A Controversial and/or Informative Site [Archive] - Page 29

Saundra Hummer

October 29th, 2008, 07:36 PM

<><><><><><><>
With Florida tied, McCain tries to play a Palestinian card
Story Posted
on
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
By
Margaret Talev & William Douglas
McClatchy Newspapers ~
RALEIGH, N.C. —Hours before Democrat Barack Obama's 30-minute paid political ad was to run on network television, Republican John McCain tried Wednesday to create controversy about his presidential rival's connections to a Palestinian scholar and compared Obama to George McGovern and Jimmy Carter.

Obama aides accused McCain of hypocrisy. They noted that the International Republican Institute, which McCain has long chaired, donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to a Palestinian research organization in the 1990s that the same scholar, Rashid Khalidi, helped found.

Obama didn't address the controversy directly at a midday rally in North Carolina. But he told voters that by week's end McCain will "be accusing me of being a secret Communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten." He charged that McCain, behind in polls, was desperate and that, "If my opponent is elected, you will be worse off four years from now than you are today."

In radio interviews while campaigning in Florida, which has a large Jewish voting population, McCain accused the Los Angeles Times of media bias for declining to release a video it obtained of Obama attending a 2003 going away-party in Chicago for Khalidi. Khalidi is a Palestinian rights advocate and critic of Israel. A former University of Chicago professor, he was leaving for a job as a professor at Columbia University in New York.

At the party, which the Times wrote about last April, Obama praised Khalidi and vice versa. But in Khalidi also told the Times in that story that he disagreed with Obama's pro-Israel views.

"I'm not in the business about talking about media bias," McCain said on Radio Mambi, a Spanish-language station in Miami. "But what if there was a tape with John McCain with a neo-Nazi outfit being held by some media outlet? I think the treatment of the issue would be slightly different."

Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt accused McCain of using a "recycled, manufactured controversy" to distract voters. LaBolt said Khalidi is not an adviser to Obama or his campaign and that Obama "does not share Khalidi's views." He said Obama had been "clear and consistent on his support for Israel."

Obama was headed to Florida later in the day for two events. One is to be part of his 30-minute paid infomercial. In the other, Obama and former President Bill Clinton will campaign together.

While Florida elected President Bush twice and had been considered safely Republican before the economic crisis, that's changed with housing foreclosures and concerns about seniors' retirement savings. An Obama win in the state could cost McCain the presidency.

The Huffington Post first posted tax returns showing donations from IRI under McCain's leadership in the 1990s to Khalidi's group, Center for Palestine Research and Studies.

In an interview with La Kalle, another Spanish-language station in Miami, McCain reiterated his concerns about Khalidi.

Asked about Obama's plans to raise taxes on the wealthy and give families earning less than $200,000 a tax cut, McCain said, "I won't call him a socialist. It doesn't matter what we call him. The point is, what he wants to do. And that has been tried before. That's what George McGovern wanted to do, that's what Jimmy Carter did, and we're not going to do it."

McCain repeatedly suggested in his radio interviews the presence of another controversial Obama acquaintance at the Khalidi farewell party: Bill Ayers.

For weeks, McCain has sought to damage Obama by linking him to Ayers, a Chicago education professor and former member of the violent anti-Vietnam group called the Weather Underground, which was active when Obama was a child. The friendship between the two appears to consist of Ayers holding a meet-the-candidate event for Obama more than a dozen years ago and the two having been active on boards of local charities, some funded by Republicans.

It wasn't immediately clear whether Ayers attended the event. The Obama campaign didn't answer the question and McCain adviser Mark Salter acknowledged that it wasn't clear. The McCain camp pointed simply to a 2005 New York Sun article saying that Ayers had praised Khalidi in a farewell book made for him.

Obama told supporters it was important that they turn out to the polls in the face of McCain's attacks. "Don't believe for a second this election is over," he said.
More on this
Story | New polls: Obama's got Pennsylvania; Ohio, Florida close
Story | Out of bounds! McCain's wrong on World Series delay
Story | Small business: Who's better on taxes, Obama or McCain?
Story | Poll: McCain has cut into Obama's edge on jobs, economy
On the Web | More McClatchy issues coverage
On the Web | Complete McClatchy election coverage

MORE FROM MCCLATCHY: Out of bounds!McCain's wrong on World Series delay
Polls: Pennsylvania is Obama country; Ohio, Florida tight
Small business: Who's better on taxes, Obama or McCain?
Check out McClatchy's expanded politics coverage

McClatchy Newspapers 2008

COMMENTS
There goes McBush again,fear and smear.... When will this Old, senile, coot learn, that the American public are sick and tired of these same old republicrook tactics ....
McBush/Palin, blew their chances for victory, by not having good sound compelling current reasons to be elected to the highest offices in the land.....
Barack Obama, on the other hand, from day one, has given very precise, coherant, current plans for the future of America. Thats what the country wants and needs to hear......
07:10:54pm 10/29/2008Tonic_Writes

Gilric: Did you miss the part that said McCain has also been involved with Khalidi? I'm having trouble finding a single thing of which McCain and Palin are accusing Obama that cannot be thrown right back at them. McCain associated with Khalidi. McCain associated with Keating and even as recently as the 90's tried to help someone involved with the Keating 5 scandal. Palin spends too much taxpayer and state money but calls Obama the wealth spreader. Palin only likes it when the wealth gets spread her way. Obama knows Ayers, McCain knows Liddy. McCain says Obama shouldn't delay a baseball game but he himself delayed a football game. The list goes on and on and on. They are full of acusations but have not told me one positive thing they will do that will make my life better. And since we've seen how McCain likes to blame others and lose his temper he is unsuited to run a company let alone a country.
07:10:06pm 10/29/2008oldetoys

Same lousy insipid SMEARS by the filthiest political party in recent US history. The Republican party is the master of HATE, FEAR, BIGOTRY, LIES, AND HYPOCRISY. I'm sick of it and in no way in the universe would I ever consider voting for a senator that has called another senator a terrorist, socialist, and even communist. Now, in a last minute ditch effort, they are "wondering" what Obama said at some gathering of politicians discussing Israel. Well, I'm wondering what McCain was doing when he chaired the group that gave these folks a nearly $500,000 donation. STOP WITH THE DAMNED HYPOCRISY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
07:10:24pm 10/29/2008finniegirl1959

Well if the smears don't get McCain the election I'm sure his buddy Bush can start another war to help him. I wonder why American's feel this man would be better at protecting them. From what I can see, he graduated 5 th, from last in a class of 600, crashed either 5 or six airplanes, and spent five years as a prisoner of war. This does not make him a first or even second class protector of our country. The garbage from McCain's side is enough to make a person throw up. Eight years led to the problems this country has, and McCain was in the thick of things, deregulating voting with Bush, and now he is going to save this country from Obama and the democrats, please people save us from McCain
07:10:09pm 10/29/2008aryan0481

This sounds like desperation on McCain.
07:10:18pm 10/29/2008norberto

Mr. McCain & Dr Cagan, lets be frank at least once in a lifetime. What’s wrong in sharing prosperity ? The poor Palestinians live isolated in worst conditions than the Jews in Poland at the turn of the century. What is their impact in this monumental theft performed at the speed of light and relative to space in the global paranoiac village inhabited by Lilliputians Malaises (in the words of Dali) ?
06:10:46pm 10/29/2008flyntstuff

The US needs a president in charge of a foreign policy that has the wisdom to sit down and listen to all sides of a conflict, to not be judgemental and prejudiced supporting one against the other, and because of neutrality, gains the respect of all parties in the conflict. How else would one ever be able to peacefully resolve conflict?
06:10:24pm 10/29/2008showmestategal

MC Cain tied in funding to suggested terrorist Khaliddi PLO!
McCain faults paper for not releasing Khalidi tape
By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer Beth Fouhy, Associated Press Writer – 25 mins ago Play Video 60 Minutes – Gambling
Slideshow: Sen. John McCain Play Video Video: McCain's corporate tax plan CNN Play Video Video: Local Middle School Students Stage Debate KDKA Pittsburgh Reuters – U.S. Republican presidential nominee Senator John McCain (R-AZ) speaks about his plans for U.S. national … BOWLING GREEN, Ohio –
Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin accused the Los Angeles Times on Wednesday of protecting Barack Obama by withholding a videotape of the Democrat attending a 2003 party for a Palestinian-American professor and critic of Israel.

The paper said it had written about the event in April and would not release the tape because of a promise made to the source who provided it.

McCain and Palin called Rashid Khalidi a former spokesman for the Palestine Liberation Organization, a characterization that Khalidi has denied in the past. Both candidates said guests at the party made critical comments about Israel.

Khalidi is a professor of Middle East Studies at Columbia University and a longtime friend of Obama's. Khalidi has publicly criticized Israel, but he and Obama have both said they hold very different opinions on Israeli issues.

McCain also has ties to Khalidi through a group that Khalidi helped found 15 years ago. The Center for Palestine Research and Studies received at least $448,000 from an organization that McCain chairs.

On Wednesday, McCain said 1960s radical Bill Ayers had attended the same party in 2003. McCain and Palin have criticized Obama for his ties to Ayers and questioned what the videotape of the party might show.

"Among other things, Israel was described there as the perpetrator of terrorism rather than the victim," Palin said at a rally in Ohio. "What we don't know is how Barack Obama responded to these slurs on a country that he professes to support."

In a story published in April, the Times said Obama spoke out at the event on the need for common ground on the Israel-Palestinian issue. Obama has said during the campaign that his commitment to Israel's security is "nonnegotiable."

"More than six months ago the Los Angeles Times published a detailed account of the events shown on the videotape," Jamie Gold, the newspaper's reader's representative, said in a statement. "The Times is not suppressing anything. Just the opposite — the L.A. Times brought the matter to light."

McCain and Palin cited the paper's position as evidence of media bias. The Times has endorsed Obama's candidacy.

"If there was a tape of John McCain in a neo-Nazi outfit, I think the treatment of the issue would be slightly different," McCain said in an interview with Hispanic radio stations.

Palin said the Times should win a Pulitzer Prize for "kowtowing."

"It must be nice for a candidate to have major news organizations looking out for their best interests like that. Politicians would love to have a pet newspaper of their very own," she said.

Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor dismissed McCain and Palin's complaints as a "recycled, manufactured controversy" meant to distract voters.

"Barack Obama has been clear and consistent on his support for Israel, and has been clear that Rashid Khalidi is not an adviser to him or his campaign and that he does not share Khalidi's views," Vietor said.

Khalidi taught at the University of Chicago until 2003. Obama and his wife, Michelle, often socialized with Khalidi and his wife, Mona, and the Khalidis hosted a political fundraiser for Obama in 2000.

The Woods Fund charity gave money to the Arab-American Action Network, run by Mona Khalidi, while Obama served on the charity's board. Ayers also served on the board.

The Center for Palestine Research and Studies conducted regular public opinion surveys in the West Bank and Gaza with financial support from various foundations and from the International Republican Institute, an organization that promoting democracy around the world. McCain was the IRI chairman when it gave $448,873 to the research group in 1998, according to IRI's tax return.

Ayers was a founder of the radical group the Weather Underground, which set off bombs at the Capitol and the Pentagon in protest of the Vietnam War nearly 40 years ago. McCain has criticized Obama for having had a friendly relationship with Ayers, with whom Obama worked on two community organizations several years ago, and for downplaying their ties.

Obama has noted that he was a child when Ayers, now a university professor, was with the Weather Underground. The Democratic candidate has condemned Ayers' radical past and violent activities.
06:10:18pm 10/29/2008doctorstroke

well here we go again! I think Father Time (McCain) should tell Whacko Palin to go fetch that witch doctor (pastor) that cured her of the devil and maybe that will get them some points with the undecided voters. Father Time is beginning to crack! It's kind of pitiful to watch him stumble around on the issues and grasp at anything bizzare to reach the (normal) amarican on the street. He needs to take a hard look at Todd Palin and his terrorist connections.
05:10:51pm 10/29/2008Gilric

no McCain is saying that anyone that crawls into bed with a PLO terrorist from yassir arafats group probably caught something..and since Obama is sleeping around with other domestic terrorists and insane black preachers..he is most likely infected with all sorts of crap...and on the fourth we are going to see how many people of discernment are left in the US..or if you are all going to lead us like jews into the chambers...straight up..Obama is bad news..always has been...and always will be...but he sure looks good giving a speech..isnt that whats important anyway?? lets take someone with only a few years political experience and make him the most powerful leader in the free world..ARE YOU ALL INSANE..if it looks like,talks like and walks like a duck..it probably is a duck..

In Florida, McCain links Obama to Israel critic
Submitted by admin on October 29, 2008 - 9:05pm.
RALEIGH, N.C. — Hours before Democrat Barack Obama's 30-minute paid political ad was to run on network television, Republican John McCain tried Wednesday to create controversy about his presidential rival's connections to a Palestinian scholar and compared Obama to George McGovern and Jimmy Carter.Obama aides accused McCain of hypocrisy. They noted that the International Republican Institute, which McCain has long chaired, donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to a Palestinian research organization in the 1990s that the same scholar, Rashid Khalidi, helped found.Obama didn't address the controversy directly at a midday rally in North Carolina. But he told voters that by week's end McCain will "be accusing me of being a secret Communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten." He charged that McCain, behind in polls, was desperate and that, "If my opponent is elected, you will be worse off four years from now than you are today."In radio interviews while campaigning in Florida, which has a large Jewish voting population, McCain accused the Los Angeles Times of media bias for declining to release a video it obtained of Obama attending a 2003 going away-party in Chicago for Khalidi. Khalidi is a Palestinian rights advocate and critic of Israel. A former University of Chicago professor, he was leaving for a job as a professor at Columbia University in New York.At the party, which the Times wrote about last April, Obama praised Khalidi and vice versa. But in Khalidi also told the Times in that story that he disagreed with Obama's pro-Israel views."I'm not in the business about talking about media bias," McCain said on Radio Mambi, a Spanish-language station in Miami. "But what if there was a tape with John McCain with a neo-Nazi outfit being held by some media outlet? I think the treatment of the issue would be slightly different."Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt accused McCain of using a "recycled, manufactured controversy" to distract voters. LaBolt said Khalidi is not an adviser to Obama or his campaign and that Obama "does not share Khalidi's views." He said Obama had been "clear and consistent on his support for Israel."Obama was headed to Florida later in the day for two events. One is to be part of his 30-minute paid infomercial. In the other, Obama and former President Bill Clinton will campaign together.While Florida elected President Bush twice and had been considered safely Republican before the economic crisis, that's changed with housing foreclosures and concerns about seniors' retirement savings. An Obama win in the state could cost McCain the presidency.The Huffington Post first posted tax returns showing donations from IRI under McCain's leadership in the 1990s to Khalidi's group, Center for Palestine Research and Studies.In an interview with La Kalle, another Spanish-language station in Miami, McCain reiterated his concerns about Khalidi.Asked about Obama's plans to raise taxes on the wealthy and give families earning less than $250,000 a tax cut, McCain said, "I won't call him a socialist. It doesn't matter what we call him. The point is, what he wants to do. And that has been tried before. That's what George McGovern wanted to do, that's what Jimmy Carter did, and we're not going to do it."McCain repeatedly suggested in his radio interviews the presence of another controversial Obama acquaintance at the Khalidi farewell party: Bill Ayers.For weeks, McCain has sought to damage Obama by linking him to Ayers, a Chicago education professor and former member of the violent anti-Vietnam group called the Weather Underground, which was active when Obama was a child. The friendship between the two appears to consist of Ayers holding a meet-the-candidate event for Obama more than a dozen years ago and the two having been active on boards of local charities, some funded by Republicans.It wasn't immediately clear whether Ayers attended the event. The Obama campaign didn't answer the question and McCain adviser Mark Salter acknowledged that it wasn't clear. The McCain camp pointed simply to a 2005 New York Sun article saying that Ayers had praised Khalidi in a farewell book made for him.Obama told supporters it was important that they turn out to the polls in the face of McCain's attacks. "Don't believe for a second this election is over," he said.MORE FROM MCCLATCHYOut of bounds! McCain's wrong on World Series delayPolls: Pennsylvania is Obama country; Ohio, Florida tightSmall business: Who's better on taxes, Obama or McCain?Check out McClatchy's expanded politics coverage

McCain is saying that anyone
Submitted by smi2le on October 29, 2008 - 9:32pm.
McCain is saying that anyone who has a friend who is a Palestinian is not a patriotic American and unfit to be president of the U.S. This blatant advocacy and appeal to ethnic bigotry is one of the most shoocking and repugnant things McCain has said in his "anything goes" campaign. TAs for his statement that Jimmy Carter and anyone else who has ever criticizes the Israeli occupation of Palestine is anti-semetic (1) Carter is the only President who ever actually negotiated a peace agreement which both the Israelis and the Palestinians signed, and since at one time or other most of the population of Israel has criticized the occupation, McCain is saying Israel is "anti-semetic." As for McCain's patriotism, he has never to this day even acknowledged the the men of the U.S.S. Liberty who were killed in a deliberate and unprovoked attack by Israel.

no McCain is saying that
Submitted by Gilric on October 29, 2008 - 9:51pm.
no McCain is saying that anyone that crawls into bed with a PLO terrorist from yassir arafats group probably caught something..and since Obama is sleeping around with other domestic terrorists and insane black preachers..he is most likely infected with all sorts of crap...and on the fourth we are going to see how many people of discernment are left in the US..or if you are all going to lead us like jews into the chambers...straight up..Obama is bad news..always has been...and always will be...but he sure looks good giving a speech..isnt that whats important anyway?? lets take someone with only a few years political experience and make him the most powerful leader in the free world..ARE YOU ALL INSANE..if it looks like,talks like and walks like a duck..it probably is a duck..

well here we go again! I
Submitted by doctorstroke on October 29, 2008 - 10:14pm.
well here we go again! I think Father Time (McCain) should tell Whacko Palin to go fetch that witch doctor (pastor) that cured her of the devil and maybe that will get them some points with the undecided voters. Father Time is beginning to crack! It's kind of pitiful to watch him stumble around on the issues and grasp at anything bizzare to reach the (normal) amarican on the street. He needs to take a hard look at Todd Palin and his terrorist connections.

[CUT-N-PASTE deleted. -- JDM]
Submitted by showmestategal on October 29, 2008 - 10:36pm.
[CUT-N-PASTE deleted. -- JDM]

The US needs a president in
Submitted by flyntstuff on October 29, 2008 - 10:56pm.
The US needs a president in charge of a foreign policy that has the wisdom to sit down and listen to all sides of a conflict, to not be judgemental and prejudiced supporting one against the other, and because of neutrality, gains the respect of all parties in the conflict. How else would one ever be able to peacefully resolve conflict?

Mr. McCain & Dr Cagan, lets
Submitted by norberto on October 29, 2008 - 11:00pm.
Mr. McCain & Dr Cagan, lets be frank at least once in a lifetime. What’s wrong in sharing prosperity ? The poor Palestinians live isolated in worst conditions than the Jews in Poland at the turn of the century. What is their impact in this monumental theft performed at the speed of light and relative to space in the global paranoiac village inhabited by Lilliputians Malaises (in the words of Dali) ?

This sounds like desperation
Submitted by aryan0481 on October 29, 2008 - 11:03pm.
This sounds like desperation on McCain.

Well if the smears don't get
Submitted by finniegirl1959 on October 29, 2008 - 11:16pm.
Well if the smears don't get McCain the election I'm sure his buddy Bush can start another war to help him. I wonder why American's feel this man would be better at protecting them. From what I can see, he graduated 5 th, from last in a class of 600, crashed either 5 or six airplanes, and spent five years as a prisoner of war. This does not make him a first or even second class protector of our country. The garbage from McCain's side is enough to make a person throw up. Eight years led to the problems this country has, and McCain was in the thick of things, deregulating voting with Bush, and now he is going to save this country from Obama and the democrats, please people save us from McCain

Same lousy insipid SMEARS by
Submitted by oldetoys on October 29, 2008 - 11:41pm.
Same lousy insipid SMEARS by the filthiest political party in recent US history. The Republican party is the master of HATE, FEAR, BIGOTRY, LIES, AND HYPOCRISY. I'm sick of it and in no way in the universe would I ever consider voting for a senator that has called another senator a terrorist, socialist, and even communist. Now, in a last minute ditch effort, they are "wondering" what Obama said at some gathering of politicians discussing Israel. Well, I'm wondering what McCain was doing when he chaired the group that gave these folks a nearly $500,000 donation. STOP WITH THE DAMNED HYPOCRISY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gilric: Did you miss the
Submitted by Tonic_Writes on October 29, 2008 - 11:42pm.
Gilric: Did you miss the part that said McCain has also been involved with Khalidi? I'm having trouble finding a single thing of which McCain and Palin are accusing Obama that cannot be thrown right back at them. McCain associated with Khalidi. McCain associated with Keating and even as recently as the 90's tried to help someone involved with the Keating 5 scandal. Palin spends too much taxpayer and state money but calls Obama the wealth spreader. Palin only likes it when the wealth gets spread her way. Obama knows Ayers, McCain knows Liddy. McCain says Obama shouldn't delay a baseball game but he himself delayed a football game. The list goes on and on and on. They are full of acusations but have not told me one positive thing they will do that will make my life better. And since we've seen how McCain likes to blame others and lose his temper he is unsuited to run a company let alone a country.

McCain spent his last
Submitted by capnmike on October 30, 2008 - 12:40am.
McCain spent his last birthday at a party on a megayacht owned by a Russian Billionaire crook, and with another character who was just busted for Fraud and given 4 1/2 years in the slammer and then deportation. All this aside from the Keating 5 thing and his phony "Joe the Plumber", who is related to the Keatings.
McCain is a typical Republican old-school sleazeball. Voting for him is voting for 4 more years of sleaze, after the 8 years his buddy Bush just laid on us. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

Go on-site to gain access to article and it's links as well as more comments
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/54962.html?mi_email=McClatchy%20Washington%20Burea u_DC+Newsletter
More of the same arguments from so many people. Say, think of this.... Just take a look back at our founding fathers, where was their experience in writing our Constitution? Where was their experience in governing: in leading? There were no experiences to be had. They went in blind. Intelligence, open minds and the desire to do right as well as do proud. Keeping their honor bright, not that there wasn't some bad blood and words back then just as there is now, but they, for the most part thought of the common good. The desire to do good works is a big qualification don't you think?

Obama has so much more experience than those against him are willing to admit. Then there's this, a lot of us do feel he can be given the prize when it comes to inspiring us. He does this, and he knows what he is talking about when he deems fit to talk about government, not like Sarah Palin who will be learning on the job , and this is for certain. If she were to inherit the Presidency? I shudder to think of it. SRH
If I tied in posters ID"s to the wrong post, forgive me. Go on-site to get it all straight. SRH<><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 11:02 AM

~~~~~~~
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pound ought and six, result misery.

Charles Dickens
(1812 - 1870)
David Copperfield
1849
~~~
He that is of the opinion money will do everything may well be suspected of doing everything for money. - Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)
~~~
There is some magic in wealth, which can thus make persons pay their court to it, when it does not even benefit themselves. How strange it is, that a fool or knave, with riches, should be treated with more respect by the world, than a good man, or a wise man in poverty!

Ann Radcliffe
The Mysteries of Udolpho
1764
~~~
The chief value of money lies in the fact that one lives in a world in which it is overestimated.

H. L. Mencken
1880 - 1956
~~~
Make money your god and it will plague you like the devil.

Henry Fielding
1707 - 1754
~~~~~

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 11:32 AM

^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^
The New American Century: Cut Short By 92 Years By Mike Whitney

02/10/08 'ICH" -- - America's time as a superpower is coming to an end. The financial crisis was just the last straw. Whatever good faith was left after the invasion of Iraq, the shrugging off of international treaties and the shameless disregard for human rights, is now gone. The United States has polluted the global economic system with worthless mortgage-backed securities and, by doing so, has pushed 6 billion people closer to a long and painful recession. That's not something that can be easily forgiven.

The anger at the US seems to be surfacing everywhere at once. It was particularly noticable at the recent opening of the UN General Assembly. Typically, this is a tedious event full of empty political blabbering and pretentious ceremonies. But not this time. With the world sliding towards a US-created recession; patience have worn thin, and foreign leaders have started to lashing out at the United States more vehemently. The speeches have been blunt and acrimonious; no one is "pulling their punches" any more. Venezuela's Hugo Chavez summed up the mood of the meetings like this:

"I think that, sooner rather than later, this empire will fall - to the benefit of the whole world, enabling a balance in the world to be created: polycentric and multi-polar. That will guarantee peace in the world. To the creation of this multi-polar world we are making our small contribution."

Chavez likes the American people but opposes the American Empire; it's that simple. He was the first foreign leader to offer food and medical assistance to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. (Bush refused his offer) Also, he regularly supplies tons of heating oil to low-income families in the Northeast USA.

What Chavez objects to is Bush's "unipolar" model of global governance whereby all the world's crucial decisions--on everything from global warming to nuclear proliferation--are made by Washington. No one likes being told what to do, just as no one likes the US constantly meddling in their affairs. That's why none of the UN attendees seem particularly bothered by the fact that the US financial markets are in freefall. It's called schadenfreude, taking pleasure in someone elses misfortune, and there was ample supply of it at the United Nations last week.

Many of the dignitaries seem to believe that America's sudden downturn presents opportunities for a change in the way the world is run. That's what everyone wants; change. Real change. No one wants another 8 years like the last. That's why the central theme in Chavez's speech was repeated over and over again by the other world leaders. They reject the present system and want a bigger role in shaping the world's future.

That doesn't mean that the world hates America. It just means that everyone wants a breather from the torture, the abductions, the bombing of civilians, and now, the financial contagion that the US has spread throughout the global system. The US's lack of regulation and low interest monetary policies have driven up inflation, triggered food riots, and sent oil prices skyrocketing. Enough is enough. The United States is like the dinner guest who doesn't know when it's time to go home. Perhaps, a touch of recession will help to rebalance Washington's approach and make its leaders more responsive to the needs of the rest of the world. In any event, other nations are already preparing for a world where America's role is greatly reduced.

Journalist John Gray summed it up like this in his article in The Observer, "A Shattering Moment in America's fall from Power":

"The control of events is no longer in American hands.....Having created the conditions that produced history's biggest bubble, America's political leaders appear unable to grasp the magnitude of the dangers the country now faces. Mired in their rancorous culture wars and squabbling among themselves, they seem oblivious to the fact that American global leadership is fast ebbing away. A new world is coming into being almost unnoticed, where America is only one of several great powers, facing an uncertain future it can no longer shape."

The US is about to join the family of nations and learn how to get along with its neighbors whether it wants to or not. There's simply no other choice; the dollar is falling, the deficits are soaring, and the financial markets are in a shambles. America will either learn to cooperate or become isolated in a world that is rapidly integrating. It's "get along or get out"; a message that Washington needs to learn quickly so it can adapt to a new power-paradigm.

Yes; plenty of money will still go into covert operations and CIA-sponsored dirty tricks just to keep alive the hope the Superpowerdom will be restored. That is to be expected. The well-heeled rogues in the British royal family still dream of rebuilding the Empire, too. But realists know that it's just a harmless fantasy. Nothing will come of it. Empire's have a short shelf-life and they're impossible to stitch-back together. They usually end on a corpse strewn battlefield or in a towering financial bonfire which leaves nothing behind but a pile of ashes and shards of broken glass. We can only hope that the yawning economic chasm ahead of us all, will involve less hardship than we anticipate. But when a nation sows dragon's teeth, it shouldn't expect a harvest of sweet plums.

Journalist Steve Watson reports on Infowars:

"A Council on Foreign Relations member and former policy planner under prominent Bilderberger Henry Kissinger has penned a piece in the Financial Times of London calling for a “new global monetary authority” that would have the power to monitor all national financial authorities and all large global financial companies.

“Even if the US’s massive financial rescue operation succeeds, it should be followed by something even more far-reaching – the establishment of a Global Monetary Authority to oversee markets that have become borderless." writes Jeffrey Garten also a former managing director of Lehman Brothers

The biggest global financial companies would have to register with the Global Monetary Authority (GMA) and be subject to its monitoring, or be blacklisted. That includes commercial companies and banks, but also sovereign wealth funds, gigantic hedge funds and private equity firms. The GMA’s board would have to include central bankers not just from the US, UK, the eurozone and Japan, but also China, Saudi Arabia and Brazil. It would be financed by mandatory contributions from every capable country and from insurance-type premiums from global financial companies – publicly listed, government owned, and privately held alike." (Infowar.com)

The dream of "one world" government does not die easily, but it is dead all the same. The center of the present global financial system is the Federal Reserve. Its offspring includes the Council on Foreign Relations, the IMF, The World Bank, the G-7 banking cartel and thousands of predatory NGOs which have expanded the grip of the Washington banking cabal and the dollarized system across the planet. Neoliberalism is collapsing. What we are seeing now is the erratic spasms of a terminal heart patient entering the final stages of cardiac arrest. There is no drug or medical procedure that will restore the victim to good health.

No one is looking to the US or its "economic hit-men" to chart a course for their country's economic future. Those day's are over. The US will have to pull itself from the rubble and start over without the massive infusions of low interest capital from China, Japan and the Gulf States. The money spigots have been turned off. It's thin gruel and hard times ahead. That's the price one pays for swindling the world with worthless mortgage-backed snake oil and other "illiquid" garbage.

Russian President Vladimir Putin summed up recent events in the financial markets like this:
“Everything that is happening in the economic and financial sphere has started in the United States. This is a real crisis that all of us are facing, and what is really sad is that we see an inability to take appropriate decisions. This is no longer irresponsibility on the part of some individuals, but irresponsibility of the whole system, which as you know had pretensions to (global) leadership.”

Back at the United Nations, Germany's Finance Minister Peer Steinbuck echoed similar sentiments when he said:

“The United States is solely to be blamed for the financial crisis. They are the cause for the crisis and it is not Europe and it is not the Federal Republic of Germany. The Anglo-Saxon drive for double-digit profits and massive bonuses for bankers and company executives that were responsible for the financial crisis.”

He added,"The long term consequences of the crisis are not clear. but one thing seems likely to me; the USA will lose its superpower status in the global financial system. The world financial system is becoming multipolar."

Steinbuck was merely reiterating the feelings of Chancellor Angela Merkel who used more diplomatic language in her critique:

“The current crisis shows us you can do some things on the national level, but the overwhelming majority must be agreed to on the international level. We must push for clearer regulations so that a crisis like the current one cannot be repeated.”

Merkel knows that Europe was blind-sighted by America's deregulated system which allows crooks and chiselers to rule the roost. Even now--in the middle of the biggest financial scandal in history--not one CEO or CFO from a major investment bank has been indicted or dragged off to prison. US markets are a lawless "free for all" where no one is held accountable no matter how large the crime or how many people are hurt. But, there's a price to be paid for running a crooked system and fleecing investors, and the US will pay that price. Already, the purchase of US Treasurys has slowed to a crawl. In the coming months, America's life-support system will be disconnected altogether and the oxygen tent removed. Kissinger's protege is not worried about that; but working class American's should be. There's a train wreck just ahead and many people will suffer needlessly.

This is how Spiegel Online puts it:

"The banking crisis is upending American dominance of the financial markets and world politics. The industrialized countries are sliding into recession, the era of turbo-capitalism is coming to an end and US military might is ebbing....This is no longer the muscular and arrogant United States the world knows, the superpower that sets the rules for everyone else and that considers its way of thinking and doing business to be the only road to success.

A new America is on display, a country that no longer trusts its old values and its elites even less: the politicians, who failed to see the problems on the horizon, and the economic leaders, who tried to sell a fictitious world of prosperity to Americans....Also on display is the end of arrogance. The Americans are now paying the price for their pride." (Spiegel Online, "America loses its Dominant Economic Role")

President Dmitry Medvedev was not present at the opening ceremonies at the United Nations, but his views on the nascent "multipolar" world are worth considering. In a recent interview he said:

"We cannot have a single polar world. The world has to have various poles. A policentric world is the only way of ensuring security for the years ahead. So I think it is a very promising direction for our country to pursue...The world is more stable when there are a range of major, important political players. In a multipolar world, everyone influences everyone else. We will work to extend ourselves.

I do not think that the bipolar world that existed between NATO and the Warsaw Pact (The Cold War)has any future prospects. But it is clear today that the single-polar world is completely unable to manage crisis situations."

Both presidential candidates have vowed to continue the unilateralist Bush Doctrine. Obama is just as eager as McCain to violate sovereign borders, invade countries that pose no imminent national security threat to the US, and carry out the many flagrant violations of human rights and international law as long as it advances the geopolitical objectives of western mandarins. There's no doubt that the impending financial meltdown will bring our leaders back to their senses and help to restore the republic. The US needs a foreign policy that doesn't require slaughtering people in their homes or ripping off their retirement savings to maintain our standard of living.

The war that Bush has launched against the world--the war on terror--will persist for years after the US financial system collapses in a heap. The will to power is fueled by arrogance, class consciousness, and a "sense of entitlement" that is stronger than even the will to survive. This is the force that animates the destructive, suicidal impulses of the current conflict. And that is why the war will continue. The social fabric within the US will be torn to shreds long before the fighting stops. A strong sense of entitlement creates the belief that "The world is mine to do with whatever I choose; the claims of others are of no consequence". These feelings cannot be changed through logic or rational discussion; they must be eradicated with a scalpel the same way one would remove a cancerous tumor.

There's trouble ahead. The multi-polar world is about to collide head-on with the "faith-based" unipolar world and millions are bound to suffer. But there is no doubt about the final outcome. The geopolitical plates are shifting inexorably away from Washington. America's ability to wage war will steadily erode as capital and resources dry up. Its only a matter of time before the war machine sputters to a halt and the troops return home. When the killing stops, a truly new world order will begin.

