I Am SICK Of Palin’s Arrogant Trash-Talking…Back All that Sh$& Up With Facts and Evidence and Examples and Stop Running Your Mouth

Obama adviser David Axelrod says they expect a tough fight:

“I fully expect her to be ready for this debate, and I think there will be a great deal of interest in this. I think it will be a well-watched debate, so it’s going to be important… She’s very skilled and she’ll be well-prepared. I know she’s preparing this weekend. As you saw at the convention, she can be very good, so I think it would be foolish to assume that this going isn’t going to be a really challenging debate. We’re preparing for that, on that assumption.”

Biden’s spokesman tried to raise expectations even more, calling Palin “a leviathan of forensics.”

McCain strategist Nancy Pfotenhauer helped, saying that while Palin would win on “wits,” moderator Gwen Ifill shouldn’t ask her “trapdoor questions” or too much about foreign policy.

Palin herself, meanwhile, isn’t acting worried, the Washington Post reports:

“I’m looking forward to meeting him. I’ve never met him,” she said at a rally here. “I’ve been hearing about his Senate speeches since I was in, like, the second grade.”
She noted that Biden seems pretty confident about winning the debate.

“Then again,” she said, “this is the same Sen. Biden who said the other day that the University of Delaware would trounce the Ohio State Buckeyes.”

SEPT 28: CNN reports that Sarah Palin will go to McCain’s home near Sedona, Arizona for “debate camp” until Thursday night. An aide said McCain thought it would be an “invigorating and enjoyable place to prepare for Thursday.” Palin spent the past four days preparing in a Philadelphia hotel.

The AP explains that Biden and Palin will be questioned by Gwen Ifill, senior correspondent on PBS’ “The NewsHour” and moderator of “Washington Week.” Each candidate will have 90 seconds to respond to a question, followed by a two-minute discussion.

How Does THIS Sound?

“I think she has pretty thoroughly — and probably irretrievably — proven that she is not up to the job of being president of the United States,” David Frum, a former speechwriter for President Bush who is now a conservative columnist, said in an interview.

The Pressing Question No One is Asking…

Ronald Reagan, in his first inaugural address, famously declared that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”

Twenty-seven years later, in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and seven-plus years into the reign of Bush and Cheney, Reagan’s anti-government battle cry should be on trial. But, stunningly, it is not.

This needs to change. The presidential candidates’ view of the role of government should be one of the central questions of the last 36 days of the campaign. And it should definitely be a question they are asked at their next debate:

“Sen. McCain, given the part deregulation played in the current economic crisis and your support of a massive government bailout of the financial industry, are you now ready to break with Ronald Reagan’s assessment?”

And, to be even handed: “Sen. Obama, in 1996, Bill Clinton cheerfully announced that ‘the era of big government is over.’ As the Dow plummets and Wall Street and Main Street turn to Washington for big government bailouts, are you now ready to break with President Clinton’s assessment?”

The shift in my own thinking on the role of government was what led to my disillusionment with the Republican Party, and the transformation in my political views. I’ve always been progressive on social issues: pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-gay rights — even when I was a Republican. The big difference is that I once believed the private sector would address America’s social problems. But the hope that people would roll up their sleeves and solve this country’s social ills without the help of government was never fully realized. There were never enough volunteers or donations — and the problems were just too massive and intractable to tackle without the raw power of appropriations that only government can provide.

Our economy is not the only thing that is crumbling. So is the philosophical foundation of the modern Republican Party — also known as the Leave Us Alone Coalition, led by its spiritual guru, Grover Norquist. His dream of making government so small “we can drown it in a bathtub” has been embraced by the GOP mainstream.

Indeed, during his 2003 inauguration, Jeb Bush stood in front of Florida’s capitol building and said: “there would be no greater tribute to our maturity as a society than if we can make these buildings around us empty of workers; silent monuments to the time when government played a larger role than it deserved or could adequately fill.”

I sadly suspect that Jeb and Grover and their Republican compatriots have not yet updated their views of government — they have not yet made the connection between demonizing government and looking to it to save the day.

The financial meltdown has put the Grand Old Party’s schizophrenia on full display. But why are so many in the media, the Democratic Party, and the Obama campaign averting their eyes from the spectacle of a party that wants to drown government until they need it to bail out Wall Street or AIG — that wants to vanquish government workers, unless they are listening in on our phone conversations or working hard rolling back government regulations?

