No More Gadgets!

President-Elect Obama's transition team interviewed Gilbert Lowell and Louis Skolnick this week for a new cabinet post: Secretary of Tools. Neeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrds!

Our first yuppie president will lose his toys on January 20:

For years, like legions of other on-the-move professionals, Obama has been a heavy user of his BlackBerry. The device, basically a phone and a hand-held computer, has rarely been far from his side.

"How about that?" Obama replied to a congratulatory e-mail message from a friend after his election victory.

But before he arrives at the White House, he will probably be forced to sign off. In addition to concerns about e-mail security, there is the Presidential Records Act, which puts his correspondence in the official record and ultimately up for public review, and the threat of subpoenas. A final decision has not been made on whether Obama could go against precedent and become the first e-mailing president, but aides said that was unlikely.

Despite the power afforded the U.S. president, the chief executive of the nation is essentially deprived of some of the tools that other chief executives depend on. Obama, however, appears to be poised to make technological history in other ways: Aides said he hopes to have a laptop on his desk in the Oval Office. He would be the first American president to do so.

And McCain was only becoming "computer literate" during the Summer months of the campaign. He never used emails. He never had a chance.

Plenty of free time for the Video Professor now. Perhaps you can learn to sell Governor Palin's stump wardrobe on eBay. Please . . . try his damn product already, you old codger!

***UPDATE***: Obama uses online videos to disseminate his weekly addresses and taps the unmatched reach of Youtube as his vehicle. A tech savvy President? How cool. But killjoy Allen Stern cries foul and mewls about "fair competition."

The Election Year Coda of Bill Ayers

With the votes counted, William Ayers, former leader of the Weather Underground, "unrepentant terrorist," Obama's "pal," speaks on his prior dealings with the President-Elect and inculpates Hillary Clinton as the but-for cause for GOP character assailments:

During the primary, the blogosphere was full of chatter about my relationship with President-elect Barack Obama. We had served together on the board of the Woods Foundation and knew one another as neighbors in Chicago’s Hyde Park. In 1996, at a coffee gathering that my wife, Bernardine Dohrn, and I held for him, I made a donation to his campaign for the Illinois State Senate.

Obama’s political rivals and enemies thought they saw an opportunity to deepen a dishonest perception that he is somehow un-American, alien, linked to radical ideas, a closet terrorist who sympathizes with extremism—and they pounced.

Sen. Hillary Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) campaign provided the script, which included guilt by association, demonization of people Obama knew (or might have known), creepy questions about his background and dark hints about hidden secrets yet to be uncovered.

He cannot resist the visceral urge to take a cruel, ironically radical cheap shot at John McCain:

It was inevitable. McCain would bet the house on a dishonest and largely discredited vision of the ’60s, which was the defining decade for him. He built his political career on being a prisoner of war in Vietnam . . .

The war in Vietnam was an illegal invasion and occupation, much of it conducted as a war of terror against the civilian population. The U.S. military killed millions of Vietnamese in air raids—like the one conducted by McCain—and entire areas of the country were designated free-fire zones, where American pilots indiscriminately dropped surplus ordinance—an immoral enterprise by any measure.

And he visualizes the tableau conjured up by Governor Palin:

When Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin got hold of it, the attack went viral. At a now-famous Oct. 4 rally, she said Obama was “pallin’ around with terrorists.” (I pictured us sharing a milkshake with two straws.) The crowd began chanting, “Kill him!” “Kill him!” It was downhill from there.

Asked to comment on Bill Ayers's summation of the past few months, Reverend Wright bellowed, "NOT GOD BLESS, MCCAIN. GOD DAMN MCCAIN! NOT JOHN MCCAIN, BUT JOHN MC-K-K-K-CAIN. CHICKENS COMING HOME TO ROOST! WOOOOOOOOO! WOOOOOOOOO!"

Rashid Khalidi and Tony Rezko could not be reached for comment.

The Cracks Begin to Leak

For weeks now we've heard about Sarah Palin "going rogue" and how certain staffers have disparaged her whilst others have come to her defense, saying the McCain campaign rolled her out (making her sound like Lecter) improperly. Now some meat appears on those bones of a story:

Randy Scheunemann, a senior foreign policy adviser to John McCain, was fired from the Arizona senator's campaign last week for what one aide called "trashing" the campaign staff, three senior McCain advisers tell CNN. One of the aides tells CNN that campaign manager Rick Davis fired Scheunemann after determining that he had been in direct contact with journalists spreading "disinformation" about campaign aides, including Nicolle Wallace and other officials.

Well, that could mean anything, right? "Disinformation" - very ambiguous term there.

"He was positioning himself with Palin at the expense of John McCain's campaign message," said one of the aides. Senior campaign officials blame Schuenemann specifically for stories about the way Wallace and chief campaign strategist Steve Schmidt mishandled Palin's rollout — stories that the campaign says threw them off message in the critical final weeks of the campaign.

Oops. Sounds like someone was wearing their "Palin 2012" t-shirt around McCain's Tuscon headquarters a bit prematurely. However, I'm sure John will be in a forgive-and-forget way after getting rolled last night.

Another aide said McCain personally was "very disappointed by Randy," who worked for McCain for many years in the Senate.