Go on-site for this article, comments about it and more. Check out their archives and other articles of the day. There's also war stats, anchor articles, etc.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
^ ^ ^ ^

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 11:40 AM

<><><><><>
Bush Trying to Avoid War Crimes Charges

VIDEO
2 Minute Video
President Bush is trying to pardon himself
Should Congress pass a bill giving immunity to President Bush for possible war crimes?
Posted 10/29/2008 JUST CLICK BELOW TO GAIN ACCESS
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21113.htm
<><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 12:22 PM

<><><><><><><>How Much has Palin Damaged McCain? By
Bill Hare
10/28/2008
07:26:54 PM EST

The Republican right proceeds at a blinding speed to commit political suicide.
During an era when things so frequently went their way within the national political power structure, aided in no small part by a mainstream media that so often looked the other way or approved of atrocious electioneering and policymaking, right wing Republicans began to believe that power should be theirs, particularly the presidency, for the eternal taking.

How furious they became and how quickly already loose springs shattered from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly when Bill Clinton had the rank audacity to not only run for president, but actually win it twice. He countered the relentless bully machine with an effective instrument of his own in 1992 called the rapid response team, which met smear attacks with carefully crafted rebuttals.

McCain, after achieving the 2008 Republican nomination by pleasing the right by proudly asserting that he had voted with George Bush "90 percent of the time" ended up cornered by his own strategy when a differently structured general election beckoned.

The rightist forces that moved in his direction to enable him to overcome Republican primary challengers such as Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee reacted with angry vigilance when McCain expressed a preference for opting toward a vital center position going into the general election campaign, indicating a preference for the likes of either Joe Lieberman or Tim Pawlenty for the vice presidential slot.
Can any group in America stir up instant thunder faster than an angered Republican right? McCain found himself in the midst of such hostility at the very thought of selecting a pro-choice running mate.

So he acceded to the right's wishes, Sarah Palin was selected, and the Alaskan proved to be a shaker and mover as her right wing supporters promised, but the volcanic eruptions that occurred put McCain's campaign in an increasingly vulnerable position.

The drum beat continues to resound so loudly for Palin from the right that elements of the mainstream media, often the same sources who listened so intently to rumbles on the right through the years and looked the other way when the right's policy proposals were draconian and damaging to the nation.

There is a current stir in the direction of asking if Sarah Palin should McCain lose emerge as the logical Republican frontrunner for the 2012 presidential nomination.

This reflection is occurring at a time when Palin's negative rating, meaning numbers believing she is unqualified to currently serve as president, have reached 55 percent.

Considering the often stated current political reality that under existing American political divisions it is hard for any nominee of either political party to dip below, at least to any appreciable extent, the 40 percent support mark, that 55 percent figure has probably peaked for this election season.

There are three important reasons why Palin will have rendered serious damage to McCain once the final tabulations are in for election 2008. The first is that John McCain took the number one gut argument he could make to the electorate in these economically troubled times, whether one accepts it or not, and removed that piece from the electoral chessboard.

The argument was that he has far more political experience than Barack Obama and is a better choice during a period of turbulent uncertainty both at home and abroad.

Once that Palin, an ill-equipped running mate who screamed foul over an easy question such as what newspapers she read, was selected, McCain was no longer in a position to play his experience card without the specter of his frequently lampooned running mate slapping him metaphorically in the face.

The second reason, that also resulted in a metaphorical slap in McCain's face, was the hope that a Palin candidacy would resonate with women, particularly former supporters of Hillary Clinton. That hopeful expectancy on the part of McCain and Republican forces demonstrates how out of touch they are with the kind of pragmatic feminism Clinton and her supporters embrace.

The specter of a winking, flirtatious, shatter the traditional English language, tote your gun style of electioneering flies in the face of what Clinton style feminism represents.

Too often feminists have seen winking, flirtatious, ill-equipped women obtain positions in the workplace through male chauvinism, while Palin seems to revel in perpetuating this image to the ultimate presentation level, hoping it will be accepted by large portions of the electorate.

The third reason why Palin has been such a disaster has been in accordance with an old phrase Reagan's supporters used in connection with his movement. The saying then was "let Reagan be Reagan" while in the case of the Alaskan it has lately become "I'm Palin and I'll stick to being Palin."

When a message was sent to her by McCain forces on points to make in a Florida appearance Palin was said to have shunned the instruction and followed instead the rhetorical course established by her warm-up act, right wing talk show star Elizabeth Hasselbeck. She later denied having departed from the McCain central command's message and made a reference to "our teams" which is not the way it is supposed to work.

Sarah either does not understand, or perhaps does not wish to comprehend, that a presidential and vice presidential duo is supposed to function as an integrated team.

The resulting flap prompted Sarah to be referred to by an operative from the McCain team calling her a "diva" while another negative comment erupted during that same rocky period that "Palin is a lightweight" and that Mitt Romney will become the Republican party's chief spokesman "on November 5."

Mind you that all this is happening a week before Election Day.

As for Sarah the free spirit, even minimal vetting from the McCain forces should have been enough to remove her from consideration for the vice presidency. Her two years as Alaska's governor have been marked by bickering and cronyism in which major positions have been frequently filled by ill-qualified long time Wasilla cronies.

On top of that, there is that sticky "Troopergate" investigation that will not seem to go away. How could they have missed that? If they saw it, how could they go forward with a Palin nomination for vice president?

All the while Democrats stand aside while Republicans engage in inter-party warfare.

http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2008/10/28/192654/70 <><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 12:58 PM

)))))X(((((
PETITION
to
SIGN
Frankenfood: This Halloween trick could be for real!
Goats that produce spider silk in their milk. Pigs with mouse DNA to improve their digestion. These animals aren't freaks of nature--they're created by man through genetic engineering.

But the Food and Drug Administration wants to let the meat and milk from these animals be sold to you without your knowledge!

FDA has said that each of these animals is different enough from the normal version that it has to go through a full safety assessment. But FDA has refused to require labeling, and says that the ethics of such changes cannot even be considered in its decisionmaking.

Sign our petition to the FDA demanding the agency label genetically engineered food. We should know what we're buying and eating--and have the right to say "no" to gene-altered food.

Petition:
Docket No.

I am deeply concerned that the Food and Drug Administration has issued Draft Guidance that will allow meat and milk from genetically engineered animals into the food supply without any way for me to know whether I'm buying or eating such food. Genetically engineered animals can pose health risks, which is why the FDA is proposing to conduct a full safety assessment for milk and meat from these animals.
If these foods need to be assessed for their safety, why would the FDA allow them to be sold without labels identifying them as such?

For example, goats have been engineered with spider genes to produce spider silk in their milk. And pigs have been engineered with mouse and bacterial DNA to improve the way they metabolize their feed. These animals are obviously different than their counterparts that have not had their genes altered. Not only should the milk and meat from these animals be studied to determine if they are safe, they should be labeled so we know exactly what we are buying.

FDA requires the label on a soup can indicate the ham, chicken and different vegetables it contains. Food must be labeled if it is frozen, pasteurized or comes from concentrate. Likewise, even if it is safe, meat or milk from genetically engineered animals also should have to carry a label. These are facts that I want to know. I urge you to revise your Draft Guidance for Industry on Regulation of Genetically Engineered Animals to require labeling of food products from all genetically engineered animals.

Go on-site to gain access to online petition.

https://secure.consumersunion.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=NIMF_Frankenfood&JServSessionIdr001=kaddhn7ca4.app43a
I don't care if food is sold that has been engineered, treated or that it's from other countries, I just want to be informed so I can make my own choices. I want to know just what it is my family is eating. We know of produce managers who will not buy food from other countries for his own family, as their safety practices aren't always up to snuff. Chemical and cleanliness factors are big concerns. SRH

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 01:25 PM

. . . FUNNY SRH
~
The Other O in Ohio

Barack Obama has gotten a lot of grief about his campaign's vaguely presidential seal. But shortly after he attended an event in Toledo, Obama was accused of taking his enthusiasm for heraldry too far.

On the October 15 broadcast of his radio show, conservative personality Bob Grant complained that there was something funny about one of the flags on Obama's stage:

What is that flag that Obama's been standing in front of that looks like an American flag, but instead of having the field of 50 stars representing the 50 states, there's a circle? Is the circle the 'O' for Obama? Is that what it is? Did you notice Obama is not content with just having several American flags, plain old American flags with the 50 states represented by 50 stars? He has the 'O' flag. And that's what that 'O' is. Just like he did with the plane he was using. He had the flag painted over, and the 'O' for Obama.

Oh, the hubris. Not content with his already dubious demipresidential seal, Obama has now designed his own standard. Will no one stop this egomaniac? Or, as Grant said: "Now, these are symptom—these things are symptomatic of a person who would like to be a potentate—a dictator."

The gravel-voiced Grant, a pioneer of the angry talk radio format, had a point. All of these O doodads seem vaguely Napoleonic. But Grant, who once referred to New York Mayor David Dinkins as "the men's room attendant at the 21 Club," is famous for sharing his first impressions with listeners before checking for offensiveness or, well, accuracy.

Wrong again, Grant; it turns out the offending banner ruffling behind the junior senator from Illinois was, in fact, the state flag of Ohio.

—Daniel Luzer
http://www.motherjones.com/riff_blog/archives/2008/10/10424_the_other_o_in.html . . . . .

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 02:36 PM

<><><><><>
A
NEWSLETTER

Exposing Corruption Exploring SolutionsProject OnGovernment Oversight

Dear Saundra,

Huge news: Special Counsel Scott Bloch has been forced to step down! The decision by White House officials to oust the head of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) comes after years of embarrassing missteps and alarming misconduct that have left the agency in shambles. Bloch had announced his own plans to leave in January 2009, but he has now been placed on administrative leave until December 12th, when his term ends.

POGO has been investigating Bloch's gross mismanagement of the OSC since 2004 (after much deliberation, we actually called for his removal in a July letter to White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten). Bloch has recently been under federal investigation for destroying computer files related to an earlier investigation in which he was accused of retaliating against whistleblowers in his office.

Stay tuned in the next few weeks, as we'll be releasing a report with recommendations for addressing the systemic problems that are likely to plague the OSC even after Bloch's departure.

Be sure to check out our press alert on Bloch's resignation to learn more.
....................
I also wanted to let you know that POGO's Staff Scientist Ned Feder has been in the news this week for his past struggles against the leadership at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

While working as a scientist at the NIH, Dr. Feder highlighted the fact that many NIH-funded researchers at universities and hospitals around the country were privately receiving consulting fees and other payments from drug companies and similar businesses, often creating blatant conflicts of interest. Dr. Feder felt obligated to push for more transparency and disclosure. But when he made his argument public in letters to the editor of Nature and other publications, and identified himself as an NIH scientist, the NIH continued to do nothing to address the problem, and instead gave Dr. Feder a harsh reprimand.

However, all was not lost. In recent months, the movement to improve transparency at the NIH has been picking up steam, thanks largely to the efforts of Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) and his staff, who have uncovered a pattern of possibly illegal practices at several major medical schools. POGO and Dr. Feder support Senator Grassley's Physician Payments Sunshine Act of 2007 (S. 2029), which requires the public disclosure of grantees' financial arrangements. We also want to encourage a culture at NIH in which scientists like Dr. Feder feel free to speak openly and publicly about problems at the agency, and where management will not retaliate against scientists who disagree with the agency.

Dr. Feder's work was recently featured in Pharmalot, The Chronicle of Higher Education, and Nature. Be sure to check out our blog post to learn more.

Warm regards,

Danielle Brian
Executive Director
Project On Government Oversight

P.S. Next week we're going to be switching over to a completely new website. While the URL will remain the same (www.pogo.org) and the home page will look similar, the updated site will include tons of exciting new features, such as a re-organization of our program areas, a more intuitive and user-friendly navigation, related content items, and more. For those of you who visit our site on a regular basis, you might notice a few hiccups next week while the switch is taking place. We appreciate your patience, and we look forward to your thoughts on the new pogo.org!

.............
Support POGO through CFC #10785

Click here to view our most recent press alerts

Follow the link below to tell your friends about POGO.
Tell-a-friend!

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for POGO.
There are several links within this newsletter to enable you to gain more information regarding this issue, so go on-site to gain access to them.

http://www.pogo.org
<>

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 03:15 PM

. . . . . . .McCain camp trying to scapegoat Palin
Roger Simon
Thu Oct 30, 5:43 am ET

John McCain's campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday.

And it has decided on Sarah Palin.

VIDEO
Go on-site to view VIDEO by clicking here:
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=10443491&ch=4226716&src=news

In recent days, a McCain “adviser” told Dana Bash of CNN: “She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone.”

Imagine not taking advice from the geniuses at the McCain campaign. What could Palin be thinking?

Also, a “top McCain adviser” told Mike Allen of Politico that Palin is “a whack job.”

Maybe she is. But who chose to put this “whack job” on the ticket? Wasn’t it John McCain? And wasn’t it his first presidential-level decision?

And if you are a 72-year-old presidential candidate, wouldn’t you expect that your running mate’s fitness for high office would come under a little extra scrutiny? And, therefore, wouldn’t you make your selection with care? (To say nothing about caring about the future of the nation?)

McCain didn’t seem to care that much. McCain admitted recently on national TV that he “didn’t know her well at all” before he chose Palin.

But why not? Why didn’t he get to know her better before he made his choice?

It’s not like he was rushed. McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination in early March. He didn’t announce his choice for a running mate until late August.

Wasn’t that enough time for McCain to get to know Palin? Wasn’t that enough time for his crackerjack “vetters” to investigate Palin’s strengths and weaknesses, check through records and published accounts, talk to a few people, and learn that she was not only a diva but a whack job diva?

But McCain picked her anyway. He wanted to close the “enthusiasm gap” between himself and Barack Obama. He wanted to inject a little adrenaline into the Republican National Convention. He wanted to goose up the Republican base.

And so he chose Palin. Is she really a diva and a whack job? Could be. There are quite a few in politics. (And a few in journalism, too, though in journalism they are called “columnists.”)

As proof that she is, McCain aides now say Palin is “going rogue” and straying from their script. Wow. What a condemnation. McCain sticks to the script. How well is he doing?

In truth, Palin’s real problem is not her personality or whether she takes orders well. Her real problem is that neither she nor McCain can make a credible case that Palin is ready to assume the presidency should she need to.

And that undercuts McCain’s entire campaign.

This was the deal McCain made with the devil. In exchange for energizing his base by picking Palin, he surrendered his chief selling point: that he was better prepared to run the nation in time of crisis, whether it be economic, an attack by terrorists or, as he has been talking about in recent days, fending off a nuclear war.

“The next president won’t have time to get used to the office,” McCain told a crowd in Miami on Wednesday. “I’ve been tested, my friends, I’ve been tested.”

But has Sarah Palin?

I don’t believe running mates win or lose elections, though some believe they can be a drag on the ticket. Lee Atwater, who was George H.W. Bush’s campaign manager in 1988, told me that Dan Quayle cost the ticket 2 to 3 percentage points. But Bush won the election by 7.8 percentage points.

So, in Atwater’s opinion, Bush survived his bad choice by winning the election on his own.

McCain could do the same thing. But his campaign’s bad decisions have not stopped with Sarah Palin. It has made a series of questionable calls, including making Joe the Plumber the embodiment of the campaign.

Are voters really expected to warmly embrace an (unlicensed) plumber who owes back taxes and complains about the possibility of making a quarter million dollars a year?

And did McCain’s aides really believe so little in John McCain’s own likability that they thought Joe the Plumber would be more likable?

Apparently so. Which is sad.

We in the press make too much of running mates and staff and talking points and all the rest of the hubbub that accompanies a campaign.

In the end, it comes down to two candidates slugging it out.

Either McCain pulls off a victory in the last round or he doesn’t.

And if he doesn’t, he has nobody to blame but himself.

Slideshow: Sen. John McCain Play Video Video: 'Total confidence' in Palin CNN Play Video Video: Bill and Barack FOX News Reuters – Republican presidential nominee Senator John McCain listens as he is introduced at a campaign rally in … John McCain's campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday.

More on John McCain & Sarah Palin
Palin looks past Tuesday to her political future AP Fact Check: Palin's Alaska spreads its wealth AP Today on the presidential campaign trail AP
Go on-site to gain access to the NUMEROUS links within this article. Just click on the following URL:http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081030/pl_politico/15073;_ylt=AkRdWg2HS.FTa4uK3HNEudys0NUE . . .

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 03:59 PM

X X X X X Exclusive:
U.S. Expects Bin Laden Message Near Election
Analysts:
OBL Could Speak Out in an Effort to Prove His RelevanceBy
PIERRE THOMAS
Oct. 30, 2008
Multiple senior government officials tell ABC News the intelligence community is anticipating a message from Osama bin Laden before or just after the presidential election.

As we race toward Election Day, sources say a number of intelligence analysts have concluded it is critical for al Qaeda's top leader to be seen or heard, if only for public relations purposes. Those analysts believe that if bin Laden is not heard from, he runs the risk of being considered irrelevant or impotent. The U.S. intelligence community has some indication that there is some confusion among Islamic radicals about their leadership.

According to sources, the full weight of the intelligence electronic eavesdropping and human sourcing is right now desperately looking for any hint of a bin Laden statement. So far there is only rumor, no hard evidence a message is coming, officials said.

Interestingly, the U.S. government may be the reason why bin Laden could have some problems getting a message out, officials suggested to ABC News.

The United States is engaged in an intensive effort to disrupt the use of the Internet by Islamic radicals. Message boards and Web sites have been targeted. Some officials believe that if bin Laden is not heard from, some will conclude he may be dead.

Another source cautioned against such speculation, suggesting that bin Laden is most concerned about his own safety at the moment, and might increasingly fear for his life.

The sources tell ABC News the U.S. government is quietly engaged in a high-tempo moment attacking al Qaeda and Taliban leaders in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where U.S. officials fear the terrorists have found a safe haven from which to stage plots against Afghanistan, Pakistan and throughout the world, including the West.

A review of published reports about drone attacks in the tribal region suggests the United States may have more than tripled the number this year, compared to 2007, especially in recent months. One official tells ABC News, "We have killed a lot of senior leaders. They [radicals] are having a really bad month."

Another source agreed, noting that in recent weeks the No. 4 ranking leader in all of al Qaeda had been killed in a drone attack. The source said the hit, which was reported in The New York Times, was a huge deal and was surprised it had not gotten more play. The game plan is simple, the officials said. Keep al Qaeda off balance and scrambling.

There had been growing fears, not based on any specific intelligence, that al Qaeda has been likely plotting to attack the United States before the election, or during the transition to a new presidency. Homeland security officials are calling it a Period of Heightened Alert, or POHA, which ABC News first reported in last summer.

Sources confirm that there is an intensive effort all across the U.S. government to play offense. As of now, there is still no specific, credible evidence pointing to an imminent attack on the U.S. homeland. But that's clearly not stopping the government from being incredibly active at what it sees as a critical moment.

In 2004, bin Laden released a message in the days just before the election. Though some believe that the message affected the outcome in favor of President Bush, exit poll data do not support that notion. Among voters who called the tape "very important" in their vote, Kerry won, 53-47 percent. Among those who called it either very or somewhat important, the vote was 50-50. It was among those who called it unimportant that Bush won, by 56-43 percent.

ABC News' Gary Langer contributed to this report.Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures Go on-site to view photo's, as well as any links and related articles by clicking on the following URL: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=6148984&page=1X X X

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 04:13 PM

+ + + + + + +

Leading The News

Murtha pleas for $1 million after racism comments
By
Roxana Tiron
Posted: 10/30/08 01:53 PM [ET]

Veteran Democratic Rep. John Murtha (Pa.) has sent out a last-minute plea for $1 million to save his hotly contested seat, endangered by his own remarks describing his district as racist.

In an e-mail sent to potential donors, Murtha’s campaign asked his supporters to maximize all campaign contributions.

“We need to raise another $1 million to compete,” his campaign fundraiser Susan O’Neill wrote in the e-mail obtained by The Hill. “We need money immediately.”

O’Neill blamed Republicans from outside Pennsylvania for Murtha’s problems. Polls show Murtha, running for his 18th term, ahead of his GOP opponent by just a few percentage points.

“Congressman Murtha is in a brutal reelection campaign,” O’Neill wrote. “The Swift Boaters have put up a candidate from Virginia and have raised millions of dollars against Congressman Murtha. In addition, other 527s and the [National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC)] have spent millions to smear Congressman Murtha on TV, radio and in newspapers.”

Murtha’s race appeared to tighten after he called his western Pennsylvania district a “racist area.” After apologizing, he added more fuel to the fire by saying the district was, until recently, “really redneck.”

Murtha’s comments have been widely repeated, and the congressman was even parodied on “Saturday Night Live.”

In a fundraising e-mail sent on Thursday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) asked her own supporters to help Murtha. “In Pennsylvania, my good friend John Murtha — a strong supporter for me during the primaries and an important voice against the war in Iraq — is depending on your help to win,” Clinton wrote.

GOP challenger William Russell, a 46-year-old Iraq war veteran and retired Army colonel, has outraised Murtha so far. As of Oct. 15, Russell had raised $2.9 million compared to Murtha’s $2.2 million.

Political action committees can donate up to $5,000 to candidates, while individuals may donate up to $2,300.

Murtha, a close ally of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), is a welcome target for Republicans, who otherwise are headed toward what appears to be a gloomy election night.

Russell moved from Virginia to run for Congress because of Murtha's criticisms of the Iraq war. Murtha’s comments about western Pennsylvania being racist have emboldened Republicans to give last-minute help to Russell.

Murtha, a decorated war veteran, first won his seat in a 1974 special election by a little more than 100 votes.

The NRCC this week bought a television ad that highlighted Murtha’s remarks. Separately, former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) accused Murtha in a radio spot of “insulting his own constituents” and “apparently forgetting who he works for.”

Murtha is the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee. He has been very successful in the federal earmarking process, ranking as the highest recipient of earmarks in the defense appropriations bill.

His earmarks have revitalized Johnstown, the largest city in his district, and defense companies have opened offices and facilities throughout the region he represents.

Also On The Hill
Campaigning for book funds
Hagan sues Dole over atheist ad
Rep. Tancredo weighing governor’s race
Coleman sues Franken for defamation
Lott: GOP should ‘aggressively pursue’ Lieberman
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/murtha-pleas-for-1-million-after-racism-comments-2008-10-30.html + + +

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 05:41 PM

. . . . . . .FACTCHECK.ORGANNENBERG POLITICALFACTCHECK

Same Old Claims in Another Language
October 30, 2008
Ads targeting Spanish-speaking voters make claims we've heard before.
Summary
The presidential campaigns and third-party groups have been bilingual throughout the election, targeting Spanish-speaking voters with some misleading and false ads. Among the recent TV spots:

. A McCain-Palin ad tries to paint Obama as a "riesgo" (risk), falsely claiming that his health care plan would require small businesses to cover their employees. But Obama's plan explicitly exempts small businesses from this requirement, and an adviser has said the threshold "would almost certainly be higher than ten" employees for businesses to be excluded.

. The ad also says small businesses would be hit with "more taxes," but only those business owners clearing more than $200,000 would see an increase under Obama's plan.

. An Obama-Biden/DNC ad offers other misleading statements on taxes, saying McCain would tax workers' health care benefits but failing to mention he'd give a $2,500 tax credit ($5,000 for families) to cover the cost. It also says McCain's tax plan gives "nothing" to "100 million households," ignoring his health care tax credit.

. A National Rifle Association ad features a retired police officer who claims Obama "didn't think we should be allowed to use a firearm for self-defense." That refers to a vote in the Illinois Legislature to uphold enforcement of local gun bans. It wouldn't have made it a crime to use guns for self-protection elsewhere.

. A new group called Latinos 4 Reform has launched a misleading anti-Obama ad that tries to paint him as no friend to Latinos by falsely claiming he doesn't support trade with countries south of the border, among other charges.

Note: This is a summary only. The full article with analysis, images and citations may be viewed on our Web site:
Desktop users Mobile users
Please consider supporting FactCheck.org and expanding our audience by Digging this article:
This message was sent from FactCheck.org to %Member:Email% . It was sent from: FactCheck.org, 320 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045
Forward to a Friendhttp://www.FactCheck.org. . . . . . .

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 06:03 PM

<><><>A
PETITION
Support the Mobile Wireless Tax Fairness Act
Say NO to New Discriminatory State and Local
Wireless Taxes and Fees - FOR 5 YEARS!! Senator Wyden and Senator Snowe have introduced S. 3249, the bipartisan Wyden-Snowe "Mobile Wireless Tax Fairness Act," pro-consumer legislation that will provide much-needed wireless tax relief to millions of American wireless users and their families, for five years. In recent MyWireless.org® consumer survey data, 85% of consumers supported a vacation from new excessive wireless taxes.

Please urge your Senators to join their Senate Colleagues by cosponsoring S. 3249 today. Also, you can say 'thank you' to your Senators who have already cosponsored this pro-consumer legislation. Take a look at the current cosponsors of the Wyden-Snowe Cell Tax Fairness Act.
The average American wireless consumer today now pays over 15 percent in wireless taxes and fees on their monthly bill - and in some states, 17 of them to be exact, tax rates have even skyrocketed to well over 15 percent in monthly wireless taxes. Amazingly, several of these states have even broken the 20% mark for taxation. Wireless taxes are currently DOUBLE or TRIPLE that of other goods and services, which stand at an average of 7%. Wireless consumers currently pay a whopping $21 billion dollars annually in wireless taxes and fees. More than 260 million Americans use their wireless device every day to stay connected to family and friends, and to the office. Congress must not let complicated and costly layers of state and local taxes, fees and surcharges make using your cell phone unaffordable.

What would you tell policymakers who propose new wireless taxes?
Close [X]
Go to
VIDEO
YOU CAN HELP TODAY by encouraging your U.S. Senators in Washington to support and co-sponsor S. 3249, the Wyden-Snowe "Mobile Wireless Tax Fairness Act," that will freeze all new discriminatory state and local wireless taxes for five years. Tell your friends, and contact your lawmakers today.

Learn more about the issue.
*required: Name
*Email Address
*Prefix Mr. Mrs. Ms. Miss Dr.
*First Name
*Last Name
*Address 1
*City
*State
*Postal Code
Yes! Send me email updates.
(View our privacy policy.)

This letter will be sent to the following individual(s):

Submitting this form will transmit the letter below to your two Members of the U.S. Senate.

By clicking Send A Letter, you agree to these terms and conditions. If you are a new member, you will receive an email to confirm your information.

Subject: No Unfair, New Wireless Taxes for Five Years
Dear [Lawmaker]:
Pro-consumer legislation affecting America's more than 265 million wireless consumers is currently being considered in the U.S. Senate after being introduced by Senator Wyden and Senator Snowe. As a consumer who relies on my wireless phone every day, I am asking you to please support and cosponsor S. 3249, the bipartisan Wyden-Snowe "Mobile Wireless Tax Fairness Act" today.

The average wireless consumer now pays approximately 15 % in wireless taxes and fees on their monthly bills. Amazingly, a number of states are even above the 20% mark. After going over my bill, I see that my wireless taxes are currently DOUBLE or TRIPLE the rate imposed on other goods and services, which is about 7% on average. In total, wireless consumers pay approximately $21 billion dollars annually in wireless taxes and fees to federal, state and local governments.

Senator, I now use my wireless device every day to stay connected to my family, to my office and to my friends. Please don't let even more complicated and costly layers of unfair, new state and local taxes, fees and surcharges be added to my monthly wireless service, making use of my cell phone unaffordable. At a rate of taxation that is already more than double, enough is enough! As my elected voice in Washington, I urge you to stand up for me and support this legislation that would provide a well-deserved 5-year hiatus from all NEW discriminatory wireless taxes and fees.

The "Mobile Wireless Tax Fairness" bill, S. 3249, places a 5-year freeze on current state and local taxes on wireless service, enabling Congress to address wireless tax fairness and to level the playing field for consumers, no matter where you live. Most important is the example set by the recent successful movement of the House companion bill, H.R. 5793, the bipartisan Lofgren-Cannon "Cell Tax Fairness Act of 2008" – this legislation received a recent House Judiciary Committee hearing and currently stands at nearly 140 cosponsors. It is important to me that this legislation receives a proper Committee hearing before the 110th Congress adjourns, and a fair floor vote when Congress begins the 111th in 2009.

Thank you for your leadership and hard work on behalf of the tens of millions of American wireless consumers. I strongly urge you to support and cosponsor S. 3249, the bipartisan Wyden-Snowe bill. Supporting a measure that will allow me and my family to keep a little more of our hard-earned money in these uncertain economic times would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely

