scare the ignorant people out there.

12) Oh yeah, talk about the issues or something, maybe something about the economy.

(Again this is a comical, fictional guess at what the McCain camp's pre-debate talking points might be if they had been accidentally released)

Side Note: "This One Goes to Eleven"

It's pretty telling when the big debate inside the McCain campaign is whether or not to go more negative.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14587.html

McCain Seduced By Dark Arts

That McCain is using fear and half-truths against his opponent is surprising since it was these same Rovian tactics that derailed his campaign in South Carolina in the 2000 Republican presidential primaries. One of the articles below was written by Richard ("Rick") H. Davis, McCain's 2000 and current campaign manager, who therein bemoans the use of such tactics, tactics described by him as specifically smearing a person's reputation. Davis even describes it as, "the blackest of the dark arts." Perhaps, Davis and McCain, now the Rove apprentices, have truly embraced the "dark arts," the very same "dark arts" they both combated first hand in 2000.

Maybe McCain and Davis think that since it worked for Bush in 2000 against McCain and 2004 against Kerry it will work for them. But 2000 is a vastly different world than 2008. In 2000 there weren't two wars and we had a budget surplus and the dot com bubble had not quite burst. In 2000 we weren't, according to McCain, facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. In 2004 Kerry's campaign was run almost as poorly as McCain's current campaign. Keep in mind Obama and his staff have run a solid campaign. Remember, Obama and his staff beat Hillary Clinton. Unlike Kerry, Obama addresses the smears and dismisses them as assertions made by a desperate campaign that is out of touch and cannot run on the issues. And let's be honest, Obama is a better candidate than Kerry. And this time the issues really matter, especially at home given our economic outlook.

My belief (and that's all it is, my own thoughts on this subject) is that half-truths and fear mongering/pandering won't work this time, like it did against McCain in 2000. It won't work because there are more important things at stake than personal feelings and reputations. In 2000 as between W. and McCain (and then Gore) all there was to really differentiate candidates was a question of who did you like better. Who would you rather have a beer with? It really was a popularity contest. Now is more reminiscent of 1992. H.W. Bush couldn't get any traction out of the attacks against Bill Clinton in 1992, that he was pot smoking draft dodger, because the economy was bad. Well the economy is worse now than it was in 1992, by a mile. The world has changed. The strategy of a presidential campaign and the tactics employed should have changed when the changed world.

Unfortunately, Rick Davis and McCain have not yet grasped that the landscape has changed. Potentially, their overall campaign strategy (fear) and tactics (such as asking questions like "who is the real Obama," and asserting that he, "pals around with terrorists", present tense plural) used to carry out that strategy are outdated relics, not applicable to our current political landscape. Maybe they've been blinded by the fear of losing another election. Again, the "dark arts" worked against them in 2000. Too bad for McCain the "blackest of the dark arts" is not working for him, like it did against him in 2000, at least according to the polls. No matter the outcome of the election, it seems apparent that McCain really has been seduced by the "dark arts".

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/03/21/the_anatomy_of_a_smear_campaign/
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080128/banks

The "Great Schlep"

This great article from CNN's Patrick Oppman demonstrates the misinformation that Obama is combating. Remember the older lady at the McCain rally who said that Obama was an, "Arab" (Post #5, this blog)? I guessed that she may have received her information about Obama from smear, chain emails. Given what the below article relates, I may not be too far off the mark about where some people are getting their information, namely, smear, chain, patently false emails.

