The Moment

Yes We Can

It's Over

"It's Over, Go Home." - Ferris Bueller.

Barack Obama will be the 44th President of the United States.

Know Hope.

Pebbles on the Mountain Top

When Barack Obama accepted the Democratic Nomination on August 28, he did so forty years to the day after Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech. The significance was overwhelming. Today, millions of African Americans are finally knowing hope. Just a sample of stories, via Sullivan and Ben Smith:


From Nebraska:

Ahead of us in line was three-generations of an African American family. It was the first time voting for all three of them. The youngest, who graduated high school last year, was calling his friends and getting them out of bed while we waited in line. He was describing the polling place and giving directions for getting there. After he voted, he had probably the biggest grin I’ve ever seen.

From Harlem:

I'm a 37 year old African American woman. I grew up in Harlem and have lived here most of my life. In the 20 years I've been voting at the same polling place, I've never had to stand in line. Usually there were more election workers than voters. Today is the day that changed. There were about 100 people waiting in line. Most of them were young, old and even older African Americans.


I overheard a conversation one woman was having with a mother pushing her son in a stroller. The mother mentioned she told her son she would be voting for the first black president. His response was, "I want to be a black president too!" The other woman and I laughed. It was not a laugh that ridiculed or dismissed the moment, but a laugh of amazement and delight of the infinite possibilities Barack Obama's candidacy represents to the young people in the African American community.

And New Hampshire:

At breakfast, I sat next to a table of four black students, all of whom had voted. The three men were wearing ties. I asked them why. The answer: It was their first election, and they wanted to mark the occasion.

Powerful stuff. It's only the beginning.

Radio Transmission

Well, I'm feeling quite savvy this morning, having learned how to "embed" a video on this space. And, even cooler, it's MSNBC's - home of the pompously amazing Keith Olbermann and charming Rachel Maddow - live feed.

So, those without cable can watch the drama right here, right now, and all night long. Amazing.



Is this a sign that Obama will win in a landslide? Yes, yes I think so.

The Menace of Fate

Personally, the most disheartening aspect of this election, by far, has been my inability to directly take part in it. There's no doubt that, were I an American, this day would be the be-all-end-all. Surely I would find myself parading down the streets in a rather melodramatic fashion, canvasing for Change and orating for Hope like I was Aragorn at the Black Gates.

If. But. Alas, if 'ifs' and 'buts' were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas.

Instead, I offer a purely symbolic endorsement, one that should be of no surprise. There's no need to show-off with a nuanced, detailed explanation. That's been done by greater minds than myself. (Sullivan, The Economist, New York Times). So, without further ado, know that I'm basing this decision on that perishable commodity of hope and all its virtues.

For the United States and the world, the Uh, Gee, Great editorial board (yours truly) endorses Barack Obama for President of the United States.

Know Hope.

Mrs. Maverick or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Sarah Palin

At first I was afraid, I was petrified, thinking I could never live with her by my side.

But oh how times have changed.

I mean, it seems like only yesterday that Sarah Plain haunted my dreams. Wait - it literally was yesterday. Yikes. Well anyway, since September this woman has been the storm on my horizon; the bane of my existence; the thorn in my side.

No longer. For on this chilly November night, she's become something akin to a warm, childhood blanket, smothering me with affection and comforting me from my deepest, darkest worries. Surprised? Well consider this: Sarah Palin, by her presence alone, has made the reality of a President Obama far, far more likely. Humanity owes this woman, this vivacious lipstick wearing pit bull, our sincerest gratitude, goshdarnit.

Now, I admit, I've been suspicious of Mrs. Palin for some time. So much so that I was one of the relatively few who did not either swoon or panic upon her ceremonious arrival. Not to brag - I will - but I quickly saw through the political theater, Orwellian trickery and senselessness of it all. Watching the sputtering pundits, those weaselly political establishment figures and every simpleton from Arkansas to Alaska praise this woman puzzled me. Had they all gone mad? Yes, yes they had, but so too had the once-chipper Democratic faithful. I still remember several progressive types fretting that the election was now forfeit because Mrs. Palin, with her salt-of-the-earth charm, riled up some imbecilic country-dwellers and trust-fund babies at the Republican Convention. In all, the preening on the right and the hysterics on the left troubled me a great deal.

And so began my tumultuous affair with all things Mavericky.

In response to all the hullabaloo, I voiced my concerns, and opined that, given time, Obama would regain his lead, expose McCain for the cynical charlatan he was, and, ultimately, ride into the sunset with victory by his side. I'm confident that my words will indeed be prophetic.

Regardless, watching Sarah Palin's political free-fall has been a treat. From the get-go, a certain carnivalesque atmosphere surrounded this woman, but it took Tina Fey's saucy impersonation for the truth to really resonate. That truth, of course, is that Mrs. Palin offers little in the way of intelligence, seriousness, or preparedness.

Mark Twain once said that every man is a moon, with a dark side he doesn't reveal (I totally stole this from a recent article in Time). Perhaps the same cannot be said for the modern politician - man or woman, for their lives are less elusive and wondrous than before. The twenty-first century politician is more like a planet, one that is brimming with life and potential, and constantly subjected to exploration, examination and destruction. Thankfully, before settling on Planet Palin, we toured it far and wide, coming across some rather treacherous terrain. Underneath the shimmering surface was a vindictive, religiously-obsessed and mentally inept lifeform, one who threatened the intellectual stamina and virtues of humanity. The majority blasted off in search of a more prosperous future. John McCain, ever stubbornly, succumbed to the siren calls, planting his flag with pride and calling the land home. As a result, the poor old man is dwindling away on this inhabitable rock, nearly alone and conveniently lost in space.This is the cosmically laughable situation in which Mr. McCain finds himself in today.