It’s like the story, probably apocryphal, of the agitated — and obviously confused — senior citizen imploring a GOP politician not to “let the government get its hands on Medicare.”

With the madness of this contradictory mindset exposed, voters will have a chance to decide if they agree with Norquist and Jeb and W and Cheney and the Republican Messiah himself, Ronald Reagan and, yes, with John McCain. And even Cindy McCain who, in her otherwise bland convention speech, called for “the Federal government” to “get itself under control and out of our way.”

A staggering 83 percent of Americans believe that we are heading in the wrong direction. And, I’m sorry, Sen. McCain, I don’t think it’s because of too many earmarks or because $3 million was spent in 2003 to study bear DNA in Montana.

Size matters in some things, but when it comes to government, it’s not the size of the government, it’s the way it is utilized.

“Big government” didn’t get us into Iraq. It didn’t spy on Americans or open black op rendition facilities all over the world. “Big government” didn’t create Guantanamo or okay the use of torture. “Big government” didn’t leave the residents of New Orleans to suffer in the wake of Katrina. “Big government” didn’t cause the financial industry to run off the rails. Indeed, the free market is what created all the new, risky ways for banks to game the system and, eventually, implode — then come calling on “big government” to ride to the rescue.

So let’s hear what McCain and Obama think the fundamental role of government should be. I can think of no better way to underline the massive gulf between the two candidates — and the two parties they represent — at the very moment when McCain is so desperately trying to blur the differences (see his recent shopping spree at the second-hand populism store: “Big discounts on ‘fat cats’ and ‘Wall Street greed’!”)

Stanford professor Lawrence Lessig says that if Americans recognize that the financial crisis — and the need for a government bailout — is due to “policies McCain still promotes… this could well be the event that effected a generational shift in governmental attitudes. Think Hoover vs. (the eventual) FDR.”

But if we want to make sure that Americans make that connection, we need to put the question of the role of government front and center in the campaign. Economic policy and foreign policy and domestic policy are all important areas of debate. But before we continue looking at the (falling) trees, let’s take a step back and consider the forest.

-Arianna Huffington

Palin Can’t Name Any Supreme Court Cases Other Than Roe v. Wade

Let’s get together and help Sarah Palin out, shall we? We all went to high school, learned a little bit of American History…let’s put our heads together and think of some landmark cases off the top of our heads that might have had some impact in how we work things in the good ole’ US of A. I’m an attorney by trade, so I guess it’s unfair, but I’m not running for VP, so I guess Palin and I are even. I’ll go off the top of my head, you fill in the blanks that I forget with posted comments.

• Marbury v. Madison – kinda decided for us what the power of the judicial branch of government was. The first landmark case of many led by the Marshall court.
• McCulloch v. Maryland – oh the whole state reserved powers v. federal enumerated powers thing
• Dred Scott v. I forget – slaves ain’t citizens and Congress can’t tell the states to free the slaves. Abe Lincoln isn’t happy with the decision
• Plessy v. Ferguson – Separate but equal.
• Brown v. Board of Education – Separate but equal overturned. Just equal….kinda.
• Gideon v. Wainwright – if you cannot afford counsel, one will be appointed for you without cost
• Miranda v. I forget – it’s only appropriate that Miranda followed Gideon – when cops arrest people, they gotta read them their rights; if cops perform an improper arrest, any information that they find out during the time the arrest is improper cannot be used in court against the accused
• Roe v. Wade – ok she knew that one…I wonder if she could really articulate the findings of the Court though.
• US v. Nixon – no Executive Privilege unless it’s a matter of national security
• Regents v. I forget – Affirmative Action defined
• Texas v. Johnson – flag burning case

I’m at a loss for any landmark cases over the past 20 years. But invite Gov. Palin to visit the blog and learn some U.S. history. It’s kinda important if she ever is in the position to, ya know, appoint PERMANENT members to the Supreme Court.

For cryin’ out loud people, can you just please stop the madness and send this woman and her “boss” packin’ on November 4? Thanks in advance.