Meanwhile the "Great Schlep" tries to get out the Jewish vote in favor of Obama in Florida.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/13/great.schlep/index.html

Again, What Are McCain & Palin "Sowing"?

someone outside of Obama's economic policy speech in Toledo. Oct. 13



image from http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/religulous.html



Civil Rights leader and U.S. House of Representative John Lewis recently said that McCain/Palin are, "sowing the seeds of division and hate." Rep. Lewis went on to describe the atmosphere of hate created by segregationist Governor George Wallace during the civil rights era. McCain called Rep. Lewis remarks unfair. McCain/Palin rallies have had people say that Obama is an "Arab", and yell, "terrorist", "kill him", and "off with his head". And of course there's this gentlemen above.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/13/mccain.interview/?iref=mpstoryview



Biden has warned about fringe elements that could latch onto the McCain/Palin rhetoric.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=6021550&page=1



At how many more rallies are people going to have to yell such hateful words before McCain realizes and/or acknowledges what his campaigns rhetoric is inciting? How many more people need to show up with signs like, or worse than, the one pictured above before McCain gets it? Maybe not too much longer since, apparently, Palin toned down her rhetoric.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/sarah-palin-ton.html



If McCain and Palin are going to stop their divisive rhetoric, good, finally. But do you really think we've heard the last from the McCain campaign regarding Obama being, "pals with terrorist" or asking rhetorical questions like, "who is the real Barack Obama"? I hope so. But, somehow I doubt it.

Postscript:

Well, I doubted it for a reason. Surrogates of McCain continue the rhetoric of divisiveness.

Take for example this person giving a blessing before a McCain rally:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws_MhRovj5E

His prayer said:

"I would also pray Lord that your reputation is involved in all that happens between now and November, because there are millions of people around this world praying to their God -- whether it's Hindu, Buddha, Allah -- that his [McCain’s] opponent wins for a variety of reasons.And Lord I pray that you would guard your own reputation, because they’re going to think that their god is bigger than you, if that happens. So I pray that you would step forward and honor your own name in all that happens between now and Election Day.Oh Lord, we just commit this time to you, move among us, make your presence very well felt as we are gathered here today in Jesus's name I pray."

This is so out there, where should I start? Apparently, according to this guy, all the other gods' followers are praying Obama wins. He must have some type of dialouge with those other deities to know something like that. And so God should back John McCain so God can show up the other gods or he'll look bad at the next deity card game. Maybe he never considered that God might be in agreement with his fellow deities. Of course I would think someone like this guy would believe in only one true God, and wouldn't think the Christian God is in competition with other "lesser" gods, but I digress.

Then there's this Virginia Republican chairman who said that Obama and bin Laden both have friends that bombed the Pentagon. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dot.comments/2008/10/obama_polls_ahead.html

A New York Times article explored Obama's relationship to Ayers in detail and found that there really isn't that much there, they merely "crossed paths". http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html

Where is McCain correcting these surrogates? Maybe McCain will only correct his surrogates and supporters when they make wild allegations in front of his own eyes and within earshot. Maybe he's flip flopped again about what is true about Obama and what is not. Remember, this the 2008 McCain that defended every political ad and talking point from his campaign as 100% true to journalists not so long ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jhb41Z-Znkg

And lastly, if McCain and his surrogates think this rhetoric is going to help McCain win they must not be looking at the same polls everyone else is.

Side Note: Obama when someone boos McCain

Notice how differently Obama responds when someone just boos at the mention of McCain's name. http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/13/obama-urges-his-supporters-to-vote-not-boo-mccain/

Side Side Note: McCain and Glass Houses

If McCain wants to play guilt by association, and the closer and more recent the association the more guilty then, what is to be made of this? McCain's transition chief was essentially a lobbyist for Saddam Hussein. How many lobbyists does McCain have in his campaign anyway? Answer: lots.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/09/mccain.lobbying/

Now of course McCain himself wasn't a lobbyist for Saddam. But he's employing someone who was. Someone who served as an advocate for a genocidal dictator. So to be clear, McCain would hire, for his campaign, a former advocate for a genocidal dictator. Obama didn't decide whether or not Ayers would be on the board they served on. Shouldn't McCain be careful of throwing stones from his 5+ glass houses with associates and associations like this? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/14/mccain-transition-chief-a_n_134595.html

Who's Running McCain's Campaign - A Democratic Operative?

Seriously, is Rick Davis a double agent for the Democrats? How else can you explain how poorly run McCain's campaign has been since the Republican National Convention. Or is it someone else's fault entirely.