There's no question that Palin has effectively torpedoed McCain's chances, and remarkably, almost single-handily. With every cringe-inducing interview she gives and abrasive speech she delivers, Palin nudges another concerned citizen towards Obama. Since September, her favorable ratings have plummeted and, now more than ever, a vast majority of Americans accept that this woman is pitiful farce. In fact, a recent New York Times poll found the number to have peaked, and, by golly, just at the right time.

All told, 59 percent of voters surveyed said Ms. Palin was not prepared for the job, up nine percentage points since the beginning of the month. Nearly a third of voters polled said the vice-presidential selection would be a major factor influencing their vote for president, and those voters broadly favor Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee.

It's all quite humorous. Yet the most fascinating aspect of this train wreck has been the demise of the Republican coalition. One by one every conservative (nearly every, I should say) with a soul (or perhaps foresight) has jumped ship to Obama. Even McCain's loyal staff - those incredulous straight talkers - began bickering to the media about Palin's troublesome antics. She, they argued, had warped their message and cost them dearly. You think? Last week, for instance, an anonymous McCain aid called Mrs. Plain a "whack job." That snippy bastard. How dare he! After all, I can't have Team Hope's most precious commodity ridiculed so crudely. Well anyway, it seemed to snowball from there, as more and more disgruntled McCainians fumed about Palin's peculiar behavior. One cowering McCain official ranted endlessly against the Thrilla' from Wasilla:

“She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone,” the advisor told CNN. “She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else. Also she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: divas trust only unto themselves as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom.”

And another:

"She's lost confidence in most of [the McCain advisers] on the plane," said a senior Republican who speaks to Palin, referring to her campaign jet.

Go on...

"I think she'd like to go more rogue," he said.

Rogue you say! Well, duh. John McCain is absolutely poisonous. By this point, Palin's playing a game of self-preservation, if not for her gubernatorial office, than a possible duel with Obama in 2012. She'll loose, of course, whether in the primaries or general election remains to be seen. This woman was a dangerous weapon, one that backfired on its possessor, and exposed the rabid-right wing for the vapid cretins they have become. Good riddance, my darling.

I'll let Mr. Christopher Hitchens take it from here. Fire away, old chap:

This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just "people of faith" but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity.

Advantage Hope? You Betcha.

On Hallow's Eve

I'm expecting trick-or-treaters any minute now. It's all very exciting. If some devilish youth arrives at my house dressed as Sarah Palin they will receive a splendid reward of chocolate goodies. Such a child would be quite precocious - and truly terrifying. My respect and admiration would be earned instantly.

On a related note, as the forever-stylish John Kennedy proves, one need not engulf themselves in masks and make-up to have a frightfully good time.

It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia

Wake me when it's over.

The looming election has, naturally, begun to stress me out. Oh sure, by logic, reason and faith, Obama's got this thing tucked away, but you try telling that to my night terrors.

Thankfully, for Obama, the world, and my own sanity, John McCain is a damned fool. When emotionally sober, as I am now, it becomes quite clear that Mr. McCain has made one-too-many missteps to be taken very seriously at this stage. Granted, he's found some of his old swagger as of late, and even the national polls are tightening, but they are doing so ever so slowly, mind you. Propelled by this "Joe the Plumber" degenerate, Mr. McCain has launched into his latest and, perhaps, most effective line of attack: Barack Obama is a, wait for it, wait for it...SOCIALIST!

et tu, comrade?

Mr. McCain seems quite at home with such pesky McCarthyism, in a way that he's never seemed comfortable with his previous divisive, race-baiting, fear-mongering, petty, shallow attacks. Indeed, it appears that he's rather found of this red scare creation. This is easily explainable. After all, it's apparent that, given his loathing of Russia and painfully obnoxious Churchill complex, the Republican candidate would love to re-ignite the Cold War. So why not spark some jingoistic fury at home to get things rolling?

Will it work? No. Not enough people are crazy enough to relive the Boomer wars - cold or hot. For Mr. McCain, though, the problem is not only the message - although it's terribly mumbled, ignorant and solipsistic - but where that message is given.

I can't help but laugh, then, as McCain parades around Iowa and Pennsylvania in these closing days. Iowa is absolutely nonsensical, considering Mr. McCain never contested the Republican caucus in January and, as a result, finished a distant fourth. Who beat him? Well, Mike Huckabee, a religious nut who campaigned with, I swear to god, Chuck Norris (and Jesus, of course); Mitt Romney, a millionaire Mormon with the intellectual prowess of a peanut; and, my personal favorite, "Dead Fred" Thompson, a gentlemen who, so deprived of charisma and consumed with indifference, that he entered the race just to show off his bodacious "trophy wife." That's who.

Oh, and did I mention that Barack Obama won his Iowa caucus? You know, the same one that launched him into the political stratosphere? What about the fact that Mr. McCain opposes (and does so correctly, I'll admit) the ethanol industry, a power-player in the Iowa heartland? And that Iowa, a small state of only 7 electoral votes, has been deep-blue since the summer? To top it off, Mr. McCain is a tool, so why the hell is he in Iowa?!

