Hillary Clinton: Republicans to the Economy as the Iceberg is to the Titanic

Hillary Clinton campaigns for Obama and the Democrats.

Hat tip to Bupkiss

I love the line about “if you believe that the Republicans….who made this mess can fix it, then you believe that the iceberg could have saved the Titanic”.

But what I need to take to heart is her telling us to canvass and phone bank. There is no reason I can’t pick one week night to do this (Wednesdays).

Unfortunately, I spend almost all of my political discussion time with those who already agree with me.

My Bubble Has Been Burst, part II

This builds on a previous post.

Is Obama counterpunching effectively? Many don’t think so.

For all that’s right and good about Barack Obama, he suffers from the same fatal flaws that have afflicted most Democratic presidential nominees over the last thirty-two years: he is both a gentleman, and a scholar. Fine attributes if you’re applying for the job of headmaster at some patrician New England Boy’s School. But they don’t get you elected to the highest office in the land. Just ask Mondale or Dukakis or Gore or Kerry. All stood idly by like guys respectfully waiting for a fresh pour at a wine bar while they were mocked, maligned, denigrated and Swiftboated from contention by agents of the other side.

Obama has been no better. Since the day he tossed his hat into the ring he has been hit up with vicious innuendo and outright lies regarding his heritage, his patriotism, and his religion. And in almost every circumstance his denials have been tepid when not simply nonexistent. Contrast that with the entire Republican machine (aided and abetted by the media) getting “outraged” by the “lipstick on a pig” line.

Meanwhile Georgia Rep. Lynn Westmoreland calling the Obamas “uppity” — a slur that is one more downed beer away from being nigger — barely got a register out of the left. In response Obama could have legitimately said, echoing the words from his acceptance speech; “this uppity smear is not about me, it’s about you, the people. And this is what the Right thinks about you: if you’re different, even if you work hard, do good and put yourself through the best of schools and achieve, you’re still uppity for thinking you deserve a seat at the table.” In other words, hit ‘em where they live.

But when asked about the uppity remark by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, Obama punted on second and one with: “I am confident that, the American people, once the dust is settled, will ask themselves, do we really want to do the same thing we’ve been doing for the last eight years, or do we want something new?”

Zzzzzzz… [...]

More on this from a PBS NOW video: Obama is not appealing to emotions enough (in debates and in policy position presentations) He does a good job of this in speeches.

Hat tip to Seattle for Barack Obama.

We need more of these kind of ads:

Hard hitting, and completely true. Like this one:

Saturday Political Blogging

Obama talks about energy and other topics:

Hat tip to the Jed Report.

Here is a nice summary of Obama’s past judgments:

If there’s been one constant over the campaign season, it’s this: Every time Barack Obama announces a new foreign policy idea, he’s ridiculed by his opponents as naïve, inexperienced, and unready for the dangerous world he’d inherit. But if you run a tally, Obama’s record over the last year shows a remarkable degree of foresight, even-tempered judgment, and a real willingness to make hard calls that aren’t the politically popular flavor of the week. Indeed, almost every one of Obama’s foreign policy positions has been vindicated.

Start with today’s news that the Bush administration has issued classified orders authorizing special forces to conduct ground operations against al-Qaeda targets in Pakistan, even without prior approval from the Pakistani government. Obama was well ahead of the curve on this one. In August 2007, during the primary, Obama startled the foreign policy establishment when he declared, “Let me make this clear . . . There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans . . . If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and [then-Pakistani] President Musharraf won’t act, we will.” Obama was written off by his critics as out of his element, too inexperienced to know that you can’t unilaterally order raids on an ally’s turf. But Obama alone saw back then that Pakistan’s government and powerful intelligence agency weren’t stepping up to the plate when it came to fighting al-Qaeda, and that we needed to pick up the slack. As the security situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan has deteriorated even further, it seems the rest of Washington has, a year later, realized that Obama had the right idea.

The plan for U.S. forces in Iraq is another powerful example of Obama leading the herd. John McCain questioned not only Obama’s judgment, but his patriotism as well, for suggesting a sixteen month timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces. It was easy for Republicans to call Obama a defeatist. Easy, that is, until the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, actually endorsed Obama’s plan. And as if McCain’s fantasy of spending the next hundred years in Iraq didn’t seem radical enough at this point, even the Bush White House (!) and Gen. David Petraeus have since announced that they see a substantial drawdown of U.S. forces from Iraq over the next two years as a real possibility.

The story’s the same with Iran. Obama was lampooned as a weakling for suggesting diplomatic engagement with Iran, even if it would not commit beforehand to abandoning its nuclear ambitions. He was branded irresponsible, an appeaser of tyrants. But wouldn’t you know it, the Bush administration this summer has quietly been establishing our highest level diplomatic contacts with Iran since the 1979 revolution, once again stranding McCain out in left field. Our Iran troubles aren’t over, but perhaps overlooked in the firestorm of the campaign is that the level of incendiary rhetoric between the U.S. and Iran has very markedly declined over the last few months. Don’t discount that as a force for stability in the Middle East (and, not coincidentally, as a factor in the recent decline in oil prices). [...]