Maureen Dowd Barred From McCain’s Campaign Plane

Howard Kurtz writes today that, in advance of this week’s vice-presidential debate, “some journalists say privately they are censoring their comments about Palin to avoid looking like they’re piling on” the beleaguered McCain soul/running-mate, whose interviews last week with Katie Couric more-or-less oscillated between “crash” and “burn.” But what gives with the journalistic self-censorship? Kurtz is probably referencing the conversation from this past week’s Reliable Sources, in which ABC News’ Jake Tapper suggested that the press is having a hard time cutting through the signal-to-noise ratio of the blogosphere:

KURTZ: Well, is this all just media whining, or does she have some responsibility? It’s not that we want to talk to her because we want to hang out with her. We want to ask questions that presumably the public want to ask of her.
TAPPER: Jessica was talking about the two lines of attack that you’re getting from Republican partisans and Democratic partisans — the press has been too mean to her, the press is not being tough enough on her. It’s possible that those are both correct.

But the difference is the press defined largely, as the McCain camp did early on, which is liberal blogs, tabloid media, “US” magazine. They were mean to her. They were inappropriate to her. But that’s not to say that the mainstream media was.

But I think that the McCain campaign has successfully taken all of the inappropriateness of that initial coverage of Palin and turned it around so that the media is now boxed in and can’t really push back to say, well, I don’t understand what she’s saying here, or I don’t understand, is this person actually prepared for this job?

Frankly, I don’t know what the point of having a press is if they cannot cut through the fog of conversation to offer a sincere assessment of Sarah Palin’s acumen. As Kurtz notes, it’s not a problem that conservative columnists have been having of late: “…pundits on the right are jumping ship. MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough says Palin ‘just seems out of her league.’ National Review Editor Rich Lowry called her performance ‘dreadful.’ Dallas Morning News columnist Rod Dreher described the interview as a ‘train wreck.’ Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker urged Palin to quit the race, saying: ‘If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.’” That said, we are talking about the same media that went hog-wild in dissecting the phrase, “lipstick on a pig.” That was a pile-on of undampened enthusiasm.

Actually, the larger bombshell about “censorship” comes earlier, and off-handedly, in Kurtz’s column, where he notes that New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has apparently been “barred…from [McCain's] plane” by the campaign.

Jack Cafferty

Jack Cafferty unloaded on Sarah Palin’s “disastrous” interview with Katie Couric Friday afternoon on CNN, telling Wolf Blitzer, “There’s a reason the McCain campaign keeps Governor Palin away from the press.”

After showing a clip of Palin stumbling over Couric’s question about the bailout and offering an answer connecting the bailout to healthcare, Cafferty asked, “Did you get that?”

He warned the viewers: “If John McCain wins this woman will be one 72-year-old’s heartbeat away from being President of the United States. And if that doesn’t scare the hell out of you, it should.”

Later, Cafferty continued, calling the clip “one of the most pathetic pieces of tape I have ever seen from someone aspiring to one of the highest offices in this country.”

Cafferty’s concerns were echoed by “a growing number of Republicans,” according to Politico’s Alexander Burns and David Paul Kuhn: A growing number of Republicans are expressing concern about Sarah Palin’s uneven — and sometimes downright awkward — performances in her limited media appearances.
Conservative columnists Kathleen Parker, a former Palin supporter, says the vice presidential nominee should step aside. Kathryn Jean Lopez, writing on the conservative National Review, says “that’s not a crazy suggestion” and that “something’s gotta change.”
Tony Fabrizio, a GOP strategist, says Palin’s recent CBS appearance isn’t disqualifying but is certainly alarming. “You can’t continue to have interviews like that and not take on water.”
“I have not been blown away by the interviews from her, but at the same time I haven’t come away from them thinking she doesn’t know s–t,” said Chris Lacivita, a GOP strategist. “But she ain’t Dick Cheney, nor Joe Biden and definitely not Hillary Clinton.”

We Cannot Afford This…Please Register to Vote on November 4

McCain Supporters Distributing Anti-Muslim Documentaries in Swing States to Incite Fear…Dayton, Ohio has Already Fallen Victim to the Hate…Mosque Gassed During Ramadan Prayers

On Friday, September 26, the end of a week in which thousands of copies of Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West – the fear-mongering, anti-Muslim documentary being distributed by the millions in swing states via DVDs inserted in major newspapers and through the U.S. mail — were distributed by mail in Ohio, a “chemical irritant” was sprayed through a window of the Islamic Society of Greater Dayton, where 300 people were gathered for a Ramadan prayer service. The room that the chemical was sprayed into was the room where babies and children were being kept while their mothers were engaged in prayers. This, apparently, is what the scare tactic political campaigning of John McCain’s supporters has led to — Americans perpetrating a terrorist attack against innocent children on American soil.