Pennsylvania, however, is even better. Why? Because of all the time and resources the Republicans have poured into the state. Mr. McCain, along with the gift that keeps on giving, Sarah Palin, have screeched, hollered and ranted incessantly from Pittsburgh to Philly, but little has changed. I'm sure that they're counting on every racist, bigot and backwards, bitter hillbilly to turn out, but even so, I'd say Barack takes PA by double-digits.

You would think, given the desperate nature of the race, that the Republicans would battle with their trademark gusto and determination. Nah. A simple bout of rain drops sent the Gruesome-twosome packing for the day, leaving a bunch of Quakers to shiver in the cold, muttering about Mooslims and Commies to themselves. Now Sarah, I understand your plight. You're off the hook this time. McCain, no such luck, buster.

Meanwhile, Barack was chilling in Pennsylvania that day too, but instead of taking cover, he fired-up a couple thousand hope-mongers, rain and all.

Hello sunshine.

The Audacity of Hope

Know Hope

Having a Sensibility

Well, my beloved Andrew Sullivan has managed to spare himself a minute or two to write an insightful essay on the importance of blogging. How he finished the damn thing without scathing Sarah Palin is simply beyond me. After all, she still keeps him up at night - and no, not in the way that she "keeps up" those festering fools on the lunatic fringe, like Rich "little starbursts" Lowry.

Palin's lack-of-presence aside, "Why I Blog," published in November's Atlantic, is a fascinating foray into the strange, spiritually-consuming vortex that is the blogosphere. So, he pretty much states the obvious: blogs are, for better or worse, the medium for the future. Yet Andrew's intellectual gravitas and mastery of the issue - he began blogging in the Spring of 2000 and is one of the most-read bloggers in the world - makes the piece a must-read.

I, like Andrew, think highly of blogging. That should be of no surprise. Consider this: Where would Barack Obama be without the Internet? Where would he be without the diatribes of grass-roots activists and intellectuals? It's quite difficult to imagine a successful Obama campaign - especially in the daunting primary battle - without the likes of Andrew, Daily Kos, Talking Points Memo and, of course, the Huffington Post behind him. Blogs are, without doubt, the most democratic and accessible form of writing, explains Sullivan:

To blog is therefore to let go of your writing in a way, to hold it at arm’s length, open it to scrutiny, allow it to float in the ether for a while, and to let others, as Montaigne did, pivot you toward relative truth. A blogger will notice this almost immediately upon starting. Some e-mailers, unsurprisingly, know more about a subject than the blogger does. They will send links, stories, and facts, challenging the blogger’s view of the world, sometimes outright refuting it, but more frequently adding context and nuance and complexity to an idea. The role of a blogger is not to defend against this but to embrace it. He is similar in this way to the host of a dinner party. He can provoke discussion or take a position, even passionately, but he also must create an atmosphere in which others want to participate.

Indeed. But the relationship between writer and reader, blogger and, uh, blogee, has always tickled my fancy. So perhaps out of interest, emotional longing or sheer envy, I found this commentary on the communal aspect of blogging most appealing:

That atmosphere will inevitably be formed by the blogger’s personality. The blogosphere may, in fact, be the least veiled of any forum in which a writer dares to express himself. Even the most careful and self-aware blogger will reveal more about himself than he wants to in a few unguarded sentences and publish them before he has the sense to hit Delete. The wise panic that can paralyze a writer—the fear that he will be exposed, undone, humiliated—is not available to a blogger. You can’t have blogger’s block. You have to express yourself now, while your emotions roil, while your temper flares, while your humor lasts. You can try to hide yourself from real scrutiny, and the exposure it demands, but it’s hard. And that’s what makes blogging as a form stand out: it is rich in personality.

I've come to realize that this space is more of an editorial page than a blog, really, and a poor one at that. I mean, with its impersonal nature and the infrequency of postings, it would be rather dubious to call this experiment blogging-proper, no?

That's not to say that it lacks personality or emotion. On the contrary, my self-indulgent prose and overzealous grandstanding surely enriches the experience and makes it, if I can be so bold, truly unique.

Then again, having absolutely no credibility or professional responsibility can be exceptionally liberating.

Zap! Biff! Pow-ell!

So it was written, and so it has come to pass.

Okay, Okay, so Colin Powell's endorsement of Barack Obama has been a long time coming. No need then for the self-congratulations, right? I mean, duh, they're both black - and Powell ain't no Uncle Tom. How hard was it to figure out, really? Just one brother supporting another. Oh those "boys," always rollin' together, so predictable...

That, at least, has been the explanation of today's events from the lunatic fringe. Comedian Rush Limbaugh, the self-appointed mouthpiece of the cesspool class, mocked Powell's decision in a message to Politico, which read:

"Secretary Powell says his endorsement is not about race. OK, fine. I am now researching his past endorsements to see if I can find all the inexperienced, very liberal, white candidates he has endorsed. I'll let you know what I come up with."

Ha, ha, ha. What a great guy. In between the tee-offs and the painkiller gorging, he still has time for some Sunday snark. Even George Will, a conservative who manages to maintain some integrity, echoed this nonsense. I can only assume the whiter-than-Wonder bread nuts at the National Review Online are saying the same thing, only with more sillyness and scorn.

Just for the hell of it, let's play along with these clowns. So, based on the aforementioned malarkey, conservative supporters of Barack Obama are, naturally, blacks adhering to race loyalty. That means that these conservative men and publications which have openly endorsed Obama are really black syndicates.

