and so it begins...

The McCain campaign was right... they were going to try to change the subject since McCain was dropping in the polls. So, the attack dog (Palin) started it this weekend. She's bringing up all the old stuff that has been debunked already. But, as she said in the VP Debate, she's only been in this for 5 weeks. She made a mistake yesterday when answering a reporters question, when she said that these things that haven't been talked about before, should be out there. Guess in Alaska, she didn't hear all the talk of these things before. This has been tried already. Hopefully people will be as smart this time as they were last time, and not buy into this crap. Oh yeah, Fox News also had a show on last night that couldn't have just been made in last two days, but it practically had Obama as the head of Al Queda for pete's sake. They really have sunk pretty low, but that's nothing new. And they call themselves fair and balanced.

And so begins the part of campaign season that I hate... the personal attacks that are so desparate. The only thing I'm happy about (and I don't like that people have to do this) is that Obama is not letting it slide as John Kerry did. As soon as I heard all of this on Saturday, I said... "boy... McCain should be careful or Obama camp could do the Keating 5, Palin's troppergate, and Palin's own share of Rev. issues". Not sure about the rest of them, but there is already a reminder video on the web about Keating 5 as a reminder of the bank failing there, and how it relates to the same things that are happening in the banks now.

To bad you had to do it Obama... but good for you for not letting them walk all over you like they've tried to do to others in past elections. Shame on you McCain for not living up to your word of NOT doing this stuff since it was done to you in 2000. You've completely caved to everything for a win. I hope it's all worth it to you when you have to look in the mirror. What a hypocrit.

Very funny...

By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press WriterFri Oct 3, 3:08 PM ET

Joe Six-Pack is somewhere out there on the campaign trail, coveted and courted by the presidential candidates. He is the electorate, reduced to one guy. He would be really interesting to talk to if we could only find him. Nobody ever seems to say what he looks like or where he is, exactly.

Rumor has it he is, um, a he. The "Joe" is probably a dead giveaway, though Sarah Palin has referred to putting "government back on the side of the people of Joe Six-Pack like me." He probably wears a shirt with a blue collar and lives someplace on Main Street, or at least sometimes goes to Main Street, perhaps to pick up a six-pack.

He likely drinks that six-pack at his kitchen table, where, if he's still married, he and his wife, Soccer Mom, talk about how it feels to personify Middle America and how Washington insiders are out of touch.

But at least they're better off than Six-Pack's cousin, Joe Lunchbucket, a working stiff who has to pack his own lunch and can't even afford beer. Nobody seems to mention him much.

Another prominent resident of their town, Small Business Owner, has it tough, too. To be honest, these days even the guy in the McMansion one subdivision over, White-Collar Elite, faces hardships. He could get laid off anytime. When it comes to heavy mortgages, high gas prices and the other weighty issues of our time, he's starting to look an awful lot like Joe Six-Pack, even if his shirt is a different color.

Fact is, Joe Six-Pack knows a lot of so-called blue-collar types — plumbers, electricians, truck drivers, the guy who owns the local car-repair shop — who make more money than White-Collar Elite. In fact, if you catch them after they've taken off their white or blue collars and put on t-shirts to go watch football, they're awfully hard to tell apart.

Still, Joe Six-Pack is the one the politicians seem to like best. It is generally understood that he is a heckuva nice guy. He drinks, but he never drinks and drives. When he does drive, he would be the last person to tailgate or cut anybody off in traffic. He just Wants What is Best for America.

Maybe the reason Joe Six-Pack sounds so good is that he doesn't exist.

Tagging voters with cliches simplifies them to the point of caricature — and is far removed from reality. People are more complicated than that, whether their employment status is classified as blue-collar, white-collar, retired, self-employed or unemployed. However pollsters might slice and dice the public, there is no Everyman. Thank goodness. That's one of the things that makes the two-year journey to the election interesting.

I grew up in a blue-collar family. My father's name isn't Joe and he doesn't drink beer. Never has. Can't stand the stuff. My mother was a "stay-at-home mom" and didn't go back to work until my brothers and I were teenagers. She wasn't a "soccer mom" or a "hockey mom." Those sports were expensive, too expensive.

My mother did pack my father's lunch each day, and later on, when she went back to work, my father used to pack hers. Did that make either of them "Joe Lunchbucket?" Now that they're retired, what are they? Just what they've always been: People who know the score and have their own opinions about politics and policy, none of which fits the candidates' cliches.

Back when I was a reporter in Wisconsin, I remember getting dispatched to one of President Clinton's speeches to ask voters "in the Heartland" about their views on his impeachment proceedings.