Oh well. Perhaps not. Guess Randy shouldn't be expecting that Holiday Card from Cindy and John this year. But when exactly did this seismic shift in one of McCain's closest allies take place?

Scheunemann became close with Palin during her debate prep process.

Ah. Now I see. During debate prep. Those long hours spent honing her oral skills. Those late nights straighting out policies.

And after that, he probably was hitting it. But that's just rote speculation, of course.

Apparently, Scheunemann and Palin were "unusually giggly and touchy-feely" during the foreign policy briefings. "I think there was more de-briefing there than briefing, frankly," grumbled one McCain aide.

WHAT? No - just kidding. Just seeing if you rubes were still reading. But the top part was true, courtesy of CNN.com.

A Final Note to John McCain

Dear Senator McCain:

My name is Patrick Bateman, and I work here in New York in Mergers and Acquisitions. I live at the American Gardens building on the Upper West Side, and I enjoy feeding stray cats to ATM machines.

The reason why I write today is to laud you and encourage you. Yes, that's correct. You see, I have hurled muck from this bully pulpit for a few weeks - at you, at Governor Palin (that won't stop) and at your party for its fearmongering and duplicity (likely ditto). But I will sling no more mud at your feet, Senator. Your journey is done. You have come many miles and it is time for you to have a well deserved rest - and a little bit of appreciation and understanding from this commentator.

So I write today to congratulate you, sir, on your concession speech last evening. It was one of the finest I have ever heard, and perhaps the most inspiring speech I personally have ever heard you give, Senator. It was conciliatory and supportive and you curtly cut down the negative elements in your crowd and commanded their attention, respect and that they keep their demonstrations of support positive.

I wish that your campaign had been more like your speech last night - but then again, if it had been, I think you would have been a more formidable opponent, and so perhaps I take that back. But last night, a glimmer of the man that many of us felt was a beacon of hope in the GOP years ago showed through. In your commendable address, to borrow a bit of the Star Wars comparison used by WAP in his post last night, I started to believe you were Darth Vader. You were seduced by the Dark Side of your party into compromising the ideals you once stood for in exchange for the ultimate Prize. But last night, as the final battle came to its then-inevitable conclusion, you were - as in the end of the Trilogy - redeemed. The Empire was defeated, but Anakin Skywalker, a good and decent man who simply chose the quick and easy path and got lost along the way, was given a second chance to do the right thing. I think that in losing, you, like Anakin, can reclaim your soul. In fact, I believe you will.

You have a job to do - you are still a Senator of the State of Arizona. You return to a Senate that is in need of a steady hand and leadership from both sides of the aisle to do what is necessary now in these troubled times. Let the light continue to shine through. Once it surrounded you and it is not too late for its return. It is never too late to reclaim the man you used to - a paradigm of what a politician should strive to be. The shackles of evil are off. You are unbound and free to return to Straight Talk and reason, moderation and cooperation.

We have serious problems and we need serious people to solve them. You were once one of these men. You could be again. In defeat, prevail. I have faith that this, your darkest hour, might too be the moment you turn it all around. This liberal is behind you, John. Be part of our new world. There is room for you to lead yet.

Sincerely,
Patrick Bateman
McCain Supporter 1999-2000

Warm Apple Pie Endorses Barack Obama For President

(Length warning. Someone's getting maudlin and windy!)

Formerly, I was an insalubrious fatty. I puffed a pack of Parliaments each day, considered exercise my morning constitutional to the toilet for bladder relief and stuffed my pudgy face full of McGriddles (ah, McGriddles - you still haunt my dreams!). There is a telling photograph of my bespectacled visage from Thanksgiving 2005 with a thick film of gravy - yes, gravy - on the right lens of my glasses. I really got into my food. I used my whole grill.

I was pretty sorry. My longtime girlfriend and I had parted ways six months prior to the humiliating candid shot - "ode to gluttony." My skin was a bit ruddy. I couldn't get my motor going in the morning. I sleepwalked through a dead end job. My apartment was a mess, strewn with cigarette ash and empty pizza boxes. Generally, the zest for life so self-evident during my early and mid-twenties had eroded into the enervation of my thirtieth year. A sad state of affairs.

Simply put? I needed hope. I needed change - change I could believe in.

I wiped the gravy off my glasses and addressed the mirror, confronting an old reflection before its time. Then, I took the first step.

I put down the smokes and tried to extricate the psychosomatic yearning in the pit of my chest. It wasn't easy. I teetered back and forth, sneaking drags from enabling friends, sometimes a whole butt. Like Ben Stiller playing "Simple Jack," the cold turkey removal of nicotine-produced endorphins made me feel "actually retarded." It was a dreadful epoch - those first few months. The withdrawal from addiction was frightening. Could I stop smoking forever?

Change was scary.

I got off the couch and trudged towards the gym, lugging my hefty 215 pound blob of a body to the treadmill, to the weights. My stringy muscles could hardly muster the will to do any meaningful strength training. My initial visits were painful. It was excruciating early on and progress was small, measured in baby steps. I wanted to quit. But I didn't. I kept at it. I got stronger, slowly, then steadily. The results manifested themselves. My vigor returned.

Change was tough.