I read the story as reported by the Dayton Daily News, but this was after I had received an email written by a friend of some of the victims of these American terrorists. The matter of fact news report in the Dayton paper didn’t come close to conveying the horrific impact of this unthinkable act like the email I had just read, so I asked the email’s author for permission to share what they had written. The author was with one of the families from the mosque — a mother and two of the small children who were in the room that was gassed — the day after the attack occurred.

“She told me that the gas was sprayed into the room where the babies and children were being kept while their mothers prayed together their Ramadan prayers. Panicked mothers ran for their babies, crying for their children so they could flee from the gas that was burning their eyes and throats and lungs. She grabbed her youngest in her arms and grabbed the hand of her other daughter, moving with the others to exit the building and the irritating substance there.

“The paramedic said the young one was in shock, and gave her oxygen to help her breathe. The child couldn’t stop sobbing.

“This didn’t happen in some far away place — but right here in Dayton, and to my friends. Many of the Iraqi refugees were praying together at the Mosque Friday evening. People that I know and love.

“I am hurt and angry. I tell her this is NOT America. She tells me this is not Heaven or Hell — there are good and bad people everywhere.

“She tells me that her daughters slept with her last night, the little one in her arms and sobbing throughout the night. She tells me she is afraid, and will never return to the mosque, and I wonder what kind of country is this where people have to fear attending their place of worship?

“The children come into the room, and tell me they want to leave America and return to Syria, where they had fled to from Iraq. They say they like me, … , and other American friends — but they are too afraid and want to leave. Should a 6 and 7 year old even have to contemplate the safety of their living situation?

“Did the anti-Muslim video circulating in the area have something to do with this incident, or is that just a bizarre coincidence? Who attacks women and children?

“What am I supposed to say to them? My words can’t keep them safe from what is nothing less than terrorism, American style. Isn’t losing loved ones, their homes, jobs, possessions and homeland enough? Is there no place where they can be safe?

“She didn’t want me to leave her tonight, but it was after midnight, and I needed to get home and write this to my friends. Tell me – tell me – what am I supposed to say to them?”

When acting as a representative of Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), the 501(c)3 non-profit organization that I work for, I cannot engage in political activities. The distribution of Obsession, however, although a political campaign scheme, clearly crosses over into the mission of MRFF. So, I’m going to make two statements here — one in my capacity as MRFF’s Research Director, and another as an individual whose disgust at the vile campaign tactics of John McCain’s supporters completely boiled over when I opened up the email about children being gassed.

My statement as MRFF’s Research Director:

The presidential campaign edition of the Obsession DVD, currently being distributed by the Clarion Fund, carries the endorsement of the chair of the counter-terrorism department of the U.S. Naval War College, using the name and authority of an official U.S. military institution not only to validate an attack the religion of Islam, but to influence a political campaign. For these reasons, this endorsement has been included in MRFF’s second lawsuit against the Department of Defense, which was filed on September 25 in the Federal District Court in Kansas.

My opinion as an individual and thoroughly appalled human being:

John McCain has a moral obligation to publicly censure the Clarion Fund, the organization that produced Obsession and is distributing the DVDs; to denounce the inflammatory, anti-Muslim message of Obsession; and to do everything in his power to stop any further campaign activities by his supporters that have the potential to incite violence.

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

PLEASE PASS THIS INFORMATION ON SO PEOPLE CAN SEE REPUBLICANS RESORTING TO TERRORIST ACTIONS LIKE THOSE THEY SUPPOSEDLY DENOUNCE.

I Can See Russia From My House!

Two More Questions Were Asked of Palin by Couric but were Not Aired…Because They Were Embarassing!

McCain campaign flack Howard Kurtz says that “sources say CBS has two more [Palin] responses on tape that will likely prove embarrassing.” Why have they not been released? We have next to no press interaction with this person and yet a news organization is withholding interview footage they actually have? That is MESSED UP! The American people have a right to see just how STUPID this lady is…we know she’s a moron, but how far does the rabbit hole go?!