Democrats and Republicans on the talk shows had already offered their caricatures of the average person's opinion. But the people I spoke to — Democrats, Republicans, independent or indifferent — all had nuanced views on the impeachment. They weren't simply pro or con. And I'll bet if I had asked whether they thought of themselves as Joe Six-Pack, Soccer Mom, Main Street or any of the other categories, the answer would have been none of the above.

There used to be a feature on one of the network new shows in which a correspondent picked a spot on the map, went there, closed his eyes and pointed to a name at random in the phonebook. The theme was that everybody has a story, everyone was interesting. No one was the same. And whether the reporter went to small towns, large cities or a lonely house in the countryside, no one was a stereotype.

Yet politicians never seem to see that. Pandering politicians are as old as politics. The idea seems to be that claiming kinship with this or that voting bloc is enough to win that bloc over.

Will the mythical Joe Six-Pack swing this election to one candidate or the other? Remains to be seen. Besides, what I really want to know, if there truly is a Joe Six-Pack out there somewhere: Is he single?

You know you’re in trouble when...

When your campaign basically is admitting that you're losing on issues, so you have to start more agreesively attacking people personally. In an article on msnbc it states...

"Two other top Republicans said the new ads are likely to hammer the senator from Illinois on his connections to convicted Chicago developer Antoin "Tony" Rezko and former radical William Ayres, whom the McCain campaign regularly calls a domestic terrorist because of his acts of violence against the U.S. government in the 1960s."

There going to go after the fact that Obama knows or has ever had association with these guys. And they will probably start this at Tuesdays debate first before putting out ads. Maybe that's so they can see if the CNN line goes up or down to know how the public will deal with hearing this kind of thing. It's been pretty well shown that people don't like hearing this stuff. We have enough real issues to hear about, on both sides, to stop this stuff. They also admit they can't do the Rev. Wright thing becuase McCain said he wouldn't have any part of that when they tried before. Guess he's wishing he didn't say that now...that and the fact that Palin has her own Rev. issues. So, what should Obama do if this comes up on Tuesday night. Maybe he could just simply reply...

"say it ain't so John... There you go... looking backwards instead of forward again". Or, maybe he could leave out the "say it ain't so John" part. That was annoying enough when I had to listen to it this week from Sarah. But the point would still be made correctly.

seems folks agree with me...

I just found this part of a transcript of McCain on a radio talk show this morning. Apparently he was appauled about the pork barrel spending that is in the bail out bill. Odd to be so upset about it, and then vote for it. I didn't hear him name any names or make any one famous. Unbelieveable...

Update 6: Some actual language from Morning Joe, per Think Progress(they have video too!):

SCARBOROUGH: Why did these items have to be in this critical bill?

MCCAIN: Well that's just the way the system is working in Washington and the reason why it's got to be fixed, and it's got to be changed. And no matter what the stakes are, you've got to stop this by starting to veto bills that come across the president's desk. ... It's insanity and it's obscenity, because it's a waste of taxpayers' dollars and it goes on, and until we stop it, until we get frankly a president who will say, I'm gonna veto these bills, I'm gonna make the people famous that put them on there, uh, famous.

YES McCAIN... you are NOT the president so you don't get to veto it... but you could have voted NO. That would have made a statement that you at least intend to live up to this one huge promise you've made on your campaign stops. Oh... that's right you can't this one time, because if you do, it takes away your other argument that you saved the day on this whole econimic crisis.
Can anyone really take this man on his word that he's CHANGE.

Oh yeah... and by the way... McCain also said this bill is putting us on the road to economic disaster. He still voted YES.

Post VP debate thoughts...

Phew... it's finally over. While talking with Tim yesterday prior to the debate, I gave him my views on how I "thought" it would all play out. He suggested I put it on here before it started so that people would know it ahead of time, then I could contrast it after the fact. Unfortunately, I didn't have time for that. But here is what I thought before watching...

Sarah would come out pounding on Biden and be exactly what we saw in the RNC speech. It would be full of jabs and sarcastic comments and then if she was lucky enough to goad him into any retaliating comment, we'd hear her and the whole right scream sexism. I did believe she would come out much more coherently than she has in her previous interviews, but that was either going to be because she had so much debate camp... or that the previous interviews were just a ruse to get the expectation game where they wanted it.