I said goodbye to my beloved food, my blocks of Cracker Barrel, Extra Sharp, my Wendy's Junior Bacon Cheeseburgers, my chicken and cheese quesadillas (what can I say - I like cheese). Instead, I filled my robust belly with boatloads of protein. Chicken. Fish. I broke company with Mayo. I made my peace with Ben & Jerry's "Chunky Monkey" and sent it on its way. But a funny thing happen while my taste buds held vigil: I felt better. I felt spry. I reclaimed my youth.

Change was necessary.

Today, I'm 180 pounds, haven't smoke a cigarette in over a year (not a drag), fallen madly in love and generally keep my wits about me in the restaurant. No f**king mayo. No thank you, sir. I've improved, but it took change - scary, tough, necessary change.

My point (look, it's pretty late and I'm spent. I'm also half-drunk. Blogging is hard!): I endorse Barack Obama for President of the United States, our shining paragon of freedom, but do so with reservations about the future of an Obama administration, with the understanding that the road to American wellness will be long and painstaking, but with the unflappable realization that Barack Obama is a necessary panacea for the viral policies of George W. Bush's disastrous two terms.

This country is an insalubrious fatty right now. Barack Obama can bring it back to fitness. John McCain cannot.

I'm out of gas and really don't feel like ragging on John McCain again. His campaign speaks volumes. His inability to stay on message or offer a cohesive vision of our economic destiny is just too telling. John McCain is too risky to lead. That's a funny realization.

Yes, like the rest of the blogging world except for the incorrigibly cynical and intellectually bankrupt, Sarah Palin didn't shift the political winds for me. But for a different reason than most. It wasn't her feckless efforts during her first interviews or her desultory presentation in front of the electorate. It wasn't even McCain's judgment in making the selection. For me, it's why he picked her - a straight, unabashed pander to the GOP base. That scares me more than the flimsy radical associations portrayed by the Republicans as surrounding Obama. For the first time in his political career, McCain played the partisan sycophant and tossed in with the far right. In appeasing the divisive component of the party, he forever coated his favorite word "Maverick" with thick irony. I would never take his campaign seriously again.

As for Obama, I go in believing, but with my eyes open. I like his energy policy. I like setting a hard deadline for energy independence in 10 years - a bold initiative rivaling Kennedy's race to the moon. I also like his health care plan. It's a hybrid between private insurance and the European model (yes . . . socialism! Woooooo.). We fatuously call this land the "shining city on the hill" until the remaining 42,000,000 of our fellow citizens can afford basic health care and, in turn, basic human dignity. And we'll quibble with taxes later on and reach a compromise.

Finally, I like what Obama represents to the global community, a signal that America will no longer play racial identity politics. He may become a galvanizing figure in this world always on the brink, embolden our allies to stand with us and fight evil, and cause our enemies to lose their stomach for battle. A beatific vision of course, but shouldn't we shoot for the stars and come up short, rather than admiring the distant twinkles of possibility from the wallow of our realities.

Hope - the fuzzy depiction the Republicans lambasted and disrobed throughout the campaign as shell promises. Tawdry goods. Valueless preacher hype. They never understood that hope fuels progress, creates ideas, sparks innovation. Hope is the thing of gut checks, when you're at rock bottom, no health care, no job, no prospects, a mountain of bills, not a pot to piss in, no way out. Fettered by hopelessness, that's your only spiritual leverage - the faint glimmer of hope. It's why you buy a lottery ticket. It's why you dream. McCain, Palin and the surrogates discredited it with every talking point. I firmly believe they will pay the price for their political atheism in less than 24 hours.

I hope Barack Obama wins. And that's enough to keep me going if he loses. Hope is real.

So that's it. You have my prediction for a metered Obama victory. Sorry about this stream of consciousness. On the old devil box, I'm watching Sarah Palin speak live from Elko, Nevada as she completes her campaign '08 gauntlet. Gosh, her crackling voice crawls into my debilitated brain like those slimy creatures Khan inserts into Chekhov's ear in Star Trek II. "I must obey . . . her incoherency . . . must write not good and dumb also."

One hell of an election though. The Potatoe will have reports from the field throughout the day, including live reports from polling districts in battleground states. We will be with you through the results of the election. Our country names a President in 24 hours (as long as Florida doesn't get unruly again). That's a hell of a thing.

Polls open in less than five hours on the East Coast. Good luck America. Let's keep it fair and civil. In the words of Jack Burton, "may the wings of liberty never shed a feather."

I leave you with Senator Obama's words from his October 22 rally in Richmond, Virginia. Click the link.

Screw it. I also leave you with this, Obama supporters:


One vote at a time. That's an election, guys. That's all it is.

Now . . . what are you going to do?

The Penultimate Results: Greetings From Pennsylvania!

Florida in 2000.

Ohio in 2004.

Pennsylvania in 2008?

First, a smattering of the final national polling conducted during the three-day period from October 30 to November 1:

CBS News: Obama +13 (apparently conducted from a pool of 546 Trinity United Church of Christ parishioners)

CNN/Opinion Research: Obama +7

Rasmussen: Obama +5

Gallup Traditional: Obama +8 (Matt Drudge relied on this 51-49 poll last week to show John McCain was chipping away at Obama's lead. Obama has since gained about a point each day since Drudge's "red alert." The traditional model assumes an apathetic response from newly registered voters and places more emphasis on likely voters, among other factors.).