Republican strategists, not associated with the McCain campaign, appear to agree that McCain needs to focus on the economy to try to make up his deficit in the polls.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14512.html

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a McCain supporter and often seen talking head, said on Saturday that McCain was going to offer a, "very comprehensive approach to jump-start the economy."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/us/politics/13plan.html

Somebody should have told the McCain campaign because they said that McCain wasn't going to do so. Specifically, Tucker Bounds, McCain campaign spokesperson said, “We do not have any immediate plans to announce any policy proposals outside of the proposals that John McCain has announced, and the certain proposals that would result as economic news continues to come our way.”

In the mean time on Monday, Oct. 13 Obama unveiled a four point plan in an attempt to help deal with the economic crisis. Essentially doing what Graham had promised McCain would do Monday.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14523.html

Wow.

Seriously, is Rick Davis secretly working for the Dems or Obama? For that matter where was the communications director, Jill Hazelbaker, on this one? (of course she didn't do so well when she credited McCain for the passage of the bailout bill that didn't pass) Steve Schmidt is the chief strategist, where has he been?

Not to go over recent history in detail nor kick dead horses but let's not forget the following to date:

1) picking Palin

2) fundamentals of economy are strong on Sept. 15

3) worst economic crisis since the Great Depression Sept. 24

4) suspends campaign, kind of, ads still run, surrogates still campaign

5) calls on (demands) Bush call a meeting of both parties' leaders including himself (of course) and Obama

6) his communication's director and other surrogates give McCain credit for getting first version of bailout passed before it passes, and oh, by the way, it doesn't pass

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html

7) rhetoric of his campaign has inspired some of his supporters at rallies to say/yell that Obama, "is an Arab", "kill him"; "terrorist", and "off with his head - See past posts and

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/10/08/1517943.aspx

That's all I can think of right now. There are more, I know.

And now the "very comprehensive approach to jump-start the economy" isn't needed because the situation presumably doesn't call for it otherwise McCain would offer up new ideas, right? If the situation for new economic policies is not called for now, then when would it ever be called for according to McCain?

So who is to blame for the poorly run McCain campaign? Rick Davis, the campaign manager? Someone else in the campaign like chief strategist Steve Schmidt, communications director Jill Hazelbaker, or talking head/supporter Senator Graham? Maybe all of them to some degree are to blame. But, it's McCain's campaign ultimately. Ultimately, the blame lies with him for his poorly run campaign.

Although I still think there's an outside chance Rick Davis is a double agent for the Dems. That way this poorly run campaign by McCain would make more sense.

(To be clear, I have no information that Rick Davis or anyone else associated with the McCain campaign is a secret, double-agent operative for Obama and/or the Dems, the suggestion made that he or anyone else may be a secret, double-agent operative for Obama and/or the Dems is made in jest.)

Postscript: John Martin on his blog on politico.com is reporting that Doug Holtz-Eakin, McCain's chief domestic policy adviser, said on a conference call that McCain is going to offer specific new measures regarding the economy. Wow. Double wow. First, Graham says McCain has new policy proposals regarding the economy. Then, spokesperson Bounds says no, he doesn't. Now, Hotz-Eakin, says wait a minute, yes he does, tomorrow though. Stay tuned, they may decide they don't have any new economic policy proposals by tomorrow. Triple wow.

A Joke, Kind of, Except It's Not Funny If You're a Republican (Or Hillary Clinton)

Here's my joke: How many Republicans does it take to lose a presidential election?

Answer: None. Just hire the Democrats that ran Hillary Clinton's campaign.

Here's a good article describing 5 things that Hillary Clinton did wrong in her race against Obama:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1738331,00.html

There is one parallel between Clinton's campaign and McCain's. McCain has tried to be the change candidate but at the same time talks about his vast experience. This not a time to run on experience against Obama. Ask Clinton how that went for her.

McCain's mistakes:

1. McCain is reaching by trying to be the "change" candidate.

The Repulicans in the past have taken the strongest campaign point for the Democrats and co-opted it with great success. GW took "strong on defense" and "war veteran" away from Kerry, for example, even though GW never served in Vietnam.