Andrew Sullivan
Matthew Yglesias
Michael Smerconish
Wick Allison
Wayne Gilchrest
William Buckley Junior
Christopher Hitchens
The Los Angeles Times
The Huston Chronicle
The Chicago Sun-Times

The Black Attack! It's overtaking America, one clueless Republican at a time. I wonder which unsuspecting conservative will go black (and never come back) next? Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, Chuck Hagel? Thankfully, El Rusho has been saved from this dark menace...for now.

Aside from the patently absurd right-wing spin, General Powell proved what it means to put "Country First." And, as a result, exposed John McCain for the conniving salesmen he has become. Poor Johnny Mac, getting upstaged and slapped down by a person with more integrity and prudence than he has ever known. Congrats, Mr. Powell, may you be redeemed, in part, for some rather poor decisions.

Regardless, this excerpt from Micahel Tomasky's political blog on the Guardian website demonstrates the profound importance of the endorsement and, no doubt, the sincerity behind Powell's decision:

He cited Obama's "steadiness" and "intellectual curiosity". When asked about the race issue, he said: "If I had only had that in mind, I could have done this six or eight or 10 months ago," instead of taking the time to watch the two contenders on the trail and judge their performance under pressure.

But he really shone when discussing some of the smear tactics being used against Obama. No, the correct answer is that Obama is not a Muslim, Powell said. "But the really right answer," he continued, "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?"

Stay Cool. Know Hope.

Postscript: If anyone remains convinced that McCain's story is a sad one, do yourself a favor and read "Make-Believe Maverick" from last month's Rolling Stone. Barack Obama's thrashing of this life-long asshole is indeed the feel-good story of the year.

Postscript II: It's rather trivial now, but for the sake of continuity, the last debate grades are as follows: Obama B+/McCain B. Clean sweep Obama.

A Thief in the Night

So comes word that Christopher Hitchens has struck yet again - but this time in a rather unexpected fashion. In his latest Slate column, the notorious intellectual and agitator shocked many by openly endorsing Barack Obama for President. And, as a consequence, "Hitch" resoundingly emasculated John McCain, to my great amusement, of course. As I've said, this was quite out of the blue, considering Hitchens' distaste for Obama and, moreover, his rather odd neo-con sympathies.

But, like some shadowy rogue, Hitchens swiftly - and brutally - pillaged McCain with no fair warning, flaunted his trademark gaudiness, and, in a crescendo of feverish banditry, left friend and foe alike in awe of his sharp tongue and lethal wit.

This was vintage Hitchens. Carnage and controversy are, after all, ends in themselves to this salient scoundrel. While I applaud his scathing assessment of the McCain campaign - and, more importantly, his endorsement of Barack Obama - I must confess that the article, when examined in context, reflects rather poorly on our beloved atheist. Still, I'm not complaining - yet.

Before daring to criticize Hitch, I'll first highlight some of his more venomous - and thus entertaining - passages. Needless to say the piece is as captivating as it is vicious. He begins, unsurprisingly, with a dig at Bill Clinton, a man the author considers to be a vile opportunist. Fair enough, I thought, but what say you about Mac Daddy and the Wicked Witch from Wasilla, Mr. Hitchens? In an interesting tidbit, he reveals that last week's debate seems to have cemented this decision:

Last week's so-called town-hall event showed Sen. John McCain to be someone suffering from an increasingly obvious and embarrassing deficit, both cognitive and physical. And the only public events that have so far featured his absurd choice of running mate have shown her to be a deceiving and unscrupulous woman utterly unversed in any of the needful political discourses but easily trained to utter preposterous lies and to appeal to the basest element of her audience. McCain occasionally remembers to stress matters like honor and to disown innuendoes and slanders, but this only makes him look both more senile and more cynical, since it cannot (can it?) be other than his wish and design that he has engaged a deputy who does the innuendoes and slanders for him.

This does not shock me in the slightest. No person with a right-mind could, after weeks of cringe-inducing interviews, unflattering exposés and shameless pandering *wink*, think Sarah Palin a respectable human being. Yet, as Hitch properly notes, the real problem lies not with the puppet, but the puppeteer (I would never dream of calling McCain a "puppet master." That would be a fraudulently stupid claim. He's simply a feeble-minded puppeteer with the precision of a drunkard). McCain's spiteful tactics and jingoistic fury have truly ruined his chances and tarnished his once-admired character, writes Hitchens:

The most insulting thing that a politician can do is to compel you to ask yourself: "What does he take me for?" Precisely this question is provoked by the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin. I wrote not long ago that it was not right to condescend to her just because of her provincial roots or her piety, let alone her slight flirtatiousness, but really her conduct since then has been a national disgrace. It turns out that none of her early claims to political courage was founded in fact, and it further turns out that some of the untested rumors about her—her vindictiveness in local quarrels, her bizarre religious and political affiliations—were very well-founded, indeed. Moreover, given the nasty and lowly task of stirring up the whack-job fringe of the party's right wing and of recycling patent falsehoods about Obama's position on Afghanistan, she has drawn upon the only talent that she apparently possesses.

Hitchens, like so many conservatives and skeptics before him, has rightly condemned McCain for his mendacious campaign. However, this article is less an endorsement for Obama than a vehement thrashing of the Republican candidate and his dimwitted, rapture-loving, moose-shootin' sidekick. So in the end, in spite of his brilliant mind and fierce prose, Hitch remains a pompous ass. This is due, of course, to his tawdry sense of self worth and an overwhelming faith in his ideological dispositions. Such blatant egotism prevents Hitchens from giving credit where credit is due; in this case, with Barack Obama.

