DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THE PALIN WARDROBE FUND?

Just a quick question for donors to the Republican Party. It's been difficult economic times for everyone. Do you mind that the McCain Campaign spent $150,000 on a new wardrobe for Sarah Palin or would you like your money back?


Or as Mike Murphy (McCain's 2000 campaign manager) put it:

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PITBULL & A HOCKEY MOM?

YOU CAN FEED A PITBULL FOR 368 YEARS ON WHAT IT TAKES TO CLOTHE A HOCKEY MOM!

WHY I SUPPORT OBAMA: STEWARDSHIP

I have many reasons for supporting Sen. Obama's campaign. Some of those reasons are because I support specific policies that he has proposed. Some of the reasons are less distinct. An example of such is my belief that Sen. Obama would show the best stewardship of the country. Stewardship is defined as the act of caring for another's property or interests. It is an often neglected aspect of the job description of President. But ultimately the concept that the President is responsible for the wise use of the resources of government is one of the most important ideas to the running of good government.

Many people believe that the government should have NO influence over their lives. They have a "survival of the fittest" mentality which denies any need of government influence in thier lives. Other people strongly feel that the government should solve every problem for them. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. We may not want to be taxed: but without those taxes there is no revenue to run the country. Without those revenues bad things happen...bridges fall down, military endeavors fail and economic failings can leave society at a standstill.

So we need government and we need the administration of that government to be wise and responsible. The degree to which we need that government is and always will be an issue of contention among Americans. There are many who believe that Sen. Obama will tax and spend us all into poverty. And that is an issue that has been discussed on many blogs, talk shows and at every bar in the country. The degree to which government needs to be involved is a matter for argument, the need for responsible use of those resources is not.

Simply put, I believe that Sen. Obama will be the better steward of America's resources. You may disagree with how much to give him, but he is the one who will best administer what he is given to work with.

I believe strongly that people fall into two categories as they grow older. Some see the future as a fragile gift to our children and grandchildren. Others believe (regardless of what theology they profess) that when they die....the world for all practical purposes STOPS! I do not profess to know for sure how Sen. McCain sees the future, but I am certain that the father in Sen. Obama looks to the future legacy he leaves his children.

It's much like the Biblical proverb: One servant buried his master's money to make sure that it stayed safe and wasn't lost. He was rebuked for the waste of potential. The wise servant cared for the money as if it were his own. He used it responsibly and produced a profit for his master. He wanted something better for the future...not just to maintain the status quo.

Many have called Obama a socialist or suggested that in "re-distributing the wealth" he would take from the rich to give to the poor. In many cases, this is a thinly veiled assertion that Sen. Obama will "look after his own" and give your hard earned money to those "other black people." The labels & name calling are merely a way to form divisions among us. A way to keep us from examining the real issue: How do we use our resources to our best advantage?

The truth is that Sen. Obama feels ALL Americans are hurting now. And some are doing more than hurting. They make just enough to pay the rent and keep the lights turned on but there is no "extra" to be cut. Under an Obama plan, the ones who make a quarter of a million dollars or more per year will pay more money towards our national upkeep. Why? Because that extra payment will not result in their utilities being turned off. I once listened to a woman ahead of me at the bank who was complaining that the economy was so bad that she couldn't afford to go to Europe for vacation and would have to settle on Mexico this year. I hope you don't mind if I don't get all misty eyed over her loss.

We are a nation at war...on two fronts. We are a nation that has ignored it's infra-structure to the point that it is falling down around us. We are a nation facing a severe recession. We must increase our revenues and we must use those revenues wisely. Never has our nation staged a war paid for by credit and now we must pay the bill. The manner in which that bill is payed is of extreme importance to our future.

All sides, whether they support Obama's bid for presidency or not, have commented on the way his campaign has been run. There have been conservative Republicans who have publicly held the Obama Campaign as a shining example of executive management. The same cannot be said of the McCain campaign. When Obama was asked by the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, "why when you have no executive management experience, should we believe you can run America?" And Obama replied, "Watch how I run my campaign."

So on Nov. 4th, I will look to the future and cast my vote for Sen. Barack Obama. The Senator summed it up best today in a speech:

"We can choose hope over fear, unity over division, the promise of change over the power of the status quo...In one week, we can come together as one nation, and one people, and once more choose our better history. That's what's at stake."

"The change we need isn't just about new programs and policies...It's about a new attitude, it's about new politics _ a politics that calls on our better angels instead of encouraging our worst instincts."

NEW ENDORSEMENT FOR McCAIN

Sen. John McCain's presidential bid received a new endorsement today. Several bloggers on a web site called al-Hesba have endorsed Sen. McCain as the best choice for an American President to promote their agenda. Normally, the McCain campaign would be thrilled at a new endorsement....but this web site is a password protected site sponsored by Al-Qaeda!

They feel that a President McCain will continue to occupy American military resources in Iraq and that his "impetuous" character will lead him to make decisions that will increase the Anti-American sentiment that feeds Al Qaeda funding and recruitment.

It's very easy to make light of this "endorsement". Many on the left are having a field day with it. Look to see it as the "joke of the week" on any number of late night shows. But it alludes to an extremely serious issue that many would like to ignore. We still live in dangerous times! One of the many pro-McCain quotes also suggests that an attack before the election could swing the vote enough to allow McCain to win.