Now after the debate... how well did I predict? In my mind, she did come out full bore ready to fight him on most any topic... albiet she tried it in a cute sort of way. It was kind of like watching a teenage girl trying to flirt with a boy, but not quite being sure exactly how to go about it. She was full of what they are calling "fokesiness", but still comes across as sarcastic to me. It's what I have been telling my kids forever "it's not what you say, but how you say it". In her case, I think I could amend it and also add "and how you mean it". I understand the need on her part to want to "seem" like the average person, and I believe a lot of "average" people will fall for it. But like I've said in the past... I don't want someone just like me running the country... I want better, smarter and actually more informed. I don't think she came across much more informed last night... just much more coherent. She obvioulsy learned a couple of more talking points at McCains ranch, but just a couple. Other than those, she used almost word for word, the exact same verbiage that she has since that convention, and in every stump speech she's given. She just had to figure out where to plug them in based on what was asked.

On to point 2... the problem with them being able to scream sexism, is that Joe Biden didn't give them any reason to even try (although to be fair, I haven't listened to that wonderful am talk radio yet). Joe Biden was exactly what I expected him to be... he was very very good. He always has been. In fact a couple of years ago, when I tinkered with voting for McCain before he morphed into his current version of himself... I mentioned to someone that the only thing that could get me to do that would be if he reached across the isle to pick his running mate... and that running mate was Joe Biden. Joe can claim much more expert status on many of the issues and wouldn't trouble me at all if the President died and he had to step in. So... I was wrong on how that part of the night would go. Way to go Joe for staying above the respect line.

Overall, I think Palin completely ducked far too many questions, and even as much as admitted that she would not answer some as they wanted her to. She couldn't answer some simply because she couldn't... she didn't know how. So whenever that happened, she just simply turned it back to energy... something she likes to believe that she can not only talk to, but is an expert in. That point is still out for debate. I found all of the tactics of ducking questions and throwing in instead the "I'm like you" talking points, a bit annoying.

The absolute most telling point last night was her answer to questions about Dick Cheney. In the debate, she thinks he's right with the kind of power he has or has tried to have... in fact she'd seek to have more of it if she were VP. That's frightening. He has so much power and as much as I don't like him, he had at least had some real intelligence and ability to think thru issues (whether we like his thoughts or not) to go along with it. She wants more power, and doesn't have the intelligence to know what to do with it. In that regard, she should be more frightening than Cheney. And on the Katie Couric interview last night prior to the debate, she was asked what was the worst thing that Dick Cheney did for our country. She replied "the duck hunting incident". Really??? That was bad for his friend, but the worst thing he did for our country. Wow... I'm sure there are worse things than that.

I think the debate was good... it was engaging, they were polite enough to each other and actually you came out of it thinking they had some sort of respect for each other that might become genuine. I think she did a good job and I wanted that for her if for no other reason that we could stop looking so bad for standing behind her, but also that maybe they'll let her off her leash now. I think she did a good job simply because she looked better, not because of any substance behind anything she said. I think them letting her out now will still be the telling point. Put her on Meet the Press and Face the Nation and see if she can still speak to questions without flash cards or if she falls on her face again... or can say anything we haven't heard from her before. They really really need to do this... not just campaigning, really answering questions... real questions on policy. Debating has been her thing for a long time as she can turn things around and answer what she wants. I still want to see her in the real settings answering more policy type questions. However... it still won't make me vote for that ticket, as she's still not ready, and McCain still doesn't have a clue either. I'm still in it for someone intelligent.

The bottom line is still this.. she isn't like us... but she isn't smart enough yet to be one of them either. She still shouldn't get there. One commentator said last night, she didn't do McCain any good really... no change. But she did herself good for 2012. We won't see the last of her regardless, so hold on to your hat folks, she could be around for a long time. If they win, it could be many many years of her.

Broken promises or just plain stupidity...

I spent a very nice and relaxing evening with my better half last night (thank you to the boys volleyball team for having a chicken bbq fundraiser... it was delicious). However, by the time I got back home, I felt like I had run two miles instead of relaxed for several hours. You see, I turned on am talk radio on my way home. I know... why in the world would I do that? But I was just trying to see if the Senate passed the bail-out bill, and was sure there'd be news about it. There certainly was news. Unfortunately it was the Michael Savage show. For several years I've been trying to determine who I detest more... Michael or Rush Limbaugh. It's still a toss up. But, since I'd eaten alot, I did get a good workout as my blood pressure and heart rate rises so much when I listen to these kinds of people.

The point though is this... Michael was yelling at the radio in his normal "you're all idiots and I'm the only one with a clue or morals" voice, and stating that the democrats should all be put in jail for 25 years to life because they "squeeked into the bill a provision for health care for the mentally challenged". To be fair, he wasn't complaining about the mentally challenged this time, but about the fact that this amounted to porkbarrel spending that got into the already too pricey bill.