John McCain’s lie de-jour

Why is McCain lying so much? Simple. He wants to win.

It’s hard to imagine a more unlikely perch for John McCain to be shamed for his increasingly hard-edged and truth-stretching campaign than the middle seat on “The View.”

Yet on Friday morning, there sat the Republican nominee — a politician who has built an all but saintly reputation for “straight talk” over the years — caught in a vise between Joy Behar and Barbara Walters and getting a lecture from each on honesty.

“They’re lies,” Behar said of two recent lines of attack from the McCain campaign.

“By the way, you yourself said the same thing about putting lipstick on a pig,” Walters interjected as a defensive McCain struggled to respond.

The two daytime talk show hosts are hardly alone.

McCain’s tactics are drawing the scorn of many in the media and organizations tasked with fact-checking the truthfulness of campaigns. In recent weeks, Team McCain has been described as dishonorable, disingenuous and downright cynical.

[...]
The furor presents a breathtaking contrast to McCain’s image as a kind of anti-politician who plays fair, disdains politics as usual and has never forgotten how his 2000 presidential campaign was incinerated by a series of loathsome dirty tricks in the South Carolina primary.

The defense from the candidate himself — heard only on “The View” because he hasn’t held a news conference in more than a month — is to essentially assert that he’s savaging Obama because the Illinois senator wouldn’t agree to the series of town hall meetings McCain proposed at the end of the Democratic primary season.
[...]
That’s the candidate’s public answer — and one that a former adviser suggested that McCain may have convinced himself to believe is true.

Current campaign aides and other Republicans who’ve closely watched the race, however, have a very different response to the media elites and good-government scolds: We don’t care what you think.

McCain seems to have made a choice that many politicians succumb to but that he had always promised to avoid — he appears ready to do whatever it takes to win, even it if soils his reputation.

Of course, McCain has had a history of lying. Notice this video from 8 months ago (which covers a Republican debate)

Speaking of lies: Is Barack Obama really a Muslim? Find out the answer here. (hat tip to Friendly Atheist)

State of the campaign The news from Florida isn’t good even if a poll showed us tied as of a week ago. Of course, Florida never figured into my calculations anyway (lots of elderly and retired military); I am thinking more in terms of Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Iowa, Ohio and Indiana, all of which are close at the moment. We won’t win them all, but if we can either pick off Ohio OR Iowa and Virginia or New Mexico, Colorado and Iowa, we win.

Here is a nice article that compares the state of the race now to the Kerry-Bush race of 2004.

A Bit of Running and the Dangers of Linear Extrapolation (no Politics)

Running Notes: Last night, I helped out at the Bradley Cross Country Meet. Rain had made the course into a mess and the times were slow, by NCAA standards (thought there were good runners there).

I got a kick out of one young lady XC runner asking me if I had run in the Olympics years ago. I replied “of course; 1984 marathon, 2:09:20″. Just kidding. Actually I replied that the only way I’d get into the Olympics is to buy a ticket.

Morton 10k Pumpkin Fest race. The results are already up; my shame there for all to see. Yeah, you have to scroll down to 262 to find me (out of 418). Was it really only 1999 when I ran in the 42s for this course? (scroll down to number 66)

The interesting thing is that my place was higher in this 10K run (in terms of percentage) than it was in the 5K swim, even though I was much more prepared for the latter.

The reason: in running, if you get too tired, you can do a slow walk. In swimming…well you swim or you drown!

Anyway, about the race: Time: 57:15. Yes, it was supposed to be a “run”.
How it went: I did some walking and then some light walk/jogging to warm up (about 2 miles); the day was very overcast and we were between heavy rain showers. The streets were wet. The humidity was literally 100 percent and the air temperatures in the 70’s; very sticky.

I lined up way in the back and eased into mile 1 in 9:12. I was far enough back to see almost everyone but yet close enough to feel as if I were part of the race. I admit it was kind of fun just to run with friends without being at puke intensity.

We turned into a semi-rural neighborhood and mile 2 came at 18:34 (9:21). I noticed that I was gaining on folks without really trying to; I could hear lots of heavy breathing. I still felt relaxed and I focused on my torso; I tend to bend forward from the waist.

I knew from experience that the mile 3 marker is short and the mile 4 marker is accurate (that is, mile 3 is at about 2.9 and mile 4 is really at mile 4) so I ignored the mile 3 marker and recored mile 4 in 37:39 (19:05 for the last 2). I heard some sighs of discouragement from those who had thought that they had slowed down on mile 4.