Gallup Expanded: Obama +9

Diageo/Hotline: Obama +5

Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby: Obama +6

Pew Research: Obama +6 (Pew's poll was conducted over a four-day period beginning on October 29. I include it here because Obama enjoyed a +16 lead in the Pew poll during the October 23 to October 26 period and shows a definite trending towards John McCain. Pew essentially projects that undecideds will break evenly on election day, thereby resulting in a 52-46 Obama victory. McCain-Palin spokesperson Rick Davis bets the house that these undecideds will break heavily for McCain.).

But national polling is only part (the secondary part) of the election day equation. The true strength of the Obama campaign, as crafted by the two "Davids" - Plouffe and Axelrod, is its understanding of the electoral map.

Current polling indicates that Barack Obama maintains strong or "leaning" leads in every state carried by John Kerry in 2004 totaling 252 electoral votes. It takes 270 electoral votes to win the presidency. Obama augments this number (accounting for population shifts since the last election) using the Rocky Mountain West - Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado - showcasing a total of 19 electoral votes.

Despite the reported "tightening" of polls spouting from the right-wing punditry, these 19 Western votes solidify Obama's bid for the presidency and makes victory for John McCain a Herculean feat or, more appropriately phrased, a Sisyphean task. It is all uphill and a really big electoral boulder.

Give McCain Ohio and Florida, the most coveted toss-up jewels. Give him the traditional Republican safe harbors of North Carolina, Virginia, Montana, South Dakota and Indiana - states put in play by Obama's broad-based ground campaign. Give him Missouri and its 11 electoral votes notwithstanding a 100,000 person Obama rally in St. Louis last week and that 20% of Missouri's population resides in St. Louis county.

Scoreboard? 278-260. McCain still doesn't win if everything breaks right. And I mean everything.

McCain's advisers understand this. Thus, only one strategy remains: Pennsylvania and its 21 electoral votes. A state won by John Kerry in 2004 by 2.5 points and Al Gore in 2000 by 4.2 points. It is vital that McCain flips one of the 2004 "blue" states to "red." Pennsylvania is the only one within shouting distance and with enough electoral votes to essentially "change the math" of this election.

Want to know what's in store for Barack Obama on Tuesday night? Pennsylvania polls close at 8 p.m. EST. If McCain loses the Keystone state outside the margin-of-lawyers (i.e., more than 3%), you can practically pop the Grant Park bubbly. Something apocalyptic must befall the rest of Obama's map for McCain to wrestle the election away.

On the other hand, if McCain eeks out a Pennsylvania win, in the words of Joe Biden, "gird your loins." It may be a long night.

Most recent Pennsylvania polls (trending towards McCain after double-digit Obama leads earlier in the week. McCain and various 527 political action committees dumped millions into Pennsylvania over the past few days):

Rasmussen one-day poll (November 1): Obama +6

Public Policy three-day poll (October 31 to November 2): Obama +8

Mullenberg three-day poll (October 31 to November 2): Obama +6

One more day of the circus, kiddies! I will publish my formal endorsement for President and election day predictions tomorrow evening. Enjoy your work week, socialists!

I'm Afraid

I'm willing to admit it - I'm scared of Tuesday, no matter which way the vote goes. And an article in the Pinko Times (New York Times to you Socialists who don't know its "real" name) supports my biggest fear.

In a poll of over 1300 registered voters, the numbers in terms of candidate support were about the same as most other polls (except the one posited by Bill O'Reilly, which, to be fair, has a margin of error of 101%), showing Obama with a solid lead. Those, however, are not the numbers that give me some concern about what will happen not Tuesday, but rather Wednesday:

The survey found that opinions of Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain had hardened considerably, as 9 out of 10 voters who said they had settled on a candidate said their minds were made up, and a growing number of them called it “extremely important” that their candidate win the election. Roughly half of each candidate’s supporters said they were “scared” of what the other candidate would do if elected. Just 4 percent of voters were undecided, and when they were pressed to say whom they leaned toward, the shape of the race remained essentially the same.

These are the numbers that are starting to frighten me. A growing number on both sides feel it's "extremely important" that their guy win. Everyone involved here feels that nothing less than the very future of America is at stake on Tuesday. And even if Senator Obama wins by the forecasted ten percent - a pretty substantial margin of victory - that still means that approximately 2 out of 5 people in America will likely, according to this poll, be not only disappointed, but "scared" - and possibly very, very angry.

I am concerned at this point that no matter which direction the election goes, there could be a substantial number of violent incidents during and immediately following the outcome. Perhaps never before has the country been so polarized and so deathly afraid (on both sides) of the "other guy" winning.

But there's another more sinister factor: race. Let's remove our PC rose colored glasses for a moment and be honest. If Obama wins, there is a not insubstantial percentage of the white electorate that will be despondent, terrified - and possibly violently so. If McCain pulls off the upset, I will go on record as saying it is my view that many African Americans will feel this is the ultimate outrage and paradigm of White America stealing just one more thing from the Black community - but this time, possibly the most important thing in the world. And I think many of them will feel this is their own personal breaking point.