So my question is simply this... If that is porkbarrel spending that was added, is it just his stupidity and how he loves to yell at people that is the issue, or is it that Presidential Nominee McCain is already breaking his promise to "name names and make them famous" for anyone that adds pork to a bill. After all, he did vote in favor of this one with that provision in there. Guess the republican party nominee doesn't see it as pork at all. Oh an one last note, there is a provision now for Alaskan Fisherman. Guess Todd will like that one...

It’s been a long time...

There has been so much going on in the news that I've been busy watching, instead of commenting on it... at least in here. But today, I think I'll take a couple of moments to say... What the heck???

Sarah Palin is getting worse by the day in my opinion. I'm actually starting to feel sorry for her. Maybe if McCain thought she was really smart enough to be the next VP of the United States and was qualified to do so, he'd also think she's qualified enough to speak... and even for herself every now and again. The interviews she's "been allowed" to give so far, are laughable. But the thought that they blame the press for "gotcha" when it was an average joe voter that asked a question, is crazy. Then instead of letting her even answer that, McCain sits in on the interview and interrupts her. Is he really that frightened of what she'll say on her own. Even his campaign is saying that the boot camp is because she hasn't been exposed to all this foreign policy stuff and needs to get up to speed before the debates. Shouldn't our VP have at the very least dabbled in this stuff before excepting a nomination.

Back to that "average Joe" thing. McCain and Palin mocked the "average joe" voter in the instance at the philly cheesestake restaurant, but then last night Palin goes on a radio interview and dubs herself as the "average joe six-pack" american that happens to be running for office. There is a lot wrong with that... not the least of which is that I DON'T WANT AVERAGE in the White House. Didn't we get that with Bush. He ran on the "I'm just an average american living on a ranch..." Oh yeah...I hear he bought that ranch just before that and now that he's leaving office, he's selling it. Guess it worked out for those great photo ops though. But, I digress...

So... Palin is just an "average joe six-pack" and that makes her understand our woes over the economy. After all, she has lost $20K in her own 401K because of it. Not sure there are too many "average joe six-packs" americans that have enough in their 401K (if they even have one) to have lost that much. Also, she says this one day after an article comes out that explains her net worth (just a clarifying point on that... they had to dig because she still hasn't released her records that all other candidates were forced to release). Anyway, based on that net worth, she's clearly NOT average by any means, and completely wealthy in comparison to all others in her home town.

But all that aside... I want a smart person in the Pres and VP positions. Whether the American public thinks that's Obama or McCain, it's clearly not Palin. I'm routing for her to do well in the debate because I believe the whole world will be watching and we are already pretty laughable to most of the rest of the world. If she tanks and can't put a sentence together like on these interviews, we'll only look worse because so many people actually believe she's qualified for this. What will that say about the intelligence of Americans to the rest of the world.

One notion that keeps popping into my mind is the crisis between Russia and Georgia. Days after Palin was picked as VP, President Bush dispatched VP Cheney to Russia and Georgia to try to help negotiate peace. If that crisis were to happen in January of 09 (if McCain/Palin wins) would McCain dispatch Palin to try to negotiate with those foreign leaders. And if so... could I please be a fly on the wall? I can't imagine how that would go.

So, everyone seems very happy that the bar is so low for the debate tomorrow night. For me, I cringe when I hear those words. I don't want the bar to be low for something like this... I want the bar to be extremely high as I believe they should ALL be able to acheive that to be in line for these jobs. I'm not saying by any means that I believe any of these people are the best our country has to offer... but lets at least be honest about who's even capable in the running field that we have in front of us. We range from someone who spent 6 years in 5 colleges to get a 4 year degree in jounalism and still can't form coherent sentences (Palin) , to Senators who've been around for very long periods of time and have morphed into people they are not in the last 6 months just to get the nomination (McCain), to Military schooling finishing almost last in his class (McCain), to Senator with wide foreign policy credentials that makes mistakes in some comments but has the issues right (Biden) to Senator with less time to be that experienced but Political Science/Harvard Law graduate and professor (Obama). It's a wide range, but this time around, I have to go with intelligence and the ability to think things thru vs. gut reactions that force them to change their minds every other day. Look where that lack of intelligence and the "fight at all costs mentality" has gotten us in the most recent years for our country.

All of our prayers should be made that the people of America become honest with themselves and vote based on real issues, not who they want to have a cup of coffee with. And also, it wouldn't hurt to pray for whomever gets elected. They're gonna need all the help they can get.