Your Name
Your Address
City, State Zip
Edit Signature
Go to the following URL to sign petition. This is important.http://www.mywireless.org/celltaxletterSenatecpa/ <><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 07:05 PM

~~~~~~~
POETIC JUSTICE IN THE MAKING?

Wouldn't that be something, then he could go after the thugs who went after him. But you know they will be pardoned before the first Champagne cork is popped; before the first bubble makes it's way to our noses.
Obama approaches lawmaker about White House post
By
DAVID ESPO and BEN FELLER
Associated Press Writers
1 hr 1 min ago

WASHINGTON –Barack Obama's campaign has approached Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel about possibly serving as White House chief of staff, officials said Thursday as the marathon presidential race entered its final, frenzied stretch with a Democratic tilt.

The disclosure came as Republican John McCain, in need of a comeback, focused on pocketbook issues amid fresh signs of a recession. "Ohio is hurting now, people in Ohio are having trouble staying in their homes, keeping their jobs," he said as he set out on a two-day bus tour of the state.

"We have got to get this economy out of the ditch."

Obama, bidding to become the first black president, also pointed to the government's report that the economy had declined in the third quarter. He told a large crowd in Florida that McCain has been perched "right next to George Bush" for eight years, and consumers are paying a steep price for their partnership.

The Democrats who described the Obama campaign's approach to Emanuel spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to be quoted by name. An aide to the congressman, Sarah Feinberg, said in an e-mail that he "has not been contacted to take a job in an administration that does not yet exist. Everyone is focused on Election Day, as they should be. "

Emanuel is a veteran of President Clinton's White House, and has made a rapid ascent of the House leadership ladder since his election to Congress. He was chairman of the Democratic campaign committee two years ago when the party won a majority for the first time in more than a decade, and he cemented his reputation as a prodigious fundraiser and strong-willed political strategist.

Both Obama and McCain have authorized their staffs to begin transition operations in recent weeks — although only one of them will be in a position to make use of the results. As far as is known, no job offers have been made by either man.

Opinion polls, early voting statistics and even the candidates' campaign schedules all make it look like the race is Obama's to lose.

The Democrat campaigned exclusively in traditionally Republican states during the day, flying from Florida to Virginia to Missouri, in hopes of winning a sizable victory on Tuesday. Polls consistently show him ahead nationally as well as in a half-dozen states that sided with Bush in 2004, and tied in three more.

McCain's bus tour of Ohio underscored his political predicament. Bush won the state twice, it has voted for the winner in every presidential election for 20 years, and public and private surveys all give Obama the advantage.

Both campaigns invested heavily in turning out early voters.

Officials in North Carolina said roughly 30 percent of all registered voters had already cast ballots — about 1.7 million in all — and the Board of Elections ordered the state's 100 counties to keep longer voting hours.

Like the opinion polls, the early ballot count favored Obama. Officials in Iowa, Florida, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada as well as North Carolina said more Democrats that Republicans had cast ballots, in some cases by lopsided margins.

Democrats, increasingly optimistic about regaining the White House, looked forward to padding their majorities in Congress, too, and then tackling the economy and bringing the war in Iraq to an end.

But McCain and his aides sought to stoke doubts about one-party government. The campaign challenged Obama to say whether he supports a 25 percent cut in defense spending that is advocated by some in his party

In Sarasota, his first stop of the day, Obama tried to take advantage of the day's dreary business news, a government report that consumers had cut back spending so sharply that the economy had shrunk at an annual rate of 0.3 percent in the third quarter.

It was the economy's worst showing since the fall of 2001, when a recession in progress was compounded by the impacts of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11.

"Folks have to watch every penny, tighten their belts," said Obama, contending that the downturn was the result of eight years of Republican economic policies.

"If you want to know where John McCain will drive this economy, just look in the rearview mirror. Because when it comes to our economic policies, John McCain has been right next to George Bush. He's been sitting there in the passenger seat, ready to take over, every step of the way," he added.

Obama's campaign reinforced the rhetoric with a new television commercial. It showed the faces of Bush and McCain together in a car's rearview mirror as the announcer said, "Look behind you. We can't afford more of the same."

In a second ad, Obama touted endorsements from Colin Powell, the former secretary of state and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Warren Buffett, arguably the nation's best known investor.

McCain countered with a new ad in Florida in which Gov. Charlie Crist heaped praise on the Republican candidate. "A reformer, a maverick, he'll fight out-of-control spending and keep our taxes down," Crist says. "John McCain never quits and he'll always fight for you."

McCain's first stop of the day was in chilly Defiance, Ohio, where he did not dwell on the economic report. Instead, he pointed to Exxon Mobil's announcement of a $14.83 billion profit in the third quarter, a record, and said Obama had voted for legislation that included millions in tax breaks for oil companies.

"Senator Obama voted for billions in corporate giveaways to the oil companies," said McCain in an apparent reference to a 2005 energy bill that Bush pushed through Congress.

"I voted against it," the Arizona Republican said.

Ben Feller reported from Florida. Jim Kuhnhenn contributed from Washington, Mike Baker from North Carolina and Mike Glover from Florida.Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.Questions or CommentsPrivacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCopyright/IP Policy
Related:
Polls: Obama leads McCain by 13 points in NH AP Unable to vote, noncitizen immigrants volunteer AP
Palin looks past Tuesday to her political future AP
More...
Video:'I'm running to create wealth'

CNN Video:How Can Voters Evaulate Judge Hopefuls?

CBS 2 Chicago Video: Election Coverage Online ABC News
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081030/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_rdp;_ylt=Ap6y5DwcyrQ4bHJRitQnnNSs0NUE
~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 07:16 PM

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ World Tires Of Rule By Dollar
By
Paul Craig Roberts
30 October, 2008
Vdare.com

What explains the paradox of the dollar’s sharp rise in value against other currencies (except the Japanese yen) despite disproportionate US exposure to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression?

The answer does not lie in improved fundamentals for the US economy or better prospects for the dollar to retain its reserve currency role.

The rise in the dollar’s exchange value is due to two factors.

One factor is the traditional flight to the reserve currency that results from panic. People are simply doing what they have always done. Pam Martens predicted correctly that panic demand for US Treasury bills would boost the US dollar.

The other factor is the unwinding of the carry trade. The carry trade originated in extremely low Japanese interest rates. Investors and speculators borrowed Japanese yen at an interest rate of one-half of one percent, converted the yen to other currencies, and purchased debt instruments from other countries that pay much higher interest rates. In effect, they were getting practically free funds from Japan to lend to others paying higher interest.

The financial crisis has reversed this process. The toxic American derivatives were marketed worldwide by Wall Street. They have endangered the balance sheets and solvency of financial institutions throughout the world, including national governments, such as Iceland and Hungary. Banks and governments that invested in the troubled American financial instruments found their own debt instruments in jeopardy.

Those who used yen loans to purchase, for example, debt instruments from European banks or Icelandic bonds, faced potentially catastrophic losses. Investors and speculators sold their higher-yielding financial instruments in a scramble for dollars and yen in order to pay off their Japanese loans. This drove up the values of the yen and the US dollar, the reserve currency that can be used to repay debts, and drove down the values of other currencies.

The dollar’s rise is temporary, and its prospects are bleak. The US trade deficit will lessen due to less consumer spending during recession, but it will remain the largest in the world and one that the US cannot close by exporting more. The way the US trade deficit is financed is by foreigners acquiring more dollar assets, with which their portfolios are already heavily weighted.

The US government’s budget deficit is large and growing, adding hundreds of billions of dollars more to an already large national debt. As investors flee equities into US government bills, the market for US Treasuries will temporarily depend less on foreign governments. Nevertheless, the burden on foreigners and on world savings of having to finance American consumption, the US government’s wars and military budget, and the US financial bailout is increasingly resented.

This resentment, combined with the harm done to America’s reputation by the financial crisis, has led to numerous calls for a new financial order in which the US plays a substantially lesser role. “Overcoming the financial crisis” are code words for the rest of the world’s intent to overthrow US financial hegemony.

Brazil, Russia, India and China have formed a new group (BRIC) to coordinate their interests at the November financial summit in Washington, D.C.

On October 28, RIA Novosti reported that Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin suggested to China that the two countries use their own currencies in their bilateral trade, thus avoiding the use of the dollar. China’s prime Minister Wen Jiabao replied that strengthening bilateral relations is strategic.

Europe has also served notice that it intends to exert a new leadership role. Four members of the Group of Seven industrial nations, France, Britain, Germany and Italy, used the financial crisis to call for sweeping reforms of the world financial system. Jose Manual Barroso, president of the European Commission, said that a new world financial system is possible only “if Europe has a leadership role.”

Russian president Dmitry Medvedev said that the “economic egoism” of America’s “unipolar vision of the world” is a ”dead-end policy.”

China’s massive foreign exchange reserves and its strong position in manufacturing have given China the leadership role in Asia. The deputy prime minister of Thailand recently designated the Chinese yuan as “the rightful and anointed convertible currency of the world.”

Normally, the Chinese are very circumspect in what they say, but on October 24 Reuters reported that the People’s Daily, the official government newspaper, in a front-page commentary accused the US of plundering “global wealth by exploiting the dollar’s dominance.” To correct this unacceptable situation, the commentary called for Asian and European countries to “banish the US dollar from their direct trade relations, relying only on their own currencies.” And this step, said the commentary, is merely a starting step in overthrowing dollar dominance.

The Chinese are expressing other thoughts that would get the attention of a less deluded and arrogant American government. Zhou Jiangong, editor of the online publication, Chinastates.com, recently asked: “Why should China help the US to issue debt without end in the belief that the national credit of the US can expand without limit?”

Zhou Jiangong’s solution to American excesses is for China to take over Wall Street.

China has the money to do it, and the prudent Chinese would do a better job than the crowd of thieves who have destroyed America’s financial reputation while exploiting the world in pursuit of multi-million dollar bonuses.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com
http://www.countercurrents.org/roberts301008.htm$ $ $

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 07:31 PM

<><><><><>
The 2008 US Recession,
Military Keynesianism And
The Wars In The Middle East

By
Peter Custers
30 October, 2008
Countercurrents.org

1.Introduction

In the first part of 2007, there was a striking coincidence between two kinds of speculative talk - speculation about the then impending recession in the US economy, and speculation about an open war by the US against Iran. Both forms of speculation were rife when the US's financial crisis had just started. As the incapacity of small house owners to pay for rising interest rates on their mortgages backfired against American banks who had provided them with loans, - the former president of the US Federal reserve, Greenspan, warned that these troubles could well snowball into a recession. Simultaneously, speculation in March/April of 2007 intensified about plans by US policymakers to launch air strikes against Iran. Such speculation about the eventuality of yet another US war, in which nuclear weapons would likely be employed, was of course not new. However, quite noteworthy is the fact that such speculative talk about war expansion ran parallel to talk about a new recession.

Meanwhile, the financial crisis which in early 2007 had barely started, has engulfed the entire world economy. Moreover, the crisis by now has actually emanated in a recession, a crisis in the realm of industrial production. The new periodic crisis has come very soon, i.e. hardly five years since the US had emergend from its previous recession in March/April of 2003. Signs that the financial crisis has reached the real economy became especially strong in July last, when international press reports highlighted the fact that US automobile manufacturers, foremost General Motors, had incurred huge losses during 2007 and during the first half of 2008. These facts moreover were quickly corroborated with facts indicating that the slump in the sales of cars is not limited to US car manufacturers alone, but affects production of other leading manufacturers of cars, including Japanese and German corporations. Yet while there is now broad recognition of the fact that the US economy and other Western economies face a periodic crisis, there is little discussion as yet on how the recession and militarism intersect.

2.Previous US Recessions and US Wars
In order to face this issue head-on, let's briefly review how previous recessions in the US economy have been related to US wars. Both the 1991 and the 2001-2003 recession happened to coincide, not with speculative talk about war, but with the launching of bloody wars in the Gulf region of the Middle East. The 1991 war, ostensibly intended to end Iraq's occupation of Kuwait, happened to take place at the very moment when the US economy passed through a brief recession. This was not accidental, for the war was premised amongst others on calculations made by US economic and military policymakers, that a shift in policy-orientation had become inevitable. Paradoxically, the 1991 Gulf war was not aimed at increasing the reliance of the US state on military allocations as leverage to keep the business cycle going, - but aimed at the opposite: a relative reduction in the size of the US's military budget, and a relative reduction in state orders for those corporation which dominate the US's military sector.

To understand this paradox, we need to be aware of the fact that military allocations during the period of the Reagan administration of the 1980s had functioned both as main leverage to steer the US's overall accumulation process, and had contributed towards the occurrence of a new recession. Since the world's media appear to have forgotten how they reported on Reagan's macro-economic policymaking in those years, it is necessary to emphasize the point: throughout the eighties, meaning from the beginning of the new business cycle in 1982 onwards, the US government did rely on military keynesianism to drive the economy. It notably engaged in deficit spending so as to support the overall demand for goods in society, which deficit was largely caused by the Pentagon's lavish purchases of armament systems, and by other purchases of military and civilian goods for the US army. And when this course of action by the end of the 1980s had become untenable, and the state had to partly scale down its military purchases, the Bush sr. government used the 1991 Gulf war inter alia to help US arms' corporations bag additional export orders, in replacement of orders by the US state.

The war which the US launched in 2003 for the overthrow of Iraq's Saddam Hussain regime once again was related, not just to the US's interest in controlling Middle Eastern oil, but also to a transition towards a new business cycle in the US economy. During the Clinton years of the 1990s, the military budget had remained exceedingly high, with observers reporting that US arms' spending continued to be equal to half the world's total. Yet military allocations were no longer a primary driving force of the business cycle, since this role during the given decade was fulfilled by the production of information technology. The 'plight' of the armament corporations can graphically be illustrated via the example of 'forced' mergers in the military sector. In order to maintain their capacity to produce, armament corporations were advised to merge, by none other than the US state secretary of 'defense'. The official encouragement resulted in a dramatic concentration of economic power in the military sector: only five giants remained.

The launching of the 2003 war has never been adequately explained, but was premised on the determination of the Bush administration to get a new business cycle going, by relying once again largely on military allocations. This was understood well by the world's press media, when they reported that during the second quarter of 2003 US military allocations accounted for 60 percent of resumed economic growth. The policy mix which the US government has been used this time round cannot be fully equated with that of the 1980s. For the Pentagon, even while obtaining a huge expansion in its budget along with huge extra-budgetary war allocations, has continued to advise military corporations that they should give due importance to exports, and has promoted a transatlantic policy of capital concentration to facilitate their access to import orders of European states. Nevertheless, a proper assessment of all, official and hidden, millitary-related allocations along with recognition of their multiplier effect, does lead to the conclusion that the Bush jr. government has been pursuing a policy of military keynesianism all through.

3.What Outcome from the Current Recession?
The above reflections on the history of US recessions and wars in the Middle East sufficiently indicate the need to discuss the present US recession in its relation to militarism. In what manner will US economic policymakers seek to draw the economy from its slump this time? First, there will be no let-up in war making in the Middle East. Although the launching of an open war against Iran seems unlikely at the present, - there is all reason to fear that the US will continue with its multiple aggressions against, and slaughter of people in, the Middle East. Very telling is the fact that Barack Obama, who seems set to win the upcoming US presidential elections, has announced he intends to intensify the war in Afghanistan, where the US and its NATO allies are bogged down in fighting the Taliban. In fact, there are increasing signs that the US considers the whole region of the Middle East and West Asia, including Pakistan and Syria, a legitimate theatre for the waging of war.

At the same time, there is little doubt that the US will continue to bank on military keynesianism as its preferred economic strategy. With military related spending having reached over a trillion (a thousand billion) US dollars, - the existence of macro economic effects covering both the military and the civilian sectors of the US economy can hardly be disputed. Surprisingly, the Bush administration earlier this year has taken recourse to a (small) programme of civilian spending to stimulate aggregate demand. Yet the 438 billion dollar budget deficit over 2008 has continued to be axed primarily on military and military related spending. Moreover, where ideological barriers against state intervention are being broken down, as part of overall western efforts to counter the threat of a financial collapse, it is not unlikely that the US and European policymakers will jointly seek to institute draconian state controls and regulate their economies along the lines of an expanded version of military keynesianism. Nouriel Roubini, the Wall Street economist who has gathered world fame by predicting the current world financial crisis, has already warned that the US economy may end up as a 'war economy', just as happened during the 20th century world wars. Clearly, it is time economists catch up, and engage in debate on the military underpinnings of economic policymaking in the US and beyond.

Peter Custersis a theoretician on the political economy of arms' production, and is the author of 'Questioning Globalized Militarism. Nuclear and Military Production and Critical Economic Theory' (Tulika, New Delhi/Merlin Press, London/Independent Publishers' Group, Chicago, 2007)
http://www.countercurrents.org/custers301008.htm
<><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 08:00 PM

<><><><><><><> A FOLLOWUP ON A PREVIOUS POSTOctober 30, 2008Senators back Kahana evictees
But state refuses to delay proceedings until Legislature convenesBy
eloise aguiar
Advertiser Windward O'ahu Writer

The state Senate leadership has pledged its support to six families facing eviction from Kahana Valley state park.

Senate President Colleen Hanabusa, Vice President Donna Mercado Kim and Sens. Clayton Hee and Russell Kokubun said at a press conference yesterday at the state Capitol that they want to work with the state to find an amicable and peaceful resolution to the eviction.

"This is not an issue that can not be solved," said Hanabusa, D-21st (Nanakuli, Makaha). "Our plea to the administration is to work with us."

On Friday, the state Department of Land and Natural Resource informed the families that they must move, based on a finding by the state attorney general that a law, Act 5, adopted in 1987 to provide leases to long-time valley residents, no longer applies and the department could not issue any new leases in the valley.

However, until March of this year the state had been negotiating with valley residents to stay.

Hanabusa questioned the timing of the eviction during these difficult economic times and scoffed at the attorney general's interpretation, saying the problem can be fixed legislatively. But lawmakers must wait until the session begins, so she asked that the eviction be delayed until the Legislature can address the issue.

Deborah Ward, spokeswoman for the DLNR, said in an e-mail that the department will not delay the eviction any further because there's no guarantee that a bill would pass.

"The Legislature has tried three times to pass a bill and not succeeded," said Ward, adding that the residents would have to move in any case because they are in an area of the park that was meant for public use. The homes are located in the lower valley.

Laura H. Thielen, DLNR chairwoman, will meet with the families today to explain transitional housing options that the department can provide, Ward said.

Hee, who represents Kahana Valley, met with Thielen earlier yesterday and said she seems receptive but still wants to move the six families out of their present homes and then discuss options.

The families are weighing legal options, and Hee said a fund is being set up in case money is needed to bail residents out of jail if they are arrested, for possible court challenges and to help feed the 30 children involved as their parents focus on the eviction.

In the end, Hee said, the goal is for the families "to have the wherewithal and opportunity to qualify and own a home in perpetuity in Kahana Valley."

Thielen has said the development of the living park concept was a way to accommodate a limited number of private residential leases in the park so families that had lived there for generations could stay. In exchange they were required to provide 25 hours a month of cultural activities for visitors and do other work.

But the law limited the number of leases that could be issued to 31 and no new leases could be issued after that, she said.

As the years passed, some of the adult children moved out but six families remained in hopes of receiving a lease, Thielen said. When three leases were defaulted, 28 families applied for them.

However, the March decision by the attorney general ended any hope for new leases.

Representatives of the six families attended the press conference and said they were grateful for the support from senators.

"We are just families exercising our traditional, customary, ancestral rights, living an ahupua'a lifestyle," said Lena Soliven, spokeswoman for the group. "This is really taking a toll. We cannot sleep and if we do sleep, it's with one eye open and our ear to the floor because we don't know what kind of tactics or what they got planned for us.

"We're going to stand our ground and we will not be moving."

Wouldn't squatters rights apply in these Hawaiian's situation? How about Native Hawaiian rights? Is there such a thing? Do Hawaiians have any rights at all? There doesn't seem to be when looking at their predicament. Such a pity, it truly is. SRH

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081030/NEWS01/810300353/1001/localnewsfront <><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 30th, 2008, 08:54 PM

^ ^ ^ ^ ^
New UFO sightings investigated in Erath County
By
MATT FRAZIERmfrazier@star-telegram.com

That’s not the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown.

Texas’ UFOs are back — just in time for Halloween.
Reports of UFOs sighted over North Central Texas last week are the latest in an apparent sequel to the Stephenville sightings in January, which made headlines nationwide.

Dozens of residents in and around Erath County reported seeing strange lights in the sky the evening of Oct. 23, according to the Stephenville Empire-Tribune, which also reported that the military has confirmed the presence of F-16s in the area at that time.

"I think more people are willing to come forward now that more people are talking about this," said Whitney White-Ashley, a reporter for the paper.

CNN reported last week’s sightings, interviewing Dublin resident Andy Monroe, who caught a 30-second video of a line of red lights he says encircled an oval shape floating in the sky.

Most of the descriptions are of an oval shape with lights around the outside, said Alejandro Rojas with the Mutual UFO Network, a nationwide organization created in 1969 to scientifically study UFO sightings. A MUFON investigator is interviewing witnesses, and the group has already sent requests for radar data from the F-16s.

"These are descriptions that were sent into our Web site the night of the sighting, so they could not have been something just copied from media coverage," Rojas said.

January sightings
In or around Jan. 8, dozens of people around Dublin and Stephenville — about 70 miles southwest of Fort Worth — reported seeing something that did not move like conventional aircraft.

Descriptions varied. Some told of objects up to a mile long and hundreds of yards high. Others reported seeing two to eight lights that flew in formation, changed color and shone with intensity greater than a welding flame. Some witnesses said the objects were accompanied or followed by military jets.

Latest Texas sightings

According to MUFON’S Web site:

Near Dublin. A couple said that at about 7:20 p.m. Tuesday they were headed west on U.S. 377 when they saw a flying object sporting three sets of three lights in a semicircle.

Dallas. A man said he was walking his dog at about 11:30 p.m. Tuesday when he saw a triangle-shaped object with orange lights flying silently almost due south over downtown.

Fairfield. Residents reported seeing from their porch an oval object glowing red while hovering at about 8:30 p.m. Tuesday in the southwest. "Occasionally it would throw a whitish blue light. We could see other air traffic way high above it [planes fly along Interstate 45 as a normal route]. This looked nothing like what else was in the sky."

www.mufon.com

www.empiretribune.com

www.cnn.com

MATT FRAZIER, 817-685-3854

UFOs RELATED STORIES
British archive recounts UFO encounter
(2008-10-21)
Britain releases UFO files, dispels some...
(2008-10-20)
http://www.star-telegram.com/804/story/1006837.html ^ ^ ^

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 12:12 AM

:: :: :: :: ::
Hollywood weighs impact of electionThu Oct 30, 2008
11:20pm EDT
By
Steven Zeitchik and Paul J. Gough
NEW YORK (Hollywood Reporter) - Jay Leno and David Letterman are rooting for the Republicans.
That's not a comment on their political beliefs, which late-night hosts play close to their vests. But if comic fodder is any factor, after-hours hosts will benefit from a John McCain administration: During a survey in September, the Center for Media and Public Affairs counted seven times as many jokes about the Republican ticket than the Democratic one.

The outcome of the battle for the White House will have consequences far beyond entertainment. But next week's election will also impact Hollywood, influencing culture and policy in crucial ways.

In redefining the pop cultural zeitgeist, it could indirectly affect which movies are made and how much media regulation conglomerates face as well as have an impact on digital development and cable-news ratings.

And it will vault some personalities to popularity and doom others to obscurity.

The principle: What's good for one category of entertainers under one administration is bad for another.

"If McCain wins, late-night hosts would have a field day," CNN pundit and Hunter College professor Karen Hunter said.

And if Barack Obama wins?

"(Right-wing radio hosts) Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would have a field day," she said.

There are many variables in the relationship between the White House and Hollywood. But the governing principle, according to several industry vets and experts, is that opposition rules -- that is, the entertainment world will favor those aligned with the opposition.

Bill O'Reilly, Matt Drudge, Limbaugh and other conservative stars rose to power during the eight years of the Clinton administration. Over the past eight years of Republican rule, such entertainers as Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert and Al Franken were able to make the jump to the big time on the backs of White House blunders.

That means if Obama converts his lead in the polls to a victory, the next four years could bring these stars back to earth and vault others into the stratosphere.

"The people who have the most trouble will be people like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert," one network late-night producer said. "It's very hard to rail against the machine when you helped support the machine. They're going to have to find a different dynamic."

It's not just traditional television comedy either.

Hybrid personality Michael Moore enjoyed under Bush his two biggest box office successes in "Fahrenheit 9/11" and "Sicko," feeding off resentment for Bush's foreign policy and health-care plan. Moore is prepping a sequel to "Fahrenheit" that Paramount Vantage and Overture are co-producing. But rival studio execs are questioning the movie's commercial prospects if Obama wins the White House and the country puts the Bush years behind it.

Cable news, meanwhile, is increasingly polarized, and the election will only widen the gulf. Fox News' most successful shows -- led by O'Reilly's "The O'Reilly Factor" and Hannity's "Hannity & Colmes" -- are also two of its more conservative shows (though Colmes provides a counterbalance), while MSNBC has taken a sharp turn to the left with Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and, to a lesser extent, Chris Matthews.

An election that lifts either the left or right to power will provide a boost to the network imbued with the ideology of the other side. Given Obama's lead at the polls, an MSNBC comeback -- Olbermann's ratings continue to be strong and Maddow's upstart show is an unlikely second-place challenger to CNN's Larry King -- could stall if the Illinois senator ascends to the Oval Office.

And such effects wouldn't be limited to MSNBC: Cable ratings in general could sag.

"A lot of people are going to suffer from withdrawal after the election," said Hunter, only half-joking. "What are people going to talk about after there's no more campaigning?"

On the feature film side, expect consequences in the medium term, particularly when it comes to subject matter.

"It may take a few years, but I think the scripts we'll start to see will be impacted by who's in the Oval Office," one studio development exec said. "We're going to see a glut of projects about whatever the administration's weak spot is. Just look at the last two terms, when studios started developing all these scripts about the failures of U.S. intelligence."

That doesn't necessarily mean a McCain presidency would lead to a glut of economic-policy scripts, but money-centered tales both personal and political could come into vogue.

One of the side-effects of having a new president in the West Wing will be a change in the relationship between Tinseltown and D.C.

After eight years of chilliness between entertainers and the Bush White House, there may well be a return to the warm feelings of the 1990s, when the Clintons hosted or were frequent guests of Hollywood luminaries.

If Obama were to win, it's likely that that love affair will be rekindled. He already has won the endorsements of many in Hollywood -- not only from Tom Hanks and George Clooney but from CEOs like Barry Diller.

Even a McCain victory, though, would likely mean a thawing of relations or at least an attempt to engage afresh with a different Republican playbook.

In any case, no matter who they fraternize with along Wilshire Boulevard, candidates in trying times tend to focus on what they consider weightier matters than Hollywood -- particularly once a campaign is over and fundraising is not an immediate priority.

"While I think that there's a lot of fondness by a lot of people in Hollywood toward Obama, I think the problems we're facing right now probably mean that his focus is not going to be on Hollywood," said Motion Picture Assn. of America CEO Dan Glickman, a former Clinton cabinet member.

The most immediate impact of a new president will likely center on the FCC. Current FCC chairman Kevin Martin set out an agenda that promised stricter controls on broadcast television content. If Obama is elected, his choice for the post (rumors have mentioned Karen Kornbluh and Julius Genachowski) likely will return the commission to tighter rules on media ownership and fewer Martin-esque passion projects like a la carte pricing.

A McCain appointee as chairman would push on several Martin initiatives and in general emphasize less regulation.

"McCain clearly believes in a smaller government, a more nimble FCC," said Andrew Lippman at Washington-based Bingham McCutchen law firm.

But Glickman said that the lines won't break down clearly.

"A lot of folks sometimes think that (when) you get more Democrats in office, that means more protection for the products that television and movies and the content industries put out. The truth is that Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who is likely to be the new chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, is very engaged in these issues and has strong views on these issues."

It's likely that no matter who is in the White House, a censorship battle will be in large part an effort on the part of the new FCC chair. Whether indecency or anti-TV violence efforts are part of that will be determined by the new chairman's priorities, much as the recent efforts have come from Martin.

"I don't think they're going to spend two minutes prosecuting people for letting Bono say a word of common expletive because he got excited," said Jonathan Taplin, a USC communications professor said of the Obama administration. "It doesn't pass the who-cares test." (The U2 singer generated a big fuss a few years ago when he swore at an awards show.)

No matter who wins, the election will of course make history, putting either a woman or a black man in the White House. But one wag said that if Obama wins and an entertainment culture of opposition develops, we could make history in another way: This country could see its first hard-core Republican comedian.

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
© Thomson Reuters 2008. All rights reserved
http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSTRE49U0MG20081031 :: :: ::

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 12:27 AM

<><><><><><><>Qaeda wants Republicans, Bush "humiliated":
Web video
Thu Oct 30, 2008 6:15pm EDT
DUBAI(Reuters) - An al Qaeda leader has called for President George W. Bush and the Republicans to be "humiliated," without endorsing a party in the upcoming U.S. presidential election, according to an Internet video posting.

"O God, humiliate Bush and his party, O Lord of the Worlds, degrade and defy him," Abu Yahya al-Libi said at the end of sermon marking the Muslim feast of Eid al-Fitr, in a video posted on the Internet.

Libi, a top al Qaeda commander believed to be living in Afghanistan or Pakistan, called for God's wrath to be brought against Bush equating him with past tyrants in history.

The remarks were the first from a leading al Qaeda figure referring, albeit indirectly, to the U.S. elections. Muslim clerics often end sermons by calling on God to guide and support Muslims and help defeat their enemies.

Terrorism monitor SITE Intelligence Group said in a report on Wednesday that militants on al Qaeda-linked websites have for months been debating the significance of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama or Republican John McCain.

Some posters have also argued over the merits of trying to attack the United States before the election or waiting until later, the report said.

But SITE said it did not expect al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden or deputy Ayman al-Zawahri to openly favor a candidate.

"To support a particular candidate would debase al-Qaeda's long-standing argument that the United States government is a corrupt institution no matter who is at the helm," SITE director Rita Katz said in the group's November newsletter.

In 2004 bin Laden issued his first video in more than a year just days before the U.S. elections. It derided Bush and warned of possible new September 11-style attacks.

Bin Laden made little mention of Bush's Democratic challenger, John Kerry, telling Americans: "Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands and each state which does not harm our security will remain safe."

Kerry has attributed his loss in part to the video's high-profile reminder of the terrorism issue.

In 2006, after Democrats captured Congress, Zawahri issued an audio message saying all Americans remained al Qaeda's enemies regardless of party, SITE said.

SITE said militant postings on al Qaeda-linked websites typically discuss Obama in terms of his race, or his religion and foreign policy. Some forecast a racial crisis dividing the United States if he wins. Others say his planned phased withdrawal from Iraq would be a boon to al Qaeda's affiliate and give it a base for Middle East expansion.

Republican presidential nominee John McCain has been portrayed as likely to allow "the continuation of Republican control and aggressive policies toward the Islamic world."

Additional reporting by Randall Mikkelsen in Washington; editing by Chris Wilsondubai.newsroom@reuters.com If peace were to come to Iraq, and the whole of the region, then what would Al Qaeda have to fight against? If the people there were allowed to prosper, then what would their belly ache be? If peace were to happen what would Halliburton's multi million dollar contracts and bonus's do? Dry up? Who and what would be their cash cow then?

There are so many reasons why those who control such things as the wars and police actions of the U.S.A. don't want peace, that it's astounding, and with these men who are now in the seats of power, and in control of the terrorist movements, knowing for certain that much of their power and their income will dry up. What do we expect, flowers in gun barrels instead of bullets? They don't want peace and all of it's luxuries due to that very fact. Look at Palestine and Israel. Another prime example of what funding can do. Make it hell on earth for too many of us. SRH http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49T76620081030<><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 10:55 AM

A
PETITION

FAITHFULAMERICA

Standing by Our Record
Faithful America has been attacked for its response to the horrific abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

Please sign our petition below and let our political leaders know that standing against abuse is the just response, not a radical one.

Partisan interests have tried to distort our position, running an ad that calls us a "liberal advocacy group that ran ads on Arab TV apologizing for the actions of US troops."

What the attack ad does not mention is that the 2004 Faithful America ad was a specific response to the abuses committed at Abu Ghraib, or that America’s political and military leaders similarly deplored and condemned the brutal treatment of detainees at the Iraqi prison.

Here is the ad that's being attacked as "liberal":
A Salaam A'alaykum ["Peace be with you" in Arabic]. As Americans of faith, we express our deep sorrow at abuses committed in Iraqi prisons. We stand in solidarity with all those in Iraq and everywhere who demand justice and human dignity. We condemn the sinful and systemic abuses committed in our name, and pledge to work to right these wrongs.
Standing against human rights abuses isn't liberal or conservative, it is a moral obligation and we are proud to stand by our record

We are disturbed by a recent attack on people of faith standing against human rights abuses.

Partisan interests are running a TV ad mis-characterizing Faithful America as “a liberal advocacy group that ran ads on Arab TV apologizing for the actions of US troops.”

What the attack ad does not mention is that the 2004 Faithful America ad was a specific response to the abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib, or that America’s political and military leaders similarly deplored and condemned the abuses committed at the Iraqi prison:

“I view those practices as abhorrent.”
-- GEORGE W. BUSH, on Arab satellite television, May 2004

“ Totally despicable.”
-- COLIN POWELL, U.S. Secretary of State, May 2004

“Totally unacceptable and un-American.”
-- DONALD RUMSFELD, U.S. Secretary of Defense, May 2004

“It was sickening and outrageous.”
--CONDOLEEZZA RICE, U.S. National Security Adviser, May 2004

Standing against human rights abuses isn't liberal or conservative, it is a moral obligation.

We stand by Faithful America's response to the horrors of Abu Ghraib and call on the ad’s sponsors to cease airing this negative and misleading
advertisement.

Setting the Record StraightFaithful America has been attacked for its response to the horrific abuses at Abu Ghraib prison. Go on-site for photos, and other articles of interest.

Please sign our petition and let our political leaders know that standing against abuse is the just response, not a radical one.

Partisan interests have tried to distort our position, running an ad that calls us a "liberal advocacy group that ran ads on Arab TV apologizing for the actions of US troops."

What the attack ad does not mention is that the 2004 Faithful America ad was a specific response to the abuses committed at Abu Ghraib, or that America's political and military leaders similarly condemned the brutal treatment of detainees at the Iraqi prison.

Standing against human rights abuses isn't liberal or conservative, it is a moral obligation and we are proud to stand by our record.
SIGN THE PETITION> > < < http://www.faithfulamerica.org/
+ + +

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 12:11 PM

<><><><><><><>The Note:
Palin Paradox
McCain Caught In Old Bind,
With Running Mate's Drag
By RICK KLEIN with HOPE DITTO
Oct. 31, 2008—

So as October is set to pass without a surprise . . .
Sen. Barack Obama wants us to be scared of something in the rearview mirror . . .

While Sen. John McCain wants us to be scared of something coming into view through the front windshield . . .

Both candidates are a little bit scared when their running mates get behind the wheel. . .

Republicans are mildly haunted by a ghost whose name cannot be mentioned . . .

Democrats are counting on certain ghosts in Florida . . .

And McCain is dealing with a set of familiar demons.

As he and his running mate tax the tax issue, and hope for a boost from an action hero Friday, McCain is caught in the same sort of push-pull that has defined his political career.

Call it the Palin Paradox: McCain seems unable to effectively fire up the GOP base without turning off independents. He can't win without both, not this year, not in this climate. And Palin, for all the energy she's inspired, has pretty much literally caused more trouble than she's worth to the ticket.

Does this sound like total confidence? "The enthusiasm level is incredibly high," McCain told ABC's Robin Roberts in Ohio, on "Good Morning America" Friday. "It's higher than I've ever seen it in any campaign I've ever been in. I'm not predicting -- well, I think, I'm confident that we'll win, but this intensity level in the last several days has really been remarkable. And I'm enthusiastic."

"We're going to fight it out on the economic grounds," McCain said.

If McCain really isn't concerned about his running mate's impact, well, he's the one. "59 percent of voters surveyed said Ms. Palin was not prepared for the job, up nine percentage points since the beginning of the month," Michael Cooper and Dalia Sussman write in The New York Times. "And in a possible indication that the choice of Ms. Palin has hurt Mr. McCain's image, voters said they had much more confidence in Mr. Obama to pick qualified people for his administration than they did in Mr. McCain."

(It's Obama 51, McCain 40 in the latest NYT/CBS poll.)

Said ABC's George Stephanopoulos, on "Nightline" Thursday: "When you look at the bottom line, Joe Biden helped Barack Obama with all voters. He made people feel better about Barack Obama. Sarah Palin has hurt John McCain with the broader electorate. It's shown in poll after poll after poll."

McCain supporter Lawrence Eagleburger, a former GOP secretary of state, has his concerns. Asked by NPR whether Palin could step in during a time of crisis, he said: "It is a very good question. . . . I'm being facetious here. Look, of course not."

He added: "Give her some time in the office and I think the answer would be, she will be -- adequate. I can't say that she would be a genius in the job. But I think she would be enough to get us through a four year . . . well I hope not . . . get us through whatever period of time was necessary. And I devoutly hope that it would never be tested."

Responds McCain, on "GMA": "Larry has never had a chance to meet Sarah." Then this head-scratcher: "She's got more experience than Sen. Biden and Sen. Obama put together."

And McCain sees her as the future of the party, kinda sorta: "As vice president or -- OR [looks straight to camera] -- I think there's no doubt." (What a facial expression!)

The comparison that really hurts: McCain, as Bob Dole. "Both are war heroes, known best for their political biography. Both returned to the Senate in the midst of campaigning, foundering for a time as a result. And both watched their opponent draw record crowds while theirs were comparatively lackluster," Jill Zuckman writes in the Chicago Tribune.

Zuckman recalls that earlier this year, McCain was still talking about how Dole's isolation was an error: "I would not enjoy, in any way, the seclusion and keeping the media away," McCain said. "It just wouldn't be any fun. And it's got to be fun."

If McCain pulls this off, it will have to be about more than him and his running mate connecting -- at this point, it will have to be about his rival missing, in a way that hasn't been picked up by the polls.

(And not all that many people missed his infomercial Wednesday night.)

Witness Ohio, McCain's absolute must-win: "Heading into the crucial final weekend, Republicans say their operation is even stronger and running ahead of where they were four years ago at this time," Laura Meckler writes in The Wall Street Journal. "But Republicans also have a lot more ground to make up than they did four years ago. . . . Polls now show Sen. Obama leading here [in Ohio], by four to nine percentage points. Sen. McCain is spending two of the last six days here, and twin efforts are under way to replicate Mr. Bush's 2004 performance."

"In case anyone was wondering if Ohio was a combat zone for Senator John McCain's presidential campaign, consider that five days before the election the candidate took a 220-mile, six-stop, 12-hour bus tour across the northern breadth of the state," Elisabeth Bumiller writes in The New York Times. "Along the way, he deployed his unofficial running mate, a disappearing and reappearing Joe the Plumber, to try to drive his points home."

"The modest crowds that met McCain on Thursday in Ohio -- a state with 20 electoral votes crucial to his strategy -- illustrated his struggle to inspire supporters as fervently as Obama has," Maeve Reston and Michael Finnegan write in the Los Angeles Times.

If you could discern a message . . . "John McCain is employing several lines of attack each day and Republican strategists say the lack of focus makes it nearly impossible for him to gain ground before Election Day," The Hill's Sam Youngman writes.

Bold declarations: "Republican presidential candidate John McCain goes into the campaign's final weekend a bigger underdog than any victorious candidate in a modern election," Bloomberg's Indira A.R. Lakshmanan reports.

"This election is cooked and done, it's in the warming tray," said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

McCain "is as desperate as a candidate can be," said Stu Rothenberg.

On the other side: "His Democratic rival, meanwhile, exuded confidence as the two toured many of the same battleground states. Sen. Barack Obama is all but taking for granted states that Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) won four years ago and is spending the last few days in George W. Bush country, forcing McCain to defend what was friendly territory for the GOP just four years ago," Michael D. Shear and Peter Slevin report in The Washington Post.

"Being president when things are easy -- not to say being president is ever easy -- but being president when peace and prosperity already exists is less of a challenge," Obama tells USA Today's Kathy Kiely. "I signed up to make this country better."

No worries here: "In an interview with USA TODAY, McCain was defiant toward the polls that show him trailing Democrat Barack Obama, combative about a new government report that shows a contracting economy, dismissive of talk of friction with running mate Sarah Palin and focused on pressing his case in the campaign's final days," David Jackson writes.

Says McCain: "When people saw Joe the Plumber ask the question, and the answer that Sen. Obama gave him." McCain snapped his finger. "The light went on."

But that same light was dimmed Thursday. "Joe, where are you? Where is Joe? Is Joe here with us today?" McCain asked at Defiance Junior High School in Ohio.

The New York Times' Bumiller: "It turned out that Mr. Wurzelbacher, as he told CNN, had never received final confirmation from the McCain campaign that he was expected. The campaign, after watching Mr. McCain haplessly call out for Mr. Wurzelbacher on the cable networks, dispatched a car and rushed the plumber to Mr. McCain's next event, in Sandusky, where Mr. Wurzelbacher spoke."

"Maybe Joe the Plumber was out on a job. But he wasn't out campaigning with Sen. John McCain Thursday morning," ABC's Bret Hovell reports.

(He showed up on the trail and endorsed McCain later: "As far as my vote goes," he said, "It's going to be for a real American. It's going to be for a real American, John McCain.")

It didn't go much better for Palin: "His veep pick Sarah Palin had her own awkward moment at an afternoon rally in Erie, Pa. -- Pittsburgh Pirates territory," Michael McAuliff and Richard Sisk report in the New York Daily News. "Apparently nobody told her. She said she was 'thrilled to be here in the home state of the world champion Philadelphia Phillies.' She got booed."

It's Obama 52, McCain 44 in the latest (and remarkably stable) ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll.

And you thought Palin might be a drag? "Fewer than half of likely voters in the latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll, 47 percent, think McCain would lead in a new direction; 50 percent instead say he'd mainly continue on Bush's path," ABC polling director Gary Langer writes. "McCain has not exceeded 48 percent 'new direction' all year, at a time when dissatisfaction with the country's current course has hit record highs."

Bring an action hero with you, my friends: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif., joins McCain on the stump in Ohio Friday. "I know it is going to be a very tough uphill battle for him," Schwarzenegger said Thursday, per the Los Angeles Times' Jordan Rau.

Obama unleashes his own secret weapon: Al Gore hits Florida on Friday, campaigning for a presidential candidate there for the first time since you-know-when.

"By dispatching former Vice President Al Gore to Palm Beach and Broward counties today, Democrat Barack Obama is hoping to stir strong sentiments about the 2000 election and emphasize that this election may be as close as the one eight years ago," Mark Hollis writes in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. "At a noon rally expected to draw several thousand people to the Palm Beach County Convention Center in West Palm Beach and later in Coconut Creek, Gore and his wife, Tipper, will prod Obama supporters to participate in early voting."

Parity, at last: "Sen. John McCain and the Republican National Committee will unleash a barrage of spending on television advertising that will allow him to keep pace with Sen. Barack Obama's ad blitz during the campaign's final days, but the expenditures will impact McCain's get-out-the-vote efforts," Matthew Mosk writes in The Washington Post. "The decision to finance a final advertising push is forcing McCain to curtail spending on Election Day ground forces to help usher his supporters to the polls, according to Republican consultants familiar with McCain's strategy."

This is a shift: The latest from the Wisconsin Advertising Project: "From October 21st to October 28th, spending on television advertising in the presidential campaign has totaled nearly $38 million. Over this time period, the Obama campaign spent nearly $21.5 million while the McCain campaign spent nearly $7.5 million."

A different mode on the other side: "Barack Obama's campaign has approached Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel about possibly serving as White House chief of staff, officials said Thursday," per the AP's David Espo and Ben Feller. "The Democrats who described the Obama campaign's approach to Emanuel spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to be quoted by name. An aide to the congressman, Sarah Feinberg, said in an e-mail that he 'has not been contacted to take a job in an administration that does not yet exist. Everyone is focused on Election Day, as they should be.' "

Said Obama, late Thursday: "I'm trying to win an election," Obama shouted back at a yelled question, per ABC's Jake Tapper. "Plouffe is my chief of staff," he added, referring to campaign manager David Plouffe.

Surely something's getting measured: "Expect a turbocharged transition if Barack Obama wins, with a Treasury secretary and White House chief of staff named days after his election," the New York Daily News' Thomas M. DeFrank And Kenneth R. Bazinet report. "The list of candidates for Treasury secretary includes former Clinton administration Treasury chief Larry Summers; Timothy Geithner, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; and ex-Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, among others."

Is there anything McCain's folks want to measure? "Aides say Sen. McCain's transition team, headed by former Navy Secretary [John] Lehman, has a different, less-structured approach. Mr. Lehman and a small group of aides are concentrating on the logistics of swiftly taking control of the U.S. national security apparatus," The Wall Street Journal's Andy Pasztor writes. "Sen. McCain is reluctant to set up formal transition teams for individual departments and hasn't asked for specific recommendations of possible appointees, according to aides. They said that at this stage, domestic agencies aren't the top priority and the team is staying away from compiling formal lists of candidates for choice jobs."

David Axelrod isn't celebrating yet: "I think it would be foolish to the extreme to ever suggest that a campaign is over until it's over. I like where we are positioned. I think I'd much rather be us than him, I've always believed that he's on the wrong side of history," Obama's chief strategist tells Time's Jay Newton-Small.

Is he worried about the Bradley effect? "People have got bigger concerns and we've moved beyond that as a country. So I don't worry about that, what I worry about is mobilizing our voters so that when people come out they understand that in many of these battleground states the race is close. It's not enough to anticipate victory; you have to earn it," Axelrod says.

Karl Rove says to ignore the polls -- except when you can't. "The question that matters is the margin," Rove writes in his Wall Street Journal column. "If Mr. McCain is down by 3%, his task is doable, if difficult. If he's down by 9%, his task is essentially impossible. In truth, however, no one knows for sure what kind of polling deficit is insurmountable or even which poll is correct. All of us should act with the proper understanding that nothing is yet decided."

How McCain will be spending the hours before the election? "John McCain will be in Prescott [Ariz.] on election eve, according to the Yavapai County Republican Party," per the Daily Courier. "He plans to attend the party's annual Victory Rally at approximately 9 p.m. Monday on the historic courthouse plaza. The rally starts at 6 p.m. and typically attracts Republican elected officials from around the state."

MoveOn.org is up with a new anti-McCain ad in Arizona featuring a veteran: "I'm a lifelong Republican, and I'm voting for Barack Obama."

Big shifts? "The racial divides that have buttressed Republican power in the South for decades appear to be crumbling in this year's elections, loosening the GOP's firm grip on the region, political analysts and independent pollsters say," Susan Milligan writes in The Boston Globe. "The South is still culturally conservative, and the deep South in particular is still challenging territory for Democrats, political specialists say. But demographic changes -- including a migration of voters from other regions, as well as an increase in education and racial tolerance among some younger residents -- have given Barack Obama and other Democrats an opening this year and are likely to change the electoral map in future elections, they said."

Glimpses of 2012? Former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass., is doing a five-day fly around for McCain-Palin starting Friday morning with stops in Nevada (Las Vegas, Reno, Elko), New Mexico (Farmington, Albuquerque), Colorado (Colorado Springs), Missouri (Kansas City, Columbia, Cape Girardeau), Indiana (Evansville), Ohio (Cincinnati, Columbus) and Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh, Harrisburg). The trip wraps up Tuesday morning with a rally in Manchester, N.H.

The Sked:

John McCain continues his busy Ohio campaign tour with another four rallies Friday. He begins in Hanoverton at 10 am ET, then it's off to Steubenville at 11:45 am ET, next to New Philadelphia at 1:30 pm ET and finally to Columbus at 5:50 pm ET.

He will be joined at the Columbus rally by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, R-Calif.

In Hanoverton, McCain sits down with ABC's Charles Gibson.

Barack Obama has two rallies planned for his Friday -- he heads first to Des Moines, Iowa at 12:25 pm ET, then it's off to Highland, Ind. at 9:20 pm ET.

In between, he'll grab some trick-or-treating time with his daughters.

Sarah Palin is in Pennsylvania Friday with two rallies -- first in Latrobe at 9 am ET, then in York at 4 pm ET.

Joe Biden has a busy Halloween ahead of him, too. He begins with a rally in Newark, Del. at 10:30 am ET, then a second in Kettering, Ohio at 2:30 pm ET and a third in Lima at 6:15 pm ET. He rounds out the day with an event in Evansville, Ind. at 10:10 pm ET.

Former vice president Al Gore hits the trail for Obama in Florida.

Also in the news:

Time to seize more than a victory, says Howard Wolfson: "Republicans will argue that the election results were merely a referendum on John McCain's campaign or on George Bush. Nonsense. If this election was merely a referendum on John McCain or George Bush, or even just on Barack Obama, we would not see the gains that Democrats are about to make in Congress."

Wolfson continues: "Democrats should reject this argument -- success in this election, coupled with Democratic victories in 2006, signal that the public has rejected the tenets of modern conservatism -- pre-emptive war, deregulation, trickle-down economics, and cultural division in favor of core Democratic principles -- engagement with our allies abroad, broadly shared prosperity at home, and health care for all."

Politicker's James Pindell charts an interesting course to 60: "If Democrats wind up with 59 U.S. Senate seats on Election Day, they can still reach the magic filibuster-proof number of 60 if the new President appoints Republican Olympia Snowe to his cabinet. The Governor of Maine, John Baldacci, would presumably appoint a fellow Democrat to serve until a November 2010 special election to fill the balance of Snowe's term.

In one of the critical races: "Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole is being sued for defamation and libel by Kay Hagan, her Democratic Senate challenger, for broadcasting a television ad which, in the words of Hagan's legal action, 'falsely implies' that Hagan shares the views of an entity that calls itself the Godless Americans PAC," per ABC's Teddy Davis.

In another one: "A Texas businessman has filed a lawsuit alleging that Minnesota multimillionaire Nasser Kazeminy used his Houston marine company to funnel $75,000 to Sen. Norm Coleman last year via a Minneapolis insurance company that employs the senator's wife," Paul McEnroe and Tony Kennedy write in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

"Coleman adamantly denies the claims in the lawsuit. 'This is a vicious, defamatory attack on the senator and his wife less than one week before the election,' Cullen Sheehan, Coleman's campaign manager, said Thursday."

Sad news: "Frederick M. "Fred" Baron, the plaintiff's lawyer who amassed a fortune that he used to rejuvenate the Democratic Party in Texas, died Thursday at his Dallas home of complications of cancer. He was 61," per The Dallas Morning News' Joe Simnacher. "Mr. Baron was catapulted into the national political limelight twice this fall, first when it was revealed that he had paid to move the woman who had an affair with former presidential hopeful John Edwards. Mr. Baron had been Mr. Edwards' top fundraiser," Simnacher continues. "Earlier this month, Mr. Baron was granted FDA approval for an experimental treatment in a last-ditch effort to save his life."

The Kicker:

"And ladies and gentlemen, the question is -- and the stakes, by the way, the stakes could not be higher. You all know, you students here -- and by the way, I love your mascot. . . . I call it a donkey. You call it a mule." -- Joe Biden, at Muhlenberg College.

"Since we don't allow knives, you guys are gonna have to carve it with your pens." -- Barack Obama, at a pumpkin patch with this traveling contingent.

Bookmark The Note: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=3105288&page=1

Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=3105288 Go on-site to gain access to the numerous links within this article <><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 02:12 PM