Am I predicting race riots, a replay of Watts or Rosewood depending on the outcome? No, I don't think so. But do I see this election cycle passing without incident? No. I think we've come very far as a country. However, considering what's at stake on Tuesday, I think that no matter the outcome, some Americans of one color are going to feel the country has been hijacked by Americans of another color... and I think it is naive in the extreme to believe they will take that news absolutely peacefully.

I hope I am wrong and underestimate the American electorate. Something tells me I am not.

The Ineffable Reverend Jeremiah Wright

Michael Goldfarb? Dude looks like one of my meathead fraternity brothers from Auburn who used to light his farts on fire and kick the crap out of pledges for "eye-ballin' him." Is McCain resorting to interns as mouthpieces? Where have all the GOP cowboys gone? Iron your shirt, Goldfarb. Anyone have a comb?

On the other hand, the pathos of McCain's loyal, tongue-tied abettors is palpable. "We both know who the number 2 guy is" - i.e., the other radical besides Khalidi finding no favor with the state of Israel under the auspices of the United States.

If McCain is vanquished on Tuesday, the political post mortem has to begin with the campaign's peculiar decision to leave the most demonic toy in the trunk when so many other diabolical action figures came out to play with the electorate.

Oh, since I'm not bound by the strictures of the ticket, allow me to present "the Number 2 guy":

Probably my biggest criticism of Senator Obama. The guy McCain won't talk about.

***UPDATE**: . . . McCain won't talk about and now won't have to. As reported by Talking Points Memo:

Get ready for a deluge of Wright rantings.

The National Republican Trust PAC, which has been airing an ad attacking Barack Obama's association with Reverend Wright in three battleground states, has now put down for a national buy on five networks that will last from now through election day, a consultant with the group confirms to me.

The ad will run nationally on Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC for the next five days, the consultant, Rick Wilson, says -- "all the way until election day."
The ad, which you can watch here, features the now-infamous footage of Wright's livelier sermons, and intones that Obama "never complained" about Wright "until he ran for President," adding that Obama is "too radical, too risky."

Previously, the ad was only running in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida, as Ben Smith reported the other day.

Now, however, the ad will run nationally, Wilson says, adding that the group just got through getting the spot vetted with network lawyers and is good to go.

I mean did you really think you would get through this election cycle without the Wright hobgoblin striking fear in the hearts of "Real Americans?" It's Halloween. We're supposed to be fearful.

Works out nice for McCain too. Plausible deniability. If he loses the election, but the Wright ad airs on a continuous loop, he maintains the moral high ground and can live with himself as he blithely enjoys dinner theater and early bird specials in Fort Myers, Florida. If he wins, same difference - I wouldn't expect a principled stand by the McCain campaign against a PAC's infection of this race with Wright in the gloaming hours. John's scruples only extend so far and only to whom he can justifiably call "his people."

So begins the 72-hour Republican blitzkrieg. The bottom-of-the-ninth GOP scare-a-palooza. In 2004, it was an audio tape from Bin Laden. Just reminding us to "gird your loins" as the terror alert level was raised to a new Crayola color: "We're F**ked Red."

Obama has endured the political maelstrom for two years and still sees clear skies. Chin up, liberals. If he does manage to survive one more weekend, think what a free pass he'll enjoy on character issues in 2012. Obama's gang of cruddy associations won't play twice. We all hated Scream 2.

Bateman to LA Times: Release the Hounds, er, Tape

So Sam Donaldson wrote an editorial on ABCNews.com today about "Video Tape That Won't Be Released"-gate. This is what our friend over at The Kansas Citian referenced in some of his comments on our site yesterday.

Apparently, this is the situation:

The McCain campaign is demanding that the Los Angeles Times release a videotape it possesses of Sen. Barack Obama attending (and speaking) at a dinner for Rashid Khalidi, a Palestinian-American activist, many years ago when Obama was in the Illinois State Senate. Also at the dinner was the Weatherman co-founder William Ayers.

Apparently at this dinner, Khalidi said many things that Americans, particularly Jewish-Americans, would not find very appropriate or amusing. Sam Eyebrows continues:

So, why won't the Los Angeles Times release the tape? Because it says it obtained it on condition that it wouldn't. The Times points out that it was the news organization that brought the matter to public attention in the first place by doing a full story. And as far as its agreement not to release the tape, the paper says, "the Times keeps its promises to sources."

Now, it IS interesting that this story didn't gain much traction until the last few days. Hell, I'd never even heard of this alleged tape until very recently even though the Times apparently did a story about it last April - although it should be pointed out that I often don't hear about news until it bops me on the head.

So Donaldson goes on to say that the GOP has a point - the tape should be aired so everyone can see what exactly is on it - but that the Times' promise to its source is more important, because nothing should trump journalistic integrity and the Times promised to keep the tape confidential. Thus, concludes Sam I Am, they are doing the right thing, end of discussion.

Respectfully, Sammy, I disagree. I'm a raging liberal - have been since my days in that barbershop quartet back in Skokie - but there are limits. This is not painted as the usual case of protecting a source. When a source's name or identity is protected by the media, due to danger of reprisals or the like, that is one thing. That sort of thing must be protected in order to allow people to come forward. This situation, however, is not the same.