"If al-Qaida carries out a big operation against American interests," the message said, "this act will be support of McCain because it will push the Americans deliberately to vote for McCain so that he takes revenge for them against al-Qaida. Al-Qaida then will succeed in exhausting America till its last year in it."

As a liberal, I am often accused of being blind to the dangers of the world we live in. That is simply not correct. Al-Qaida IS still a danger. But it is important to consider how the next President will react in a moment of crisis. Conventional wisdom suggests that the ex-military pilot would have a better grasp of what is necessary to combat the enemy. Unfortunately, all we have seen from Sen. McCain are knee-jerk reactions to events as opposed to a clear, concise response to a situation. (Look at the economic crisis.) When you examine the irratic manner in which he has managed his own campaign, it calls into question his judgment in managing a military operation. We should also keep in mind that our actions in Iraq have been one of the best recruitment tools Al-Qaeda has ever had.

You see, it is not enough for a President to only understand the military aspects of a conflict. He must be equally versed in the political ramifications of his actions. If you blow up a building to kill a terrorist, you will probably also kill civilians. That action may strengthen the resolve of the people to support the terrorists you are trying to defeat. The importance of the target may outweigh the political risk of killing civilians. That is a matter to be judged each time by the President. I have no doubt that McCain can blow up the building. I am no longer sure that he has the wisdom to see the end result of his actions or the political impact they will have on the situation. (Remember, McCain is one of those who insisted that we would be greeted as liberators by the Iraqi people.)

While it has been suggested that an Obama Presidency would be "tested" to see how he would react early in his term, it could also be suggested that the predictability of McCain's temperment is equally dangerous. The first rule of war is to understand your adversary's strengths & weaknesses in order to exploit them. McCain's predictability is very easily exploited.

There is danger in the world today. An "impetuous" president will NOT help us navigate the dangerous waters of the world we find ourselves living in! A new direction is needed!

WHY I SUPPORT OBAMA: THE CONSTITUTION

When I was in grade school it was required that every student memorize the Preamble to the Constitution. In middle school we were required to read the entire document...test on Monday. We were taught the three branches of government and how they were to be a system of "checks & balances" on each other. And in high school, we discussed the implications of that document in a class called Comparative Political Systems taught by a man who took great pride in his nickname..."BETTER DEAD THAN RED" CHARLIE. This was during the Reagan years and the end of the Cold War, it was a class that left an impression.

"Charlie" is dead now. And as conservative as he was, I can't help but think that he would be horrified to see what has happened to his favorite document during the past 8 years. Because the greatest casualty to 9/11 has been the Constitution! Under the guise of "homeland security", President Bush has used the attack on the Twin Towers to justify the gutting of the most impressive document of government written since the Magna Carta.

It can now be stated of America that under the leadership of President Bush, we have legalized the following acts that are considered by many to be unconstitutional:

* The government can imprison ANY AMERICAN whom the government has determined to be an "enemy of America". There is no need for a warrant.
* Suspension of Habeas Corpus. The right of an individual to petition the court for release from incarceration. This is the right to a trial. You can't simply be held indefinitely without a court appearance.
* While Congress has passed laws during the Bush Administration prohibiting torture, the President has issued a "signing statement" allowing it under his own interpretation of the law but in violation of the Constitution.
* Up until the passing of the most recent FISA Bill, President Bush authorized warrantless domestic wiretapping of American citizens.

The argument offered by the administration to justify these acts consists of the establishment of the never ending War on Terror. Then the President claims the additional powers offered to him by the Constitution in times of war and national emergency. The problem with this is that it has become a very open ended commitment on the part of the President. If the war never ends....you don't have to give up the extra power you wield.

President Bush & Vice President Cheney have long felt that the Executive Branch was stripped of it's power following Watergate. They have used the excuse of 9/11 to take power that Nixon never dreamed of.

Please don't misunderstand, I am aware that we face many dangers in today's world. But I fear anything that disrupts the delicate balance established by our founding fathers between the duty of the Executive Branch to execute the laws and the oversite obligation of the other branches.

These changes can be as dangerous in the long run as the threat of terrorism is in the short term. It sounds good to say that the President won't be bothered with liberal courts and evidence when terrorists stalk our streets to kill us. But in a few years, we could find that the "terrorists" are no longer Muslim but something much closer to home. You see the Patriot Act doesn't discriminate between citizen and non-citizen. So the next time it's used to arrest an "enemy of America" it might be you! And then you have no right to a trial or even to see the evidence presented against you.

This may sound silly, but if you have been called traitor and un-American as often as I have by bloggers, you get a little nervous when a candidate for vice-president starts talking about the "REAL AMERICA". I often argued in 2005 that you should never give President Bush power that you would not want a President Hillary Clinton to have.

I don't mind wiretapping of citizens. I do mind when it is done without a court order. I know I should trust the government to act responsibly, but as we learned last week...it often doesn't. We now know that countless American service men were listened in on while they called home. And instead of catching terrorists, we established a military intelligence 900 number. Military Intelligence was listening to phone sex between soldiers and the partners left at home. Worse, they were passing the BEST calls on to others to enjoy! Please explain to me how this is either making me safer or is protecting my constitutional rights.