McCain’s Gambling Problem…I Don’t Want Him Gambling with MY Future

Yesterday’s New York Times front-page investigative story about John McCain’s long time ties to the nation’s gambling industry (“For McCain and Team, a Host of Ties to Gambling“), jogged my memory about an unsettling bit of information I was given by Ross Perot in 1995.

In November 1995, my wife and fellow author, Trisha, and I, interviewed Perot for several days for an unauthorized biography (Citizen Perot: His Life & Times, Random House, 1996). During one of our conversations, outside of the ‘on the record’ taped interviews, Perot discussed with us how he had utilized private investigators to uncover information about other people. Perot never used, from what I could determine, any of the personal details he assembled about others. Rather, he was merely a collector of information, never knowing when it might come in useful.

I discussed this with my editor, Bob Loomis. Without independent reporting, much of it was no more than informed gossip. Perot had passed along personal details about Barbara Walters family, Clinton chief of staff Leon Penneta, and business tycoon Peter Ueberroth, someone Perot had seriously considered as a vice-presidential candidate in his own 1992 presidential run.

From our interviews with Perot about the Vietnam POW/MIA issue, it was clear there was no love lost between Perot and a number of public officials who opposed his efforts to keep looking for soldiers he believed had been left behind and were alive. On Perot’s most disliked list was George Herbert Bush, who as Reagan’s vice-president had shut the door to any further government probe on the matter. Richard Armitage, George W. Bush’s ex-deputy Secretary of State, had earned Perot’s eternal animosity because of his conclusion that there were no MIAs left in Southeast Asia. And the final person to earn Perot’s enmity was John McCain, who as a decorated war hero, and then Senator, had also closed the door to any further MIA investigations.

Bob Loomis and I decided that I should not report Perot’s personal details about these men and women, with two exceptions. Regarding Ueberroth, I wrote in Citizen Perot that one Perot campaign insider had concluded that “Ueberroth was the perfect match,” but that “Perot and Mort Meyerson (Perot’s top business executive at EDS) personally made inquiries about him and eventually opted for a stand-in candidate.”

And as for Armitage, Perot’s information was so detailed, including even surveillance photos of Armitage in supposedly compromising situations, I did report it. And Armitage was generous in giving me extensive interviews that helped explain the background and put into context Perot’s one man war on him.

I am only reporting now Perot’s rumor/information about McCain because of today’s New York Times story. Perot told me that McCain had a gambling problem and he had uncovered details that McCain was bailed out in the late 1980s from a big gambling debt by his wife, Cindy.

If true, it raises a question as to whether McCain’s gambling might ever have put him in a situation where he was pressed to repay his debt through Senatorial favors.

An enterprising reporter has to ask Ross Perot if he will acknowledge what he shared with me 14 years ago, and if so, if he will now provide the evidence to back up the assertion. Perot hasn’t talked to me since I published my unauthorized biography, so unfortunately, I am not the person to ask.

And some reporter should ask McCain, directly, if he has ever had a gambling debt that his wife had to pay off. American voters have a right to know.

IF Eligible Voters are ALLOWED to Vote, Obama Will Win

Let me hedge my bet.

Maybe, at the vice presidential debate, the talking points Sarah Palin’s handlers have been stuffing her head with will come out of her mouth so butchered that even Republican voters will say, like Kurtz in Heart of Darkness, “The horror, the horror.”

Or maybe, at one of the remaining presidential debates, a contemptuously smirking John McCain will finally become so enraged by having to share a stage with Barack Obama that he will pop his notorious cork right there in front of a hundred million Americans.

Or maybe Obama or Biden will goof or gaffe or otherwise give such a bloody bit of chum to the media sharks that the gazillionth replay of the the sound bite will drive every swing voter in the country away from them.

But I don’t think so.

Sure, cable yakkers will declare after each debate who won on points, and who on body language; who played Nixon, and who played Kennedy; who won their focus groups of undecideds, and who flatlined with them. But my guess is that the prestige press headlines will continue to play it safe, as they did after the first debate — “Candidates clash” (New York Times), “differ sharply” (Los Angeles Times), “quarrel” (Washington Post) — and that on television, it will be concluded that no one delivered a knockout blow, which will require audiences to remain in suspense, and therefore to keep tuning in, until the photo-finish.