~~~~~ SPIEGEL ONLINEBATTERED AND BRUISED America Looks Beyond the Bush WarriorsBy Erich Follath
10/31/2008
06:43 PM
In his two terms in the White House, US President George W. Bush has presided over a precipitous fall in America's reputation around the world. History is likely to judge him a failure. Now, his successor will have to dig the US out of a deep hole.
The Chinese astronaut Zhai Zhigang was filled with pride as he reported to Chinese mission control from his space capsule. It was Saturday, Sept. 27 and Zhigang was about embark on his first space walk, marking a breakthrough for the space program of this rising power in the Far East. President Hu Jintao looked jubilant in the live television broadcast. With its successful excursion outside the space capsule, the People's Republic, as a nation in space, drew level with the United States and Russia in one important respect. Indeed, Beijing is already discussing a manned expedition to the moon. Once exclusively American, the Earth's biggest satellite may soon become Chinese as well.

Illustration Jean-Pierre Kunkel für den SPIEGEL
This illustration was on the cover of this week's SPIEGEL. It is a remake of a SPIEGEL cover from 2002 (below) showing President George W. Bush's cabinet on its way to war. The US Embassy in Berlin ordered 33 copies of the original illustration in poster form for the White House. There has been no word yet as to whether orders have been placed for the new version. The title reads "The Bush Warriors: End of the Show."
Almost at the same time, at a point halfway around the earth, a finance minister was doing something highly unusual: falling to his knees in a gesture of desperation. The Republican Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson was kneeling before the Democratic Speaker of the US House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi, begging her to do everything in her power to make sure that the $700-billion bailout package for the US economy was passed. Paulson's unmistakable message was that the United States was on the brink of an abyss.

Meanwhile, the White House, the center of power in this superpower, seemed oddly abandoned, as if no one were at home. As if 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D.C., were temporarily closed for renovations. It wasn't, of course, but amazingly enough, had it been, hardly anyone would have noticed. The master of the house, certainly, would be missed by only a few. Bush did address his fellow Americans to talk about the financial crisis, but he seemed oddly disinterested. And even in these dramatic times, hardly anyone was listening. He may still be the president, but is he no longer shaping policy.

Illustration by Jean-Pierre Kunkel
The original "Bush Warriors" SPIEGEL cover illustration from 2002.
"The fundamentals of our economy are strong," the president said in August. But what could be more disconcerting than to be told by George W. Bush that everyone is going to be alright?

US in Deep Decline
Rarely has the decline of a nation -- and the soaring success of another -- been so strikingly documented as it was by the almost simultaneous events in Beijing and Washington at the end of November. Of course, the bailout package has since been approved (although Paulson revised the conditions attached to it based on the European model and it was coordinated with Beijing) and, of course, China has also been hard-hit by the worldwide financial crisis (although its economic growth, after "declining" from almost 12 percent last year to an estimated 8 percent this year, remains impressive against the backdrop of the American recession).

But none of this changes the fact that the United States is in deep decline, in the wake of the dramatically ruinous policies of George W. Bush, 62, and his administration. That decline begins at home. Never before have such low approval ratings been measured for a US president than for Bush in his last few months. They are currently at between 19 and 20 percent. More than four out of five Americans believe that the nation is "headed in the wrong direction." And the image and reputation of this dominant Western nation has also declined to a new low in the rest of the world during the two terms of the 43rd US president.

In Western Europe, the US's popularity has declined by almost half, and in Turkey by 75 percent. The numbers are even worse when it comes to Bush himself. Even the citizens of the two neighboring countries, Canada and Mexico, consider George W. to be about as likeable -- and as dangerous -- as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. According to a recently published BBC poll, a majority of people worldwide believe that Washington's activities have in fact strengthened the al-Qaida terrorist organization. Absurdly, al-Qaida has a better image than the United States in Egypt and Pakistan, two countries that are the recipients of especially generous US financial assistance.

How could it have come to this? What is the legacy of the Bush era? And can a new man in the White House turn the tide?

Avoiding Bush Like the Plague
In the twilight of his presidency, George W. seems markedly relaxed among friends. He has built himself his very own Bush World, where everything has its place. There is no such thing as failure in this world. It serves as protective armor for Bush. It is a cosmos, a virtual, Manichean cosmos in which everything is clearly delineated between good and bad, perpetrators and victims. And, in this world, anyone who is not "with us" is branded a contemptible enemy.

When someone like journalist Bob Woodward approaches Bush with critical questions, he suddenly becomes forgetful. When asked about the notorious and decisive memo leading up to the Iraq war, the war president pleads overwork -- Oh, there was so much going on at the time, and it isn't much better today: If you only knew how much work there is to do here. And if the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist presses him for an answer, Bush can quickly become curt, the man of the permanent smile turning into the impatient that's-it-end-of-story president.

After seven years of Republican dominance in Washington, Bush's fellow Republicans now avoid him like the plague. Republican presidential candidate John McCain gave Bush all of 14 seconds of public togetherness, 14 seconds on the tarmac in front of Air Force One, on a day in May 2008. An armored black limousine pulled up to the plane, Secret Service agents opened the doors of the car, Bush and McCain came together briefly in a carefully choreographed moment in front of cameras that had been set up in advance, the president pinched the candidate's wife on the cheek and shook hands with his fellow Republican, but then McCain turned away, as if fearing pursuit. Bush jumped up the steps to the waiting aircraft, and the 14 seconds were up.

Bush did not attend the Republican Convention in September, instead delivering an address via satellite. Another hurricane threatening New Orleans required the president's presence in the disaster zone. But he was not missed by his fellow Republicans. The only person who had more than a few friendly words to say about Bush in St. Paul was his wife Laura.

Self-doubt is anathema to George W. He hates pity. And why should anyone pity him, pity the man with the "best job in the world," the job that, as he says, hasn't brought him challenging or satisfying experiences, but "joyous" ones. Only minor details suggest that his presidency is coming to an end. "You can hear his Texas accept creeping back into his voice rather than the I'm-the-president, no-accent kind of voice," a Bush confidant told the New York Times Magazine recently. Although the friend claims that Bush cares very little about his disastrous approval ratings, it is hard to believe George W. Bush when he says that he is not interested in his legacy.

A biography of Winston Churchill is on his night table, and a bust of the British statesman stands in his office. Churchill, consistent and ruthless and farsighted in his battle against evil, is Bush's political role model. In the United States, Bush likes to compare himself with Harry Truman who, despite his unpopularity, would not allow himself to be deterred from the course he believed was the right one and who many today consider rehabilitated, long after his death, because he kept a steady hand in the Cold War.

George W. would like to be remembered as a second Truman. "His view of leadership is defined as doing the right thing against pressure," Michael Gerson, a former Bush advisor, told the New York Times Magazine. The president himself was less eloquent when asked by Bob Woodward about his legacy: "History? We don't know. We'll all be dead."

'A Gambler Who Bet Everything on Iraq'
But the verdicts are already coming in. In a new survey of 109 historians, 107 call his presidency a failure, while 61 percent see George W. Bush as the worst president of all time. "We've never seen a presidential meltdown like this…. This is a terrible loss, and a dangerous one, for the whole world is watching," writes Peggy Noonan, the speechwriter for former Republican President Ronald Reagan. According to historian and author Douglas Brinkley, Bush's "legacy is disastrous. He is a gambler who bet everything on Iraq."

"Gambler" and "Iraq" are the key terms in the life and work of George W. Bush, and they will likely remain so for eternity.

Iraq is the gaping foreign policy wound, even if the level of violence in Baghdad and some provinces has declined. The war violated international law, divided the allies and wounded the Americans in terms of their value system and self-respect. Over and above the enormous financial cost, the war has been the source of great human tragedy. More than 4,000 American soldiers and an estimated more than 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died, while more than four million Iraqi men, women and children have been forced to flee their country.

There will always be debates over whether it made sense to bring down the brutal regime of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein with military force and become an occupying power. There is much to suggest that it was the wrong choice. It undermined America's political standing (while bolstering Iran's influence as a regional power) and, even among US allies, fueled the suspicion that Washington was solely interested in oil and military bases.

Bearing Responsibility
The answer to another, equally critical question is already beyond debate. There is "no longer the slightest doubt," writes The New Yorker, that the Bush administration lied to and manipulated the American public to gain support for the invasion of Iraq. It is also considered indisputable fact today that the conduct of the war was incompetent. It was a mistake for the Pentagon, but also a case of serious mismanagement by the White House, which talked itself into a euphoric state of victory. "One big problem with the war was the president himself," says George Casey, the former commanding general of the multinational force in Iraq.

Another ugly blemish on the Bush administration is the disgrace of human rights violations in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. The administration bears responsibility -- as it does for the scandalous weakening of prohibitions on torture, a move that is simply incompatible with a country based on the rule of law. The man in charge at the White House is believed to have directly approved the practice of waterboarding, which simulates the sensation of drowning in its victims.

Although the constitutional institutions in the United States have continued to function -- the free press has remained critical and the US Supreme Court has ruled twice that the Bush administration violated the Constitution, forcing the Bush team to make changes to its policies -- the world still sees the United States in moral decline.

The loss of trust in the United States as a superpower is reinforced by its undisguised contempt for international organizations like the United Nations and for agreements like the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, as well as its relative unwillingness, as the world's biggest air polluter, to take the pressing problems of climate change seriously.

The domestic consequences of the Bush years have also been catastrophic. The national debt has almost doubled, to an inconceivable $10 trillion (€7.75 trillion). The number of Americans without health insurance rose by over eight million to 47 million, while the number of those living below the poverty line grew by almost six million. Bush's tax breaks for the country's wealthiest citizens have made America's already extreme social disparities even more glaring. Every week, the top 1 percent of US income earners becomes an average of $1,000 (€775) richer, while those in the lower fifth on the income scale see only an additional $1.50 (€1.17) in their wallets.

Continues to Shape Him
George W. Bush can endure this because his value system is one that allows him to be at peace with himself. The man who his father (and predecessor in office) declared a failure more than once, who was an alcoholic and then rehabilitated himself after becoming a fundamentalist Christian, clings to his faith and the conviction that "the guy upstairs" is giving him the right advice. With God on his side, Bush compensates for his addictive behavior -- but in reality it continues to shape him.

"He's the first one to admit that he has an addictive personality, and he has to channel this addictiveness to constructive things," his friend Dan Bartlett told the New York Times Magazine.

Like a man possessed, Bush ignored all warnings on the subject of the Iraq War. Like an addict, he now clings -- during the worst financial crisis in the last 50 years, which ought to consume all of his attention -- to sports. He spends hours riding his bike, taking ever longer and more difficult routes. He is suddenly deeply involved in opening ceremonies for local tennis, baseball and softball events.

Bush is a man on the run -- from himself and his legacy. And he looks on, apparently in disbelief, at how the world loves to hate him, and how even close friends are leaving the sinking ship he still claims to be steering.
---------------------The scene is a book unveiling in Washington, DC, in May 2008. The author is a professional. His name is Scott McClellan, he was the president's press secretary, and he was considered a loyal representative of the White House and a staunch advocate of the policies of his boss. But today he is no longer praising the administration's achievements. Scott McClellan, 40, is settling scores with his former employer -- with the verve and toughness and relentlessness unique to spurned lovers.

His book is titled "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception." On the day of its publication, it is already clear that it will be yet another heavy blow for the president, who praised McClellan when he resigned from his job at the White House in 2006 as one of the "best of our country" and as someone who "handled a challenging assignment with class and integrity." The attacks on Bush could hardly hit any closer to home. According to a White House insider, the president, stunned, read the words on the jacket and angrily tossed the book into a corner.

Too Gullible and Insufficiently Critical
"Scottie" McClellan has known Bush since their days together in Texas. He still admires him, says the former press secretary at his book unveiling. He adds that he does not consider George W. to be a bad person, only a weak one who is and was easily manipulated. McClellan concludes that his former boss has an extreme aversion to analysis and is the victim of self-suggestive wishful thinking -- that "his leadership style is based more on instinct than deep intellectual debate," as McClellan wrote in his book.

It was only gradually, says Bush's friend of many years, that he realized how policy was shaped in the White House. All too often, according to McClellan, the goal was that of "manipulating sources of public opinion to the president's advantage." Not without a healthy dose of chutzpah, Bush's former spokesman accuses the American media of having been too gullible and insufficiently critical.

This is the sort of accusation that causes journalists to sit back and take a deep breath. Is this man a Judas who trims his sails to the wind and an opportunist hoping to make a few bucks with his revelations? Or is he a truly disappointed man, an upstanding conservative who is criticizing the failings of the Bush administration out of conviction and a sense of moral dilemma?

The reviews have been overwhelmingly negative. Commentators note sharply that McClellan was surprisingly good at hiding his doubts and keeping his true feelings hidden from everyone else. Nevertheless, hardly anyone questions the veracity of McClellan's account. A few weeks after the publication of McClellan's book, it is already at the top of the bestseller lists. McClellan himself is considering a career in politics, or perhaps in journalism. And just recently, he endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
-----------------
It has become a popular game to use Bush as the punching bag, to blame him for everything and to paint him as an object of hate. And yet, say many experts, Bush has changed during his second term. The man who once insisted on waging US wars with ad-hoc coalitions -- and without his truculent allies -- began approaching rejoining the international community.

It Wasn't Just the President Alone
There were the negotiations with North Korea, together with the Chinese, Russians, South Koreans and Japanese, which led to the extremely wobbly Pyongyang promise to halt its nuclear weapons program; the cautious agreement with European negotiating partners on the question of the Iranian nuclear program, and even the first direct diplomatic contacts with adversaries in Tehran; the late -- far too late -- diplomatic initiative to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; the abandonment, albeit only verbally so far, of a hard-line position on climate protection -- aren't all of these things signs that George W. has become more refined, at least a little?

America's allies, to be sure, no longer had to read the papers to learn about the president's decisions during Bush's second term. It is also true that, now that the financial crisis is turning into an economic crisis, Washington may even be more willing to engage in real international cooperation than Berlin. But it is also true that one man -- the president himself -- disavows these changes. The New York Times Magazine recently reported on a conversation between the military historian Max Boot and the president, in which Boot asked Bush about changes in White House policies during his second term. But Bush, clearly irritated, replied: "That's ridiculous. That's not true. I've been fighting for this (freedom agenda) from Day One. It's part of everything I do."

And it wasn't just the president alone. His entire team felt bound by this agenda and bears its fair share of the responsibility for the crumbling of America's unique position of power. It is the team that formed in his initial years as president: Richard Cheney, the vice-president; Donald Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense for many years; Condoleezza Rice, the former national security advisor and current secretary of state; and Colin Powell, Rice's predecessor at the State Department.

Religious Convictions and Messianic Eagerness
Cheney, 67, has something in common with Bush. He too had problems with alcohol as a young man and, like his later boss George W., was arrested for drunk driving and lost his driver's license. But Cheney, who comes from a middle-class, white-collar family, did not have a prominent über-father. He fought against his weaknesses with an iron will. He was interested in big business and politics, and in combining them in ways that were as lucrative and career-promoting as possible. He was always a man of few scruples. He met Rumsfeld, who was of similar makeup, in the 1960s. It was the beginning of a lifelong friendship.

After holding a series of high-level positions, first in Washington and later in the oil industry, Cheney joined George W. Bush's campaign team in 2000 to head his vice-presidential search committee. He cleverly played off all the potential candidates against one another and neglected to mention his serious heart condition, so that, in Bush's eyes, there was only one possibly candidate left for the job of vice-president: Cheney himself. Vastly superior to the president intellectually and always ready to outwit cabinet members, "Dick" became the most powerful vice-president in US history -- and, with his talent for currying favor and his calculating assertiveness in the White House, probably the most powerful man in the United States.

If religious convictions and a messianic eagerness to export democracy played a role in Bush's decisions -- political scientists call it "well-meaning imperialism" -- Cheney was a supreme expert in power politics. Pipelines, oil reserves and military bases were his maxims, and expanding American power at all costs his ambition. He lost all restraint after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "We also have to work, though, sort of the dark side, if you will," he told Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press," five days after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. "We've got to spend time in the shadows in the intelligence world...and use any means at our disposal." This meant, as it turned out, the torture and the kidnapping of suspects, among other things. Cheney consistently treated the US Constitution as a document to be interpreted broadly. His nickname is Darth Vader, the character representing the Prince of Darkness in the "Star Wars" films.

Cheney's friend Rumsfeld, 76, a former navy pilot, a hawk and a proponent of preventive war, was considered a star in Bush's cabinet for some time. He was quick-witted, funny and cynical. But then the mismanagement of the Iraq war came crashing down over his head, and he was also held politically responsible for the human rights violations at Abu Ghraib prison, even though he never actually admitted to that responsibility. By November 2006, Rumsfeld had become too much of a liability to be kept on as defense secretary. At Rumsfeld's farewell ceremony, Bush praised the outgoing defense secretary as a "superb leader during a time of change," and as a man who made the "world a safer place."

Since then, internal memos have been dug up in which Rumsfeld dictates his instructions to his staff. "Keep elevating the threat," he wrote, as the Washington Post reported a year ago. "Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists." He showed his contempt for Muslims by noting that they avoided "physical labor." His creed was: "People are looking for leadership. Sacrifice = Victory."

But there is little in the way of personal sacrifice in the life of "Rummy." Since being forced to step down, he is often flown in a private Learjet to his 50 acre ranch in New Mexico, where he likes to hunt coyotes and cut down trees with a chainsaw. Otherwise, the former Pentagon chief lives in Maryland, just around the corner from Cheney's estate. Cheney is the only former colleague Rumsfeld still sees today.

Two Puppet Masters
Rumsfeld, busy writing his memoirs, has no regrets or trouble sleeping. He ignores the protestors who refer to him as a "war criminal" and demand to see him tried before the United Nations War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague, even when they demonstrate near his ranch. "It's a free country," he says. "People can say whatever they want."

Cheney and Rumsfeld never completely trusted Condoleezza Rice. She was simply not invited to some meetings, and Rumsfeld was often absent at meetings she asked him to attend. On one occasion, Rice was so upset that she burst into tears according to a new Cheney biography by Barton Gellman called "Angler." She was kept in the dark about an intelligence unit at the Pentagon that, circumventing the CIA, was to provide the hardliners with reasons to justify going to war with Iraq. Cheney and Rumsfeld refused to treat Rice as their equal, despite the fact that she had Bush's ear and was just as adept on matters of intelligence as the two puppet masters were.

Rice, 53, brilliant, goal-oriented and as well-versed on nuclear issues as she is in classic diplomacy, is nevertheless -- or perhaps precisely because of her qualifications -- one of the biggest disappointments of the Bush years. She looked up to the president without voicing her criticism, instead of waking him up from his dangerous dreams. She fed Bush talking points instead of correcting him.

The United States could not wait to be attacked by its enemies, she said. Referring to the risk of Iraq obtaining a nuclear weapon, she said: "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud," and she characterized the invasion of Iraq as "anticipatory self-defense." She exculpated the United States, the world's number one polluter, by called the Kyoto climate protocol "dead on arrival." She spent time with her boss at family events on his ranch, went fishing with him and helped him complete crossword puzzles, and even sang hymns with him on board Air Force One. But when push came to shove, she said nothing and nodded. She proved ultimately incapable of standing up to her boss. Only in the last few months, when it was already too late, did she gain some stature in the Middle East with her sharp criticism of Israel's settlement policy, which is in violation of international law.

Bush on Trial?
Colin Powell, 71, was the biggest loser on the Bush team, and yet he could still end up being the biggest winner. As Rice's predecessor, he was a paragon of weakness and misunderstood loyalty. Although he was the only member of Bush's inner circle to argue against the Iraq war, Powell, ever the military man accustomed to obeying orders, had the president's back at the critical moment. The man who helped President George H.W. Bush win the first Gulf War over Kuwait, a war approved by the UN, accepted the unilateral American invasion in 2003. And, in February of that year, he argued the case for the war with an impassioned speech before the UN Security Council.

None of the "evidence" of weapons of mass destruction Powell presented to the international community held up to closer inspection. It was a house of cards constructed of lies. Powell later referred to his appearance at the UN as a "blemish" on his career and said that he felt used. Only when his resignation could no longer have any effect did he draw the necessary conclusions. He wrote bestseller memoirs, gave talks and appeared to have removed himself from active politics -- until two weekends ago, when he dropped a bombshell: Powell, a Republican and successful African-American, endorsed Barack Obama, a Democrat and successful African-American. Because everyone knows that Powell has been friends with McCain for decades, the endorsement was especially significant.