Earlier this year, Sen. Obama showed that he understood the tightrope that must be walked between keeping the country safe and protecting the rights of its citizens. When the FISA bill was first presented, he worked to ensure that it required a court order be obtained for any wire tap. FISA was a very hot button issue for the liberal side of the Democratic party. He upset many of them when he voted for the FISA bill because he felt the need for safety outweighed the minor problems of the bill once oversight was established. In this, he showed a clearer understanding of the true intent of the Constitution than our current president has.

As a Constitutional Law professor for one of the best law schools in the US, Senator Obama offers our best hope for restoring the mindset of government to one that believes in the importance of the Constitution. He understands that it is our Constitution that makes America different from the rest of the world. We have seen this recently when the Supreme Court overruled a ban on handguns within a municipality. Sen. Obama disagreed with their ruling, but pointed out that while he didn't like it, once the Supreme Court makes a ruling....that's the law. How nice that he accepted it when he didn't get his way. Refreshing after the last eight years.

The Constitution is the single most important legal document in the history of our country. Sen. Obama is the candidate most inclined to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America (and not just the parts that he likes!)

REST IN PEACE

"Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no. That's not America. Is there something wrong with a seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might have an association with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I feel particularly strong about this because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay, was of a mother at Arlington Cemetery and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone, and it gave his awards - Purple Heart, Bronze Star - showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death, he was 20 years old. And then at the very top of the head stone, it didn't have a Christian cross. It didn't have a Star of David. It has a crescent and star of the Islamic faith.
And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. And he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was fourteen years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he could serve his country and he gave his life."

Ret. General Colin Powell, MEET THE PRESS, October 19, 2008

Thank you, Sir. For reminding us what it means to be an American. There are over 20,000 Muslim-Americans currently serving in our Armed Forces. We must remember them and their sacrifices with all due honor and respect. May the blessings of God & Allah be upon you.

MUCH ADO ABOUT ACORN

It's October of an election year. And as predictable as the turning of the autumn leaves, comes the Republican cries about the evils of ACORN and voter fraud. Now don't get me wrong, I am not trying to make light of what could be a serious problem. But listening to the Right will cause you to confuse the crime of Voter Fraud (a major offense) with the lesser crime of voter registration fraud. They are screaming about the potential problems of the oak when all they really have in hand are a few nuts.




ACORN is an organization dedicated to being a political voice for the poor. They are involved in a number of projects that include working on housing issues, rebuilding New Orleans, school lunch menus, etc. The most visible arm of their work is their voter registration drives. Both in 2004 & 2006 there were allegations that ACORN was submitting thousands of fraudulent voter registrations. These allegations have resurfaced this election cycle as well. The Right would have you believe that these registrations are being done in order to alter the results of the election. They will remind you that Sen. Obama once represented ACORN as an attorney and has worked for them repeatedly over the years. They then allege that the Obama campaign is behind this "conspiracy". They point out that the Obama campaign gave 830,000 dollars to ACORN and on an FEC report listed it for "event management" instead of voter registration. (We know this because the Obama campaign amended the report without prompting. If they hadn't we would never know this.)




I have a lot of trouble with "conspiracy theories". For a conspiracy to be big enough to make a difference in the real world, it requires a lot of people's active participation. It also requires them to keep quite about it. (And nobody has ever accused Democrats of being "quiet" or of being able to keep a secret.) What I think has happened instead is an organization with lofty goals being bogged down in the nuts & bolts operation of their agenda. The incompetence of the organization is then used as "evidence" of massive wrongdoing with large leaps of assumption thrown in to smear both the organization and the Democratic candidate. A review of their operations is not out of line, but to condemn them for "fixing" an election is a stretch of the imagination.




It is a fact that ACORN has submitted many fraudulent voter registrations. We know this in part because ACORN flags many of these when they turn them in. But the law requires them to turn in all registrations they take, regardless of ACORN's belief in their authenticity. (If this was not the case, you would be hearing cries that ACORN throws away any registrations they think would vote Republican.) The legal requirement to turn them in is a safe guard to protect both sides.




The next major question is why take fake registrations in the first place if not to alter an election? Well, the fraud is not being perpetrated by the organization on America, but by the workers of ACORN on ACORN itself. ACORN hires out of work people to do the registration. They are trying to give a "hand up" to the poor by giving them a paycheck. In many cases this is a great thing, but some of the people they hire are more interested in getting a paycheck than in helping out. If you are told you must get 25 registrations per day to keep your job, then a few will always decide to take the cards home, look through the phone book and make up the names. This way they can keep their paycheck (without going through the hassle of the work). Eventually they are caught & fired...but the law requires that they submit their registrations regardless.




Now Sen. Obama did as an attorney represent ACORN in Illinois. What the right doesn't want you to know is that his co-council for this was the UNITED STATES JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. And his involvement with them afterwards has been as a guest speaker twice to the Chicago branch as a motivational speaker to a group of about 50. Now if the fact that he still spoke to them twice bothers you, keep in mind that in February 2006, John McCain was the keynote speaker at a major immigration rally in Florida sponsored by (drum roll please) ACORN. It is even more interesting to note that much of the speech was to praise the work of ACORN. Talk about flip-flops!