This election won’t be won or lost at the debates. Nor will it be determined by the two campaigns’ “ground games” — their get-out-the-vote efforts. Nor, unfortunately, will its outcome even depend on how many Americans wake up on Election Day intending to vote for one candidate or the other.

Instead, my fear is that the Electoral College results will hang on the swing state voting systems’ vulnerability to sabotage.

It’s already happening.

In El Paso County, Colorado, the county clerk — a delegate to the Republican National Convention — told out-of-state undergraduates at Colorado College, falsely, that they couldn’t vote in Colorado if their parents claim them as dependents on their taxes.

In Montgomery County, Virginia, the county registrar issued a press release warning out-of-state college students, falsely, that if they register to vote in Virginia, they won’t be eligible for coverage under their parents’ health and car insurance, and that “if you have a scholarship attached to your former residence, you could lose this funding.”

In Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin, Democratic voters received a mailing containing tear-out requests for absentee ballots addressed to the clerk in Caledonia — the wrong location. In Middleton, Wisconsin, Democratic voters received absentee ballot requests addressed to the clerk in Madison — the wrong address. Both mailers were sent by the McCain campaign.

Florida, Michigan and Ohio have some of the country’s highest foreclosure rates. “Because many homeowners in foreclosure are black or poor,” says the New York Times, “and are considered probable Democratic voters in many areas, the issue has begun to have political ramifications.” If you’re one of the million Americans who lost a home through foreclosure, and if you didn’t file a change of address with your election board, you’re a sitting duck for an Election Day challenge by a partisan poll watcher holding a public list of foreclosed homes. In states like New Mexico and Iowa, the number of foreclosures is greater than the number of votes by which George W. Bush carried the state in 2004.

In the 2006 election, according to the nonpartisan Fair Elections Legal Network, black voters in Virginia got computer-generated phone calls from a bogus “Virginia Election Commission” telling them that they could be arrested if they went to the wrong polling place; in Maryland, out-of-state leafleters gave phony Democratic sample ballots to black voters with the names of Republican candidates checked in red; in New Mexico, Democratic voters got personal phone calls from out of state that directed them to the wrong polling place. Does anyone think this won’t be tried again in 2008?

The reason behind Alberto Gonzales’ attempted purge of US Attorneys was that some of them wouldn’t knuckle under to Karl Rove’s plan to concoct an “election fraud” hoax that would put Republicans in control of the nation’s voting lists. “We have, as you know, an enormous and growing problem with elections in certain parts of America today,” Rove falsely told the Republican National Lawyers Association, an evidence-less problem crying out for a draconian solution. Does anyone think that Rove’s move from the White House to Fox has dampened Republican ardor for this ruse?

And if all of that doesn’t alarm you, consider the new report on electronic voting systems [pdf] from the Computer Security Group at the University of California, Santa Barbara, which concluded that “all voting systems recently analyzed by independent security testers have been found to contain fatal security flaws that could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the voting process…. Unless electronic voting systems are held up to standards that are commensurate with the criticality of the tasks they have to perform, the very core of our democracy is in danger.”

And did I mention that on Election Day, some polling places in minority precincts in battleground states will be shocked, simply shocked, to discover that so many people want to vote that it will take hours of standing in line to vote. That is, of course, unless they run of out ballots.

So while the presidential and vice presidential debates may make for swell political theater, the likelihood is that victory will be determined not by how the debates move a small percentage of undecided Americans off the fence, but by the voting experiences of a few thousand voters in a few swing states on November 4. Josef Stalin is reputed to have said, “Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.” I think he had it half right. Those who decide who cast the votes also decide everything.

Since when?

Huffingtonpost.com

Despite bad reviews from all sides, John McCain’s campaign has decided that having Sarah Palin do big broadcast interviews was a good idea, the National Review reports:

Team McCain tells me the strategy of having Palin talk to traditional broadcast networks ABC and CBS was designed to allow Palin to reach the maximum number of viewers. “Coming off her tremendous performance at the convention, our goal was to allow as many Americans as possible an opportunity to see her answer questions about her record, her biography and her principles and convictions on as large a stage as possible,” one campaign source told me this afternoon. The new CBS interviews, to be done tomorrow, are intended to keep Palin in the public eye as she prepares for Thursday’s debate.

