You are currently browsing the daily archive for October 16, 2008.


Many women who really listened to the debate last night were very angry about Obama’s answer on the abortion. It was patronizing as it was fear mongering and non-committal. My pet peeve was this part

women in consultation with their families, their doctors, their religious advisers, are in the best position to make this decision

I remember bringing it up last night and my guy saying “he wants to ingratiate himself with the Catholics”

And sure enough, today I read this piece from Politico:

Barack Obama and John McCain’s last appearance on stage together wasn’t at Hofstra University, but will be tonight, when the candidates speak back to back at the annual Al Smith Dinner in New York City.

Whats the connection, you ask?

For the past 60 years, distinguished guests have attended the Catholic charities fundraiser in honor of Smith, the late New York governor and first Catholic to run for president, in 1928.

Would that be a problem for a candidate? Apparently it was last time around

In 2000, both George W. Bush and Al Gore appeared. However, Bush and Kerry weren’t invited in 2004 because the Archdiocese stated there were divisive election issues that would take away from the charity dinner. (It was assumed by some that Kerry’s abortion stance might have been the issue, but the Archdiocese never specified.)

So, ain’t it convenient to be the media darling? You get to pander to the Catholics in a debate without anyone raising the flag to the women voters – who were directed to only be offended by…Sarah Palin.

And it seems my vote gets cheaper and cheaper…its less than the price of a dinner right now

https://i2.wp.com/www.foucault.info/documents/img/notapipe/surrealistplumber.jpg

Politico has the video

McCain was solid in his performance,” he says. “I still don’t know where he stands,” he says of Obama. “I’m middle class. I can’t have my taxes raised any more.”

He also says he actually isn’t in the bracket where Obama would raise his taxes — but he’s worried that Obama will shift the bracket down.

Update

It seems Joe the Plumber won mCain the independents in the last debate.

Inder the title “Obama Wins by a hair the buried lede is:

Perhaps the best news for McCain is the rating he received from independent voters. Among respondents not identified with either major political party, McCain was judged tonight’s winner, 51-42 percent.

Update

From Mr Biden’s neighborhood

faking authenticity again

And for all the attaks on poor Joe, it won’t work. because Joe is not even the messenger. Obama is.

Obama said he’ll spread the wealth – and he can’t take it back now.

Good statement from McCain’s campaign:

“It’s an outrage that the Obama campaign and the media are attacking Joe the Plumber for asking a legitimate question of a presidential candidate. This is why voters still have so many questions about Barack Obama. Instead of answering tough questions, his campaign attacks average Americans for daring to look at the reality behind his words,

And from a satisfied customer

I just have to put in my response here- I’m Sue from Toledo, and believe it or not, THE “Joe the Plumber” is MY plumber!! He works for a small company with only a few employees- when they come to my house, it is either him or another guy who comes and they do excellent work!! And they are very fair in what they charge. I have kept them because I feel they are honest and like I said, do good work. The last time he came to my house, he put in a new sump pump after our basement flooded. He came right away and did an excellent job- is always very pleasant. I am REALLY amused by all of this- especially when the Obama camp or the media is trying to discredit him!! Believe me, he is just who he says he is!! I am just flaberghasted by this, but not nearly as much as he is, I am Sure!!

and a video montage from the debate on Joe


Remember “Assassinationgate”? K0 getting red in the face about Hillary’s mention of RFK – tape sent to all media?

The new version is now proven to be a hoax

SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.

Too bad, John lewis – and Obama mentioned it in the debate too

at some of the rallies that your running mate was holding, in which all the Republican reports indicated were shouting, when my name came up, things like “terrorist” and “kill him,” and that you’re running mate didn’t mention, didn’t stop, didn’t say “Hold on a second, that’s kind of out of line.”

And there was the media frenzy

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.

Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.

The first time they planted this meme was at the very beginning of the campaign

. Got him the Secret service quite early – that appearance of presidential he so craves.

Ironically, they are now the witnesses to this hoax. Not that this debunking will be widely reported.

The idea that the fix was in started to take shape when I started seeing “Obama as Reagan”

While Reagan’s name was mostly uttered on the republican side – their first debate was at his Library, it was more significantly used in the Democratic election.

I believe it was part of the original deal made with the media.

It was initiated by Obama and carried on enthusiastically by the teflon makers

To my surprise, I just discovered the process started way before the primaries, when Obama was a virtual unknown.

Politico wasn’t too subtle when trumpeting the campaign talking points back in July 2007

Obama models campaign on Reagan revolt

complete with photo

here’s what the campaign wanted them to write:

“Now, it is blasphemy for Democrats,” Obama pollster Cornell Belcher said of Reagan, “but that hope and optimism that was Ronald Reagan” allowed him to “transcend” ideological divisions within his own party and the general electorate.

Primaries ongoing, in February E J Dionne was writing

Barack Obama‘s critics bear a remarkable resemblance to the liberals who labored mightily to dismiss Ronald Reagan in 1980.

Like Reagan’s enemies, Obama’s opponents concede that he gives a great speech. Indeed, both Obama and Reagan came to wide attention because of a single oration that offered hope in the midst of a losing campaign — Obama’s 2004 keynote to the Democratic National Convention and Reagan’s 1964 “A Time for Choosing” address delivered on behalf of Barry Goldwater. But surely speeches aren’t enough, are they?

And it goes on lovingly about both.

Once the campaign started, Obama made headlines expressing his admiration for Reagan, dissing Clinton in the process. Those of us actually watching, went the other way. For me this was where the  much vaunted similarities between the two ended: one was a Clinton, the other a Reagan wanna-be

Of course, we still were blissfully ignorant that this was a process on its way probably since before we knew he was a candidate.

But I did figure at the time that this was a win-win for the media – erase Clinton from history, establish Reagan some more

Thanks Paul Krugman for keeping the sanity then:

Now progressives have been granted a second chance to argue that Reaganism is fundamentally wrong: once again, the vast majority of Americans think that the country is on the wrong track. But they won’t be able to make that argument if their political leaders, whatever they meant to convey, seem to be saying that Reagan had it right.

And as I decided to write about this based on past readings, but it’s obviously ongoing as here’s today’s catch:

Is Obama the New Reagan?

Obama may already have the political insulation that gave Reagan the moniker of the Teflon president. He has survived questions about his relationship with a fiery minister and his own controversial comments about small-town American life. In overcoming these landmines, Obama may have demonstrated that he is more like Reagan than many would like to admit.

And that’s where the comparison betrays the fix. Some of us know that teflon is not a naturally occurring miracle, but a man made coating. In presidents – it’s media made.

The media tried its best to teflonize W as well (I remember that Reagan’s Son piece in the New York Times), but it wore off before W’s terms were over. So now, they want to make another.

It was the pollsters who advanced this since the General election began, lately Zogby

Zogby said the race mirrors the 1980 election, when voters didn’t embrace Ronald Reagan over then-President Jimmy Carter until just days before the election.

“The Sunday before the election the dam burst,” Zogby said of the 1980 tilt. “That’s when voters determined they were comfortable with Reagan.”

Seems someone is building a narrative – and I wonder who made the voters so comfortable?

They want, as Zogby recommended – to convince the voters the new guy is acceptable (just like they did with Reagan). They want to teflonize the media installed Obama throughout, offering him the “political insulation” (from accountability) they gave Reagan.

I am not sure if voters have any word in this.

What I do know, it was Reagan who started the deregulation that led to today’s economy (and Obama did express admiration for this idea).

What I know is that at times like these, we need an FDR, not a Reagan.

But the media made sure she was out.

Not Your Sweetie