It is also interesting to note that while voter fraud registration is evident.....THERE HAVE BEEN NO CASES OF TRUE VOTE FRAUD! No trials, no convictions, not much of anything except cries of cheating ALWAYS timed just before the next election. And that brings me to my final observation. Does anyone really believe that if this was a true danger to Democracy, that Republicans would just drop it every year after the election is done? Wouldn't they spend the next two years making sure that they weren't cheated again?




This is nothing more than a distraction. Republicans have controlled the House & Senate for so long that they don't want you to look at issues. They don't want you to think about the economy or Iraq or any of the real problems facing America. They want you to believe that Democrats are stealing the election by registering fictional cartoon characters in a Disneyland vote drive. But until Mickey Mouse shows up at the polls to vote: ACORN's stealing the election is just an urban myth. Much ado about NOTHING!

A PICTURE'S WORTH A 1000 WORDS

They say that "a picture's worth a thousand words". A thousand words. I've written that many and more over the past year trying to explain to people my support for Sen. Obama. And while there are a lot of reasons I support the Senator, one of the most difficult to explain is his unflappability and why it's important. Whether you like the man or not, many would agree that the man is a very cool and detached individual. That is one of the things that many people dislike about Sen. Obama.

But I prefer a President that is a bit detached. I don't need a "beer buddy", I'm hiring a President. I want someone as President who can sit at a negotiation table (across from both our friends and foes) and who doesn't wear his emotions on his sleeve. I want him to be cool and collected. Giving nothing away.

I don't want a man who appears out of control or angry. Or wandering around lost. I don't think it will do America any good to have another President who sneers or rolls his eyes. Giving everything away with his "tells". In poker, a player like this is called a "fish". And a fish (and his money) are always welcome at any table. I don't want a "fish" for President.

A "detached" poker player doesn't let his emotions rule his play. He maximizes his wins when the cards are good and minimizes his losses when lady luck goes to lunch. When helpful, he bluffs. But the bottom line is that he wants to walk away with all the chips on the table! I want a President that gets "all the chips" for America! To do that, you need to be calm, collected and careful!

I've spent a lot of time and a lot of words trying to explain this to people over the past year. And then today, I saw this photo from last night's debate. It said it all.....without the thousand words!

WHICH MAN DO YOU WANT TO BE SITTING AT THE TABLE?







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/443/slide_443_10841_large.jpg

RATS AND THE GOOD SHIP "GOP"

Each day more and more CONSERVATIVES are speaking out about their doubts concerning the McCain campaign. The liberal media has termed them "rats deserting the ship" and these are their comments!




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"[McCain] knows, in his gut, that he put somebody unqualified on the ballot. He knows that in his gut, and when this race is over that is something he will have to live with... He put somebody unqualified on that ballot and he put the country at risk, he knows that."

Matthew Dowd, Chief Strategist for George W. Bush's Re-Election Campaign


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I voted for Bush, father and son, but this time I'll vote for Obama...."I pray God, Barack Obama is elected,"

Dennis Hopper, Movie Star & Long Time Republican currently starring in AN AMERICAN CAROL. (I don't know which is scarier...Dennis Hopper voting Democratic or Dennis Hopper praying?)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear had to feel sorry for the old lion on his last outing and wish that he could be taken somewhere soothing and restful before the night was out. The train-wreck sentences, the whistlings in the pipes, the alarming and bewildered handhold phrases—"My friends"—to get him through the next 10 seconds. I haven't felt such pity for anyone since the late Adm. James Stockdale humiliated himself as Ross Perot's running mate. And I am sorry to have to say it, but Stockdale had also distinguished himself in America's most disastrous and shameful war, and it didn't qualify him then and it doesn't qualify McCain now.

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."

Christopher Hitchens, Conservative writer & Iraq War Supporter


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's time for John McCain to fire his campaign. He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic.

William Kristol, Fox News Commentator


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Obama-Terry Voter, anyone?" I’ll admit it: I’m voting for Obama and Lee Terry. Why? Because I want our officials to work hard, to be honest, exhibit strong ethics and be accessible. That’s Lee Terry. Ever talked with Lee? I have. You ask him questions, you get straight answers. I like that. Please join me in voting for Lee Terry. Paid for by Lee Terry for Congress"

Campaign Ad paid for by Lee Terry, incumbent REPUBLICAN running for re-election to Congress in Nebraska's second congressional district.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Do I believe in John McCain? Not as much as I used to. Do I believe in Sarah Palin? Despite my early enthusiasm for her, now not at all. Do I believe in the national Republican Party? Not in the slightest -- even though I see no meaningful alternative to it. So, my choice for President in 2008, scrawled in my ballot as an act of futile protest, is Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. If nothing else, I am confident this is the first of several votes I will cast for him in years to come."

Joshua Trevino, RedState co-founder


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sorry Dad, I'm voting for Obama"

Christopher Buckley, Son of William Buckley


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn't know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions require her promotion.

Palin didn't make a mess cracking the glass ceiling. She simply glided through it.

It was fun while it lasted.

Palin's recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

Kathleen Parker, Conservative columnist for the Washington Post


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?