By then we were running past farms.

We then turned into a neighborhood and mile 5 came at 47:02 (9:22). I wasn’t feeling that bad so I decided to pick it up a little to something resembling a race effort (don’t laugh; my running conditioning sucks right now)

I made it my goal to pass someone who seemed to be about 200 meters ahead (and of course, everyone in between) and I got them all, though my target got me back at about 50 meters to go. Then I remembered him; he is a USAFA graduate that I had bantered with in the past! (Like John McCain, I am a USNA graduate)

So my last 1.2 miles was done in 10:13 or at about 8:30 mpm, my old marathon pace.

Afterwards, I walked around a bit and congratulated Kevin Carrigan (who ran at 7:27 mpm) and who had sent me a card thanking me for cheering him on last weekend.

Then I made a yoga class at the Riverplex. I found that the instructor’s personality to be completely grating, but she gave good feedback and was really good at demonstrating the poses. Yes, she was attractive too, personality aside. But more importantly, I left with a good stretch.

The Dangers of Linear Extrapolation

Hey, two weeks ago, my time for a road 10K course was 1:00:44, so I improved by 3:30 (3 and one half minutes). That is 1:15 minutes worth of improvement per week. So at this race of improvement: 24 x 1.25 = 30 minutes, and 57:15 – 30 = 27:15. So, in 24 weeks (less than 6 months), I’ll be racing at world class speed!

Does anyone want to buy stock in my road racing career?

My Bubble Has Been Burst and othe Political Topics

I admit that I have been living in a political bubble of sorts. I do discuss politics with people at work (mostly liberal Democrats) and I’ve been hanging out at the Daily Kos and the Huffington Post.

There are some local places I know that aren’t so partisan but the people there are mostly, well, to put it politely, not that well informed in either facts or on what constitutes logic.

The downside is that I am completely tone-deaf as to what the general public thinks or what they might think about something.

But I should have known better.

Think about this: are there films or TV shows about war heroes? Sure.
Are there films or shows about the ordinary person (e. g. “hockey mom”) who goes to Washington, or to City Hall and gives all of those arrogant know-it-alls what they deserve? Sure.

Also films abound about that “common sense” hero who “just does it” and “gets it done” in cases where all of those egg heads fail (think: “Dirty Harry”, “Die Hard”, “Rambo”, etc.)

Now, how many shows or films are there about some super smart, mostly play by the rules guy who out works and outsmarts the opposition?

That brings me to another point: I see Obama’s big strengths as his being very smart and capable and clear headed; much more so than McCain. Yet arguments such as “Obama is much smarter and more capable than McCain” would flop with the general public; whereas everyone wants to think of themselves as being smart (even when they are clearly not), no one wants to think that others are smarter than they are. Fewer will admit it.

So, Obama has a very tricky path to walk; though Bill Clinton indeed walked that path. He managed to get elected without appealing to the fact that he was a genius.

So, in the spirit of seeing the other side, here are a couple of Dick Morris articles.

Now yes, you can’t trust Dick Morris when he is shilling; he has an amazing capability of being two faced. And never trust him when he talks about Hillary Clinton; he has it in for her.

But he is good an analyzing the state of a race and what might work and what might not work.

First, when Sarah Palin was introduced into the race, this is what I thought (and many in my bubble agreed with me)

Former Republican John Cole on Sarah Palin:

Sarah Palin is the distilled essence of wingnut. She has it all. She is dishonest. She is a religious nut. She is incurious. She is anti-science. She is inexperienced. She abuses her authority. She hides behind executive privilege. She is a big spender. She works from the gut and places a greater value on instinct than knowledge.

And most dangerous of all, she is supremely self-confident to the point of not recognizing how ill-equipped she is to lead the country.

Why do you think they love her so? But Cole really nails it here:

George Bush in a dress. The Palin interview should be a gut-check for Republicans and conservatives who think the last eight years has been a perversion of conservative principles. I am betting most of them will not even put down their pom-poms, though.

Conservatives are trying to rescue the reputation of their battered ideology by claiming that Bush was either incompetent, or not a good enough conservative. It may be laughable, but they’ve got to somehow explain away why conservatism has failed this country so disastrously. Their ideology is sacrosanct, infallible. Conservatism can’t fail, only people can fail conservatism. Yet as Cole notes, the very qualities that made Bush such a failure are perfectly encapsulated in Palin (with a healthy dose of Cheney-style abuse of power for added spice).

“Ha, not so bright but self confident” I thought. “They are toast.” Dick Morris saw more clearly.

Republicans shouldn’t mourn the loss of the first night (at least) of their convention. Sarah Palin’s warm reception by the American people and the relative success of preparations to contain the damage of Hurricane Gustav seem to have given the GOP far more bounce than it would’ve gotten from a “conventional” first night in St. Paul.