Bill Kristol says McCain isn’t happy, however, with the way his staff has been handling Palin and is making some changes for the debate:

I’m told McCain recently expressed unhappiness with his staff’s handling of Palin. On Sunday he dispatched his top aides Steve Schmidt and Rick Davis to join Palin in Philadelphia. They’re supposed to liberate Palin to go on the offensive as a combative conservative in the vice-presidential debate on Thursday.

The Wall Street Journal has more on Palin’s liberation:

McCain campaign manager Rick Davis and senior adviser Steve Schmidt are planning to coach the candidate ahead of the debate, according to senior advisers. They traveled Sunday to meet the Republican vice-presidential nominee in Philadelphia. After her appearance with Sen. McCain at a rally in Columbus, Ohio, these top officials plan to fly with her on Monday to Sen. McCain’s ranch in Sedona, Ariz., which they hope she will find a comforting place to prep, these people said.
More broadly, the McCain campaign aims to halt what it sees as a perceived decline in the crispness and precision of Gov. Palin’s latest remarks as well as a fall in recent polls, according to several advisers and party officials.

…

Some prominent Republicans and senior members of Congress have expressed worries about certain facets of the Palin campaign, particularly that Gov. Palin may be “overprepared” and not encouraged to be herself, an adviser said.

“She hasn’t had the time or inclination to question the judgments of the people telling her to hit her marks,” said one Republican strategist. “Gov. Palin is a team player, but the campaign needs to adjust to a game plan that works for her.

…

“It’s time to let Palin be Palin — and let it all hang out,” said Scott Reed, a Republican strategist.”

We love National Enquirer

Again, they report some real weird news on Victoria Beckham…

Victoria Beckham‘s truly bizarre bedtime ritual.

Former Spice Girl Victoria’s sophisticated and chic image goes out when the window as she gets down-and-dirty.  She admits she wears both woolen socks and loved before climbing into bed with the soccer superstar hubby David Beckham.

It’s part of Posh’s beauty regimen – smothering her tootsies in moisturizer before covering them with the must-have warming accessories – the gloves.

“I put really thick foot lotion on with socks before I go to sleep,” Posh admitted.

“I also use think hand cream with gloves at the same time.

“David must think I’m a loony, because I get into bed with gloves and socks on.”

Posh also confessed to another extreme beauty trick – she plucks her eyebrows one by one.

Hopefully she won’t be the next Paris Hilton

National Inquirer reports:

Matilda, Heath Ledger’s daughter, will inherit his fortune.

Ledger’s father Kim told Aussie paper The Sunday Times that Heath signed a will in January leaving everything to his parents and three sisters.

There was some speculation that Ledger’s ex- actress Michelle Williams would issue a challenge for the money.  She did not.’

“There is no claim,” Kim Ledger said. “Our family has gifted everything to Matilda.”

Ledger’s will was signed on April 12, 2003 and his estate is believed to be more than $16.3 million the tab revealed.

The estate’s executor Mark Dyson, an accountant from Adelaide, did not divulge exactly how much Matilda would inherit.

I love me some Citibank!

Citigroup Inc. has agreed to buy Wachovia Corp.’s banking operations, creating the largest U.S. bank by total deposits.

In announcing the agreement, Citigroup said it would pay Wachovia approximately $2.16 billion in stock and assume Wachovia senior and subordinated debt, totaling approximately $53 billion. Wachovia will remain a public company and retain its asset management, retail brokerage, and certain select parts of its wealth management businesses, including the Evergreen and Wachovia Securities franchises. Going forward, Wachovia expects to have adequate capital to support its remaining businesses.

Citigroup will acquire more than $700 billion of assets of Wachovia’s banking subsidiaries, and related liabilities. Vikram Pandit, CEO of Citigroup, says the transaction will give it $600 billion in deposits in the U.S., or about a 9.8 percent market share. Total global deposits would reach $1.3 trillion.

Citigroup says it expects to raise $10 billion in common equity in connection with the transaction and would reduce its quarterly dividend to 16 cents per share, effective immediately, to maintain the company’s capital position. On a pro forma basis for the second quarter ended June 30, 2008, Citigroup’s Tier 1 capital ratio is expected to be 8.8 percent assuming completion of the transaction.

Under the agreement, Citigroup will absorb up to $42 billion of losses on a $312 billion pool of loans held by Charlotte, N.C.-based Wachovia, which is the tenth largest bank in the Austin area by deposits.

The FDIC will absorb losses beyond that.