George Will, Fox Commentator & Washington Post columnist


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Perhaps it is important as we laugh at them for being "rats" that we keep in mind why rats desert a sinking ship. Because it is SINKING! It's called survival. And many of the best minds of the Conservative movement are beginning to suspect that the election of their own candidate, Sen. John McCain could seriously endanger our chances as a nation for survival!

It only makes sense. When your boat is sinking....SWITCH BOATS!

WHY I SUPPORT OBAMA: LEADERSHIP

I am often asked WHY “I SUPPORT OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT?” This is usually followed by the comment that he doesn’t give a plan and I probably only support him because of his pretty rhetoric. So, I would once again like to address one of the many reasons he has my support...leadership and our country's need for it.

Now immediately those on the Right will rise up in arms asking how I can claim that a "community organizer with no experience" can be a better leader than a decorated war hero? The answer is simple. The complexities that will face our next president will require a wide range of talents that have been seen much more clearly in Sen. Obama than Sen. McCain. The recent financial crisis has given us an excellent example of this.

Sen. McCain has exhibited a wide variety of ever changing views on the crisis. First he tells us that "the fundamentals of the economy are sound"! Then he tells us that there are problems but he is suspending his campaign to go to Washington to solve them. (Oh, and can we cancel the upcoming debate while we're at it?) Each day brings a new idea or the promise of a new plan. But mainly Sen. McCain attacks Sen. Obama. I wouldn't mind the fact that he is continually changing his mind...this has been a rapidly growing problem that requires quick, adaptable response. But I have never felt that McCAin's views were evolving into a better solution. Instead they appear to have been a "shotgun" approach that relies on luck to find the answers. But as McCain has said before, the economy really isn't his strong suit. And as his campaign has stated, if the discussion continues to focus on the economy....McCain loses!

Sen. Obama's response has been calm and measured. Some have criticized him for not immediately releasing a statement to tell America how he would handle the situation. But this has been a national crisis and Sen. Obama is not currently the President. Any immediate response before the President's would be overstepping his authority and possibly causing further problems.

Newsweek recently did an in-depth article on the initial meetings that each campaign held to discuss the responses of the candidates to the crisis. The differences in their style lend a great deal of credence to the idea that Sen. Obama is a leader to be trusted with America's economy.

So Sen. Obama waited for President Bush to offer his plan....all three pages of it. Then speaking as the Senator from Illinois and the Democratic nominee, he offered his party's suggestions to improve the plan (addressing home mortgages, CEO compensation and oversite of the trillion dollar goverment initiative) and began working the phones to gather the votes needed.

Once the bailout was passed and the Dow continued to fall, it was Sen. Obama who spoke to the press (and the people) to explain that the bailout was only the start. He made it clear that this was not a problem that could be solved unilaterally. In a global market it would require the cooperation of other countries to calm Wall Street's jitters. Yesterday the G-7 issued a joint plan and today the Dow had a record day.

Today was also the day that Sen. Obama offered his revised economic plan taking into consideration the recent changes in the world economic climate. The plan focused on Middle Class economic relief. (A subject that McCain can't even bring himself to say; much less address.) It is designed to be a comprehensive approach to stimulating the economy through a variety of targeted financial incentives. It addresses foreclosures, U.S. infrastructure and the need to keep city and state governments financially viable. The plan has aspects that should please conservatives by giving tax breaks to start up companies and companies that create US jobs. It helps to keep city workers employed instead of being layed off due to budget cuts. And while it may not be perfect, it is a better and more comprehensive plan than any proposed by either McCain or Bush.

OBAMA'S MIDDLE CLASS RESCUE PLAN
JOBS.
(1) Tax breaks for companies that create jobs in U.S. (not new)
(2) Eliminate capital gains taxes for new small businesses and start ups. (new)
(3) Fast track loan guarantees for car makers (not new)
(4) Jobs/Growth fund -- aimed at local municipalities to keep jobs that might have otherwise been cut for budgetary purposes. (new)

FAMILIES.
(1) Middle class tax cut (not new)
(2) Calls on Congress to give rebates by Winter (new)
(3) Extend employment benefits for those who lost their jobs (not new)
(4) No taxes on unemployment benefits (new)
(5) Retirement Savings: Welcomed McCain's proposal to let people withdraw from their 401Ks, but went further: proposing people could withdraw without penalty up to $10,000 from their 401Ks through 2009. (new)

HOMEOWNERS.
(1) Mortgage Tax Credit -- worth 10% of mortgages
(2) Three-month moratorium on foreclosures (new) -- "give people breathing room to get back on their feet.

INCREASED $ FOR BANKS
(1) Have Treasury move faster on his plan to inject money directly into banks.

MAKE LOANS AVAILABLE.
(1) Create a Small Business Lending Fund (already proposed)

The latest word is that Sen. McCain will release a new plan as well. We will see what his proposed solutions are. But regardless of what they are, we have now seen the manner in which these candidates approach problem solving.

Simply put, Sen. McCain's irratic journey to solutions scares me. As candidate McCain: he is only a danger to himself. But the problem with a President McCain is that we are all along for the ride with him. He might get us to where we need to be on the economy or he might put us in a ditch, but regardless his drive will be a terrifying ride that leaves me with the sinking feeling that even if his latest plan is great...he only got there through luck and lack of oncoming traffic.