Unless disclosure of this tape would without question implicate the person who provided it as the source (which seems odd - was he the lone person with a camera in the room?), keeping a promise to keep the tape confidential is protecting nobody but Barack Obama (potentially).

This is not keeping the name of a whistleblower secret. This is keeping the contents of a tape secret from the American public at a time when they are going to be electing their next leader. One of the allegations tossed around is that Obama pals around with terrorists and harbors sympathies for Muslim extremists. This tape seems to me to be the most direct evidence to date that some of that might have some traction (discussed further below). But yet we are not going to have an opportunity to see it and decide for ourselves.

I'm usually a hard-line liberal, but sometimes you must step back and use common sense. Unless disclosure of this tape could potentially harm the source of the tape in some obvious way (in which case, I retract my comments), the LA Times should not be able to hide behind the "confidential source" chestnut tree in this game of "hide and go seek Obama's terrorist pals." Honoring a source's request that you keep something from the public eyes seemingly "just because" is not good enough.

I am going to the polls on Tuesday. My vote is for Barack Obama. But if the Senator has been at dinners and, to paraphrase Governor Palin, "palling around" with divisive elements such as Mr. Khalidi, I have a right to know about it. And that right - along with the right of the other 250 million folks like me - trumps the "confidential source" protection in this situation.

Now, let's be fair here: Khalidi denies being a PLO spokesman, as many have accused him. He is a respected scholar even if his views on Israel and the Middle East are not the same as most Americans. Is he a terrorist? No, I don't believe that he is. But he most certainly is a divisive and somewhat inflammatory figure in the ongoing discussion of the Arab-Israeli question, and we have the right to know what Barack Obama's relationship was and is with him and to what extent.

However, let's also be fair about this on the other side. John McCain has a prior relationship with Khalidi as well. As HuffPo reports:

During the 1990s, while he served as chairman of the International Republican Institute (IRI), McCain distributed several grants to the Palestinian research center co-founded by Khalidi, including one worth half a million dollars. A 1998 tax filing for the McCain-led group shows a $448,873 grant to Khalidi's Center for Palestine Research and Studies for work in the West Bank. The relationship extends back as far as 1993, when John McCain joined IRI as chairman in January. Foreign Affairs noted in September of that year that IRI had helped fund several extensive studies in Palestine run by Khalidi's group, including over 30 public opinion polls and a study of "sociopolitical attitudes."

So let's be fair. The LA Times tape is not a smoking gun story. This is not video of Obama strapping up suicide bombers in Ramallah. McCain's had affiliation with the guy too. But it is something that should be added to the overall mix of information out there. There are times for discretion. There are times for full disclosure. It is important that our media outlets have the good sense to discern one from another, especially with everything at stake on Tuesday.

If You Couldn't Gather From The Cradle Of Life Music . . .

. . . John McCain thinks Barack Hussein Obama is Muslim or at least has a Muslim name or at least wants YOU to think he is Muslim (if for only one day next Tuesday):


Just when I think John McCain's campaign could not disgust me more, he reinvents himself and reaches new heights in election year destestability.

New Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby poll just released: John McCain is now within the margin-of-error from being a vomitous cretin. Just 5 days to go! You can do it, John. Go get that Los Angeles Times tape. You know, the one where Barack Obama is probably - just speculating here, I mean I know what the Los Angeles Times reported about the tape in detail back in April - burning an American flag and shouting "Death to America." Maybe he has a bomb strapped to his chest. Maybe Ayers, Khalidi and Obama are "three sheets to the wind," reciting windy passages from The Communist Manifesto and spinning maudlin yarns about the halcyon days of the proleteriat.

Keep pushing for tapes, sound bytes, clips, affidavits, photographs, forensic evidence, fortunes from cookies, "magic 8 ball" revelations, testimony from psychics, smoking guns, Elizabeth Hasselbeck's "thought" (singular - cannot generate multiple thoughts), whatever, showing Barack Obama cannot stomach America and seeks to shred the fabric of democracy from within.

If you try hard enough, Bob McRumpson, you may browbeat Fake America into unqualified capitulation. We'll hate gays, stretch the necks of abortionists and keep all of our money upstairs with the top 1% (you know, the conservative elite) and hope some of it trickles down when the rich are overwhelmed by a fleeting spasm of munificence (call me if there's a hurricane, tsunami or tornado. Other than that? Get off my lawn!).

We'll read the Constitution literally and dogmatically (even if that provision counting one black as 3/5 of a vote should rear its mildly controversial head again). We'll support strict constructionist judges who interpret words with their plain meaning as long as plain meaning comports with their world views.

We'll elect officials imbued with the holy spirit, to win the kulturkampf against the secularists and bring them to their knees . . . in prayer. Oh we will pray. We'll pray in school, pray before every class, pray before bed, pray before meals, pray before Kirk Cameron, pray we are not speaking Chinese in 20 years, pray the terrorists leave us alone, pray that God intervenes in this election, pray for the big, bad storms to leave the Gulf of Mexico, pray not that America is on the side of God, but that God is on the side of America (I may have muddled that).