In fact, his "endorsement" consists of two, unflattering sentences near the end of the article:

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.

Wow, riveting stuff. Why not acknowledge Obama's strengths? His ability to inspire? His undeniably assertive handling of the economic crisis? It's all quite simple: such an admission would make Hitchens - who revels in his controversial persona - look like a damned fool. Not only has he joyously rebelled against the Obama phenomenon, but he's even trumpeted some nonesense against the man. Hell, at one low-point he even began blaming Michelle Obama for the Reverend Wright fiasco.

I could care less whether Hitchens loves or hates Obama. But I expect a gentleman - especially of the caliber of a Christopher Hitchens - to acknowledge their faults or missteps rather than cower from them.

Not that I'm asking him to, you know, repent.

Charade

I cannot wait until November 4, 2008.

Then and only then will this silly charade be over. After all, it's no longer a proper contest. There's only one man running for president, and his name is Barack Obama.

Barack Obama is to politics what Carey Grant was to cinema. He's obviously articulate and assuring, but also effortlessly charming and debonair. Obama, much like Grant's greatest characters, possess a curiosity and self-confidence that often gets him into some delightful quandaries. But, underneath the modern-man bravado, there's a quirky aloofness and spiritual warmth to him, which allows you to cheer for the man who's obviously going to get the girl, save the day and look damn good doing it.

Obama's ability to connect with the gullible proletarian and whimsical intellectual is a marvellous gift. One particular moment of awe was when he forcefully defended health care as a "right" and followed by discussing his mother's own desperate saga with the American insurance system. Right-wing fringe nuts aside, I can't think of a particular socio-economic group who would not be able to relate to that answer. It was as genuine as it was ingenious. Kudos.

In general, I thought he owned the discussion on national service - Correctly noting that Bush's post-9/11 "go shopping" rallying cry was a stupid farce - and, more importantly, dominated on the broader issues of the economy and foreign policy. Scoffing at the notion of letting bin Laden escape yet again showed everyone that this guy - this liberal Democrat - means business.

McCain, on the other hand, looked like a confused, muttering old man at a duck pond in the winter. Where are my ducks? Where have they gone? My fiends. I brought bread. I'm old.... What a strange, pitiful performance.

I was struck not only by McCain contemptuous posturing - not that it surprised me, though I thought he would be smart enough to conceal his irrational disdain for Barack - but by his nonsensical policy positions. Did he just propose nationalizing America's entire mortgage debt? Comrade or Maverick? Pick a side, McCain, we're at war! (Yes, I'm channeling Colbert).

What about his comment that health care was a responsibility? Or, even more odd, that he favored Teddy Roosevelt's policy of speaking softly and carrying a big stick? I thought Obama absolutely crushed McCain with his superb rendition of "Bomb, bomb, Iran."

I assume most mainstream media minions will score this a draw/slight edge Democratic. Preposterous. There was only one man worthy of praise tonight. This is all but over.

Debate Grades:

Obama A/A+
McCain B


Edited to add: McCain's "that one" comment was one of the stupidest, most repugnant moments I've ever seen in presidential politics. This man - nay, this indignant, warped little child - is beyond hopeless.

Campbell Brown Rules the Universe

Well, those Liberal Elites over at the New York Times are riding my conspicuous coattails yet again. Surely, you're in disbelief. How could a well-respected, world-renowned publication be so, oh, I don't know, unprofessional, you wonder. I assure you it's true, for how else could you explain this fawning piece on Campbell Brown from Friday's edition!?

Go ahead, read it. Sounds a little familiar, doesn't it?

Now, I can excuse the Times for their blatant thievery; everyone knows that the print-media business is absolute rubbish these days. What I cannot excuse them for is their ungentlemanly pursuit of my woman du jour.

The article, blandly titled "Weighing In - An Anchor Tacks Toward Commentary," was written by some Ivy-League educated, fancy-pants named Jacques Steinberg. I can picture this pretentious half-wit sipping on his low-fat latte and nibbling at some Danish pastry while obnoxiously flirting with Maureen Dowd. I'm sure he lives off Daddy's trust fund and spends his days whimsically walking about Manhattan, sometimes hobnobbing with the city's culturally and politically savvy citizenry.

It irks me a great deal. And oh how I envy him...

Anyway, his work re-hashes many of my well-made points, only without my narrative flare and unapologetic ignorance. That said, his laminated Liberal Elite all-access pass provided him with the opportunity to interview the ever-feisty Ca-Bro one-on-one. His description of the meeting is as follows:

In an interview in her CNN office, wearing jeans, her laceless Converse All-Stars tucked beneath a desk as seemingly cluttered as the cable landscape, Ms. Brown went to some pains to try to separate her approach from that of her cable competitors.

“They’re partisans,” she said of Mr. O’Reilly and Mr. Olbermann in particular. “You’re not going to see me ever be partisan. I’ll never take a position on a candidate or an issue.”

This woman is a goddess. The image of Campbell rocking a pair of Chuck Taylor's and (what I image to be) low-rise, ultra-sexy blue jeans while chatting with this wanna-be GQ hack sends me into a tizzy. She's just a no-nonsense, all-American woman. What's not to love?

Well, according to Jacques, the blurring of commentary and news, that's what. Campbell immediately dismissed such a suggestion by this Jacques character - this pesky ragamuffin! And in a wonderful, totally Ca-Bro fashion:

“As journalists, and certainly for me over the last few years, we’ve gotten overly obsessed with parity, especially when we’re covering politics,” Ms. Brown said. “We kept making sure each candidate got equal time — to the point that it got ridiculous in a way.”