This has been a chance to watch how both candidates would handle a true emergency. This is an economic 3 AM call...and it's Sen. Obama who has answered the phone!

BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE ME A DIME

Remember the "Good Ol' Days" in the 1950's that everyone wants to go back to. (Whether you were alive during those times or not.) Back when everyone worked hard and made a good living. There were jobs for everyone and life was good!

Fast forward to the next century. Everyone seems to have one question regarding the economy lately...are we heading towards another Great Depression? People are scared and they should be. I am way too young to remember the Depression but I do remember that until the day she died at 80, my grandmother lived in fear of another one. So today, while watching the seemingly ever falling Dow numbers, I stumbled across an article that quoted a variety of figures from Paul Krugman, a noted economics professor & writer. And they were very troublesome. Not because they show the same type of slide that we experienced in the 30's (after all back then 1 out of every 4 Americans were out of work). But they do seem to indicate one set of numbers that correlate to the time BEFORE the Depression started. Those numbers revolve around the distribution of wealth in America.

In 1928, one year before the crash that started the Depression, 1% of the population owned 40% of the nation's wealth. Once FDR's new deal started, you saw between the years of 1930 and 1947 that the working class wage rose an average of 67% while the income of the wealthiest 1% dropped 17%. (I would feel bad for the top 1% but they still made more money than everyone else by far.) This was the birth of the middle class and it was a direct result of unionization of manufacturing jobs and the New Deal.

Between 1947 and 1973 the inequality of income lessened even more. With working class wages rising 81% and the income of the top 1% rising 38%. (Note: These numbers reflect "real wages" adjusted for inflation.)

Then came the 70's! More bad times that were shared between both the richest and the middle class. Between 1974 and 1980, a combination of higher oil prices, too much influence of unions and a generally bad world economy meant that the working class lost 3% in real wages while the wealthiest 1% lost 4% of income. Proving that too much of a good thing, be it unionization or tax breaks are not necessarily a good thing. You never want the pendulum to swing too far to either the right or the left.

Enter the savior Ronald Reagan! His tax revamps once again helped the wealthiest 1% to earn a larger percentage piece of the pie. Under Reagan & Bush tax plans, the real wage for the working class fell by 1%, but the income for the wealthiest 1% increased by 135%! This difference is a direct result of "trickle down economics" and the tax policies that "trickle down" represents.

The inequity slowed slightly during the first years of a Clinton presidency and then skyrocketed again once the Republicans gained control of Congress. By 2006, under President Bush and a Republican controlled Congress the top 1% of the wealthiest Americans controlled 34% of America's wealth! The wealthiest 5% of Americans now control over two-thirds of America's wealth as well as 88% of the nation's business interests & almost 80% of America's stock wealth (After today's market close, you are allowed to chuckle a little if you like the thought that they now own four fifths of "not much"). (But don't chuckle too much since your retirement is tied into this mess as well.) This is where you are allowed to notice the similarities to 1928.

Now the argument of the top 1% is that they spur the economy on with thier purchasing power. But it doesn't seem to work well that way. If a really wealthy man spends ten million on a new yacht...it helps the yachting industry. If a million working class Americans spend $10 each on food...it helps thousands of restaurants and grocery stores across the country. It takes less time to spread through the economy to help society as a whole. When the distribution of wealth varies so much between the working class and the wealthy, the economy gets top heavy...and falls! Only certain very limited sections of society patronized by the rich make a living.

Now don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with making lots of money and becoming wealthy. That's the American Dream. But there are limits. The average CEO of a Fortune 100 company makes on average 17.6 million dollars per year. That's approximately $8,461.00/hour! That means that the average Fortune 100 CEO goes to work on Jan. 2nd and by the time he knocks off for lunch he has earned more on his first day of work by lunchtime than the minimum wage employee will earn all year. Now it may be that his expertise is worth that much to the company...though one would think that if they were THAT good at their jobs, we wouldn't be bailing them out now!

We need to look at CEO pay. We need to restore tax equality to our nation. We need to stop rewarding companies with tax breaks who outsource jobs overseas! Otherwise the question will not be...is another Depression coming? The new question on everyone's lips will be "Brother can you spare me a dime? and "Which way to the nearest soup kitchen"?

YOUR PAL, "AL"

There have been many stories commenting on the crowd reaction at the latest rallies of VP candidate, Governor Sarah Palin. She has gone on the offensive against Sen. Obama in an extremely personal way. The attacks have been very inspiring to the crowds. There have been numerous reports of people yelling "terrorist" and at least one man has screamed "kill him" at yesterday's rally.


The anger of the crowd has also been directed towards the media. At least one African-American technician was called a "racial ephitaph" and then was told by another crowd member to "Sit down, BOY!".

Most people just see personal attacks as a sign that the McCain campaign is desperate and would rather talk about anything than the economy. And that is probably true! But to work a crowd up to the point where there are cries to KILL the opposing candidate takes this election into a very scary place. This is not the type of discourse that our founding fathers had in mind when they dreamed up this exotic scheme called "Democracy".