Most of all, we will pray that God rids our country of the scourge of science, the dark magic of scientist-idolaters foisted upon our good citizens, with its hocus-pocus and artifices, misrepresenting the world as 4.7 billion years. We will pray that intelligent design is taught in our schools rather than this sham sorcery, along with bible study in the time slots normally reserved for such impious pursuits like physics, chemistry or biology. We will pray that our history books contain colorful graphics - like a caveman riding a T-Rex.

We will "drill, baby, drill" at the behest of America's foremost energy expert, and suck up that teeny-weeny drop of Alaskan crude, mainline it into our automotive vein and then go back to desert sheiks, hat-in-hand, asking for a bit more of the Arabian black sniff because it's 2020 and our gas-guzzlers are decidedly out of gas.

We will never look to Europe or beyond our borders for ideas and innovations. Limeys and frogs - keep your universal health care. Our 42,000,000 uninsured don't want any of your socialist quackery. We prefer to amputate our gangrenous limbs with a butter knife in the comfort of our housing project thank you very much.

We will not read newspapers. We'll stay woefully uninformed. We'll embrace hypocrisy. We'll demand the end of abuses of power as we abuse power ourselves. We'll shake things. We'll ruffle feathers. We'll be mavericks or reformers or maverick-reformers. We'll prop up clods like Joe the Plumber, deify him and buttress his astute political commentary - that our opponents would seek the death of Israel - with soaring "USA" chants. We will put a boot in EVERYONE'S ass on Toby Keith's command.

Etc., etc., etc., etc. . .

Thanks for the reminder, John, of what I should do on November 4. I look forward to your next campaign ad.

Prediction? . . . Pain! Thanks Clubber Lang!

2004 Electoral Map: 100,000 votes in Ohio decide the election.

With less than a week to go, Tim Carney from the GOP stalwart Evans-Novak Political Report offers his November 4 prediction. And my gut tells me Carney is not far off:

- Foresees an Obama victory, becomes the first African-American President of the United States. Pretty remarkable stuff.

- However, deems talk of a Democratic landslide and an unambiguous political mandate to be ludicrous. Fingers a popular vote total for Obama around 52%.

- As for the electoral college, Carney sees a "big win, but not a Reaganesque one" finding certain battleground states where Obama boasts a small lead now to actually lean towards McCain.

- Carney sees the board playing out in this fashion: Florida, Ohio, Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, Nevada, Florida and North Carolina to McCain. Colorado, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Virginia to Obama. Final electoral tally? 286 to 252. A close race, but greater than the margin of Bush's victory in 2000 over Gore (271-267) and equal to Bush's defeat of John Kerry in 2004 (286-252). The difference with 2004? Virginia, Colorado, Iowa and New Mexico flipped blue and Obama's massive ground operation in the Mountain West succeeds where John Kerry came up short.

Please comment or email the Potatoe with your predictions. We're getting close!

Oh, picture of Clubber:

If you do not vote, he will "crucify you . . . real bad."

When Dems Win on Taxes, Dems Win, Period

Despite the spectre of Joe the Plumber, Betty the Baker, Tony the Taxidermist, Peter the Pederast or any of the other Chaucer-like descriptions used by the McCain/Palin campaign to describe the working-class people that allegedly support their tax plan, it turns out that most Americans (or most Americans who participate in telephone polls, that is) are favoring the Obama plan.

Turns out that appealing to 95% of Americans by saying you'll lower their taxes, and saying that over and over again, while your opponent instead tries to explain how lowering taxes for 95% of people is a bad thing, garners you pretty solid public support with that 95% you are talking about helping.

McCain's "Joe the Plumber" argument is probably giving him some headway but interestingly, Obama still maintains a ten-point lead over McCain -- 51 to 41 percent -- on who voters trust more to handle the issue of taxes, according to the latest ABC News/Washington Post Poll.

The last Democrat to hold that sort of an advantage over his GOP opponent on economic issues going into an election: William Jefferson Clinton. And we see what a disaster for the economy that administration turned out to be. Let's just hope Obama doesn't leave us with a trillion dollar surplus or something absurd like that. We'll just spend it on booze.

BREAKING NEWS: McCain Says Something; I Agree With Him

Campaigning in vain in Pennsylvania, John McCain lambasted Barack Obama - and I agree with him. The issue:

Obama's thirty minute infomercial, where he explains his tax plan, his foreign policy stance and also how the Flowbie haircutting system can save you hundreds of dollars simply by using your existing vacuum cleaner to cut your family's hair beautifully and simply, is supposed to be aired on essentially every network in the country tomorrow night.

McCain excoriated Obama over the program, saying that it was absolutely inexcusable that the airing of the taped message would conceivably delay the start/resumption of the World Series.

McCain left few openings untouched, even bashing Obama for airing a 30-minute commercial Wednesday night that will delay the opening of a World Series baseball game if the series goes to six games.

"No one will delay a World Series game with an infomercial when I'm president," said McCain.

Now THAT is a message I can get behind, John. Do NOT mess with the World Series, Barack. You're treading on thin ice there, pal.

Unfortunately for John, Sarah "Human Cringe-Machine" Palin was there to sound off the full-retard gong again.

"You are such a welcoming and patriotic state," Palin said. "I know we have many patriots in the crowd today."