“So when you have Candidate A saying the sky is blue, and Candidate B saying it’s a cloudy day, I look outside and I see, well, it’s a cloudy day,” she said. “I should be able to tell my viewers, ‘Candidate A is wrong, Candidate B is right.’ And not have to say, ‘Well, you decide.’ Then it would be like I’m an idiot. And I’d be treating the audience like idiots.”

Owned. You heard it, party flakes, your days of mind-numbing incompetence is over. Well, at least on CNN, between the hours of 8-9. But, uh, yeah, take that.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

This day has been dreadful. The bailout deal collapsed, the market plummeted, tensions rose and, perhaps worst of all, all the people in charge checked out of reality and into a parallel loony-tunes universe - all but one, that is.

Since the Blame-Game is all the rage, I'm going to test my luck. Like the leading politicians of the day, I too shall whimsically frolic down the path of good intentions, join the chastising chorus, blame everyman and his dog and get high off my own indignation. So merry are we who shrug-off our burdens like they were sprinkles on a doughnut.

I have plenty to sing about on this night. I suppose it's only a matter of making my thoughts scathingly coherent.

First and foremost, George W. Bush was and remains an absurd failure. I cannot fathom how his approval rating remains in double-digits. It's astounding how ignorant or intellectually-inept some people are. Alas, such is the way of the world. But after this recent crisis, those who remain loyal to this incompetent cheerleader-turned-cowboy are beyond hopeless. I admit, eight years ago I was rather taken with his Southern swagger, beady eyes and "compassionate conservative" rhetoric. You know the story: He was a macho, lassoing Texan, and I, a young, reckless romantic. Sparks were flying!

At this stage, there is no point chastising Bush for his numerous mistakes, abuses and crimes. There is a time and place for everything. However, as this recent financial crisis has shown, his reign continues to wreak havoc upon America and world. He is still "the Decider," after all, and thus has a significant share in this stock market fiasco. Two weeks ago, I could not imagine Bush leaving office on a more "thank god he's outta here" note. He never seems to challenge reason, does he?

Of course, President Bush twiddled his thumbs for a week before doing anything remotely productive and, when he did, he sent out his ghoulish Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, to do his bidding. After days of strenuous negotiations, the Bush-Paulson gruesome-twosome had finally reached a deal with Congressional leaders - or so they thought. Naturally, their much-hyped plan failed to pass in the House, after two-thirds of Republicans - Mr. Bush's ilk - rejected the proposal. Stupid, crazy.

The Republican Congressional gang, lead by that charisma-deprived cracker John Boehner, explained that they would have supported the bailout, if not for a preceding speech by Democratic House Speaker "Nasty" Nancy Pelosi. No, seriously, that's their excuse. It was too partisan, screeched Republican Roy Blunt,to reporters, as he stood in front of a festering mob of Reaganomic geniuses. If this is true, then the big and bad Republicans are stating - on the freakin' record - that choice words from a sixty-eight year old grandmother hurt their feelings, causing them to sulk-it-out and go home. Jesus. Really, that's all you got? What despicable foolery. It's a lie, naturally, but such a pathetic, feeble one that it boggles the mind. Moronic, crazy.

I have both read and listened to Pelosi's incendiary diatribe. I must say, I was quite taken-aback by her venomous sermon. Any god-fearing Republican would likewise share my thoughts of horror and shock - shock I say - upon this poisonous proclamation:

It is a number that is staggering, but tells us only the costs of the Bush Administration’s failed economic policies—policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system.

Democrats believe in the free market, which can and does create jobs, wealth, and capital, but left to its own devices it has created chaos.

It continues on, and on, with Pelosi suggesting that the Republican faith in a totally lassaiez-faire economy was somewhat misguided. OK, totally stupid. Regardless, the vast majority of the speech was forgettable populist nonsense. Now, should she have bashed Bush? No. Should she have ever-so-subtly demeaned conservative principles? Probably not. Still, the speech was fairly innocuous, and further, pretty on-the-money. That's not to say Pelosi and the Democrats are blameless, since 94 (!) of their rank-and-file voted "nay" for the bill. Unbelievable. Or is it? I, personally, find it rather curious that just enough Democrats opposed the legislation to make the Republicans - and thus John McCain - seem culpable for the mess. Regardless, by deception or disorganization, the Democratic Party must be held accountable for such silliness. Incessant, crazy.

Last, but certainly not least, we have our Presidential candidates.

After his cringe-inducing campaign "suspension," irritated debate performance, and failed White-Knight moment, you'd think John McCain would, you know, learn to shut up and act with a shred of humility and prudence. Not so, because all weekend long his slithery surrogates boasted endlessly about McCain's heroic handling of the crisis. It was a dubious charade. To Team McCain, however, so deluded and desperate by now, it was an inspiring fantasy. Oh, it was to be a blissful hour when the bailout passed, so we, the simple, one-house owning downtrodden mortals, could worship the fearless maverick and usher him into the White House.

Well, uh, that didn't go as planned! Oopsie. But instead of conceding defeat, John McCain did what any low-life would do, he blamed someone else, unfailry:

"Now is not the time to fix the blame. It's time to fix the problem," McCain says, not long after his campaign blamed Obama and Pelosi for killing the bill.
Then he blames Obama and the Democrats: "Sen. Obama and his allies in Congress infused unnecessary partisanship into the process."