Because of Sen. Obama's unusual background he is very open to character attacks. His father is foreign born. Less than 8 years after the attacks of 9/11, his years in Muslim Indonesia give us even more to fear because we don't "know him" that well. His college teachings make him seem elitist and not "one of us". Many on the left would have you believe that these fears of Americans are nothing but blatant racism. But they are wrong. It is more than that and it is less than that. More because there are a great many Americans with legitimate objections to Sen. Obama's policies. Less because it is not just "rascism" like we think of during the Civil Rights Movement. There are no dogs & fire hoses or burning crosses. It's a kinder, gentler form of bias. But it is still a bias against that which we are not familiar with.

I think it is the combination of all of these things that make some of us wonder about Sen. Obama. He's not like other candidates we grew up with. But it is too simple to pin the problem on any one thing like racism. And lucky for John McCain because it gives him plenty of ammunition to attack with.

I think our fears have more to do with our buddy, Al! Who is Al, you ask? I don't know him...you do. We all know an Al in our life. "Al" is the person we see to be the exception to the stereotype.

We may not like immigrants because they are lazy and steal jobs and don't pay taxes...they're not like my pal Al, who I work with. He's ok. (Cause you know him.)

We like working for Al, he's not like most white people who try to keep a "brother" down. He's always got your back!

"AL" plays on my school's baseball team, his family eats funny food but he's a great pitcher!

"AL" just moved here from New York City, but he's pretty smart for a "city slicker"

I go to church with Al's wife and she's so sweet, not angry like a lot of "those" women!

You know Al. Maybe he's the gay man who's not like the "rest". Maybe he's the Hindu who waits on you at your favorite restaurant. But Al is the great hero in the battle against racism & predjudice in this country. He's the ONE you KNOW that helps you realize that all ethnic & cultural groups are composed of people. Some good and some bad. All you had to do to realize this is to get to know AL. He's basicly like you and me. Loves his wife and kids, wants to provide for them, wants to see his children grow up in the greatest nation on earth. It's hard to continue believing something about a culture, race, gender or whatever when you actually KNOW someone who is a part of that group. The "idealized" group becomes a little less real than the PERSON you know.

As Sen. Obama has become better known to more and more of the electorate, his favorability ratings have also increased. He's not so strange and foreign anymore to a larger portion of the electorate. He's becoming a political "AL".

This is natural. What is not natural is to try to stir up hatred and fear for a fellow American. It's wrong. Debate the issues. Discuss the failings of Obama's policies, but remember that he is still one of us. He may be wrong in his judgment but he is NOT a terrorist infiltrator. That's just silliness that gets promoted when someone gets behind in the polls.

So in the hopes of reminding everyone that Sen. Obama is an American, a father & a husband: here are some photos from his past. They look a lot like photos all of us have. They are part of America's Story. They should not influence you to vote for or against him because there is nothing special about them. They are a part of "Al's Story" and not the photos of a terrorist or traitor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/the-obama
s-anniversary-al_n_131721.html?page=12&show_comment_id=

16417017#comment_16417017

We must focus not on the personal for this election but on the issues. We must vote for who we think will promise the best future for our children & grandchildren.

POTS, KETTLES, AYERS & FRIENDS

A long time ago, like last year, John McCain spoke a great deal about the importance of running a civil campaign that focused on the issues important to the American people. Now sources within the McCain campaign have been saying for several days that McCain would go REALLY NEGATIVE because changing the discussion off the economy is his only way of winning. McCain's own campaign believes that when the focus is on issues: OBAMA WINS!

It also seems that the sources were right. Shortly after this news was posted, Gov. Palin began quoting a New York Times article discussing Sen. Obama's association with 60's radical William Ayers. "Palling around with terrorists" is how the Governor characterizes the issue. The facts are clear.

1) William Ayers was a member of the WEATHERMEN UNDERGROUND in the 60's.

2) He was on the run for years because of the bombings done by the group.

3) He has never been convicted of a crime...his trial was thrown out for "prosecutorial misconduct".

4) He is currently a Professor of Education at the University of Illinois.

5) He has authored or edited over 15 books and is a nationally recognized authority on school reform.

6) He is consulted by the city of Chicago on school reform.

7) He did work with Sen. Obama on projects in Chicago.

8) He did host a fundraiser for Obama early in his career. They both live in the same neighborhood.

9) Sen. Obama has condemned his past activities publicly on several occasions.

The same news article that Palin quotes also definitely states that while Sen. Obama has "underplayed" their relationship there is NO "close connection" between the two.

The reality is simple. The whole idea of politics is to meet as many people as possible and to convince them to support you. (It doesn't necessarily mean that you support them back!) POLITICS MAKES STRANGE BED FELLOWS. And "guilt by association" is a dangerous tact to take in a political campaign because few politicians have spotless records and all fall victim to S.B.S.