Phew! Thank Jebus you guys are in Pennsylvania - one of those "patriotic" states. Must have sucked to spend time campaigning recently in those totally un-patriotic states like... wait, now which ones were the un-American states, Governor?

I mean, have we not yet learned our lessons? Now you're by implication suggesting that some states are less or not patriotic? Please enlighten us, Governor... which states are those?

Your reign of stupidity lasts seven more days.

Change I Can Believe In. Finally.

Okay, so this not national news - it's personal news - but since it is election related, I will share it with this forum.

This morning, I arose early to a stormy day here in Boise. After doing my morning chores on the organic farm, I decided to get a workout in at the local high school gym. On the television in the background was Senator Obama's speech from yesterday in Pittsburgh. It was closed captioned (as the GNR was blasting for the high school kids getting pumped for Friday night's homecoming football game) so I could watch and listen to my Ipod at the same time.

And, early this morning, it happened. A switch was flipped. I started to believe.

Pat Bateman is a liberal, but he is not someone who often believes in people. Ideas are dandy, and I'll vote generally for the person who supports as many of my ideas as possible. Usually that's a Democrat, but not always. But mostly. Still, generally I cast a vote for that person but keep a skeptical eye. After all, it is politics. I vote ideas and rarely candidates. The more invested you become in a person rather than an idea, the more you are let down when you learn that person whom you have placed on a pedestal has feet of clay.

That is why it's been almost staggering to watch, largely from the sidelines, the mania that has followed Senator Obama's campaign. It has been like a old time Southern church revival service. People swoon over him. People believe in him like a messiah come to deliver us. And that part I couldn't figure out, because that's simply not how I am generally constructed as a person. Ideas, flawless; people, generally not. I believe in ideas. Rarely in people.

I have supported Senator Obama from the moment he became the presumptive Democratic nominee. I liked his gravitas. I liked most of his ideas. I especially liked that it looked like he could win. But until this morning, I didn't "believe."

But this morning, for some reason, my Ipod kept coming back to inspirational tunes and I kept turning back to the gym television to watch him. I read his words (I had already seen the speech, but reading the words and seeing his poise again, maybe everything just clicked). And, suddenly, despite the lingering clouds and rain outside - both literally and metaphorically - my disposition started to get sunnier. What was this thing happening to my face? Was this a... smile?

I'm a cynic at heart and a skeptic by nature. Life will teach you this lesson if your eyes are remotely open. But suddenly, as if my Ipod was programmed to dovetail with his speech, "Going the Distance" from the original Rocky came on as he reached a crescendo. And, in that moment, it happened. I could feel the change. I became a believer. I went from an ideological supporter (and intense hater of what the GOP has become) to someone emotionally invested in THIS person, not just the defeat of the policies of the last eight years.

And suddenly, as if I suddenly understood something I already knew factually, it also became crystal clear why John McCain cannot, and will not, win this election. Because his supporters don't believe. The base of the Republican party turned out to support George Bush, believing it a "moral imperative" to do so. But even with You Betcha! on the ticket, they still just can't rally that same hysteria this time around.

But Obama's supporters can. There is a religious fervor to their support that is simply indefatigable. No matter what is thrown at him, both he and they brush it off. He has deflected any slings and whatever arrows the GOP has mustered and come through it. As the Democrats found out in 2004, you cannot genetically engineer enthusiasm. The Republicans are now learning this lesson when their own strategy of using enthusiasm and energy as a voting tool is turned against them.

The amazing thing about this is that it is the "elitist Ivory tower" set that is dancing in the aisles for Obama. The Godless sodomites. The shiftless union laborers. The abortionists. Everyone, essentially, who mocks Conservatives, especially Evangelicals, for "faith based" voting. It is these folks who now are voting their hearts and see this election as a "calling" - perhaps not from God, but certainly from something collectively bigger than any of us individually.

Well, I was on the outside looking in until this morning. A supporter, without question. But not invested. Count this Elitist as having the ice melted on his cold, black heart. I'm invested now. Change is coming... and I finally, truly, believe it.

Ronald Reagan's Legacy Lives On; Votes Obama

Reported today by ABC News:

Charles Fried, the Solicitor General for President Ronald Reagan, announced today that he has already voted for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

Chief among his reasons: "the choice of Sarah Palin at a time of deep national crisis."

Ouch. Not only an endorsement, but the guy has already cast his vote. Well, okay, I suppose that's not that bad though. He's a vestige of a long-gone administration lionized by Republicans everywhere but really not that relevant anymore, right?

In addition to losing the support of a highly-respected conservative, what must especially smart for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is that Fried actually served as an adviser to his campaign.

Okay, ouch. That has to hurt a little. No, but it is even worse than that.

In [a]letter to Trevor Potter, the General Counsel to the McCain-Palin campaign, [Fried] asked that his name be removed from the several campaign-related committees on which he serves.

So let me make sure I have this right:

A former member of the Reagan administration was serving as an advisor to the McCain campaign and also participating in several campaign-related committees. Ostensibly, he might even be in line for an administration position in the unlikely event of a McCain victory. This individual then decided "nope, can't do it" and withdrew from all campaign-related posts and went and cast an early-ballot vote for Obama?

Yup. That's gotta smart.