In explaining his decision, the general said that Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is not ready to be vice-president, criticized McCain's response to the economic crisis and praised his opponent as a "transformational figure."

Always an Option
Is Powell, the son of Jamaican immigrants, who was national security advisor under President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s and one of the Republican Party's leading figures, about to embark on a new career in a Democratic administration? Obama has not ruled it out, while Powell remains reticent on the subject. But he also appears to be enjoying the personal settling of scores for countless humiliations he suffered under Cheney, Rumsfeld and George W. Bush. None of these men is truly among the ranks of the powerful anymore, but Powell still is.

While Powell exacts his revenge on George W. with political finesse, others want to see Bush put on trial -- always an option in the "Land of the Free."
-----------------The creases in his suits are as sharp as the furrows in his hawk's face and his gift of gab. This man, the Hollywood archetype in the fight against crime, is not someone one would want to be up against in a courtroom. He has prosecuted 21 murder cases -- and he has won all 21.

Vincent Bugliosi, 74, is considered a legend in American criminal justice. He put Charles Manson in prison for life in 1971, even though the Satanist did not kill Sharon Tate himself. Now Bugliosi wants to see a new spectacular case go to trial. He wants to prosecute George W. Bush -- for committing murder thousands of times. Is he serious? Or is it just a PR gag to help him work his way through the talk shows and feed his ego as he promotes a highly provocative book?

Anyone who meets Vincent Bugliosi quickly notices two things. First, the man is not a stranger to vanity. He knows how to capture media attention for himself and his cases. After the Manson trial, Bugliosi wrote "Helter Skelter," the highest-selling nonfiction crime book in history. But, all commercial ambitions aside, the second thing about Bugliosi is that he is angry and determined, out of deep conviction, to conduct a crusade against George W. Bush.

If the president had started the Iraq war to avert an imminent threat to the American people, there would be no "case," Bugliosi argues in his book, "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder." But, as the legal expert argues, because Bush concocted an imminent danger posed by Saddam Hussein and led the nation into a "criminal war," he should be held responsible. And that responsibility, in Bugliosi's view, extends to the death of each and every one of the 4,000 US soldiers killed in Iraq.

Bugliosi argues that any of the 50 state attorneys-general "could bring a murder charge against Bush for any soldiers from that state…who lost their lives fighting Bush’s war." In his book, Bugliosi writes: "Remember, Clinton was impeached for allegedly trying to cover up a consensual sexual affair. What do you recommend for Bush for being responsible for more than 100,000 deaths? Nothing? He shouldn't be held accountable for his actions?" Bugliosi is clearly a show master on a mission.------------------America is still licking its wounds, is still caught up in an election campaign more thrilling and full of substance than any other campaign has been in decades. But the new man in the White house will inherit two costly wars that are almost impossible to win, a record deficit and a deep recession, all of which will sharply curtail his ability to govern. What options does the next, the 44th president of the United States, have left, and which of the two candidates is better equipped to cope with the challenges?

The United States is in the midst of fundamental change. Everything for which the country was famous is now being questioned, both at home and abroad. The "liberal democracy" based on the Washington model is no longer considered necessarily the best path to guaranteed prosperity, now that the deregulated US economy has experienced its own fiasco and the doctrine of allowing the markets to regulate themselves has imploded. For much of the world, the phrase "exporting democracy" is now synonymous with unilateral military intervention and hegemonic ambitions.

Quietly Slipped Away
Ironically, nations with authoritarian regimes now play, as a result of their large foreign currency reserves and sovereign wealth funds, a key role in shaping the economic future of the United States: the People's Republic of China, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates. And Europe, long derided from across the Big Pond as an "economic museum" and a region contaminated by socialism, is now looking much better, writes the International Herald Tribune, "as old perceived faults -- greater state involvement in the economy, taxes on consumption to encourage savings, a broader social safety net in times of recession -- suddenly look far-sighted in the wake of Wall Street's near collapse."

Many of the neocons who supported Bush's course intellectually, like Richard Perle and David Frum, have quietly slipped away. Sorry boys, it was just an idea, seems to be their motto. Only a few staunch American conservatives, like McCain advisor Robert Kagan, still believe that the United States "is definitely still number one." According to the leading voices in the Democratic Party now shaping the political debate, the United States is an empire in decline, at least at the moment. They want to see the country acknowledge this and take advantage of the inherent opportunities in any crisis.

In their view, the American model is discredited, at least temporarily. Many in the Third World are now more attracted to Chinese-style autocracy, a state capitalism that limits the freedom of the individual for the good of the nation. Europeans recognize the deficits of authoritarianism and want to retain a free market economy, while at the same time calling for more government intervention. The well-known British philosopher and author John Gray calls it a "historic political shift" and notes: "The era of American global leadership, reaching back to the Second World War, is over."

What next?
In a world in which the human pyramid at Abu Ghraib has replaced the Statue of Liberty as a symbol of the United States (particularly in large parts of the Middle East), the first task for George W. Bush's successor must be to reestablish America's moral authority. This includes the immediate closing of the prison camp at Guantanamo, an unequivocal termination of CIA practices like the kidnapping of terror suspects and the condemnation of all forms of torture. On the home front, the new president will have to discipline and regulate Wall Street, reform the healthcare system from the ground up, introduce a rigorous energy conservation program and straighten out the tax system so that the very rich are asked to pay their fair share and the middle and lower classes face less of a tax burden.

The Job Ahead
On the foreign policy front, the new US president should commit himself to renewed strong cooperation with international organizations, agree to binding targets to limit greenhouse gas emissions, join the International Criminal Court and refrain from modernizing the country's nuclear arsenal. In terms of international relations, the next president's term could signal the dawning of a new age of diplomacy that requires unusual steps: a speedy withdrawal from Iraq that respects the needs of that country's population; the relinquishment of an American and British special status in the exploitation of Iraq's oil reserves; a strategy for Afghanistan that prevents it from turning into a new base for international terrorism, one that includes both punitive military expeditions and a much stronger emphasis on civilian reconstruction and ventures to take unusual steps, like the inclusion of "moderate" Taliban in the peace process.

In the worldwide ideological contest, there is much to support the idea that Bush's successor in the White House could take Europe's side in the struggle to promote the better system. And that he should use all diplomatic means at his disposal to seek a solution to the Iran conflict that would prevent or at least delay Tehran's plans to develop nuclear weapons.

But this new America could be costly for Europeans. No matter who wins the election next week, the victor will smile and invite the allies to join him at the negotiating table -- and his demands will be considerable: more money for reconstruction in Iraq, and a greater commitment to the war in Afghanistan. Can John McCain, 72, carry out America's Herculean challenges, or is Barack Obama, 47, the better man for the job?

"John McCain is a fighter. In fact, his bellicosity has increased over the past few years as he has discovered his inner neoconservative," writes Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International and author of the bestseller "The Post-American World." "He wants to keep the battle going in Iraq, speaks casually of bombing Iran and is skeptical of the Bush administration's diplomacy with North Korea. He wants to kick Russia out of the G-8 and humiliate China by excluding it from that body as well. He sees a "league of democracies" locked in conflict with an alliance of autocracies. This is cold-war nostalgia, not a strategy for the 21st century."

Inventing the Future
And then there is Democratic candidate Obama, who Zakaria sees as a man for a new beginning and as a deeply inspiring figure. "Imagine what people around the world would think if they saw America once again inventing the future," Zakaria writes.

A healthy dose of self-confidence is necessary, because America is in jeopardy of losing its greatest asset: its notorious optimism about the future. According to a study by the Pew Research Center, the number of people who believe that things will be better in five years than they are today has dropped to its lowest point since the organization first began asking this question 44 years ago -- and the poll was even taken a few weeks before the Wall Street collapse.

At the World Financial Summit in New York in mid-November, George W. Bush will be the "lame duck" among the leaders of the world's most important nations. It is possible that he will invite his successor to take part in the talks. That would make sense, because any resolutions reached at the summit, while barely affecting Bush's remaining term in office, will critically shape the next administration.

One can characterize it as tragic, comical or revealing that the president, shortly before leaving office, will face the task of participating in a new global economic order that he resisted for so long and that he must now approach in cooperation with all potential rivals in the struggle for international dominance.

Or perhaps it is simply consistent with the personality of someone who is preparing to embark on a new life without saying goodbye to his old life, someone who is only beginning to explore the contours of his life in retirement.----------------
Crawford, Texas, is his adopted hometown, a town profiled in a recent issue of the New Yorker. This is "Bush country." He invites favored heads of state to stay there, and he repeatedly stresses that the place is his source of energy. Crawford, a town of 705 inhabitants and seven churches, is set in the midst of a flat, monotonous prairie. A Bush campaign sign leans against a grain silo on Main Street. The wind has knocked the sign from its frame, but no one has bothered to straighten it again.

There were once seven shops in Crawford that sold Bush souvenirs. Three have gone out of business and business is slow in the other four. The last time anything newsworthy happened in the town was five months ago, when the president's daughter, Jenna, was married. Tourists crowded into the local coffee shop, hoping to catch a glimpse of the bride and her groom. But they went home disappointed, where they could watch the bride, beaming in her Oscar de la Renta gown, and George W. stiffly serving up oysters and crab cocktail instead of steak and pretzels -- on television.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. paid many a visit to his hometown. When he moved into the White House, a citizens' group organized local festivals and fireworks in Bush's honor. Crawford voted almost unanimously for its most famous son, even in his second run for office. In 2005, Cindy Sheehan, the angry mother of a soldier killed in Iraq, temporarily transformed the place into the headquarters of the antiwar movement. The locals were less than amused, and the community became divided.

When Bush gave a campaign speech in Crawford a few weeks ago, barely a dozen journalists showed up for the event, while many locals stayed at home. They will be seeing even less of George W. in the future, as the family looks for a condominium in the city. He plans to write his memoirs and establish a "Freedom Institute" next to his presidential library at Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

The New Yorker reported on his appearance at a Republican fund-raiser in Houston. "Wall Street got drunk, and now it's got a hangover," said an upbeat lame-duck president. "And then we got a housing issue," he said, "not in Houston -- evidently not in Dallas, because Laura’s over there trying to buy a house today."

The audience laughed. When someone asked why he wasn't planning to move to Crawford full-time, Bush replied: "I like Crawford. Unfortunately, after eight years of asking my wife to sacrifice, I am no longer the decision maker. She'll be deciding."

And so the small town of Crawford, Texas will like return to insignificance. Rural Texas now faces the same concerns as all of America. Because of high gasoline prices, Franklin Industrial Minerals, the town's biggest employer, is considering switching to a four-day work week. Most people in Crawford are worried about their jobs.

Little remains of the legacy of George W. Bush. Perhaps a few words carved into a slab of granite near a church. The names of Crawford residents who died in past wars are engraved in the shimmering stone. They include native sons Charles Jageler and Tommie Lee Symank, both "killed in action" in Vietnam. There is still plenty of room in the Vietnam list. Below that, the word "Iraq" is carved into the stone.

But there are no names listed under Iraq. Not yet.
Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan URL:http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,587786,00.html
RELATED SPIEGEL ONLINE LINKS:
Photo Gallery: The 43rd President
http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-36700.html
Photo Gallery: Funny Moments with George 'Dubyah' Bush
http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-36649.html
Interactive Graphic: Obama and Biden vs. McCain: The Candidates in Profile
http://www.spiegel.de/flash/0,,19242,00.html
America, Land of Extremes: An Enigmatic Country Elects a New President (10/31/2008)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,587736,00.html
Interview with Neoconservative Scholar Robert Kagan: 'America Remains Number One' (10/27/2008)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,586770,00.html
© SPIEGEL ONLINE 2008
All Rights Reserved~~~

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 04:45 PM

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ Undetectable data-stealing trojan nabs 500,000 virtual wallets
Sinowal's evil genius
By
Dan Goodin in San FranciscoPosted in Security
31st October 2008 19:41 GMT
Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/31/sinowal_trojan_heist/
A well-organized crime gang has stolen credentials for more than a half-million financial accounts in less than three years using a sophisticated trojan that remains undetectable to the vast majority of its victims, a report published Friday warns.(http://www.rsa.com/blog/blog_entry.aspx?id=1378)
The haul of bank, credit, and debit card account numbers stolen by the Sinowal trojan is among the largest ever discovered. It was unearthed by researchers at RSA's FraudAction Research Lab. They say the program, which is also known as Torpig and Mebroot, has been operating non-stop for almost three years, an unusually long time in the fly-by-night world of cybercrime.

"Only rarely do we come across crimeware that has been continually stealing and collecting personal information and payment card data, and compromising bank accounts as far back as 2006," RSA researchers wrote.

What's more, Sinowal has only managed to become more productive over time. In the past six months, it has compromised more than 100,000 accounts. Since February, the number of variants has spiked, from fewer than 25 per month to more than 70, according to RSA. The increase helps the malware evade detection by anti-virus programs.

In all, the trojan has infected at least 300,000 Windows machines and stolen 270,000 online banking account numbers and 240,000 credit and debit credentials.

Sinowal is impressive for other reasons as well. Unlike many trojans, it doesn't rely on tricking the end user into clicking on a link or file to get installed. Rather, it spreads silently via websites that prey on unpatched vulnerabilities in the Windows operating system or in third-party applications, such as Adobe Flash and Apple's QuickTime media player.

"This particular trojan can get installed without even awareness of the end-user that they have agreed to anything or that anything has been installed," Sean Brady, manager of identity protection at RSA, said in an interview.

It then hides itself on a computer's master boot record, making the infection extremely difficult to find. About the only remedy for victims fortunate enough to learn they are contaminated is to reformat their hard drive and reinstall their operating system.

Brady said RSA has shared the data it discovered with affected banks in the hopes they will notify customers who are infected.

Sinowal sits dormant on a machine until a user points a browser at the website of a bank or other financial institution. Then an HTML injection engine adds fields to the website's login page that prompt victims to enter social security numbers, passwords, and other credentials. Once entered, the information is transmitted to a server under the control of the malware authors. The injection mechanism is triggered by more than 2,700 different web addresses.

Little is known about the group responsible for Sinowal, but at least one clue suggests the group has ties to Russia: While the trojan targets institutions in dozens of countries in North America, Europe and Asia, none were located in Russia. ®

Related stories
Security researchers lift the lid on Torpig banking Trojan (31 October 2008)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/31/torpig_banking_trojan/
Excuse me sir: there's a rootkit in your master boot record (9 January 2008)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/09/mbr_rootkit/
Kaspersky: Maxtor markets password-pilfering Dutch disk drives (19 September 2007)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/maxtor_harddrives_include_virus/The return of the ransom-ware Trojan (19 July 2007)http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/19/ransomware_trojan/0wning Vista from the boot (26 April 2007)http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/26/vbootkit_authors_interview/Hackers debut malware loaded USB ruse (25 April 2007)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/25/usb_malware/
$ $ $

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 04:58 PM

X
Report Card: Was Picking Palin a Mistake?With Days Until the Election,
a
Closer Look at the Palin Pick By
ERIC JOHNSON
Oct. 30, 2008—
With the presidential election just days away, and with the latest polls still favoring the Barack Obama-Joe Biden ticket, Republican VP pick Gov. Sarah Palin is still full steam ahead, gathering huge crowds from event to event to conduct the task that always falls into the lap of the vice presidential candidate -- attack.

Today, Palin took aim at Obama's primetime infomercial, which aired last night across six television networks and garnered 33.5 million viewers.

"He's [Obama's] hoping your mind won't wander to real challenges of national security, challenges he is incapable of meeting," she said.

Since early September, when Palin was picked by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., as his running mate, she's become wildly popular with the Republican base, drawing huge crowds that often out-do McCain's. But lately, some are beginning to wonder if Palin has become a drag on the ticket.

"If John McCain wins on Tuesday, the short answer is no," ABC News' chief Washington correspondent, George Stephanopoulos, told "Nightline's" Cynthia McFadden. "If he loses, that's the question I'd most like an honest answer to.

"We know why she was picked," Stephanopoulos continued. "The campaign was looking for someone to solidify the Republican base, excite the Republican base and reach out to some voters in the middle, women and men who might be attracted to a reform candidate. She's the first female GOP candidate for vice president with working-class roots."

Stephanopoulos said the Palin selection may not have worked to attract some of the campaign's key targets.

"It didn't seem to work there, even though Sarah Palin is still popular with Republicans," he said. "When you look at the bottom line, Joe Biden helped Barack Obama with all voters. He made people feel better about Barack Obama. Sarah Palin has hurt John McCain with the broader electorate. It's shown in poll after poll after poll."

Mixed Signals Among Mavericks?
Palin rarely goes off script on the stump, and relies on a teleprompter at nearly every event. A top McCain aide told ABC News that Palin is given talking points every day.

On Tuesday, the attack of the day was based on a 2001 radio interview on Chicago Public Radio conducted with then-State Sen. Obama, in which he appeared to say "redistributive change" never occurred during the civil rights movement.

This line gave ammo to the heavily pushed McCain-Palin line of attack -- that Obama wants to "spread the wealth" among American taxpayers.

While McCain claimed Obama was running for "redistributor-in-chief," Palin went further than her running mate, accusing Obama of wanting to re-write the Constitution.

"Sometimes in politics, it's those candid little moments that give us the whole picture," Palin declared at a rally at Penn State University. "But our opponent's ideological commitment to spread your wealth around has been tried in other societies, and the only thing it ever spreads is scarcity and poverty and bureaucracy."

Internal Chatter 'Unusual' at This Stage
But are Palin's most recent words straying more and more from campaign talking points? In recent days, a chorus of anonymous McCain aides and Republican outsiders has accused Palin of reportedly "going rogue," and instead, looking out for her own political future.

"I don't think there's any question that she has ambition," said Matthew Dowd, a prominent political consultant and chief strategist for George W. Bush's re-election campaign. "And if you look at the vice presidential candidates for the last 50 years, once somebody becomes the nominee for V.P., they automatically start having future ambitions and they automatically start looking past Election Day."

However, over the past few days, criticism of Palin within the campaign has gotten uglier. One McCain advisor reportedly labeled Palin a "diva" and another "top McCain advisor" reportedly called her a "wack job."

"It is unusual to have this much talk from campaign insiders beginning to point the fingers and beginning to say someone else is to blame," said Dowd. "I mean it's almost as if they are organizing a circular firing squad before Election Day. Usually they don't start ... those circular firing squads until after Election Day."

Washington Post columnist George Will said the internal disputation is not unfamiliar turf for the McCain camp.

"Long before Sarah Palin was a glint in John McCain's eye, there was famous factional fighting within his campaign, all the way back to the summer of 2007 when his campaign imploded in disarray," he said. "So, fighting among these people is not news."

McCain aides have pointed to specific instances of Palin speaking off the cuff, sometimes interfering with her boss. On the day after McCain decided to pull resources out of Michigan, Palin told reporters, "I would sure love to get to run to Michigan and make sure that Michigan knows that we haven't given up there."

And two weeks later, she seemed to criticize McCain's use of robo-calls.

"If I could wave a magic wand," she said, "I would be sitting at a kitchen table with more and more Americans, talking to them about our plan to get the economy back on track and winning the war and not having to rely on the old conventional ways of campaigning that includes those robo-calls."

Will said the staff should've expected mistakes from a candidate with Palin's level of experience.

"If they don't want someone to make rookie mistakes, perhaps they shouldn't pick a rookie in national politics. This is part of the bargain," he told ABC News' Kate Snow. "I think she's performing the service she was initially intended to perform, [which] is energizing the base and drawing crowds. I think that, in the process of doing that, she predictably is failing to do the other job, which is appealing to people who are not in the base."

Palin in 2012?
Will also believes there are conservatives pushing the idea of Palin in 2012, but dismisses the idea that Palin is actively contemplating a future bid.

"Look, it's always possible to explain mistakes in terms of guile," said Will. "That's a sign of paranoia. The fact is mistakes often get made, particularly in the fatigue intention of a campaign, by people who are talking 18 hours a day. They're going to say some things they shouldn't say. But to ascribe Machiavellian subtlety to this woman, particularly looking four years out is, I think, to say no more, a stretch."

In an interview with ABC's Elizabeth Vargas, Palin said she was focused on winning next week.

"I'm just thinking that it's going to go our way on Tuesday, Nov. 4," she said. "I truly believe that the wisdom of the people will be revealed on that day, as they enter that voting booth. They will understand the stark contrast between the two tickets."

Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures
ABC NEWS X X X

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 06:08 PM

^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^A
VIDEO
MOJO VIDEO:
Palin for President?At a Sarah Palin rally in Fredericksburg, Virginia, earlier this week, Mother Jones found rank-and-file Republicans excited about John McCain, but even more excited about his potential VP.

Click To Play: To gain access to link, click URL:

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/10/10526_mojo_video_palin_for_president.html

— Tay Wiles, Jonathan Stein, David Corn
There are some interesting comments thrown in among some average ones, fun to read quite a few of them.
http://www.motherjones.com ^ ^^ ^

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 06:23 PM

:: :: :: :: ::New Report Documents Activities
of
Spiritual Warfare Network Tied to Palin
By Ruth, 2008-10-29 23:07:23
Section: Front Page, Topic: sarah palin

Palin's Churches and the Third Wave Series Sarah Palin thanked prayer warriors across the nation during her  interview
http://www.citizenlink.org/dailybroadcast/A000008476.cfm last week with
James Dobson.  She has been publicly anointed
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/24/13112/0816/] by Thomas Muthee,
an international leader in spiritual warfare. Muthee starred in the Transformations videos,
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/20/171755/145/] teaching tools for spiritual mapping and spiritual warfare viewed worldwide.& nbsp; Apostles of the Spiritual Warfare Network, now called the UnitedStates Global Apostolic Prayer Network, have claimed Palin as one of their own. http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/10/7/54010/1830/ & nbsp; Next week she could possibly become the Vice President Elect of the United States. What is spiritual mapping and spiritual warfare, and who are these prayer warriors of the US Global Apostolic Prayer Network and the
Transformations videos?   What is the impact of spiritual warfare for those who do not belong to this movement? The researchers who worked on the articles in the series Palin's Churches and the Third Wave,
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/5/114652/6239 have compiled a
report to answer these questions, including who and what the prayer warriors are fighting against, and how they are using the ideas of the Transformation videos to bring this fight to your community. The report is titled "Spiritual Mapping and Spiritual Warfare - Muthee and the Transformations Franchise," and includes more than one hundred links to
sources.

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/10/29/23723/734 . . .

When the Alfred E. Neuman School says "What, Me Worry?" -- about the Religious Right
By
Frederick Clarkson
2008-10-29 14:42:12
Section: Front Page,
Topic: Taking Action

Pastordan nails it
http://www.streetprophets.com/story/2008/10/28/15534/365, (or at least one of many very important its) over at Street Prophets today. In discusing how the immoderate Rick Warren
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/3/29/1509/49603 has endorsed
Proposition 8 that would repeal marriage equality in California, pastordan succinctly describes the elephant on the table that is one of the obstacles to clear thinking, informed conversation and good strategy in response to the Religious Right. Much more on all this on the flip, but before we go there, let's also note that today is Write to Marry Day http://www.mombian.com/2008/10/29/write-to-marry-day-contributed-posts/ in support of marriage equality in California and in opposition to the Religious Right's infamous Prop 8. Here is the original press release
http://pageoneq.com/news/2008/writetomarry10272008.html calling on
bloggers to highlight this important battle on their blogs today. (What we used to call a "blog swarm.") With less than a week to go, the No on 8 campaign needs financial help to compete with the enormous money advantage of the coalition of theocrats seeking to impose their particular religious view of marriage on everyone else. You can contribute via Act Blue
http://www.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/19788.
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/10/29/144212/72. . . . .

Saundra Hummer

October 31st, 2008, 08:04 PM

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Genealogical firm finds Palin ties to Hawaii
Fri Oct 31, 12:45 am ET
KAILUA-KONA, Hawaii – A Big Island couple who founded a genealogy service company has tracked GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's family ties to Hawaii and to actor Alec Baldwin.

Bruce and Kristine Harrison founded the Family Forest Project in 1995, and since have mapped the ancestral histories of thousands of political leaders, celebrities and historical figures, as well as everyday people.

"While watching Sarah Palin and Alec Baldwin talking together on 'Saturday Night Live,' I couldn't help wondering if they had any idea they are related to each other," Harrison said.

He said Palin and Baldwin are "fairly distant cousins" because their first ancestral connection is many generations back.

Harrison has connected Palin's family to several prominent Hawaii families including the Cooke family of Bank of Hawaii, the Waterhouse and Alexander families of Alexander & Baldwin, the Atherton family of Atherton Foundation and the Monty Richards family of Kahua Ranch.

Earlier, Harrison claimed he found links between Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and previous presidents, including George Washington, James Madison, Harry Truman and Jimmy Carter.

Harrison said his ancestry research program now has enough data to map generation-by-generation ancestral pathways to the ancestors of up to 2 billion people.

Recently, genealogists at Ancestry.com found Palin to be a distant cousin of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the late Princess Diana.

On the Net:
Family Forest: http://www.familyforest.comAnd Oprah is related to Elvis, or so they say, but can she sing? SRH ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 01:22 AM

* * * * *
Northern Exposure
Sarah Palin's toxic paradise.
Sheila Kaplan and Marilyn Berlin Snell
The New Republic
Published:
Wednesday, October 22, 2008

There's no reason to doubt Sarah Palin's sincerity when she talks about her commitment to family and--more specifically--special-needs kids. When she introduced her son, who has Down syndrome, to the audience at the Republican convention, the family tableau drew cheers. And she issued a promise. "To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message for you," she told the crowd. "For years, you've sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters, and I pledge to you that, if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House."

Unfortunately, as governor of a state with a birth-defect rate that's twice the national average, and which has the gloomy status as repository of toxic chemicals from around the world, Palin has pursued environmental policies that seem perfectly crafted to swell the ranks of special-needs kids. It's true that Alaska's top leaders have placed industry wishes over environmental protection for years. But, instead of correcting this problem, she's compounded it. Peer into her environmental record, and Palin ends up looking a lot like George W. Bush.

In the past 20 years, research has shown that exposure to some metals and to chemicals such as pesticides, flame retardants, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) can cause birth defects and permanent developmental disorders both prenatally and in the first years of childhood. And Alaska is vulnerable to some of the worst environmental pollutants out there. In a state whose wealth depends on the exploitation of its natural resources, the toxic byproducts of mining and energy development, such as arsenic, mercury, and lead, are particular problems. Alaska Natives, such as the Inuit people, eat a diet that is heavy in fish, seals, and whales--animals that are high on the food chain and therefore more likely to be contaminated with high doses of PCBs and mercury. And the state is vulnerable not only to homegrown pollution, but also to industrial pollution: Trace gases and tiny airborne particles are contaminating the polar regions, carried there on atmospheric and oceanic currents, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The mess of pollutants in Alaska has clearly taken its toll. In general, the state has double the national average of birth defects. While the causes are unknown, environmentalists point to the region that includes the North Slope, an area slightly larger than Minnesota, where most of Alaska's oil is produced. The byproducts of oil production can cause serious nervous system disorders, and the North Slope and its environs, home to Alaska Natives and itinerant oil workers, has the highest prevalence of birth defects in the state--11 percent--compared with 6 percent statewide and 3 percent nationwide.

Palin, however, has not addressed these concerns. Her administration irked environmentalists in February 2008, when it opposed legislation that would have given parents at least 48 hours' notice before schools were to be sprayed with pesticides and other toxic chemicals. Currently, parents get 24 hours, which the bill's proponents say is not sufficient for parents who want to arrange to keep kids out of school for a few days after the chemicals are applied. Palin's administration argued that the bill was too restrictive and would force schools to notify parents before cleaning toilets with disinfectant--which, supporters say, is not true. In the same month, members of Palin's administration testified against language in legislation that would have banned polybrominated diphenyl ethers--a flame retardant that, studies show, harms the developing brain.

Then, in the summer of 2007, Palin allowed oil companies to move forward with a toxic-dumping plan in Alaska's Cook Inlet, the only coastal fishery in the nation where toxic dumping is permitted. The Bush administration initially OK'd the companies' request to increase toxic releases, but the permits could not be issued without Alaska's certification that the discharges met the state's water-quality standards, says Bob Shavelson, executive director of Cook Inletkeeper, an organization founded to protect the area's watershed. Palin complied. "Palin's Department of Environmental Conservation issued that certification the long-discounted notion that 'dilution is the solution to pollution'--turning the federal Clean Water Act on its head and actually increasing toxic pollution," Shavelson says.

Palin next took on the Clean Water Initiative, also known as Proposition 4, which appeared on the Alaska ballot on August 26. The measure would have limited the runoff of toxic metals--known to cause developmental and birth defects, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention--from all mining operations, but it was aimed at stopping the proposed Pebble Mine, a huge mining proposal that was controversial for its potential impact on Bristol Bay, the world's largest commercial wild salmon fishery (for which Palin's oldest daughter was named). The project had been in the works for years, and, when she ran for governor in 2006, Palin told the Alaska Journal of Commerce that, if the mine was green-lighted, "there will be remediation from now to eternity." Once in office, though, environmental concerns took a backseat. In a TV interview six days before the vote, Palin said, "Let me take my governor's hat off for just a minute, and tell you personally, Prop 4--I vote no on that." Alaska's mining industry parlayed Palin's face and words into an advertising blitz--and came from behind to defeat it.

Palin's latest anti-environmental effort also came in August, when she attempted to block California's plan to curb its air pollution. The Golden State is trying to reduce its toxic emissions with a port fee that would pay for pollution-reduction projects around the state. Arguing that it would hurt Alaska's economy, Palin asked California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto the proposed legislation.

Finally, Palin was pushed by environmental activists and Alaska Natives to pressure the military in its cleanup of one of the most contaminated sites in Alaska--but the state didn't act. This was on the old Northeast Cape Air Force base on remote St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea--one of the state's closest spots to Russia. When the military closed its operations in the 1970s, it left thousands of barrels of toxic waste, containing solvents, fuels, heavy metals, pesticides, and PCBs, a group of toxic organic chemicals that have persisted in the environment. For the past few years, the Army Corps of Engineers has been slowly cleaning up parts of the site and claims it will leave it safe. (One federally funded study still in progress by the state's premier watchdog on chemical pollutants, Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), tested the local water and got a reading that was more than one thousand times the level that the EPA considers safe. "If the Corps of Engineers want to fill up their canteens in there, they are welcome to it," says Kathrine Springman, the toxicologist who did that study. "Actually, I wouldn't want them to drink it ... anymore than I would ask them to drink Drano.")

But critics say the Army is taking too long, and that its plan will leave too many untreated chemicals, PCBs in particular, at the site. According to Pamela Miller, ACAT's executive director, Palin should have used her powers as governor to forge a better cleanup plan. "Certainly this was also a pattern in the Murkowski administration, but, under Palin, it's gotten worse," she said. "Her administration has done nothing to work with the military to avoid possible contamination." Scientists have also opposed the Army's plan, saying it will leave the area dangerous.

Supporters note that Palin did boost school spending for children with the most severe disabilities, but, in general, the Alaskan government under Palin has done nothing to protect those children and future generations from the toxic stew that the state has become. "She doesn't have a good understanding of the science," says Ruth Etzel, who until recently was research director at the Alaska Native Medical Program in Anchorage. "What she tends to do is talk about personal responsibility as the key to good health."

Andrea Doll, a Democratic state representative from Juneau, says she tried to get Palin interested in her bill on flame retardants early on: "I told her about the bill. She totally was not interested in any way, shape, or form. It was that look on her face--that 'don't even go there' look."

Sheila Kaplan is an investigative reporter who divides her time between Washington, D.C., and Northern California. Marilyn Berlin Snell is a San Francisco-based investigative journalist. Research support for this article was provided by the Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute.Copyright © 2007 The New Republic. All rights reserved.

There are lots of comments, sympathetic and not. There are those who don't believe any kind of polution can been taking place due to the vast expanse of Alaska, but remember, we here in the West, as well as further inland, receive pollutants from China's burning of coal and other fuels, etc. Toxins of all sorts reach our shores. Alaska has it's share of dangers, and they are within Alaska itself, adding to the pollutants from overseas, mostly from China we hear.

Go on-site to gain access to the [B]Numerous articles. SRH
http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=96470ac7-2c43-4643-9703-ec3776ba5b10 * * * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 12:47 PM

* * * * *
STOLEN VOTES
According to reports, the election is being stolen yet again. Oprah Winfrey has even reported that her vote disappeared.

How about mandatory prison terms for people who do this? A mandatory sentence might be a deterrent I would think. Harsh, but this stealing of our votes seems to be an ongoing problem. Look at where are at this time due to two elections not having been above-board. SRH * * *

1. Miami Herald
October 25, 2008.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/campaign-2008/story/740834.html

Ballots picked up, then disappear
The disappearance of some absentee ballots, picked up under unusual circumstances, has raised some serious questions.
BY
LAURA FIGUEROA AND SCOTT HIAASEN
shiaasen@MiamiHerald.com

Three Hialeah voters say they had an unusual visitor at their homes last week: a man who called himself Juan, offering to help them fill out their absentee ballots and deliver them to the elections office.

The voters, all supporters of Democratic congressional candidate Raul Martinez, said they gave their ballots to the man after he told them he worked for Martinez. But the Martinez campaign said he doesn't work for them.