"Strange Bed-Fellows Syndrome (S.B.S.) is all about the people the candidate meets along the way. It means Sen. McCain goes on G. Gordon Liddy's radio show proclaiming Liddy to be "an old friend". G. Gordon Liddy has contributed frequently to John McCain's campaigns including his current one. G. Gordon Liddy is a convicted burglar. He has also confessed to the following:

1) plotting to kill the journalist Jack Anderson

2) plotting to firebomb the Brookings Institute

3) developed a plan for the Nixon Administration to kidnap "leftist guerillas" (read that protestors) to keep them away from the 1972 Republican National Convention

4) acknowledged his willingness to kill anyone who tried to stop him from his second break-in of a psychiatrist's office

5) has on numerous occasions instructed his radio audience on how to shoot federal A.T.F. agents

Not exactly the kind of friend your Mom wanted you to hang out with when you grow up! The difference between Obama/Ayers & McCain/Liddy is that Obama will discuss the issue and the McCain campaign ignores all requests for comment on G. Gordon Liddy and his relationship with the Senator. Senator Obama condemns the past activities of Ayers while McCain pretends it didn't happen.

STRANGE BED-FELLOWS SYNDROME (S.B.S.) could also require asking about Sen. McCain's connection with his father-in-law whose money helped fund his first Senate campaign and who has been linked to underworld figures out west.

S.B.S. could also re-look into Sen. McCain's associations with Charles Keating and the KEATING 5! It was a long time ago and he was only reprimanded by the Senate but hey it's still out there. And as Sen. McCain once said, "if Americans want to talk about a subject...we should"

Governor Palin is also susceptible to S.B.S. Her current minister is from Africa and got his start there with "witch hunts". And we're talking real witches. He drove a woman from his village who was casting spells on people to cause car wrecks! Became quite famous for that episode in Africa. Rev. Thomas Muthee has recently had a guest speaker in his church that made questionable statements on Jews from the pulpit with Palin present in the audience. Rev. Muthee has blessed Palin's bid for Governor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwkb9_zB2Pg (Notice the references to witches about 1:45 into the clip)

You could also ask why Gov. Palin was willing to address the annual convention of an Alaskan Indepencence Party whose goal is succession for Alaska from the United States of America. (How does this work with "Country First"?) Maybe she addressed them because her husband was once a member. And while it's never been PROVED that Palin was a member, several members of the group seemed to think she was!

Do ANY of these associations mean you SHOULDN'T vote for McCain/Palin? Probably not. The issues McCain/Palin represent as a ticket are much more important to me than the people they have met along the way to becoming a ticket. But it's only fair to look at them if you look at everyone that Obama has had contact with.

The truth of the matter: The McCain campaign wants to turn your focus from policy comparisons to a referendum on the character of Sen. Obama. And Sen. Obama is no "dirtier" than the McCain/Palin ticket. If there was real "dirt" on Sen. Obama the Clinton Campaign would have found it and used it!!! McCain can't argue that he's more "presidential" than Obama because the world saw how he handled the bailout crisis. All that's left are personal attacks. Perhaps McCain/Palin should heed the words of Christ and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone!"

As Americans it is important that we ignore the "silly" in this election cycle and instead look to the future. When you hear the upcoming attacks & smears, when you read the chain e-mails proclaiming "Obama is a muslim, the anti-christ or even Donald Duck" the question to ask is: Who's policies will best help our country? Who will leave a more stable and stronger country for our children and our grandchildren? But if you are listening to McCain/Palin question the associates of Sen. Obama, it's nothing more than "the pot calling the kettle black".

PALIN DEBATE STRATEGY

DICK 'N SARAH: A TALE OF TWO VEEPS

The much anticipated Vice-Presidential Debate is now over & the spin has begun. Just like the last debate, Republicans say Palin won & Democrats say Biden won. It was actually a bit anti-climatic. He didn't gaffe, she didn't freeze, the "biased" moderator didn't wear an OBAMA MAMA t-shirt. In a few days we will see if the polls shift any and that should show us who really won and lost.

I spent a lot of time today explaining to people that I didn't really expect her to be as horrible as she was for the Couric interview and I was right. She appeared much better tonight than she did on CBS. Palin gave us lots of folksy charm and even a cute little wink at the camera....I hope you felt as special as I did. But we didn't get lots of real information from her.

And that I find both sad and frightning! Sad because I feel that it is important that she answer questions to prove she is ready to take over on day one. (You may not think Obama is ready, but you have had over two years of non-stop interviews, speeches and media stories to make your decision: we've had five weeks to make that same decision about Palin) I realize that many believe that MSM is biased against her, but if she can't stand up to MEET THE PRESS, how will she stand up to _________? (Insert the name of your own favorite dictator.)

What frightened me was when she did answer a question. Especially the question concerning the Constitutional role of the Vice-President. Palin wants the office to "have more authority". She feels the Constitution is “flexible,” allowing a McCain-Palin administration to “do whatever we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans for this nation.”

This is especially scary since Dick Cheney does not believe that the office of the Vice-President falls under either the legislative branch or the executive branch of government. That (according to Cheney) means that the Vice-President is not responsible to either branch. Instead the office is a island unto itself. That philosophy has allowed him to advocate for torture, develop energy policies behind closed doors, refuse to answer oversight questions from the legislative branch under oath, etc. In short, he has made the office a law unto itself...and we have suffered as a nation for his arrogance.

Today's CBS interview let us know that Sarah Palin thinks that the only mistake Cheney made as Vice-President was while he was hunting! When you look at Troopergate (and her refusal to answer questions) you have to wonder how far she would be willing to take the Cheney philosophy. You also have to wonder if we should be even more worried about the similarities between Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney than the similarities between John McCain and George Bush.