Grim. What a confused man. I take back not a single word I have spoken or written about this shameless charlatan. Deranged, horrible, snide, temperamental, repulsive, crazy.

So Barack, it's your turn to crank up the crazy. Surely, this crisis would ensure that a man with the most sagacious of minds become frantic. Given the mood of the day, Obama would naturally succumb to partisan impulses and long-winding chicanery. I mean, such a volatile climate would make even Apollo sputter garbled nonsense and mutter foreboding tales of doom. Ah, but not so fast, assures Obama:

And today, Democrats and Republicans in Washington have a responsibility to make sure that an emergency rescue package is put forward that can at least stop the immediate problems we have so we can begin to plan for the future. As I said, this is a hard thing to do. And right now Democratic and Republican leaders have agreed but members have not yet agreed.

There are going to be some bumps and trials and tribulations and ups and down before we get this rescue package done. It is important for the American public and for the markets to say calm because things are never smooth in congress and to understand that it will get done. That we are going to make sure an emergency package is put together because it is required for us to stabilize the markets and to make sure that when a small business-person wakes up tomorrow morning, he will be able to make payroll.

We are not going to lose jobs at an even faster clip than we are doing right now. I am confident we are going to get there but it’s going to be sort of rocky. It’s sort of like flying into Denver. You know you’re going to land but it’s not always fun going over those mountains.

That's why Obama matters. Sane...and soaring, right over the cuckoo's nest.

The Shark and the Stooge

What to do, what to do, oh what to do when so confused.

I have not my wits about me this night. You see, I'm feeling quite ho-hum after yesterday's debate. But that's not because Barack did poorly. On the contrary, he was nuanced and assertive - without a doubt personifying "Presidential." Rather, I'm feeling somewhat aloof because I was so desperately craving McCain's demise, and so sure that Obama would strike with such force, that I presumptuously planned for a joyous day of pompous grandstanding. Oops.

That cursed Obama. Putting his needs - and the needs of the American people - before my very own. Who does he think he is? I wanted my damned knock-out! But no, he has to think about "winning elections" and "saving the world." C'mon, that's so yesterday. Let's just accept our apocalyptic fate and ridicule McCain as some sort of Nazi sympathizing, latte sipping, drag queen loving, Franco-Queer, money-bags, hipster doofus. No one will care about such senseless shenanigans once the markets collapses, panic ensues and we all become zombie hordes. Right?

Alas, Obama played it safe, and kudos to him. I suppose he thinks some disastrous Mad-Max scenario for the future avoidable. Idealist. Anyway, in the short-term, the strategy was wise indeed. Obama passed this much talked-about "Commander-in-Chief" threshold, spoke with sophistication, and acted, on the whole, like a gentleman. He can save the bravado and tenacity for another day. Interestingly enough, his graceful performance won him many a fans, as Nate Silver from FiveThrityEight explains:

The [CNN] poll suggests that Obama is opening up a gap on connectedness, while closing a gap on readiness.

Specifically, by a 62-32 margin, voters thought that Obama was “more in touch with the needs and problems of people like you”. This is a gap that has no doubt grown because of the financial crisis of recent days. But it also grew because Obama was actually speaking to middle class voter....

The CBS poll of undecideds has more confirmatory detail. Obama went from a +18 on "understanding your needs and problems" before the debate to a +56 (!) afterward. And he went from a -9 on "prepared to be president" to a +21.

Still, Obama could have hit harder on several occasions, yet he chose not to. Totally intentional, I would gather, because given the circumstances - McCain's clumsy display in Washington, his "to debate or not to debate" malarkey and, of course, the cringe-inducing Palin fiasco - the election should be effectively over.

Let's not forget that Barack Obama had a very, very difficult task - and still does and always will. Not only did he have to duel with McCain on foreign policy, but he had to be tough without, you know, being the "angry black guy." Prejudice in twenty-first century middle America. It's a bitch.

Sullivan, in a far more eloquent fashion, echoes this point:

But Obama is also a black man against a white man. So he must also be very careful not to get angry and to stay cool and calm. He has to do that to avoid the "angry black man" trap. But then he cannot afford to seem weak either. You realize how hard a balance that is for ninety minutes?

Obama has to walk through a racial minefield all the time.

Exactly.


Now we turn to that little rascal Johnny Mac. During the sparring I thought him to be a contemptuous brute. For the entire night, he made snide comments and indulged in his own god-awful wit. That said, he made some decent points, and often distracted Obama just enough to prevent exposing his own incompetence. So, I will give him credit, after a terrible introduction, he rebounded with some smart, quick jabs and demonstrated a command of several issues - Ukraine, Russia and Iran. That's not to say he was right, but he definitely knew his stuff and spoke with a distinguishable confidence.

But, as Chris Matthews and Josh Marshal noticed, McCain couldn't even look Obama in the eye - not once. How petrified or arrogant is this man? He clearly loathes Obama, respects him very little, and thinks him some sort of prep-school fancy-pants. How mistaken he is, that old man McCain. It wasn't Obama who was born into privilege, who developed a destructive James Dean complex, who left his crippled wife for a beer heiress, and who was involved in a notorious congressional scandal. No, Senator, that was you. You're the one, Mr. McCain, who does not deserve the time of day, the slightest gratitude, or begrudging respect from his opponent.