Citigroup has granted the FDIC $12 billion in preferred stock and warrants to compensate the FDIC for bearing this risk.

“This morning’s decision was made under extraordinary circumstances with significant consultation among the regulators and Treasury,” says FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair. “This action was necessary to maintain confidence in the banking industry given current financial market conditions.”

According to The Wall Street Journal, Wachovia held advanced merger discussions with both Citigroup and Wells Fargo & Co. late Sunday. The Journal cited individuals familiar with the discussions.

It was only last fall that Citi was seeking to raise billions to offset its substantial losses amid the credit crisis.

Spain’s Banco Santander SA also was said to be interested in Wachovia, but longtime industry observers were dubious that the U.S. government would be interested in working with a foreign bank to rescue Wachovia.

Late Friday, a Wachovia spokeswoman declined to comment, saying the bank doesn’t discuss merger speculation.

Reports late last week indicated that struggling Wachovia was seeking a suitor. The bank fumbled badly on its ill-timed purchase of Oakland, Calif.-based Golden West Financial Corp. Much of the bank’s mortgage woes stem from that $25 billion deal completed in 2006. Many analysts said that deal was a huge mistake even before it closed.

Source

Obama in Virginia with 26,000!

So on the day after the debate, Barack Obama and Joe Biden got together in Virginia and what a site it was! 26,000 strong with a TON of veterans supporting the cause. It was soooo awesome!

Madeline Albright’s Thoughts on Debate #1

Tonight was a breakthrough for Senator Obama, who showed himself truly ready to be president. He responded knowledgeably, thoughtfully and confidently to the toughest questions on the economy, Iraq, and terror. Meanwhile, Senator McCain spent so much time attacking his opponent, he neglected to show how a McCain-Palin administration would differ from Bush-Cheney. As a result, Obama answered the threshold question about his candidacy; McCain did not.

Palin on Dinosaurs

Soon after Sarah Palin was elected mayor of the foothill town of Wasilla, Alaska, she startled a local music teacher by insisting in casual conversation that men and dinosaurs coexisted on an Earth created 6,000 years ago — about 65 million years after scientists say most dinosaurs became extinct — the teacher said.
After conducting a college band and watching Palin deliver a commencement address to a small group of home-schooled students in June 1997, Wasilla resident Philip Munger said, he asked the young mayor about her religious beliefs.

Palin told him that “dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time,” Munger said. When he asked her about prehistoric fossils and tracks dating back millions of years, Palin said “she had seen pictures of human footprints inside the tracks,” recalled Munger, who teaches music at the University of Alaska in Anchorage and has regularly criticized Palin in recent years on his liberal political blog, called Progressive Alaska.

The idea of a “young Earth” — that God created the Earth about 6,000 years ago, and dinosaurs and humans coexisted early on — is a popular strain of creationism.

Though in her race for governor she called for faith-based “intelligent design” to be taught along with evolution in Alaska’s schools, Gov. Palin has not sought to require it, state educators say.

In a widely-circulated interview, Matt Damon said of Palin, “I need to know if she really think that dinosaurs were here 4000 years ago. I want to know that, I really do. Because she’s gonna have the nuclear codes.”

The Record Endorses Obama – First Time It Has Endorsed a Democrat Since 1932

For the first time in 72 years, The Record is endorsing a Democrat for president.

Franklin D. Roosevelt got our nod in 1936.

The reasons for the endorsement of Barack Obama over John McCain are articulated in the editorial on this page.

The unanimous decision was made by our editorial board, which consists of Publisher Roger W. Coover, Managing Editor Donald W. Blount, Opinion Page Editor Eric Grunder, Human Resources Director Sandi Johnson and me.

There are many who will question – with some validity – the power or value of such an endorsement. Our decision is hardly going to tip the balance in a competitive presidential election.

But endorsements of elected officials are an important part of a newspaper’s public service duty.

This is the third time I’ve been involved in the presidential endorsement process.

Our presidential endorsements over the years have involved decisions by many different publishers, editors and editorial board members. The Record has changed ownership several times.

Delailah Little, The Record’s librarian, diligently combed our archives when I sought to find out our endorsement history. I was stunned to discover the newspaper has endorsed 17 consecutive Republicans – the anomaly being 1992, when The Record chose not to endorse either George H.W. Bush or Bill Clinton.