Juan ''told me not to worry, that they normally collected all the ballots and waited until they had a stack big enough to hand-deliver to the elections department,'' said voter Jesus Hernandez, 73. 'He said, `Don't worry. This is not going to pass through the mail to get lost.' ''

Hernandez said he worries his ballot was stolen or destroyed. He and two other voters told The Miami Herald that the man was dispatched by a woman caller who also said she worked for Martinez. But the phone number cited by the voters traces back to a consultant working for Martinez's rival, Republican congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart.

Martinez's campaign manager, Jeff Garcia, has asked the Miami-Dade state attorney's office to investigate.

Garcia has also spent the past week investigating the complaints, taking sworn statements from the three voters and mounting an ameteur sting operation at the home of an 84-year-old voter to try to catch the culprit.

`IT IS DISTURBING'
"These are very serious allegations that could affect the outcome of an election,'' Garcia said. ``It is disturbing that in a win-at-any-cost election the congressman's campaign may be resorting to breaking the law.''

But the mystery only deepened after one complaining voter's ballot arrived at the elections office on Thursday, apparently unmolested.

The Diaz-Balart campaign denies collecting ballots and says it has no knowledge of any callers posing as the Martinez camp.

''What you are telling me is completely ludicrous. I denounce it under the strongest terms,'' said Ana Carbonell, Diaz-Balart's campaign manager. ``If someone is doing that, that's not authorized.''

Miami-Dade voters are supposed to deliver absentee ballots by mail or in person -- not through surrogates. Under a county ordinance, a third party can deliver only two ballots, and then only with a voter's permission and a note from the voter's doctor.

But Assistant State Attorney Joe Centorino said there's nothing preventing campaigns from collecting ballots and mailing them in.

The three voters said they first spoke with a woman at a phone number that belongs to Sasha Tirador, a subcontractor who manages a phone bank operation for David Custin, a Diaz-Balart political consultant.

Tirador denied collecting ballots or posing as the Martinez campaign.

Carbonell said the phone bank is only supposed to encourage absentee voters to choose Diaz-Balart.

One of the complaining voters, 47-year-old Irene Perez, said she turned over her ballot to Juan after being contacted by a woman named Aliosha Castro -- who had called Perez about voting absentee in the past.

A man named Aliosha Castro works with Tirador on the campaign, Custin said, and records show he is her partner in a car-wash business. Castro could not be reached for comment.

REPORTER HEARD CALL
On Monday, a Herald reporter listened and observed as a Martinez volunteer called Tirador's office. The voice on the other end said more than once that it was Martinez's office -- not Diaz-Balart's.

The Martinez camp then tried to set a trap after a supporter reported receiving a similar phone call from the same phone number.

Martinez's wife, Angela, hid in the bedroom of 84-year-old Clara Suarez and Garcia stood outside with a video camera when a man came to Suarez's Hialeah apartment following the call.

But Suarez -- whose niece is Martinez's longtime secretary -- said the caller she spoke with identified herself with the Diaz-Balart campaign, and the caller sent the man to bring stamps for her ballot, not to take it.

Custin said he doesn't believe Tirador's phone bank has done anything wrong, but he said he would look into the allegations. ''Nobody -- not on my watch -- goes and takes a ballot,'' he said.

In automated calls, Diaz-Balart has urged voters to put their absentee ballots in the mail -- and warned them not to give their ballots to anyone.

The ballots for Hernandez and his roommate, Felipa Gonzalez, have not been turned in. But they have not lost their votes: Angela Martinez said she drove Hernandez and Gonzalez to the polls herself to vote early.

Miami Herald staff writer Luisa Yanez contributed to this report. ...

2. Los Angeles Times, October 20, 2008.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-fraud20-2008oct20,0,3842357.story

From the Los Angeles Times
Ontario police arrest man in voter fraud case
Mark Jacoby, who owns a firm hired by the California Republican Party, violated state laws with his own registration, authorities say.
By
Evan Halper
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 20, 2008

SACRAMENTO —The owner of a firm that the California Republican Party hired to register tens of thousands of voters this year was arrested in Ontario over the weekend on suspicion of voter registration fraud.

State and local investigators allege that Mark Jacoby fraudulently registered himself to vote at a childhood California address where he no longer lives so he would appear to meet the legal requirement that all signature gatherers be eligible to vote in California. His firm, Young Political Majors, or YPM, collects petition signatures and registers voters in California and other states.

Jacoby's arrest by state investigators and the Ontario Police Department late Saturday came after dozens of voters said they were duped into registering as Republicans by people employed by YPM. The voters said YPM workers tricked them by saying they were signing a petition to toughen penalties against child molesters.

The firm was paid $7 to $12 for every Californian it registered as a member of the GOP.

Dan Goldfine, an attorney for Jacoby, on Sunday denied any wrongdoing by his client and called the charges "baseless."

He said the arrest outside an Ontario hotel, which involved seven squad cars and nine police officers, was part of a "long pattern of harassment against Mr. Jacoby for an entirely valid voter registration effort."

Goldfine said the case that prosecutors are bringing against his client involves charges that are rarely pressed.

Jacoby was released on bail Sunday evening from the West Valley Detention Center in Rancho Cucamonga, Goldfine said.

After complaints by voters and Democratic Party officials, several agencies launched investigations into Jacoby's activities. They included the Los Angeles County district attorney's office, which issued the warrant for his arrest earlier this month on felony charges of voter registration fraud and perjury.

"We contacted people at the addresses where he registered, and they have no idea who he is," said Dave Demerjian, head deputy of the public integrity unit at the L.A. County district attorney's office.

Goldfine said his client does business in many states, traveling frequently, and his permanent address has been his parents' Los Angeles County home, where he received mail and registered to vote.

Demerjian said his office is continuing to investigate allegations that YPM workers improperly re-registered voters with the GOP.

Several dozen voters recently told The Times that YPM workers said they had to become Republicans to sign the petition, contrary to California initiative law. Other voters said they had no idea their registration was being changed.

YPM has been accused of using bait-and-switch tactics across the country. Election officials and lawmakers have launched investigations into the activities of YPM workers in Florida and Massachusetts. In Arizona, the firm was recently a defendant in a civil rights lawsuit.

In a written statement Sunday, the state Republican Party called the charges against Jacoby "politically motivated." The party said the charges do not support accusations from voters and Democratic officials that YPM has been duping voters into joining the GOP.

The statement accused Secretary of State Debra Bowen, who announced the arrest, of "using her office to play politics."

Bowen is a Democrat.

[email]evan.halper@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-fraud20-2008oct20,0,3842357.story. . .

3.UPI, Oct. 28, 2008.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/10/28/Phony_flier_advises_Dems_to_vote_Nov_5/UPI-99161225226657/

Phony flier advises Dems to vote Nov. 5
Hampton Roads, Va., Oct. 28 (UPI) -- Virginia state officials are advising residents to disregard a phony state flier advising Democrats to vote on Nov. 5, a day after the actual election.

The flier, which is designed to look somewhat like a State Board of Elections document, has been distributed in several Hampton Roads, Va., locations, the (Norfolk) Virginian-Pilot reported Tuesday.

The flier features the state board logo and the state seal. It purports that "an emergency session of the General Assembly has adopted the following emergency regulations to ease the load on local electoral precincts and ensure a fair electoral process." The words following and electoral were spelled incorrectly.

One of the alleged "emergency regulations" is that Republicans are to vote Nov. 4, while Democrats are to vote a day later, the flier said.

Election officials say they have forwarded the flier to the Virginia State Police for investigation as a possible incident of voter intimidation.

© 2008 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
. . . . .

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 02:42 PM

<><><><><>Dear friends,

Two quick extra announcements this week:

. Our staff helped the folks over at GoLeft.tv put together a farewell video for George W. Bush. Check it out here:

http://jimhightower.com/node/6643

. In Austin this weekend, a very important film called "Trouble the Water" is opening this weekend-- and it needs your support to stay in the theater! Head on down to the Regal Arbor cinema and see it if you can. If you're not in Austin, check out the movie's website to see when it will be playing near you.

Keep agitating!
The Hightower Staff

REAL AMERICANS
Friday, October 31, 2008
Posted by Jim Hightower
Listen to this Commentary
(It's a plus to hear Jim put his thoughts into an audio. Go on site to hear him. His way of telling things adds so much to any article he publishes. SRH)
It hurts me deeply to say this, but here goes: I’m not a real American.

Oh, I’m proud to live in America and grateful for all the opportunities I’ve been given in this great country. Also, I would probably seem pretty American to you: I was born and raised in Texas, I came up through public schools, I drive a made-in-America 1997 Ford, I own a modest house, I have a small business, I pay taxes and meet a payroll, I work hard, I’m a beer drinker, I love baseball… and so on.

But here’s where I fall down: I don’t live in a place that Sarah Palin likes.

“I like to visit the pro-America parts of this great nation,” she recently explained to an appreciative crowd at a Republican rally in North Carolina. In fact, she talks incessantly about how small town, moose-dressing, hockey moms like her are the real Americans. Apparently, the rest of us are, at best, fake Americans, or, worse, anti-Americans.

Live in a big city or anywhere on the West Coast? You don’t meet Sarah’s standard, and she won’t be visiting your area. Are you now or have you ever been a community organizer? Gosh darn it, get out of here, says Ms. Real America. Are you Black, a Democrat, an environmentalist, a pro-choicer, or – omigosh! – a Muslim? Well, doggone it, that’s sure not real in Palin’s America. When you get right down to it, the only ones who qualify as Real, Pro-American Americans are those who show up at Sarah Palin rallies. That leaves a whole lot of us out.

What holds us together in this big, sprawling nation of wonderfully-diverse people and cultures is the realization that no one group is more “real” than the next. What unifies us as a society is our belief in the common good – and those who try to separate us from that unifying bond are the real enemies of America. It’s you who needs to get real, Ms. Palin.

“Keepin’ it real in Fake America,” Austin American Statesman, October 23, 2008.

send to friend
http://jimhightower.com//node/6636 <><><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 03:32 PM

~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ REMEMBER
IRAQ had one of the most sophisticated and technicolgically advanced sound water systems in the world, and it was badly damaged, pretty much destroyed during the bombings of their country by us, the United States. The French had the parts to begin immediate repairs to the Iraqi water system, having built it in the first place I believe. The Cheney/Bush administration refused to let them bring in parts or do any work on it. The administration knew dies would have to be designed and made, taking over two years just to do this alone, and it was thought that the repairs if done by us would take 4 to 6 years. Have any dies been designed and made? Have the necessary parts for the repairs even been manufactured? I have my doubts, and now this.

We don't live in a box canyon, we aren't as isolated from everyone as much as we used to be. Disease spreads like wild fire any more with how all peoples travel the world like never before. We know we protect ourselvs by protecting them. Just like we do when we provide illegal's medical aid in the states. We can't afford not to. Besides, let's be human about this. SRH
Red Cross: Millions of Iraqis at Risk From Contaminated Water
World
Iraq: No Let-up in The Humanitarian Crisis. Ten liters of bottled water costs 50 cents, but many Iraqis cannot afford it, drinking water from polluted rivers instead.Uhoud Abdulmajeed Saturday November 1, 2008, 4:16 am
Ten liters of bottled water costs 50 cents, but many Iraqis cannot afford it, drinking water from polluted rivers instead.
Improved security has failed to prevent Iraq becoming the scene of one of the world's most critical humanitarian disasters with water supplies and sewage systems putting millions at risk of disease, the Red Cross said today.

The statement from the International Committee of the Red Cross said the situation has not improved significantly since March this year when the organization published its report, Iraq: No Let-up in The Humanitarian Crisis.

The report found that the humanitarian situation in Iraq following the US invasion was the worst in the world.

Today's findings state that water supplies in the war-torn country have continued to deteriorate with even the most basic infrastructure not functioning.

More than 40 percent of people are relying on poor quality and inadequate supplies and millions, especially children, are at serious risk of water-borne disease, the Red Cross said.

Cholera cases peaked in a number of provinces during the hottest months of August and September.

"Iraqis urgently need access to clean water. They try to get it from rivers and wells but these sources are contaminated throughout the country so many people become ill," said Patrick Yussef, head of the Red Cross sub-delegation in Baghdad.

Most of Iraq's water comes from its two main rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, which are heavily polluted by household waste and litter.

In poorer areas of Baghdad, streets are flooded with sewage, which seeps into walls and under the floors of houses until they collapse.

Even though 10 liters of bottled water costs only 50 U.S. cents, many Iraqis cannot afford to buy it and have to drink water from the polluted rivers.

Hospitals are struggling to keep up with the numbers of sick. Equipment and medicines are in short supply and electricity shortages are common.

"There has been some improvement in recent months, both in terms of security and essential services," said Juan-Pedro Schaerer, head of the Red Cross delegation for Iraq. "But far too many Iraqis still have no choice but to drink dirty water and live in insalubrious conditions."

The most vulnerable are those living in the countryside and suburbs and not connected to a water network.

The Red Cross is trying to gain more access into the country and said this has improved over the years.

But Schaerer stressed that the situation of many civilians remains precarious. "Clearly, fewer civilians
http://www.care2.com/news/member/736158251/938063 ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 04:13 PM

*.*.*.*.*Whew, and these people are for real. I kid you not. How in the world have they come to this? Hubris and the need to control, the need to feel all important? Wanting to be on the same level as their vindictive god? What other reason could there be? We who don't think as they do are the "hoards" they fear, and despise. We do feel however that they are the ones to watch out for, as their rational can affect their actions, so, look out everyone. SRH
Anti-Obama "Spritual Warfare" Rhetoric Now at Fever Pitch By
Richard Bartholomew
Sat Nov 01, 2008
at
04:22:33 AM EST

A new email newsletter from James Hutchens and his "Jerusalem Connection" Christian Zionist outfit directs me to "A Prophetic Warning" from Pastor Steve Foss. Foss (a protégé of Morris Cerullo) apparently received a message from God in 2000 that George Bush would just about scrape home for his first term, and that there would be an economic crash at the end of his second term. Now that it's all come true Foss has chosen to tell the world what God revealed to him, including what's in store next:

God spoke to me that after George W. Bush, America would elect its most ungodly president ever.

That is, unless Christians intercede in some unspecified way - like, for example, voting against a particular candidate:

...I had a vision earlier this year. I saw Barack Obama in this vision. He was speaking to a large crowd and being broadcast on television. He was speaking incredible words of unity, peace, and bringing all sides together; the words were elegant, the words were comforting, and the words were inspiring.
But while he was speaking I saw all a powerful spirit of violence coming out of his spirit feeding into the spirits of those that were hearing him. That spirit of violence was directed at anybody who opposed what he was saying. Those who heard his words and received it had the spirit of violence being implanted inside of them. It was a rage like I have not seen before.

It was the rage that would be unleashed against those who oppose and stand in the way of Barack Obama's agenda. We are already seeing the beginnings of this spirit manifested here in America. The vicious attacks against Sarah Palin have been unlike anything we have ever seen before. The sheer hate for this woman from people who knew nothing about her, and who claim to stand up and protect the little people, and women, has been shocking.

The demon-possessed hordes also have it in for Joe the Plumber:

These people who are under the influence of this demon spirit of rage desire to completely destroy this man because he dared to question Barack Obama/

This is just the latest evidence that Obama is using occult powers against his foes - as I blogged the other day, American missionaries in Kenya recently revealed that Obama's grandmother has been killing chickens with the result that John McCain now looks "confused and like and idiot".
Foss is not alone in his call for a fightback- neo-Pentecostal leader Dutch Sheets recently called for spiritual warfare to win the election:

ln 2000 we actually lost the popular vote and won the election-talk about grace! Please pray for this grace to be released again...

(Perhaps "God's grace" explains those dodgy voting machines in West Virginia?)

...In August of this year I predicted that September would mark a shift in momentum for these elections. This happened with the appointment of Sarah Palin as the Vice Presidential nominee (who is a true Esther in our generation), but when the economy began its meltdown and the media ramped up their unprecedented attacks on Palin, that momentum wasn't sustained.
Please understand what I am saying: if we engage in this battle and do what I am asking-in mass-we will win; if we do not, we will lose. I, for one, don't intend to allow the latter. I am in Washington , D.C. now (October 20-22) with Lou Engle and a team of prayer leaders from around the nation to war for this election. Join us! Lose some sleep, miss some meals-pray! Pray like never before for these elections. And as you do, involve yourself not only in petitioning prayer but also in spiritual warfare. Use your God- given authority over the plans and strategies of satan's kingdom. Bind all witchcraft that is working to control the outcome, including occultic powers that are suppressing truth. Release Christ's Kingdom rule in every way the Holy Spirit leads you.

Apparently other such anti-Obama "prophetic warnings" are doing the rounds, and most of them are perhaps too trivial or fringe to be worth taking notice. However, Foss and Sheets both have standing in the neo-Pentecostal movement, and Sheets in particular is a leading figure of the "Third Wave". Hutchens is also influential, and despite the "Jerusalem Connection" being a 501(c)3 he has been bold in promoting the direst attacks on Obama.

COMMENTS: 3
Isn't Dutch Sheets the originator of the... (none / 0) ..."prophecy" that Alaska will serve as a refuge state during armageddon?
by xDARKxEnERGYx on Sat Nov 01, 2008 at 10:21:51 AM EST

The frenzy continues in San Diego (none / 0) The frenzy continues. "The Call" San Diego is a prophecy and intercessory prayer gathering at the San Diego Qualcomm stadium from 10 - 10 today. "The Call" events are led by Lou Engle, member of ACEP (Apostolic Council of Prophetic Elders) and are geared toward youth. See the link at http://www.thecall.com/ and while you are there, check out the video at The Call Institute to see the latest look of the Religious Right. The advisory team is a who's who of the Third Wave and New Apostolic leadership along with some famiiar names like Gary Bauer.
Dutch Sheets and Chuck Pierce, along with Cindy Jacobs, are the top Apostolic and Prophetic leaders of C. Peter Wagner's New Apostolic Reformation. Sheets and Pierce went on a 50 state tour a few years ago and wrote a book of prophecies, state by state, titled Releasing the Prophetic Destiny of a Nation. Link to the e-book here: http://ebooks.ebookmall.com/ebook/190863-ebook.htm

Page 106 in this book refers to Mary Glazier, as one of the early forerunners of today's spiritual warfare networks and includes their prophecies for Alaska. Glazier is also a member of ACEP and head of the spiritual warfare network that Palin belonged to at 24 when she was "called by God" to enter politics.

There are a number of prayer networks associated with the New Apostolic Reformation. Dutch Sheets also heads the National Governmental Prayer Alliance with separate state networks. Cindy Jacobs (who led the Convergence 08 at the bull on Wall St. on Oct. 29) heads the new Reformation Prayer network. Chuck Pierce is being groomed to take over the Global Harvest Ministries from Wagner. Dutch Sheets and Ken Malone (of Katherine Harris phone call fame) also run Kingdom Freedom Enterprises, one of the many operations that are part of the "wealth transfer" and business end of the New Apostolics kingdom.

The leadership has made many prophecies about the election including one from Mary Glazier which implies that Palin will become President during a period of mourning. For a detailed report on the Spiritual Warfare and Spiritual Mapping activities of the NAR access PDF link at http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/10/29/23723/734/
by Ruth on Sat Nov 01, 2008 at 02:03:00 PM EST

Going on now... (none / 0) Rest Fest '08
Co-Sponsored by Elijah List
OCTOBER 30 - NOVEMBER 2, 2008

SPEAKERS:
Ed Kalnins
Heidi Baker
Paul Keith Davis
Steve Sampson

UPDATE: PLEASE READ
Regardless of our political convictions, as a Christian, I, like many of you have wondered about this woman, Sarah Palin. Is she actually a Christian? What are her spiritual roots? Is she the real deal? Who were the people who prayed for her, witnessed to her, trained her, spoke words of destiny over her until she stood as governor of Alaska? by xDARKxENERGYx on Sat Nov 01, 2008 at 05:34:41 PM EST http://www.hubministries.org/main.htmGo on-site to gain access to other articles of the day:
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/11/1/42233/9119
http://www.earthlink.net*.*.*.*.*

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 06:00 PM

* * * * *
Early Voting; Obama's Ace in the Hole By
Bill Hare
11/01/2008
05:31:49 PM EST
An interview of Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina by Joe Scarborough on his early show this week demonstrated how the 2008 presidential election has been proceeding.

While the official date of the election is November 4, it is ongoing with a number of states holding early voting, and herein lies the big story that Clyburn, an African American congressman, was talking about.

South Carolina was considered one of those "don't bother touching it, it is in the red category" decisions. To even make an attempt was throwing good money after bad and wasting other opportunities in the process.

Clyburn's illuminating commentary revealed a political story unraveling that has been revealed in Atlanta and outlaying areas as well. The story concerns African Americans as well as other voters standing in lines that typically extend to 7 and 8 hours and in some instances encompassed a staggering 12-hour figure.

Media representatives have discussed this phenomenon with African Americans during and following these lengthy experiences and have received a uniform answer.
These citizens are afraid that another election will be stolen, as was the case in 2000 with the ruthless vote scrub ploy by Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris in Florida and proceeded four years later in Ohio, when Ken Blackwell, an African American himself, led the Republican vote suppression effort against African Americans in Ohio.

According to Clyburn the early voting pattern has been so strong in Obama's favor in South Carolina with African Americans turning out in staggering numbers that the earlier reported dynamics of this southern traditionally Republican state might well have changed.

Pat Buchanan entered the discussion at one point and asked about the status of close John McCain friend and thought to be invulnerable incumbent Senator Lindsey Graham. Buchanan cited a recent poll he had seen with Graham up by a 50-41% count, much closer than what was previously anticipated.

Clyburn responded to Buchanan by affirming that with the strong tide being evinced by African American voter turnout in South Carolina that Graham's one time shoe in status could well be in doubt.

Not only does Obama have what even Republicans acknowledge is a superior ground team in place for Election Day.

It is now being said that, if the staggering pre-election vote reaches an anticipated 33% or better, that it would take a Herculean effort by the McCain forces on Tuesday to surmount the lead established through the early voting pattern favoring Obama.

Should those determined efforts of people standing on their feet for eight hours of longer prove to be the difference, this will mark one of the most positive challenges in recent U.S. political history as those that were suppressed, excluded and cheated in previous elections made the difference in 2008.

Also, a case is being established for federal legislation facilitating early voting and eliminating the need to stand in long lines. http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2008/11/1/173149/735 * * * * * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 06:47 PM

~~~~~~~
Almost all absurdity of conduct arises from the imitation of those whom we cannot resemble.

Samuel Johnson~~~
I never yet heard man or woman much abused that I was not inclined to think the better of them, and to transfer the suspicion or dislike to the one who found pleasure in pointing out the defects of another.

Jane Porter
~~~
The best security against revolution is in constant correction of abuses and the introduction of needed improvements. It is the neglect of timely repair that makes rebuilding necessary.

Richard Whately
~~~
Let us not be content to wait and see what will happen, but give us the determination to make the right things happen.

Peter Marshall
~~~
Death comes to all
But great achievements build a monument
Which shall endure until the sun grows cold.