What irks me most about John McCain is, without question, his hypocritical martyr complex. And oh how he flaunts it. The man is morally bankrupt; he is an impetuous fool and life-long swindler. There's no denying this, yet he brazenly boasts about his "honor," brandishes himself a "maverick" and trademarks this notion of "country first." It's a sickening farce. I will have none of it.

I wish him nothing but humiliation in defeat. Regardless, I expect polls to remain close for now, but the seeds were sown, and Barack's about to blossom anytime now.

Debate Grades:
Obama A-
McCain B/B+

Foxy

Amidst all this pesky economic turmoil, partisan bickering, and "the-world's-on-the-verge-of-disaster" hysteria, I've been keeping afloat by daydreaming about a certain CNN newswoman. That woman, of course, is non other than Campbell Brown.

This savvy minx has become my favorite news-queen, dethroning the once-fiery Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC fame, who has become far too sugar-coated and obnoxious for my liking. So yeah, I'll admit, Brown's "Election Centre" is a fairly typical, uninspired show with the usual cast of CNN hacks and quacks. But what it lacks in originality it makes up for in eye-candy and spunk, thanks to the always-shimmering Brown.

OK, I'll confess yet again: Brown's allure ultimately comes from her fierce duels with John McCain's never ending band of misinformed misfits. My love affair began mere weeks ago when Brown, possessed with an undeniable hotness and a fact sheet, completely owned McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds (Aside: Why are so many bratty Republicans named Tucker?). It was a fantastic display of charm and wit - well, on Campbell's part anyway. She mocked Sarah Palin's credentials and exposed the entire charade in a sweetly destructive fashion.

Swoon.

Then, the other day, Brown began a humorously silly - but totally awesome because it's Campbell Brown - "Free Sarah Palin" campaign. Charged with feminine fury, she chastised the McCain campaign's sheltering of their much vaunted Moose-Maiden from the ever-scary Press corps:

"Tonight I call on the McCain campaign to stop treating Sarah Palin like she is a delicate flower that will wilt at any moment," said Brown. "This woman is from Alaska for crying out loud. She is strong. She is tough. She is confident. And you claim she is ready to be one heart beat away form the presidency. If that is the case, then end this chauvinistic treatment of her now. Allow her to show her stuff. Allow her to face down those pesky reporters... Let her have a real news conference with real questions. By treating Sarah Palin different from the other candidates in this race, you are not showing her the respect she deserves. Free Sarah Palin. Free her from the chauvinistic chain you are binding her with. Sexism in this campaign must come to an end. Sarah Palin has just as much a right to be a real candidate in this race as the men do. So let her act like one."

Ouch. Now, I'm not one for "girl-power, you go girl, holla sister" cheer-leading, but I was inspired. It was like Eowyn slaying the Witch King or, um, some other great moment in the history of women, all other examples of which I am unfamiliar with. Sadly.

The Turn of the Tide

Well, well, well. That didn't take long, now did it? Merely two weeks removed from the Republican convention and already John McCain's reputation and polling numbers have plunged dramatically. Pity, pity. It's such a shame when bad things happen to bad people.

The downward spiral will likely continue. I certainly hope so, since I'm enjoying it a great deal. Common sense and statistics confirm a further decline. Facts aside, McCain is simply too pathetic a politician and too reckless a human being to avoid disaster. Hate to say I told you so, Mac-Daddy.

Indeed. John McCain's tedious Jekyll-and-Hyde act has reached its logical absurdum. Thankfully, the once-enchanted press, so soothed by "straight talk" that they lost their senses, are no longer willing to applaud McCain's insufferable sophistry. Like orphans on Christmas morning, some just sit and pout, wallowing about Father Christmas abandoning them yet again, while others clutch their pen, scribble some curses, and rush off to the post. A nasty letter to Santa can do wonders for the conscience.

Liberals, along with the few remaining fair-minded inhabitants of the United States, are unabashedly exuberant. How quick they are to congratulate themselves when the sky is clear and the sun shinning. Weeks ago, as the horizon darkened, these leftists were panic-stricken, ready to capitulate, beg for mercy, and worship our new Alaskan overlords. That pitiful "woe is me" attitude has been replaced by a smug sense of self-satisfaction. Obama's supporters, especially those with the loudest voices, need to emulate their leader more often. His grace under pressure and splendorous sagacity are admirable virtues.

That said, my friends on the left, however misguided and wishy-washy, are nevertheless on the side of good. And today the ranks of the righteous flourished as disgruntled conservatives including former National Review editor Wick Allison and Republican Congressmen Wayne Gilchrest endorsed Obama. Unsurprisingly, McCain and his henchmen are desperately trying to reaffirm support for the faltering candidacy. This afternoon, for instance, the irascible Raul Paul spoke candidly on the McCain campaign's incessant ploys to lure him into an insincere endorsement. Well, that's not happening anytime soon, confirmed Paul, in this amusing tale of failure:

I can't endorse somebody that disagrees with me on all the major issues -- on the federal reserve system, on spending and taxes, and No Child Left Behind, and McCain-Feingold, and foreign policy especially. I mean I could never support somebody who thinks that its funny to say "bomb, bomb, bomb Iran." That to me is not somebody I could endorse ever.

I love this guy. He's a kooky Libertarian, sure, but Paul has a certain rebellious charm and moral standing that truly warms my heart. Give him hell, Ron. Honestly, if things proceed as they are, I expect both Chuck Hagel and Colin Powell to formally endorse Obama before 4 November. Wishful thinking, perhaps, but the signs are rather ominous.

He's got this.

Stay Cool. Know Hope.