We’ll never know just how much Barack Obama gained in the polls from his magnificent acceptance speech. He spoke too late on Thursday for any post-speech polling to be effective — and John McCain announced his selection of Palin the next morning.

So the Friday night polls reflected both the bounce from Obama’s speech and from McCain’s surprise — which seems to have neutralized the Democrat’s gains. (That night, Zogby gave McCain a two-point lead; Rasmussen found Obama three ahead.)

Our guess is that Obama’s speech had a huge impact — counteracted by a huge plus for McCain from his surprise pick of Palin.

Meanwhile, making up for the loss of the first night of the convention is the contrast between the chaos that greeted Katrina’s landfall in 2005 and this year’s smooth preparations. McCain, the administration and the GOP Gulf-state governors should all gain. At the very least, they’ve all shown that they’ve learned from the mistakes of three years ago.

Palin is a godsend to McCain. She injects charisma and novelty into what would otherwise have been a deadly dull ticket. She has a compelling record of battling corruption in Alaska — uncovering misconduct by fellow Republicans and beating a GOP pork-king governor in a primary.

And his choice of her suggests that the old John McCain — the bold, fighting Senate maverick — is back.

And think of it this way: smart Republicans have someone they can manipulate into pushing their agenda, and the average dumb Republican has someone like themselves: they are unashamed to parrot Sean Hannity talking points in public.

Let’s face it: how much have we longed for someone who would be as openly unashamed of our talking points…wouldn’t we be energized? Wouldn’t smart liberals give someone a pass on their lack of intellect? Well….probably not nearly to the same degree….which is one reason we continue to lose elections.

Dick Morris has more to say about the current state of the election:

Now that the conventions are over, it is evident that the battle of John McCain is over (McCain won), and the battle of Barack Obama will determine the outcome of the election.

Now that McCain has definitively, and I suspect irreversibly, separated himself from Bush, he has become an acceptable alternative to Obama for voters seeking change. The question now is whether Obama’s extra quotient of change — or the different direction that change will take — is worth the risk of electing him.

Obama was wrong to invest so much in the Bush-McCain linkage. Any candidate can define himself at his convention. And if McCain chose, as he did, to use the gathering to distance himself from Washington and from the Bush administration, there was really nothing that Obama could do to stop him. He should have focused very specifically on McCain himself and taken shots at specific votes and bills that he introduced.

Now, after the massive exposure McCain got at his convention and the demonstrable commitment to change embodied in the selection of Sarah Palin, it is too late.

The Obama campaign doesn’t seem to get that it is running against McCain, not Sarah Palin. They spent the entire Republican Convention and the week since attacking the vice presidential candidate. That’s like stabbing the capillaries instead of the arteries.

Nobody is going to vote for or against McCain because they want Sarah Palin to be vice president of the United States, or don’t. But Palin has served, and will serve, a key purpose in illustrating and demonstrating what kind of a man John McCain is. She stands as a tribute to his desire to bring change, his willingness to cut loose from the past, and his courage in attempting innovation.

No amount of criticism of Palin is going to stop that process. Obama needs to remember who his opponent is.

Now the election will hinge on a referendum on Obama. [...]

If Iran moves closer to getting nuclear weapons or Israel attacks Iran to forestall that development, things could change in a hurry. If the current atmosphere of economic uncertainty and impending possible crisis — signaled by the federal takeover of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae — deepens, it may make voters less willing to risk the high taxes and big spending that Obama will bring in his wake.

If Russia continues to assert its imperial right to dominate Eastern Europe and restore a Soviet-style satellite empire, voters will wonder if they can take a chance on Obama.

But if things are relatively peaceful and uneventful, voters may bristle at the stagnation and turn to Obama in the hopes of change.

The key point is that this race is now not about Bush or McCain or Clinton or Palin. It’s all about Obama.

Morris also says that people are not going to believe Obama’s tax plan.

But this isn’t all bad; Obama will have to find a way to sell himself without, uh, “bragging about how smart he is”. But Bill Clinton did that.

Barack Obama on Taxes

Here is where you can calculate how Obama’s tax plan will affect you with your situation.

You can search this under the Obama Tax Cut calculator (that is what I linked to)

Here is a neutral source comparison of the plans; note that the Tax Policy Center finds out that the Obama tax plan actually adds money to the Treasury whereas McCain’s takes money from it.

The rich would pay more under Barack Obama’s tax plan, and the poor and middle-class would pay less, a nonpartisan analysis finds. Under John McCain’s plan, the rich would pay much less than they do now, the poor and middle-class would pay a bit less, and the federal deficit would grow, the study found. [...]

Largely because his tax proposals would leave tax breaks for the wealthy in place, McCain’s plan would cost the U.S. Treasury more than Obama’s, the Tax Policy Center found.

By the way, who has been better for the economy? (hat tip: Science Avenger)