Georg Fabricius
~~~~~

Saundra Hummer

November 1st, 2008, 07:18 PM

lllllllll
POLLSTER.COMArticles and Analysis October 31, 2008 Daily Tracker Update
By
Mark Blumenthal
It is probably premature to start talking about a "widening" of Barack Obama's lead over John McCain, although today's national tracking results certainly produce no evidence of any continuing "narrowing." Of the eight national tracking polls out today, five show slight movement in Obama's direction today, only one in McCain's direction and two show no change in the margin.

GO ON-SITE FOR CHARTS, NUMEROUS COMMENTS, ETC.

While there have been ups and downs, the average Obama lead on the eight daily tracking surveys today (6.3%) is almost exactly what it was (6.4%) on October 20, the day of the first ABC/Washington Post release. The Washington Post's Ben Pershing used a modified version of national trend chart today -- filtered to show just the national trackers -- to make a similar point: "Today's margin [on the trackers] is almost exactly where it was a month ago."

I'm not sure which filter Pershing applied, but the following chart displays the trend line based only on the eight national tracking surveys included in the table above

By
Mark Blumenthal
October 31, 2008 5:24 PM

CommentsWildgift:
Steady as she goes...
Posted on October 31, 2008 5:37 PM
_________________

C.S.Strowbridge:
McCain needs to gain roughly 1.4% per day to have a shot at winning this. Losing a day is terrible news. Obama gaining more than 0.6% on average is beyond terrible.
Posted on October 31, 2008 5:40 PM
____________________

thoughtful:
The polls are just remarkably (sorry) stable. Take the tightening before the conventions away and respective bounces and Obama has consolidated on the back of the economy and social issues which he has always had the advantage.

I'm one who thinks Obama's lead is wider than the average based on my calculation of likely turn out, this time out turn out advantages Obama.

It seemed to me and when its polled its apparent that McCain's age is a bigger disqualification than Obama's race.

McCain is every bit of his 72 years. I'd expect greater width over the weekend.

Makes it hugely important for Obama to get his vote out.
Posted on October 31, 2008 6:11 PM____________________ There are several more comments on-site, go there to gain access to them as well as the graphics. http://www.pollster.com/blogs/daily_tracker_update_1.php

Check out:

http://www.buzzflash.com

and see if you would like to enter their contest as to electorial vote counts for both candidates. Books are the prizes. lllllllllllll

Saundra Hummer

November 2nd, 2008, 01:59 AM

? ? ? ? ?Who’s the Question Mark?
By
MAUREEN DOWD
Op-Ed Columnist
November 2, 2008

In the final moments of the most gripping campaign in modern history, John McCain is still trying to costume Barack Obama as a dangerous enigma.

But, in an odd and remarkable reversal, it is McCain who is the enigma, even though he entered the race with one of the best brands in American politics.

And it is Obama, who sashayed onto the trail two years ago as an aloof and exotic mystery man with a slim record and a strange name, now coming across as the steadier brand.

The McCain campaign specializes in erratica, while the Obama campaign continues to avoid any dramatica.

McCain pals around with Joe the Plumber and leaves Tito the Builder to Sarah Palin, exactly the kind of inane campaign silliness that the McCain formerly known as Maverick would have mocked mercilessly.

He’s getting a little traction on taxes, as he latches on to every possible scary image about Obama — except the suggestion that the Democrat’s gray Hart Schaffner Marx suits are red.

Before he was bubbled by Bushies, McCain was one of the most known and knowable quantities in American politics. For most of his long public career, he prided himself on his openness with the press — he even allowed some reporters to watch the results of January’s New Hampshire primary in his hotel suite in Nashua. He relished spending all day being challenged by voters and reporters.

Last summer, tapped out and unable to afford a paid staff of political professionals, he talked freely, telling reporters he would have a White House that would be the polar opposite of the secretive and dismissive Bush-Cheney operation. He imagined weekly press conferences and talked of subjecting himself to a version of British question time in Congress. While acknowledging he was a tech tyro, he promised to try “a Google,” as he called searching the Web, to put government spending online so citizens could bird-dog it.

He even went so far as to spin a dream of a West Wing in which he would cut back on his Secret Service so he wouldn’t feel so constrained.

In the end, “The Bullet,” or “Sarge,” as McCain calls his replacement campaign manager Steve Schmidt, was the one who did the shackling, turning the vibrant and respected McCain into a shell of his former self.

Schmidt abruptly cut off the oxygen supply to McCain’s brain. No more of the oldest established, permanent floating crap game of press confabs. No more audiences that weren’t vetted for friendliness. No more of McCain’s trademark insouciant mocking the process even as he participated in it.

Whether it was the five years he spent in a hole in Hanoi or just his gregarious makeup, McCain seemed to feed off of the company of people who interested him, be it reporters, voters or the pols in his posse, like Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham.

Unlike Obama, He Who Walks Alone, McCain always rejected the solitary in favor of the social. But ever since Sergeant Schmidt put Captain McCain into a sterile brig on the trail, the candidate has become a question mark.

Why would he repeat that oblivious line about the fundamentals of the economy being strong, saying it once in August and again in September?

Why would he threaten to not show up for a debate (after denouncing Obama for not rising to the challenge of joint town halls) so that he could go to Washington and play the shining knight if he had no plan and no prospect for success?

Why did he allow his campaign to become a host body for a Bush virus looking for someplace to infect? After working so hard to erase the image of what Senate aides called “the Bush hug,” McCain inexplicably hugged Bushies, surrounding himself with mercenaries trained in the same Rovian tactics that tore up his family — and tore apart his campaign — in 2000.

Why did a politician who once knew how to play the game so well, who was once so beloved by people of very different political stripes, allow his campaign to get whiny, angry, vengeful and bitter?

Why Palin?

(Her latest instant classics came Friday, when she entered a rally in York, Pa., to the tune of “Thriller” and when a conservative radio station broadcast an interview in which she accused reporters of threatening her First Amendment rights by attacking her for negative campaigning that she feels justifiably calls out Obama “on his associations.”)

Why did he allow his staff to put Palin on a couture catwalk in a tin-cup economy and then, when the price tags were exposed, trash her as a “diva” and “whack job,” thus becoming the rare Republican campaign devoured by Democratic-style vicious infighting?

The ultimate riddle is this: Why doesn’t McCain question why he has become a question mark?

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/opinion/02dowd.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
<><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

November 2nd, 2008, 11:10 AM

* * * * *A
NEWSLETTER

Dear Friend,

It has been a long campaign, and a tough one. Norm Coleman has sunk to historic depths to smear Al Franken and make this election about something, anything other than his own record and the issues that affect the people of Minnesota.

But what Norm Coleman did yesterday was something else entirely, and you need to know the truth.

Here's the story: A Republican businessman in Texas by the name of Paul McKim filed a lawsuit this week against Nasser Kazeminy. Kazeminy is one of Norm Coleman's biggest donors and closest friends - he's the same man who flew Coleman on his private jet to vacations in the Bahamas and Paris.

Only a small portion of the lawsuit has anything to do with Norm Coleman - but the part that does is incredibly serious. McKim's sworn affidavit, since corroborated by a second lawsuit, describes an effort to funnel $100,000 to Senator Coleman.

So are the allegations true? We don't know. In fact, we at the campaign didn't know a thing about this lawsuit, had never heard of this company or Paul McKim, until we read about it in the newspaper.

Then came yesterday. Instead of answering these very serious allegations, Norm Coleman released the most dishonest ad of the year, blaming Al for the lawsuit.

That ad is up on TV right now. And it's a despicable lie. Al Franken had nothing to do with this lawsuit.

Norm Coleman, faced with sworn allegations of a conspiracy to funnel him improper payments, is trying to deflect blame by lying about Al Franken in a TV ad. No matter what candidate you support or what party you belong to, it is a sad day.

With just a couple of days left, the only way we can stop him is with the truth. After all, that's what Al's always been about: letting the truth carry the day.

But we need your help. Please forward this email to everyone you know. And please know that no matter what happens in this election, you can be proud that you were part of this campaign.

Thank you for all you do,

Andy Barr
Al Franken for Senate
* * *

Saundra Hummer

November 2nd, 2008, 11:42 AM

* * * * * * *FOR HISTORY: David S. Broder calls this 'The Amazing Race: I thought 1960 was the best campaign I'd ever cover. But 2008 has that election beat.' The N.Y Times' Frank Bruni has the 'Week in Review' cover: 'The Year Of Living On the Edge Of Our Seats.'

Saundra Hummer

November 2nd, 2008, 04:42 PM

^^^^^
Restore America as a Model of Freedom! By
Bob Kendall
11/02/2008
01:07:59 PM EST

The Campaign for America's Future published its positive message in the New York Times October 28.

I am quoting some power-packed statements that accurately depict who we are and how we can prosper once again. It represents a blueprint of how we can restore America as a model of freedom to become a shining light once more to the dark corners of the world amid despair, launching a search for illumination.

The Campaign for America's Future is based at 1845 K Street NW, Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20006. The organization's website is at www.ourfuture.org. This is some of what America's Future's ad in the New York Times had to say:

"Remember who we are.

"We are the children and grandchildren of Americans who confronted the Great Depression and beat it.
"We are the children and grandchildren of Americans who built a new democracy from the ground up.

"They brought big business to account. They made banks the servants, not the masters of the economy. They empowered government to address the needs of working people. They organized labor unions, created Social Security, rebuilt the nation's infrastructure. They vastly expanded the numbers of 'we' in 'we the people.'

"And they came to understand, as their president said 'There is nothing mysterious about the foundations of a healthy and strong democracy -- jobs for all who can work, security for all who need it, freedom and opportunity for all to enjoy the fruits of scientific progress.'

"Now, after three decades of conservative misrule, we witness the price of ignoring this common sense.

"We have let public good be subordinated to corporate greed, we've let our economy be run into the ground as bankers run wild. We've let labor unions be attacked and our middle class be weakened. We've allowed religion and patriotism be tarnished in the partisan pursuit of power.

"And we have suffered an ignorant presidency marked by an unjust war in Iraq, an icy indifference after Katrina, a brazen attack on our liberties and a bald complicity in torture.

"Choose new leaders and hold them accountable.

"Defeat the big lobbies and small minds, and respect human rights, enact universal health care; protect workers rights to organize; invest in renewable energy, end the endless wars, regain America's standing in the world. As a model of freedom and once again, build democracy and prosperity from the bottom up.

"That is what must be done. The time to do it is now."

Of course we can't bring about change in America by following the worn-out policies of the conservatives. That policy of disaster involved conducting 2 wars (Afghanistan and Iraq) while at the same time giving tax cuts to the wealthiest citizens, hoping some of their greedily acquired wealth will trickle down, which is a dream rather than reality.

Giving tax breaks to big oil companies while their gas prices cripple our U.S. economy is self-destruction for our economy.

To hear John McCain, the George Bush clone, talk about "change" when he along with Bush and others of like mind achieved this 8 years of nightmare democracy detour is a bad joke!

http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2008/11/2/13759/0249 ^ ^ ^

Saundra Hummer

November 2nd, 2008, 05:35 PM

<><><><><><><><><>The Real Story
of the
110th Congress:
The Right-Wing Block-And-Blame Game
As the 110th Congress nears its close, the impact of a record-breaking campaign of obstruction by a conservative minority in the Senate is now more clear than ever. The right-wing strategy of "block and blame" has driven the public perception of a "do-nothing Congress." In reality, the 110th Congress would have achieved truly landmark accomplishments—including safely bringing the troops home from Iraq, reducing America's dependence on foreign oil and its contribution to global warming, and funding long-neglected domestic priorities—had it not been for conservative obstruction.

Our October 2008 block-and-blame analysis cuts through the political spin. We document how what is being reported as political stalemate is really the product of a conservative political strategy, both in Congress and the White House, to sabotage the new majority in Congress as it responds to the mandate it received from the American public—even if it means bringing down public support for the entire Congress in the process.

Get the full story:

» Report: "The Real Story of the 110th Congress: The Right-Wing Block-And-Blame Game"

Previous reports and articles:

» Robert Borosage on "The Roots of Obstruction"

» Report: "Block and Blame: The Conservative Strategy of Obstruction in the First Session of the 110th Congress"

» “FILIBUSTERED: How the Right is Obstructing America’s Progress”

» The chart of presidential veto threats and a report on why they matter.

» Voting records of senators who are obstructing or supporting the people's agenda.

» The polling data that shows the popularity of the reforms being blocked.

» The comebacks you can use to rebut conservative talking points on the Iraq war.

» More articles and actions on obstruction Senate Obstruction Leader Go on-site for photo.

As far back as January 2007, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made it clear that he would assume the role of Senate Obstruction Leader by insisting on a 60-vote supermajority, rather than a simple 50-vote majority, for getting bills through the Senate.

He claims “that’s the ordinary procedure.” But he’s wrong, and we have the proof. The reality is, his abuse of Senate procedures to block the majority will on legislation is unprecedented. McConnell and Senate Republicans like the filibuster now, but they didn’t when Democrats used it more sparingly in the 109th Congress against President Bush’s most extreme judicial nominees. Learn more about McConnell and the Republican filibuster flip-flop »

Go on-site for the numerous links within this article and to see the related articles as well. An informative and interesting site. Just click on the following URL:
http://www.ourfuture.org/obstruction
The Majority Doesn't Count
Source:Secretary of the Senate
Go on-site to view chart:
http://www.ourfuture.org/obstruction
As this chart shows, never have so many filibusters been threatened as in the first session of the 110th Congress. In just the first year, Republicans filibustered more legislation, and required more cloture votes to break those filibusters, than in any Congress in recent history. By the time this term ends, Congress could well more than double the number of cloture votes of previous Congresses — including the ones that Republicans controlled and complained of Democratic 'obstruction.'

This is the result of a deliberate effort by the Republican minority to undercut the will of the majority of the American public, expressed when voters placed a Democratic majority in control of both houses of Congress. The filibuster, a procedure unique to the Senate to block an up-or-down vote on legislation unless a 60-vote supermajority agrees to proceed, has been historically used by both parties. But it has never been used as routinely as it has been by Republicans since January 2007.

» Read our up-to-date chart on judicial nominations.The Plot To Bury Progress
Our cameras caught the conservative mastermind leading obstruction in Congress. Watch the video and pass it on to help revive the fight for progress
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=LT9kUslHfBY<><><><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 11:39 AM

* * * * *A
NEWSLETTERNEWS DISSECTORNovember 3, 200
Posted Sunday 4:52 PM
Tick, Tick, Tick: Obama Leads But What Can Go Wrong?
A DAY TO GO
OBAMA LEADS-WHAT COULD GO WRONG?
NEW PARTY IN SOUTH AFRICA CHALLENGES ANCZOGBY POLL SUNDAYObama Holds His Lead
Obama 49.5%, McCain 43.8%
There is no escape from the pundits and the projections and the ads and the speculation. The only thing missing was interjected into the discourse by none other than Tom Friedman, NY Times superstar in a column noting that none of the issues that matter the most have been central to the campaign.

I can't remember a presidential campaign that was so disconnected from the actual challenges of governing that will confront the winner the morning after. When this election campaign began two years ago, the big issue was how and for how long do we continue nation-building in Iraq. As the campaign comes to a close, the big issue is how and at what sacrifice do we do nation-building in America.PREPARE FOR A LET-DOWNJayne Stahl says that come Wednesday, if there are no major suprises, there will be an outbreak of post partum-like depression:

This morning, The London Times reports that the Obama team has already been talking about how to deal with post-partum depression following his historical victory, and right they are. The way things are stacking up, people are flocking to the polls thinking that they will elect a president who all buts walks on water.

The presidential hopeful is right to try to mitigate against any kind of emotional upheaval which may well result when people realize that the country, and the world, is so deeply immersed in this economic morass, socioeconomic disenfranchisement, racism, and religious intolerance that even Houdini would be hard pressed to step into the Oval Office, wave a wand, and make everything better.

After all, we're electing a mere mortal…NEVER SAY NEVER: MCAIN CAN WINGreg Palast explains why:
1. The number of voters challenged or missing from the voter rolls on Tuesday will exceed six million - double the number from 2004. In that election, 1.1 million provisional ballots were rejected: this time, rejected ballots will easily double to 2 million - overwhelmingly Obama supporters. This is the result of a mass purge of voter rolls orchestrated by Republican Secretaries of State. The purge has been staggering - over ten million names disappeared since the last election.

And not just any voters. Analysis shows that purged voters who cast provisional ballots are overwhelmingly Black, Hispanic and Native American - that is, Obama voters.
2. Absentee ballots disqualified and not counted will double from 2004 to 1.5 million minimum. This is the result of a massive increase in mail-in ballots - but mostly from the hundreds of thousands of new voters who don't know that, in many states, they will have to include a photocopy of their ID with the absentee ballot. They won't, or they'll do it wrong, and lose their vote.
3. Spoiled ballots (unreadable, blank, mis-marked) will stay well over one million (there were 1.4 million of these in 2004). The chance a Black voter will find their vote lost to technical error, according to a US Civil Rights Commission study, has been 900% higher than for a white voter.
4. New voters: ID and 'verification' losses. For the first time in US history, new voters must pass through a "verification" of their identity by states. Up to 42% of new registrations have been rejected, the vast majority due to errors in government records and matching systems. New voters are Obama voters - 69% to 20% - according to a Wall Street Journal survey. 'FTF' (First-Time Federal) voters now will also have special ID and absentee voting restrictions that will disqualify voters and votes by the millions.

The total number of votes cast but not counted was, officially, 3 million in 2004. Double that this time, to at least six million. That will be concentrated in swing states where Republican Secretaries of State have conducted mass purge-and-block operations, such as Colorado, where GOP officials quietly purged 19.4% of the all the names on the state's voter rolls.

Obama can still win, but he'll have a beat a margin of voting law manipulation that will cost him nearly six million votes.

I just came across a piece I posted last May. The questions remain the same:WHY IS THE MEDIA DOWNPLAYING THE INTEGRITY OF VOTING?New York, May 19: Explain this to me: Why do so few of our TV "journalists" and political reporters seem interested in all the questions that have been raised about the integrity of our voting system?

Voting is at the heart of our democracy. Billions of dollars are spent on political campaigns and tens of millions on covering them. All the networks have election units complete with pollsters, analysts and experts up the kazoo. All of them sound authoritative and spice their commentary with personal war stories and a parade of insider anecdotes.

Just tune in any election night to marvel at the space age technology, fancy graphics and computer assisted projections. The anchors seem to know as much about what the history of voting percentages in each Congressional district as fanatical baseball fans remember earned run averages and the speed of each pitch.

If there are ten military men and women backing up each soldier in the field, there are tens of political aides, advisors, interns and hangers on "supporting" our elected professionals. Handicapping elections is one of their specialties and they know most of the races and players by heart.

Compared to corporate machinations, or even military-industrial decisions, politics is over-covered, And yet the actual process of voting-the machines, the counting, the verification, and the questions raised by well informed journalists and analysts is ignored and seems to bore them.IF THE VOTE IS CLOSEKathy Dopp writes:If the presidential results are close, the number of yet-to-be-counted ballots may be larger than the spread between candidates in swing states.

If the vote count is close on Tuesday night, there's a good chance
Americans will become as familiar with a special kind of voting -
known as a provisional ballot - as they were with hanging chads in
Florida in the aftermath of Florida's disputed 2000 presidential
election.

That is because in several battle ground states the number of
provisional and uncounted mail-in ballots - which have to be checked one by one after Election Day to validate the voter's registration information before counting - plus the number of uncounted mail-in ballots are likely to exceed the margins of victory.

In other words, if it is a close vote, you can expect Republican and
Democratic Party lawyers to start fighting over the state-by-state and county-by-county rules concerning provisional ballot eligibility.

Provisional ballots were created by Congress after the 2000 election,
but each state was given the leeway to implement its own rules for
accepting or rejection these ballots.
SEE THE ELECTION PROTECTION WIKI3 days until Election Day.Via Mark Crispin MillerJust a comment to those who want to dismiss 'vote-flipping' as voter error. All kinds of people go to the polls to vote. They are highly educated and high-school dropouts. Rich and poor. They have long fingernails and nails bitten to the quick. They have thin fingers and wide fingers. They are going to softly touch the screen or touch it hard. Vendors and election officials tend to blame vote-flipping on the voters. They touched the screen too hard; drug their finger; had long fingernails; or their fingers touched too large an area. So, is it the voters fault? NO! It is the vendors who designed, built and sold these machines that don't work for all voters and it is the election officials who bought those machines.
Comment on this post... (Go on-site to view comments.). . . . .More Banks Bailed Out, New Site Monitors The Money, FED on MedsMORE BANKS ON THE BAIL OUT LINEBailout Sleuth reports:Two more banks have announced plans to sell stakes in themselves to the federal government under the Treasury Department's $700 billion program to inject capital into the financial markets.

The banks, in Ohio and Arkansas, would sell as much as $120 million in preferred shares to the Treasury Department. Four other banks said they had applied, or planned to apply, for more than $1 billion in federal assistance.

First Financial Bancorp., a Cincinnati-based bank holding company with $3.5 billion in assets, said it had been approved to sell as much as $80 million in preferred stock to the Treasury Department.

Claude Davis, the company's president, said the capital would strengthen the bank, increase its lending capacity and help it take advantage of strategic growth opportunities.NEW WEBSITE TRACKING BAILOUTMark Cuban, chair of HDNet and blogger, has played a key role in setting up a Web site to keep an eye on the massive financial bailout. According to Cuban, Bailoutsleuth.com will try to publish daily updates on how the federal government is spending tax dollars, and how the bailout is impacting people and companies. "Its job is simple," Cuban wrote, 'keep an eye on our taxpayer dollars and call Bullshit when necessary." Cuban, who writes Blog Maverick, helped finance and set up Sharesleuth.com to uncover fraud and misinformation in publicly traded companies. He's now working with Sharesleuth.com to build Baioutsleuth.com.
America. Is. Crazy.If you do nothing else today, read this outstanding New York Times article about how five Wisconsin school boards somehow invested $200 million in insanely risky international financial instruments created by an German bank based in Dublin.

The investment bank that sold this to the school boards, collecting a fee of $1.2 million in the process, is called Stifel, Nicolaus & Co.KARL LIVESDW: Global crisis sends east Germans flocking to Marx
Two decades after the Berlin Wall fell, communism's founding father Karl Marx is back in vogue in eastern Germany - thanks to the global financial crisis.

His 1867 critical analysis of capitalism, "Das Kapital," has risen from the publishing graveyard to become an improbable best-seller for academic publisher Karl-Dietz-Verlag.

"Everyone thought there would never ever again be any demand for 'Das Kapital'," managing director Joern Schuetrumpf told Reuters after selling 1,500 copies so far this year, triple the number sold in all of 2007 and a 100-fold increase since 1990.

"Even bankers and managers are now reading 'Das Kapital' to try to understand what they've been doing to us. Marx is definitely 'in' right now," Schuetrumpf said.

The revival of Marx's treatise reflects a broader rejection of capitalism by many in eastern Germany, a communist country until 1989 and now racked by high unemployment and poverty.

A month of intense financial turmoil has toppled banks in the United States and forced a series of government bailouts in Germany and elsewhere, reinforcing anti-capitalist sentiment.
Nickolas Jones on Seeking Apha on the FED rate cutrs:"For those who are praising this act as a boost for the economy are kidding themselves. I've never been a believer in the Fed's ability to drive a multi-trillion dollar economy by manipulating short term interest rates. That couldn't be more true in today's markets.

Not only can the Fed not control the U.S. economy through interest rate manipulation, they can't even control short term interest rates through interest rate manipulation. What this does affect are the rates tied to official fed funds rate numbers like savings account rates.

What this doesn't affect are any of the short term commercial paper markets used to finance economic activity. In essence, while the Fed is not affecting the interest rate markets, they are reducing savings rates and fueling inflation.
The Fed's Real IntentionsThe Federal Reserve has dug in their heels in the mightiest bought against deflation since the 1930s. If they fail, we are looking at deflation that would dwarf that seen in the Great Depression.

In order to be successful in this fight, Bernanke and company will be forced to use all of their monetary tools, and some that were thought not to exist. The standard monetary tools have included FOMC policy and creation of money and credit.

Some of the more historic measures taken include: massive cumulative bailout, money market security blanket, commercial paper assistance, creation of more lending facilities that one can ever imagine, change in discount lending rules, direct stakes in insurers, direct stakes in banks, nationalization of privatized loss, etc. I mean at this point you could go on and on.

If it hasn't come clear to you yet, I don't know what to say. THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS ON THE PATH TO HYPERINFLATION. You need to prepare yourself financially. Things like social security will be worthless in 10 years. $100 of goods will soon buy you what would have been $10 worth. All of these things will weigh on us economically with higher interest rates and double digit unemployment.
CFR: Two two-trillionairesThe Fed's balance sheet just surpassed 2 trillion dollars. It has grown by a trillion dollars over the course of the year. Literally. See "total factors supplying reserve balances" at the close of business on October 29. That growth was financed by Treasury bill issuance ($560b from the supplementary financing facility) and a large rise in banks deposits at the Fed ($405b).Comment on this post...
ANC CHALLENGED, HAITI SINKING, STUDS SALUTED, MORE
SOUTH AFRICA: Shikota announces launch of new partyThe Shikota movement on Saturday declared its intention to launch a new political party that will rival the ANC during the 2009 elections.
HAITI STILL SINKINGThe Miami Herald reports: Mud, misery rule storm-ravaged Haitian cityColossal clouds of dust stretch for miles along a post-apocalyptic scene of human misery where schools, streets, homes and hospitals remain buried under heaps of dry earth.

Nearly two months after back-to-back storms ravaged their forgotten city, the people of Gonaives subsist in mud-caked ruins, sleeping on rooftops, in classrooms, and in shacks fashioned from tattered bedsheets and rusted tin.

After what is unequivocally one of the worst natural disasters to hit this deeply impoverished country in 100 years, international aid for recovery has stopped at slightly more than a third of the $106 million the United Nations asked for. And the recovery is mired in a lack of leadership, infighting by political and relief organizations and profiteering.Qatar Strives to End Darfur Crisis
The Media Line news agencyQatar is trying to broker a deal to end the crisis in Sudan's war-torn Darfur region, part of Doha's efforts to mediate several conflicts in the region.

Qatar's minister of state for foreign affairs, Ahmad Bin 'Abdallah Al Mahmoud, is heading to Chad this week to meet with Chadian President Idris Deby and the chairman of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), a Darfur rebel group.

Chad has repeatedly complained it has been marginalized in efforts to solve the Darfur crisis.
SALUTING STUDSLong time media critic and former FAIR director Jeff Cohen salutes the late Studs Terkel. (One of the cable nets, I think CNN was running a Saturday night calling Terkel an actor.)
Studs Terkel: He'll Never Be SilencedThe irrepressible Louis "Studs" Terkel was many things - oral historian, radio and TV host, actor, activist, Bronx-born icon of Chicago, the "great listener" who was hard of hearing, Pulitzer Prize-winner. But most of all he was an inspiration. He inspired every younger activist or independent journalist who ever met him. And who among us wasn't younger than Studs.

The self-described "guerilla journalist" died Friday at 96. He was almost 70 when I first met him, more than twice my age. But I couldn't keep up.

Whenever I did catch up with him, he never turned down a request for help - whether he was sick, under a book deadline, or in mourning over the death of his beloved wife Ida. If it was an issue of social justice or muckraking journalism, he (along with Ida) was ready to sign up and help out.

In 1986 when I launched the media watch group FAIR, Studs became a charter member of our advisory board. Along with I.F. Stone (whom he called "the north star of independent journalists"), Studs signed FAIR's first protest statement ever: a telegram to ABC News criticizing its exclusion of progressives.

Studs received generally favorable treatment from mainstream media. The respect was not mutual. He decried the elite media's coziness with the powerful, the timidity that subverted public television, and the censorial ways of corporate media bosses. He was outraged when GE/MSNBC muzzled Phil Donahue for questioning the Iraq invasion.

Studs wrote the following in his 1997 introduction to Wizards of Media Oz (a book by Norman Solomon and myself):

"When I was young and easy, an old Wobbly rewarded me with a tattered copy of The Brass Check by Upton Sinclair. The title referred to the coin that young brothel women were handed by their tricks; they, in turn, cashed them in with their madam at the end of their day's labors.

Sinclair's game, however, was not the kept women; it was the kept press. The former recognized her work as demeaning; the latter served their publishers, if not tremulously, gladly. And righteously. Need we mention William Randolph Hearst and his derring-do reporters covering - or, in the words of San Simeon's master, furnishing - the Spanish-American War?

A century later, our press, especially the Respectables, have gone Hearst one better. They helped make the Gulf War yellow ribbon time. It was glory, glory all the way. Our most prestigious journals found the horrors visited by our smart bombs upon Iraqi women and kids news not fit to print. It is no secret that our media - TV and radio, owned by the same Big Boys, compounding the obscenity - played the role of bat boys to the sluggers of the Pentagon.

With his legacy of best-selling books and historic recorded interviews, Studs will no more be silenced by death than Wobbly songwriter Joe Hill was by a Utah firing squad. If Howard Zinn wrote A People's History, Studs developed "A People's Journalism" - putting the stories and wisdom of poor and working class Americans on tape and the printed page.- was hitting the stores.

No matter his age, Studs always seemed a step ahead of everyone else. He was a premature anti-fascist in his youth. He was a premature, unrepentant anti-McCarthyite in the early 1950s: "I was blacklisted…I signed many petitions that were for unfashionable causes and never retracted." With mainstream media largely enthralled by Ronald Reagan's "Morning in America" propaganda in 1986, he neatly sized up the era: "The only thing trickling down from the top is meanness."

My most treasured memory of Studs was the day we flew him from Chicago to New Jersey to be a special guest on the (short-lived) primetime MSNBC Phil Donahue show in August 2002 - at a time the show was getting heat from MSNBC management not to appear liberal. I was a Donahue senior producer. This was years before Rachel Maddow and way before Olbermann began his dissent. With little critical journalism, Bush's approval rating stood at 70%….

Shedding his normal coat and tie, Phil decided to imitate his guest's fashion sense and wore the traditional Studs garb: red-and-white check shirt and red socks. The two looked like bookends in a Saturday Night Live skit - but, with Studs as the solo full-hour guest, it was not all fun and games.

"What have I got to lose? I'm 90 years old." Studs declared, in taking off after Bush. "We have a mindless boy right now with the most powerful job in the world. And that is perilous. We have an attorney general [Ashcroft] who is like the guy Arthur Miller described in The Crucible in Salem, Massachusetts, 300 years ago, who urges people to spy on other people, witchcraft and all."

….The end of the show turned to the end of life, with Studs saying: "I've had a pretty good run of it. And so if I kick off at this moment, I do OK."

When Phil asked about busloads of fans coming to grieve, Studs responded: "I don't want them to grieve. I want them to celebrate."

PHIL: You won't slow down. You're going to be tap dancing all the way to the end, right? That's your plan?

STUDS: My plan - my epitaph is "Curiosity did not kill this cat."* * * * *
DISCUSSING THE BAILOUTFINALLY, A VIDEO ON A RECENT BOOK STORE APPEARANCE DISCUSSING MY NEW BOOK PLUNDER (available on at Amazon.com)I will be doing a few shows to discuss the election, Press TV in Iran, Between the Lines in Connecticut Monday Night, KBOO, GRIT TV AND REAL NEWS on Tues.My blog is a bit truncated today since my compter is in the shop (yes, again!) so I am posting Sunday afternoon.

Comments to dissector@mediachannel.org
Comment on this post...
If you have ideas or suggestions, please write to Dissector@mediachannel.org
REMEMBER: THE SITE YOU SAVE MAY BE YOUR OWN.
Thank you!Spread The Word: Please forward this to interested friends and colleagues >>
Become a Member
Concerned about the media? TELL A FRIEND!

© 2008 MediaChannel.orgClick on the following URL to gain access to these articles and more. URL:http://www.democracyinaction.org

http://brighthall.aol.com/2008/11/02/mccain-wins-the-maverick-vote/?icid=200100397x1212362416x1200811140

* * *

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 12:29 PM

* * * * * * *FACTCHECK .ORG
ANNENBERG POLITICAL FACT CHECK
Closing Arguments: McCain
November 3, 2008
McCain and Palin close their campaign with a new set of dubious attacks.
Summary
In the final week, the McCain-Palin campaign unleashed some all-new misleading attacks on Obama:

. McCain strained to tie Obama to a Palestinian professor whose views on Israel are quite different from Obama's.

. McCain and Palin both distorted a seven-and-a-half-year-old radio interview with Obama concerning the court system and civil rights.

. McCain and the GOP ran ads claiming Obama's military budget would mean huge job cuts in Virginia, despite Obama's proposal to increase the size of the Army and Marine Corps – and McCain's own calls for ending wasteful weapons programs.

This is just the first-half of our final series on the candidates' closing arguments. Be sure to check out our companion pieceon Barack Obama's final pitch.

Note: This is a summary only. The full article with analysis, images and citations may be viewed on our Web site:

Desktop users Mobile users
Please consider supporting FactCheck.org and expanding our audience by Digging this article: Go on-site to gain access to this function. Just click below on the following URL:
http://www.FactCheck.org

This message was sent from FactCheck.org to %Member:Email% . It was sent from: FactCheck.org, 320 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045. You can modify/update your subscription via the link below.

Forward to a Friend * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 01:11 PM

<><><><><><><>
Daily Tracking Poll:
Not Just Economy and Bush;
Palin Is Trouble for McCain TooObama Leads McCain 54-43 in Latest ABC News/Washington Post Poll
ANALYSIS by GARY LANGER
Nov. 3, 2008—
Go on-site for photo's, etc.
http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/story?id=6166666&page=1

Barack Obama's strong close in the 2008 campaign has been boosted by more than the shell-shocked economy and the Bush legacy. There's also Sarah Palin, and the concern she incites, especially among voters who are worried about John McCain's age.

Forty-six percent of likely voters now say having Palin on the ticket makes them less likely to support McCain -- up 14 points in just the past month and more than double what it was in early September. And among those who call the candidates' age an important factor in their vote, more, 61 percent, say Palin makes them less likely to back McCain.

Click here for PDF of analysis with charts and questionnaire. (Adobe)
http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1077a26ElectionTrackingUpdate.pdf
Age in and of itself is a negative for McCain; 48 percent call it an important factor, and 71 percent of them prefer his opponent. Far fewer, by contrast, describe Obama's race as an important factor in their vote, and those who do so are no less likely to support him.

But there is a racial difference: Among whites who call race an important factor, Obama does less well; among nonwhites who call race important, Obama soars.

As reported Sunday night, Obama retains the overall lead in this ABC News/Washington Post poll, 54-43 percent among likely voters interviewed Wednesday through Saturday. Support for the candidates has run in a narrow band for weeks, with Obama at 52 to 54 percent in every ABC/Post poll since Oct. 11, McCain between 43 and 45 percent in that same period.

Other elements in this poll include a look at the level of final-week get-out-the-vote contacts, the extent of lobbying by family/friends, and an excitement/fear measure: No more likely voters are "scared" about the possibility of either Obama or McCain as president, and twice as many are "excited" about the prospect of Obama.

GOTV There's been an extraordinary level of contacts by both campaigns, with a small advantage to Obama nationally but parity between the two in battleground and toss-up states. Overall, 26 percent of likely voters say they've been contacted directly by the Obama campaign, 21 percent by the McCain side -- tens of millions of personal contacts by both campaigns, either in person or by phone, e-mail or text message.

Contacts are higher in the 18 battleground states and five-toss-up states (Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri and Indiana) as identified by the ABC News Political Unit. McCain campaign contacts are reported by 35 percent in the battlegrounds and 38 percent in the toss-ups; Obama contacts, by 37 percent in both.

What matters, though, is not just the number of contacts but their targeting and/or effectiveness. There Obama has a very large advantage nationally: Among likely voters who report a contact by the Obama campaign 72 percent support him, while among those who report a McCain contact, 54 percent support the Republican.

This gap is narrower, however, in the battleground states: There Obama's supported by 66 percent of those who've been contacted by his campaign, and McCain's supported by 58 percent of those who've heard from him.

FRIENDS/FAMILY A corollary to campaign contacts is lobbying by family and friends, and there Obama also has an advantage. Thirty-one percent of likely voters say a family member or friend has asked them to support Obama; fewer, 22 percent, say the same about McCain. Nationally, those lobbied about Obama support him by 73-24 percent; those lobbied about McCain support him by a narrower (but still wide) 62-36 percent.

There are some differences among groups, fitting the candidates' support profiles. Fifty-eight percent of African-Americans, 45 percent of voters under age 30 and 42 percent of Democrats say a friend or family member has asked them to support Obama. For McCain, such appeals have peaked among Republicans, 35 percent; evangelical white Protestants, 29 percent; and conservatives, also 29 percent.

Thirty percent of independents and 36 percent of political moderates say someone close has asked them to support Obama, outnumbering the 23 and 20 percent, respectively, who've been approached by a friend or family member on behalf of McCain.

EXCITED/SCARED Twenty-two percent of likely voters say they're "scared" by the prospect of an Obama presidency, essentially equal to the number who are scared by the idea of McCain as president, 23 percent. Naturally these views are highly partisan and ideological.

It's the opposite emotion that underscores Obama's longstanding advantage over McCain in enthusiasm. Thirty-five percent of likely voters say they're "excited" by the idea of an Obama presidency. Half as many, 17 percent, are excited about McCain as president.

RACE As noted, while 48 percent call McCain's age an important factor in their vote, fewer, 21 percent, call Obama's race an important issue. That is up from 15 percent in a Sept. 22 poll; the rise has occurred disproportionately among African-Americans. Now 40 percent of blacks call race an important factor, as do 18 percent of whites.

Overall, likely voters who call race important support Obama over McCain by 58-42 percent. But there's a difference by race. Whites who call race a factor favor McCain by 62-38 percent. Nonwhites who call it a factor prefer Obama, almost unanimously.

This, of course, leaves aside the vast majority of likely voters, 79 percent, who say race is not a factor in their vote. They support Obama over McCain by 54-43 percent, precisely the same as his support among all likely voters in this survey.

ISSUES/GROUPS As noted in a separate analysis last night, Obama's being boosted chiefly by his advantage on the economy, but he also continues to lead on taxes and remains competitive with McCain in trust to handle a crisis cutting to the experience question that has been Obama's greatest risk.

The economy is far and away the top voting issue, and Obama leads McCain by 55-40 percent in trust to handle it. Obama's also held a steady lead, now 52-41 percent, in trust to handle taxes, a chief target of McCain's.

On experience, 56 percent see Obama as a "safe" choice for president, despite McCain's suggestions to the opposite. Slightly fewer, 51 percent, see McCain as a safe choice.

Among groups, Obama's 54 percent support among men is his best this year, as his 46 percent among white men, customarily a more Republican voting group. In these and many other groups, Obama's support is markedly higher among those who cite the economy as the top issue in their vote, underscoring its strength in vote choices this year.

Part of Obama's advantage comes from his campaign's ability to turn out early voters; 27 percent say they've already cast their ballots, a strongly pro-Obama group, 59-40 percent. Among first-time voters, moreover, Obama has a nearly 2-1 advantage.

METHODOLOGY: Interviews for this ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll were conducted by telephone Oct. 29 - Nov. 1, 2008, among a random national sample of 2,172 likely voters, including landline and cell-phone-only respondents. Results have a 2-point error margin for the full sample. Questions 21 and 42 through 44 were asked Oct. 31-Nov. 1 among 1,248 likely voters; those results have a 3-point error margin. Question 45 was asked Nov. 1 among 618 likely voters; that result has a 4-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, PA.

Go on-site for this article, and related ones, as well as photo's and any links if they occurr.
http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/story?id=6166666&page=1
Click here for PDF of analysis (text) with charts and questionnaire.

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1077a26

ElectionTrackingUpdate.pdf
Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures <><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 02:50 PM

$ $ $ $ $ $ $
$1.3 million ‘Stockpiled’ Ivory Sale HeldOct. 29, 2008
10:38 AM

So, the buying and selling of ivoryis illegal, right? Nope, wrong. It is supposed to be illegal; ’supposed’ being the operative word here. China and Japan have has recently been given the green light to buy up ’stockpiled’ ivory. Stockpiled here meaning ‘died of natural causes’ or (get this) from ‘population management programmes’. Nations signatory to CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species), including the UK, voted to allow China and Japan to buy ivory from four Southern African nations and as a result, Chinese and Japanese bidders have now bought no less than over 7 tonnes of stockpiled ivory (I can feel us all taking a big step backwards at this point towards pre-1989 when the trading of ivory was outlawed).

This is surely, by extension, sending the go-ahead message to poachers who will doubtless embark on a fresh slaughtering campaign. It may seem cynical but it doesn’t bode well that China, the central hub of the world’s illegal ivory trade, and where carved ivory is a highly lucrative business, has been allowed to buy up much of this ’stockpiled’ ivory… alarm bells ringing, anyone?

eBay has stated recently (just prior to claims that they were contributing to the trading of endangered animal products) that they have imposed a global ban on the sale of ivory. The ban will kick in by January 2009 and is primarily the result of an investigation that found well over 4,000 illegal ivory listings on EBay. Shocking eh?

It’s hard to imagine not seeing the inherent irony of these ’stockpiles’ of ivory being sold and the proceeds being used for nature conservation. Logically, I’d say there are a few holes in that idea.

Ok, brace yourselves, how about this for an idea – leave the elephants alone, it’s radical, I know, but bear with me. They were born with tusks and have no intention of selling them because they don’t consider themselves a commodity. It doesn’t matter how the resulting ivory from these ’stockpiles’ was obtained – it came from elephants and it is theirs to keep, not to be sold to anyone.

Image: MSN Encarta / CC
http://blog.peta.org.uk/2008/13- million-stockpiled-ivory-sale-heldI'm not a member of Peta and think that some of their campaigns are foolish and ill informed, but this latest deal with ivory is something I pretty much am in accord with; their take on the ivory trade is how most people I know of believe as well.

How about drying up the desire to even own ivory? Then, perhaps, the elephant can last a few more decades. A harder task than one could imagine, just look at whaling and the protests over just this one assault on another one of our fellow creatures.

Drastic measures need to be taken to stop the urge to own ivory. Somehow this form of greed needs to be curtailed, howerver, as long as there are those who want ivory for any number of artifacts, this horrific slaughter will continue. As long as animal and man compete for the same spaces, there will be slaughter, and as long as men think of so many animal parts as a cure for their ailing mojo, well, we know the story. . . there's to be no end in sight to this mindless and unnecessary slaughter of our most endangered and majestic animals. SRH
* * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 03:57 PM

<><><><><>Juror who vanished during Stevens trial lied about father's death
By
JESSE J. HOLLAND
Associated Press This article is good for a laugh. I just can't imagine what she was thinking, this whole thing is hilarious, and again, what was she thinking? Amazing little story about a great big trial. And to think, she's a paralegal. BOY! SRH
Last update: November 3, 2008 - 4:06 PM
WASHINGTON - A juror who vanished during Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens' corruption trial told the judge Monday she lied about her father dying and flew to California to see horse races.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered Marian Hinnant, identified as juror No. 4, to return to court to explain why she disappeared during jury deliberations. Hinnant, 52, brought a stack of handwritten notes with her to the court on Monday along with public defender A.J. Kramer, and told the judge that her father hadn't died and she was at the Breeders' Cup in Arcadia, Calif.

She apologized for lying, and then started a long rambling story about horses, which included references to horse breeding, the Breeders' Cup, drugs, President Ford's son Steven and her condo in Florida being bugged.

"I am thoroughly convinced you would not have been able to continue to deliberate," Sullivan interrupted.

"Can I have a case of my own?" Hinnant asked. Sullivan referred her to Kramer and the federal public defender's office, and excused her from his courtroom.

Outside the courthouse, Hinnant refused to answer questions about whether she was on medication or had been hospitalized. When asked what she thought about Stevens' case, she said: "He didn't do anything any other congressman or senator or governor or president has not done. He was guilty but these other ones are just as guilty if not more guilty."

When asked if she thought Stevens was guilty, she replied: "I didn't say that."

Hinnant told court officials late on Oct. 23 that her father had died and that she had to fly to California the next morning. The judge halted the deliberations, which had begun the day before, to give her a chance to take care of her father's affairs. However, Hinnant refused to return telephone calls from court officials.

Sullivan replaced her on Oct. 27, and the jury convicted Stevens the same day on seven felony counts of lying on Senate documents to hide hundreds of thousands of dollars of gifts and home renovations from a millionaire businessman.

Hinnant, a paralegal who works in the mortgage industry, said she had returned to the District of Columbia on Oct. 27.

Stevens said it is clear Hinnant "lied to the court," and his whole trial was plagued with "unusual occurrences."

"It is now even clearer this was an unjust trial and a flawed verdict," Stevens said. "My defense team will work vigorously in the next few weeks to clear my name."

Stevens, who has represented Alaska in the Senate since 1968, is in a tight race with Democratic challenger Mark Begich, the mayor of Anchorage. He said he is going to appeal his conviction.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/congress/33754914.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD 3aPc:_Yyc:aUnciaec8O7EyUsr <><><><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 04:12 PM

IIIIIIIIIIIIWhat's at Stake By
Bernie Horn
November 2nd, 2008 - 11:36pm ET
Go on-site for more functions than just text.
There’s no doubt that George W. Bush’s administration has been a catastrophe, and that historians will one day rank him as one of our nation’s very worst presidents. It’s not because Bush has been incompetent, it’s because his team has pursued goals that violate our nation’s basic principles. That’s why Tuesday’s election is so critical—America’s fundamental values hang in the balance.

By “values,” I don’t mean the anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-science mores of the right wing. Values distinguish right from wrong. They define fairness; they describe a philosophy. In politics, values are ideals that express the kind of society we are trying to build. And American ideals have been besieged for the past eight years.

Three of the most cherished American values are freedom, opportunity and security. In the society we are trying to build, freedom guarantees everyone’s constitutional and human rights; opportunity gives every person equal access to the American dream; and security means economic security, as well as physical safety, for all.

But look where conservative policy has taken us.

Freedom

. The National Security Agency conducts warrantless eavesdropping on the phone calls and e-mails of innocent Americans, even listening in to “pillow talk” between American servicemen and their sweethearts.

. The FBI’s TALON database shows that the government has been spying on peaceful domestic groups, including Quakers, the Campus Antiwar Network, and Veterans for Peace.

. The Pentagon and the CIA use national security letters to pry into the lives of Americans.

. Just 45 days after the September 11 attacks, with almost no debate, Congress approved the USA Patriot Act, broadly increasing government power to search medical, tax and even library records without probable cause, and to break into homes to conduct secret searches.

America was founded on the principle of freedom. But freedom has been hijacked by the right wing, and a conservative-leaning Supreme Court has barely come to its defense.

Opportunity

. Wage inequality has grown. Between 1996 and 2001, the richest one percent of Americans received 21.6 percent of all the gains in national income. CEO pay, especially, has skyrocketed. Today, the richest 10 percent of Americans own 71 percent of all the wealth—the top one percent own 33 percent of all assets.
. Poverty has increased. Although the number of Americans living in poverty steadily declined from 1993 to 2000, at least six million have fallen below the poverty line since George W. Bush took office.
. Tax inequality has widened. Over the course of ten years, 36 percent of the Bush tax cuts enacted in 2001 will benefit the richest 1 percent of Americans. Only nine percent of the Bush tax cuts benefit the least affluent 40 percent of Americans.
. Educational inequality has worsened. Economic (and often racial) segregation of schools has increased, with schools in poorer areas having less money per student and paying less per teacher while dealing with larger class sizes, crumbling facilities, and inadequate equipment. Students who need more resources are given less.

The gauzy mist of the American dream is being blown away by a hurricane of conservative policy. The truth is, the affluent few have used every political opportunity to crush opportunity for all.

Security

. The Bush Administration’s doctrine of preemptive war, its utter contempt for our traditional allies, its violations of the Geneva Conventions, and its refusal to comply with important treaties have sacrificed America’s moral standing in international affairs. As a result, our nation is now far less able to protect Americans and American interests worldwide.

. The right-wing attack on Social Security is just one small facet of what has been a coordinated, cold-blooded plan to dismantle New Deal and Great Society programs that protect our health, our safety, and our environment.

. The profligate spending and massive tax breaks for the wealthy enacted by a conservative-controlled Congress have restricted our nation’s ability to deal with threats to our security—from emergency preparedness to protection of the vulnerable in our communities.

In every important way, the Bush administration and its conservative allies have made Americans less secure.

What’s at stake tomorrow? It is the soul of America. It’s our most beloved and essential political principles. It is the survival of the American dream.

The writer is a Senior Fellow at Campaign for America’s Future and author of the recent book, Framing the Future: How Progressive Values Can Win Elections and Influence People. http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008114402/whats-stake IIIIIIIII

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 04:32 PM

llllllllllllllllllllllll
The Evidence Establishes, without Question,
that
Republican Rule Is Dangerous:
Why It Is High Time to Fix This Situation,
For the Good of the Nation
By
JOHN W. DEAN
Friday, Oct. 31, 2008

Occasionally, during the past eight years of writing this column, I have addressed the remarkably dangerous manner in which Republican Party officials rule the nation when they control one or more of the three branches of the federal government. Over the same period, I've also made this argument, even more directly and loudly, in three books on the subject.

In this column, I will be more pointed on this subject than I have ever been, while also repeating a few key facts that I have raised earlier - because Election Day 2008 now provides the only clear remedy for the ills of Republican rule.

The Republican Approach to Government: Authoritarian Rule
Republicans rule, rather than govern, when they are in power by imposing their authoritarian conservative philosophy on everyone, as their answer for everything. This works for them because their interest is in power, and in what it can do for those who think as they do. Ruling, of course, must be distinguished from governing, which is a more nuanced process that entails give-and-take and the kind of compromises that are often necessary to find a consensus and solutions that will best serve the interests of all Americans.

Republicans' authoritarian rule can also be characterized by its striking incivility and intolerance toward those who do not view the world as Republicans do. Their insufferable attitude is not dangerous in itself, but it is employed to accomplish what they want, which is to take care of themselves and those who work to keep them in power.

Authoritarian conservatives are primarily anti-government, except where they believe the government can be useful to impose moral or social order (for example, with respect to matters like abortion, prayer in schools, or prohibiting sexually-explicit information from public view). Similarly, Republicans' limited-government attitude does not apply regarding national security, where they feel there can never be too much government activity - nor are the rights and liberties of individuals respected when national security is involved. Authoritarian Republicans do oppose the government interfering with markets and the economy, however - and generally oppose the government's doing anything to help anyone they feel should be able to help themselves.

In my book Broken Government: How Republican Rule Destroyed the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branches, I set forth the facts regarding the consequences of the Republicans' controlling government for too many years. No Republican - nor anyone else, for that matter - has refuted these facts, and for good reason: They are irrefutable.

The McCain/Palin Ticket Perfectly Fits the Authoritarian Conservative Mold

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican candidates, have shown themselves to be unapologetic and archetypical authoritarian conservatives. Indeed, their campaign has warmed the hearts of fellow authoritarians, who applaud them for their negativity, nastiness, and dishonest ploys and only criticize them for not offering more of the same.

The McCain/Palin campaign has assumed a typical authoritarian posture: The candidates provide no true, specific proposals to address America's needs. Rather, they simply ask voters to "trust us" and suggest that their opponents - Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden - are not "real Americans" like McCain, Palin, and the voters they are seeking to court. Accordingly, McCain and Plain have called Obama "a socialist," "a redistributionist," "a Marxist," and "a communist" - without a shred of evidence to support their name-calling, for these terms are pejorative, rather than in any manner descriptive. This is the way authoritarian leaders operate.

In my book Conservatives Without Conscience, I set forth the traits of authoritarian leaders and followers, which have been distilled from a half-century of empirical research, during which thousands of people have voluntarily been interviewed by social scientists. The touch points in these somewhat-overlapping lists of character traits provide a clear picture of the characters of both John McCain and Sarah Palin.

McCain, especially, fits perfectly as an authoritarian leader. Such leaders possess most, if not all, of these traits:
. dominating
. opposes equality
. desirous of personal power
. amoral
. intimidating and bullying
. faintly hedonistic
. vengeful
. pitiless
. exploitive
. manipulative
. dishonest
. cheats to win
. highly prejudiced (racist, sexist, homophobic
. mean-spirited
. militant
. nationalistic
. tells others what they want to hear
. takes advantage of "suckers"
. specializes in creating false images to sell self
. may or may not be religious
. usually politically and economically conservative/Republican

Incidentally, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney also can be described by these well-defined and typical traits - which is why a McCain presidency is likely to be nearly identical to a Bush presidency.

Clearly, Sarah Palin also has some qualities typical of authoritarian leaders, not to mention almost all of the traits found among authoritarian followers. Specifically, such followers can be described as follows:

. submissive to authority
. aggressive on behalf of authority
. highly conventional in their behavior
. highly religious
. possessing moderate to little education
. trusting of untrustworthy authorities
. prejudiced (particularly against homosexuals and followers of religions other than their own)
. mean-spirited
. narrow-minded
. intolerant
. bullying
. zealous
. dogmatic
. uncritical toward chosen authority
. hypocritical
. inconsistent and contradictory
. prone to panic easily
. highly self-righteous
. moralistic
. strict disciplinarians
. severely punitive
. demanding loyalty and returning it
. possessing little self-awareness
. usually politically and economically conservative/Republican

The leading authority on right-wing authoritarianism, a man who devoted his career to developing hard empirical data about these people and their beliefs, is Robert Altemeyer. Altemeyer, a social scientist based in Canada, flushed out these typical character traits in decades of testing.

Altemeyer believes about 25 percent of the adult population in the United States is solidly authoritarian (with that group mostly composed of followers, and a small percentage of potential leaders). It is in these ranks of some 70 million that we find the core of the McCain/Palin supporters. They are people who are, in Altemeyer's words, are "so self-righteous, so ill-informed, and so dogmatic that nothing you can say or do will change their minds."

The Problem with Electing Authoritarian Conservatives
What is wrong with being an authoritarian conservative? Well, if you want to take the country where they do, nothing. "They would march America into a dictatorship and probably feel that things had improved as a result," Altemeyer told me. "The problem is that these authoritarian followers are much more active than the rest of the country. They have the mentality of 'old-time religion' on a crusade, and they generously give money, time and effort to the cause. They proselytize; they lick stamps; they put pressure on loved ones; and they revel in being loyal to a cohesive group of like thinkers. And they are so submissive to their leaders that they will believe and do virtually anything they are told. They are not going to let up and they are not going to go away."

I would nominate McCain's "Joe the Plumber" as a new poster-boy of the authoritarian followers. He is a believer, and he has signed on. On November 4, 2008, we will learn how many more Americans will join the ranks of the authoritarians.

Frankly, the fact that the pre-election polls are close - after eight years of authoritarian leadership from Bush and Cheney, and given its disastrous results - shows that many Americans either do not realize where a McCain/Palin presidency might take us, or they are happy to go there. Frankly, it scares the hell out of me, for there is only one way to deal with these conservative zealots: Keep them out of power.

This election should be a slam dunk for Barack Obama, who has run a masterful campaign. It was no small undertaking winning the nomination from Hillary Clinton, and in doing so, he has shown without any doubt (in my mind anyway) that he is not only qualified to be president, but that he might be a once-in-a-lifetime leader who can forever change the nation and the world for the better.

If Obama is rejected on November 4th for another authoritarian conservative like McCain, I must ask if Americans are sufficiently intelligent to competently govern themselves. I can understand authoritarian conservatives voting for McCain, for they know no better. It is well-understood that most everyone votes with his or her heart, not his or her head. Polls show that 81 percent of Americans "feel" (in their hearts and their heads) that our country is going the wrong way. How could anyone with such thoughts and feelings vote for more authoritarian conservatism, which has done so much to take the nation in the wrong direction?

We will all find out on (or about) November 5th.

John W. Dean, a FindLaw columnist, is a former counsel to the president.

An accusatory post, yet it says the evidence bears out. SRH.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20081031.html lllllllllllllll

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 07:08 PM

:: :: :: :: ::
The Super-Close Senate Race You've Never Heard Of
In 2002, Republican Rep. Saxby Chambliss was running against Senator Max Cleland (D-Ga.), in one of the most bitter races of that election cycle. With 9/11 still fresh, Chambliss ran an attack ad featuring a photo of Osama bin Laden that accused Cleland, a Vietnam veteran and triple amputee, of not having the "courage to lead" on national security. The ad worked; Chambliss won. But even Republicans thought the attack on Cleland's patriotism was over the top: Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) called it "beyond offensive." This year, Democrats are looking to get their revenge by kicking Chambliss to the curb. And they think Jim Martin, a longtime state legislator and former candidate for lieutenant governor, is just the man to avenge Cleland.

Can Democrats really pick up a seat in deep-red Georgia? Until late September, it didn't look possible. Chambliss led by a 17-point margin in a poll released on September 16. But as the economy worsened, Chambliss suddenly appeared vulnerable. Now most polls have Martin within a few points. Martin has yet to show a lead in a major non-partisan poll, but Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com thinks the polls are "lowballing" Martin and the race is closer than it seems:

The polls, from what I can tell, are showing a fairly high undecided vote among the African-American population. Rasmussen's most recent poll, which had Saxby Chambliss up by two, shows that 12 percent of black voters are undecided in the senate race. Were those voters to split 4:1 to Jim Martin, that would be worth a net of around 2 points to him, making the race a tie. SurveyUSA, likewise, shows a higher rate of undecideds among black voters (7%) than among whites (3%).

Even if the Georgia Senate race didn't have the Cleland backstory, Democrats would find it fascinating. Ever since they took control of the Senate in January 2007, Democrats have been frustrated by an unprecedented number of Republican filibusters.

If they can pick up at least nine seats in the Senate, the Democrats would have the 60 votes (including independents Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman) they need to break Republican filibusters. Winning the Georgia race looks increasingly crucial to that strategy. If the Democrats win the easy seats in Virginia, New Mexico, and Colorado, the closer races in Oregon, New Hampshire, Alaska, and North Carolina, and the squeaker in Minnesota, they'd still need one more seat to get to 60. The only remaining races within single digits are in Southern states: Mississippi, Kentucky, and Georgia. And many Democrats think Martin and the Georgia race are a good bet.

That Martin, who calls himself a "proud Democrat and a proud progressive," might have a chance in deeply conservative Georgia might come as a shock. But in an interview with OpenLeft's Matt Stoller, Martin said he thinks progressives can run and win in the South, because "people are fed up with where we are as a country, and they are looking for real change."

Perhaps Martin's most interesting position is his opposition to the $700 billion mortgage bailout bill. Martin says the bailout "failed to address the fundamental problems created by the deregulation of Wall Street. And it lacked consumer protections to stem the abusive lending practices that are at the root of this crisis." Chambliss supported the bailout bill.

If Martin manages to pull out a victory in Georgia, not only will the Democrats be closer to thwarting GOP filibusters; progressive Democrats will have a new advocate in Washington. (That is, a reader points out, if Martin manages to get more than 50 percent of the vote on election day. Otherwise, a runoff will be scheduled for December).http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/10/10597_jim-martin-saxby-chambliss-georgia-senate-race.html
:: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 07:34 PM