2. McCain took public money.

3. McCain was not prepared to battle Obama in traditionally red states.

4. The economy.

5. Palin.

Clayton Williams & John McCain

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/15/mccain_texas_fundraiser_back_o.html?hpid=topnews

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D919V3GG0&show_article=1&catnum=0

Obama and the Secret Service

Obama receives Secret Service detail earlier than any other presidential candidate in history:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18474444/

Florida man arrested for threatening Obama:

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/07/man-arrested-in-florida-for-threatening-to-kill-obama/

Man arrested outside Obama's home:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080925/ap_on_re_us/obama_home_arrest

The latest: ATF arrest 2 neo-Nazi's for plot to assasinnate Obama:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2008/10/obama-agents-no.html

McCain to Supporter at His Own Rally: "Obama is not an Arab"

Why oh why on God's green earth would McCain have said something like that? Well, because just moments earlier a female supporter at a rally for his campaign, that somehow was handed a microphone said, "I can't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's not, he's not uh — he's an Arab. He's not — ". Then McCain snatched the microphone from this yahoo and responed, "No, ma'am. He's a decent family man [and] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not [an Arab]."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14479.html

This type of untrue and misguided sentiment is indicative of the beliefs and feelings of at least some of the people that have been gathering for McCain/Palin rallies. See post 3 on this blog for more. Now more than ever the Republican model of campaigning to and inspiring fear has reached new heights. The McCain of 2000 is rearing his head when he sees first hand what the McCain of 2008 has inspired and felt compelled to correct this ignorant woman. McCain also said to her and the crowd, "I have to tell you. Sen. Obama is a decent person and a person you don’t have to be scared of as president of the United States." He said it to boos from the crowd. Maybe McCain is scared by what his campaign has fomented. Maybe his conscious, finally, is making him act. Either way it's about time. What is sad is very likely she didn't and doesn't believe him, even after McCain told her that Obama is not an "Arab".

Why would she if, for example, she's a person that only gets her news and information from chain emails. Emails like the ones that make wild allegations about Obama. For an example of these strange, wild and highly inaccurate accusations made in these atrocious emails you have no further to look than here:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

That same McCain supporter would probably lose a small fortune if she received an email plea for help from a Nigerian prince requesting her banking information so that he could transfer his vast wealth to an American bank. Too bad for her that McCain probably won't be there to try to stop her from believing that email too. The sad thing is she probably wouldn't believe McCain if he told her the Nigerian prince wasn't real either.

Side Note: "Never Get Involved in a Land War in Asia and Never Go In Against a Sicilian When Death Is on the Line"

http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/a-misplaced-hockey-mom-moment/

Or, Oh, That's Why You Don't Send a Candidate to a Sporting Event During Election Season, Much Less a Sporting Event in Philadelphia

Apparently, "The Hockey Mom," Governor Palin was not appreciated by some fans when she dropped the first puck at the Flyers' home opener. By the way, Pennsylvania is a swing state this election. By the way again, Philly fans are notoriously rude. The McCain campaign should have known better. Or maybe they're that out touch that they didn't know about Philly fans.

Side Side Note: The "Reverse Bradley Effect"?

Regarding the "Bradley effect" some new research indicates that in some states' Democratic Primaries there may be evidence of a "reverse Bradley effect". Bad news for the McCain campaign, see Post 3. on this blog.

http://www.physorg.com/news142862643.html

Lessons from the McCain Campaign: How to NOT Vet a VP Pick

They vetted Sarah Palin? Really?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14481.html

Speilberg Borrowing Again

Speilberg sued over Disturbia. Suit alleges it's a rip off of Rear Window

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/lawsuit-and-every-film-critic-says-disturbia-ripped-off-hitchcocks-rear-window/

What about the wrong man movie Eagle Eye borrowing themes from North By Northwest?

How To Rig an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative (ISBN 1-4165-5222-7)

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/22/rigging.election/

McCain and Hispanics

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14444.html