~~~~~~~The capacity to learn is a gift;
The ability to learn is a skill;
The WILLINGNESS to learn is a choice."

Unknown
~~~
"The highest reward for man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it."

John Ruskin
1819-1900
~~~
"The only thing we learn from history is that we never learn from history."

Hegel
1770-1831
~~~
"Philosophy begins when one learns to doubt - particularly to doubt one's cherished beliefs, one's dogmas and one's axioms."

Will Durant
~~~
"I became aware of my destiny: to belong to the critical minority as opposed to the unquestioning majority."

Sigmund Freud
1856-1939
~~~
"The more extensive a man's knowledge of what has been done, the greater will be his power of knowing what to do."

Benjamin Disraeli
~~~
"It's easy to curb the freedoms of others when you see no immediate impact on your own."

Malcolm Forbes
~~~
"It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious Things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them."

Mark Twain
1835-1910
U.S. author.
Following the Equator, ch. 20
"Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" (1897)
~~~
"Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."

Thomas Jefferson
~~~~~

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 07:48 PM

.*.*.*.*.*.*.*. Listen
to the
Palin/Sarkozy prank tape
Submitted by BuzzFlash on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 1:06pm. Alerts
Go on-site to gain access to it. Just click on URL at end of post.
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
One of the responsibilities of a president and vice president is speaking to foreign leaders. One thing that would help is whether you can figure out if you are talking to that foreign leader.

As we found out, Sarah Palin still needs a few lessons. Gov. Palin got pranked by Marc Antoine Audette of CKOI, Montréal. She thought Audette was French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Oops.
transcript from Canadian Press
French singer Johnny Hallyday
There were numerous clues. His American adviser was Johnny Hallyday, a French pop singer and sixties rock star who could be a dead ringer for Todd Palin.

Audette referred to the Prime Minister of Canada as "Stef Carse" (a singer) and the prime minister of Quebec as "Mr. Richard Z. Sirois," (who is a Quebec radio host). The Prime Minister of Canada is Stephen Harper, a fact Palin should have known, and there is no prime minister of Quebec (the head of the province is Premier Jean Charest). He asks her whether the "Quebec prime minister" came to one of her rallies. If that existed, why would he come in the audience to a rally?

But the fun parts are in francais. Audette discusses shooting animals from a helicopter, noting that "like we say in French, on peut tuer les bébés phoques aussi." The English refers to killing baby seals, but the true punchline is that "phoques" is pronounced "f*ck." Palin has to be able to hear that, yet it flies by.

Later, Audette as Sarkozy, refers to his wife, former supermodel Carla Bruni, as being "so hot in bed" and notes that Bruni wrote a song for her entitled, "Rouge aux levres sur un cochon." The French title is "Lipstick on a Pig," but he says the song is about Joe the Plumber. He refers to a similar vision of Joe the Plumber as Marcel with bread under his armpit.

There is so much in the 6 minutes or so of audio. He talks about an edgy documentary from Hustler called "Nailin' Palin." Either Palin is being extremely polite or doesn't follow the exchange.

He asks that Dick Cheney not come along on the hunting trip, but Palin says "I'll be a careful shot." And she refers to "killing two birds with one stone."

He ends with this thought: "If one voice can change the world for Obama, one Viagra can change the world for McCain."

But words do not sum up the anguish and embarrassment of Gov. Palin. Maybe she'll understand this when she actually talks to the real Nicolas Sarkozy. Someday.

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
COMMENTS» login or register to post comments | printer friendly versionThis "Interview" shows palin in her finest
Submitted by kjlovell on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 8:55pm.
This "interview" shows palin (bible spice) in her finest, demonstrates those skills she will bring to the WH should the gop steal this election too. It would be even more funny if this delusional, inept woman wasn't so damned dangerous.
» login or register to post comments
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alert/501
*.*.*.*.*.*

Saundra Hummer

November 3rd, 2008, 08:34 PM

A
SURFERS NEWSLETTER

Hi folks,

It's Sunday morning, the presidential 'election' mere hours away. I was just subjected to Bob Schieffer (on Face the Nation) telling me that he is going to vote because his mother once told him that voting "makes you feel big and strong."

Okay, that's it. I'm not going to keep my trap shut as I promised myself I would…so…

Some Thoughts on the Election
or
Why a McCain/Palin Victory Might Be Our Best Hope

First, let's set this up, establish an important and obvious given.

Given: When politicians tell the truth it's a coincidence, an accident. In other words, truth is not a factor in what they say. This doesn't mean they are always lying. They'll tell the truth when it's to their advantage to do so.

This is so obvious that I'll not try your patience with evidence thereof.

So what do we do? How do we listen to a politico speak?

We listen to subtext, which is closely akin to motive - what's in it for the speaker to say whatever he says - and deep motive. Deep motive (in what a politico says) is slipperier, and more significant than regular, garden variety motive, since most often the politico is not consciously aware of his deep motive. The clichéd 'Freudian slip' is an example of what I'm talking about. This sort of subtext can sometimes tell us everything.

As I write in Can't You Get Along With Anyone?, subtext is what's really going on.

But listen: You gotta pay attention!

Let's listen and pay attention to the subtexts of some words of Obama's running mate, Joe Biden.

"Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking… Remember I said it standing here. If you don't remember anything else I said… I guarantee this is gonna happen. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

More of the Biden Blurt:

A wild-eyed insider blows it in subtext. "(Obama) is 'going to have to make some tough decisions. And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you… to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right." (emphasis added)
But not just a crisis; according to Biden, a generated crisis.

What does Biden mean by a generated crisis? What's the subtext here?

The crisis will be contrived. Artificial. Not real, in the sense of being misleading, either as to who did it and/or why they did it.

But this part is the giveaway: Remember I said it standing here. If you don't remember anything else I said… I guarantee this is gonna happen.

Subtext? Try this: He knows for a fact what's going to happen.

And Obama "is gonna have to make some tough decisions."

Subtext: The crisis ain't gonna be pretty. He's talking catastrophe here.

And: "…it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

Never mind the subtext, I gotta say it: This is incredible, if you think just a little about it. This fucking guy knows exactly what's going to happen. Otherwise, how could he possibly know "it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."

But how could he know exactly what sort of contrived crisis/catastrophe we're in for?

Going out on a short subtextual limb: He knows because he's either involved in generating the crisis, or knows the people/forces who are generating it.

More subtext: I wrote recently that Obama is the one 'they' (the powers that be, call them 'Wall Street') want for our next president, one indication being that Wall Street contributed three times as much to the Obama campaign as to McCain's. The above quote saying that Obama will need our (the people's) support because it's not going to look like we're right is indirect verification that I am correct.

Why? Because of the Cult of Personality Factor. Both Congress and the people are way more apt to support Obama on a controversial decision than McCain. This is so obvious that it needs no rationalization.

Since 'the decision' (whatever the hell it is) will be in Wall Street's favor - who can doubt that? - Obama would be a far more effective president than McCain (from Wall Street's point of view).

So why doesn't he tell us what this crisis/catastrophe is/will be? If he went public, whatever he's talking about could maybe be prevented. (When I thought a hit man was out to get me in Costa Rica, hired by the asshole I call Logan, first thing I did was to go public - via the newspapers, the embassy, the cops - with the assumption that Logan would have to back off. [See Can't You Get Along With Anyone?])

Again, why doesn't Biden go public?

Hold on, let's back up. If Biden knows, so does Obama. Right?

Right. Of course.

So let's rephrase: Why doesn't Obama go public with his knowledge of the coming crisis/catastrophe?

Hold on, let's back up further. Maybe you're thinking that my premise is off, that Biden was just mindlessly shooting off his mouth, in spite of his 'Remember I said it standing here,' and so forth comments that would seem to back me up.

Need verification? Go to this Colin Powell interview and slide the thingee button over to 2:38. (The interview took place on the same day as Biden's Blurt, October 19th.)

"There's going to be a crises on the 21st or 22nd of January, that we don't know about right now."

But whoa.

I mean whoa! Think about it. When Colin Powell names the dates, you know he knows exactly what's up. Biden's got a big mouth and sometimes has his head up his ass, agreed. Not so with Colin Powell.

I would submit that these two blurts - made within hours of each other, from politicos who are amongst the cognesceti - amount to subtextual verification that our government has foreknowledge of a coming catastrophic crisis. (As they had with 9/11; the evidence of this is so extensive that I won't insult your intelligence by delving into it.)

Biden/Obama compares Obama's coming catastrophe/tough decision based on a contrived crisis to JFK's, presumably the Cuban Missile Crisis. There's a problem here though. The Cuban Missile Crisis certainly was not contrived. That sumbitch was the real thing. So forget the JFK bullshit; a red herring.

More from Colin Powell's interview (on the above YouTube link):

(Obama should) "start using… the power of his personality to convince the American people and convince the world that America is solid…" blah blah

Do you think Powell would recommend that McCain should start 'using the power of his personality'? Who (be it Congress, our European allies, or us, the people) is going to 'follow McCain anywhere'?

So Biden and Powell both made comments the subtext of which is that Obama is going to have to make a decision that nobody is going to like.

Do you think this decision is going to be in our interest? Do you think the bail out bill, for example, which Obama supported and voted for - was in our interest? You do?

Okay. Try this on for subtext: (A freedom of information act paper with blacked out areas, Private message me for copy of letter.)

Remember how Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson promised full transparency in spending the $700 billion bailout money?

Paulson is blacking out the sections of government contracts that spell out how much private firms will be paid for their services in administering taxpayer money.

Contempt.

Paulson and his cronies should be in jail. Do you understand that? Instead, Bush and the Congress gave them about four trillion dollars of our money and let them do with it what they please (the $700 billion figure was a lie).

And you know what they're doing with it? Paying themselves billions of dollars. (The Lehman Bros. thieves in New York, for example, paid themselves 2.5 billion dollars in bonuses.)

Utter contempt.

But what's going on with this?

Wall Street is looting the treasury. (In the Third World, the looting of the treasury is what happens just before the country descends into chaos.)

Why did Obama vote for the bail out bill, knowing full well what it would lead to, i.e., the looting of the treasury? (Since I knew, I presume he did.)

Wall Street wanted the bill and Obama does Wall Street's bidding.

Remember: Nothing that Wall Street wants is in our best interest.

To cut right to the chase: A McCain presidency would be better for us because it would more likely lead to a paralyzed federal government (a strongly oppositional Congress), i.e., less government, i.e., one unable to follow the presidential (actually Wall Street's) will.

Am I recommending that you vote for McCain?

No.

Why not? I mean, with all this subtext bullshit it seems pretty obvious that…

I dislike McCain so much that I can't wait to see his veins popping, his pasty face turning a vibrant (healthy) crimson, when he loses. And who knows what hilarious shit will come out of his (and Palin's) mouth in the aftermath of defeat.

I guess I'm putting entertainment ahead of survival. (Well isn't that just like me?)

But what's my goddamn point in all this?

WAKE UP, FOLKS! Don't put up with being the object of all this contempt.

I'll be in touch.

Allan

P.S. I'm curious to know if I'm correct in my assessment of these matters, so I'll make a few predictions; down the line we'll see how it goes:

1. Obama will be elected. (Right: Not a very long limb on this one.)
Going further, though: If there is no attempt, or only a faint-hearted one, by the Republicans to steal the election, this would be an indication that Obama is Wall Street's choice. (Which would tend to verify all my assertions.)

We'll have to keep an eye on Greg Palast's reporting on this; Palast broke the stories of the thefts of the 2000 and 2004 elections (google him or read his book, Armed Madhouse).

Note: I really can't lose in the above, since a McCain victory would mean another stolen election, which itself would mean we do not live in a democracy, which in turn is what I've been trying to tell you for some time. Okay. All right.

2. Within six months of Obama's inauguration, there will be a crisis, contrived or instigated by elements of the U.S. government, although it will not appear so.
My fear is that it will be a false flag terrorist incident like 9/11, perpetrated to rationalize martial law. (Might the declaration of martial law be the tough and unpopular decision Biden and Powell spoke of?) A nuclear event is the worst case scenario, possibly detonated from the hold of a ship on the East Coast. (One thing in our favor is that - according to a Scripts Howard University poll - 36% of Americans know that 9/11 was an inside job. This might scare them off.)

Other scenarios include incidents meant to rationalize war with Iran or an expansion of U.S. imperialism in the Middle East or the Balkans. A contrived conflict with Russia or China is even possible. (A good example of media disinformation is the blatant lie that Russia, unprovoked, invaded Georgia in early August. The fact is that it was Georgia who was the aggressor, almost certainly at the behest of the Bush Administration. This is an indication that conflict with Russia is in the offing.)

3. Obama's actions in his first six months as president should be a giveaway as to whether or not his motives are pure (he is who he says he is), or if he indeed is a Wall Street puppet. Here are some of the actions he should take if the former is the case:

a) Reinstate the writ of habeas corpus, which guarantees a person (a 'person' says the Constitution, not just a citizen) the right to face his accuser in a court of law.

b) Related to the above: Abrogate the 'enemy combatant' legislation, which likewise is a blatant affront to the spirit and letter of the First Amendment.

c) Rescind the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive of May 2007, which declares that in the event of a "catastrophic event", the president can become what is best described as "a dictator":

"The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government."
--
This legislation effectively turns the whole constitution into… a joke.

d) Speaking of jokes, albeit bad ones, there's the Military Commissions Act, which includes the above writ of habeas corpus travesty. It should be rescinded within six months of an Obama presidency. This act, with its Orwellian wording and when taken en toto is perhaps the scariest piece of legislation even imaginable.

e) Abrogate the establishment of Northcom, which in effect gives the military the authority to police us. This is in direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

In case you don't know: Northcom has recalled from combat duty in Iraq a full brigade (5,000 troops) to assist, if needed, in 'civil unrest' and 'crowd control' on U.S. soil.

If the image of a few thousand wild-eyed, battle fatigued, pissed off grunts patrolling your neighborhood doesn't make you nervous, I would submit that nothing will. Good for you.

f) Rescind the Executive order that authorizes torture in the interrogation of 'enemy combatants'.

Keep in mind that Bush has given the president the authority to label any U.S. citizen, i.e., you, an enemy combatant (google 'Jose Padilla').

g) Rescind the legislation authorizing eavesdropping on U.S. citizens, another clear and blatant violation of our Constitution.

h) Obama should (at the very least) ask for an amendment to the bail out legislation that will make the actions of the Treasury Department transparent, and, more importantly, make legally responsible those who are, in my words, looting the Treasury.

I could of course go on.
I could point out that Obama - if he truly believes in rule of law - would demand a special prosecutor to bring to justice George W. Bush, for war crimes, among other felonies. (Keep in mind that Clinton was impeached for blow job-related crimes.)

But enough.

My point, in case you forgot: If Obama is who he says he is, if he has our interest at heart, he would do all of the above within six months of January 21, 2009 (my birthday!).

I predict he won't.

Too much to ask, you say? Meaning that he get all that done in six months.

I predict he will not do even one of the above. Not one.

#

Okay. Most blabbermouths don't hang themselves out there with specific predictions. At least you can't say that about this blabbermouth.

#

On a lighter note!

Some Canadian merry pranksters phone-called Sarah Palin, claiming to be the president of France offering his support and hoping he and Palin will someday go hunting together because 'killing all those animals is great fun.' It's hilarious and instructive regarding candidates for president in the U.S. as the puppets of behind the scenes forces.

Click here for a grin.

Here's another indication of recent voter fraud.

If you found my rant worthwhile, please consider forwarding it to... everyone. Let's wake this country up!

To subscribe to this newsletter, go to Banditobooks.com

@neptune.sparklist.com

There are graphs/charts, photo's and links to other articles and facts within Alans newsletter. PM me and I'll forward the letter to your own email. Saundra

Write to: acwdownsouth@yahoo.com

Saundra Hummer

November 4th, 2008, 04:29 PM

* * *
The Huffington Post
Tim Robbins' Polling Place Nightmare: He's Turned Away! (VIDEO) November 4, 2008 02:45 PM
Politically active actor Tim Robbins almost didn't get to vote in New York.

TMZ reports Robbins was turned away at his polling place.

There was some kind of ruckus and the cops were called.
Apparently Robbins has been voting at that polling place for more than a decade, but today his name wasn't on the register. They told Robbins he had to fill out a provisional ballot but he didn't want to do it. An argument erupted between Robbins and the poll worker. Robbins allegedly got loud and the poll worker said he was calling the cops.

Robbins accused the poll worker of trying to intimidate him so he wouldn't vote.

Robbins went downtown to the City Board of Elections to get proof he was good to vote.

That's where a TMZ camera caught up with him. Robbins held up his papers and told the camera:

"This is what you have to do to vote... I had to go down to see a judge... My name was not on the roll, and I'm not the only one. According to workers, 30 people in 5 hours had been taking off the rolls. You can do the math on that. 6 per hour, per district across America..."
WATCH:Popular Stories on HuffPost
Election Predictions: Pundits Weigh In
Make your own predictions below... Karl Rove Winner: Obama Electoral

Fox News' Major Garrett Defends Obama Against "Fox & Friends" In Leaked E-Mail
Fox News correspondent Major Garrett shot back in defense of...
Final Presidential Polls
UPDATE - 2:00 PM ET on November 4 GWU: Obama 49, McCain 44 Rasmussen: Obama 52,...
John Cusack No Currency Left to Buy the Big Lies As I contemplated the real possibility of an Obama victory and listened to right...

Keith Thomson The Most Accurate Election Forecast? Hardcore Gamblers
Recently I was in Kentucky, reporting on horseracing for...

Arianna Huffington Enter The HuffPost Election Forecast Contest
Update: This Election Forecast Contest was originally going to...

John McCain On Saturday Night Live With Tina Fey As Palin (VIDEO)
Live from New York was the real John McCain alongside Tina Fey as Sarah Palin...

The Obamas' Greatest Family Moments (SLIDESHOW)
This was originally published on October 16th. After the outstanding response...

Saturday Night Live's Olbermann Sketch: Affleck's Pompous, Cat-Owning Keith (VIDEO)
Ben Affleck impersonated...

Shakir Stewart, Jay-Z's Successor At Def Jam, Suicides
ATLANTA — The executive who succeeded Jay-Z as the head of hip-hop music label...

Starbucks Offers Free Coffee On Nov 4th For Those Who Voted (VIDEO)
Starbucks is doing its part to stimulate civic participation. On November 4th...

Russell Bishop Election Anxiety: Advice From Abraham Lincoln
By the time the votes are tabulated and our choice for President...

Buffett, Google Invest In Prolific Renewable You've Never Heard Of
"There's no smoke. Very little noise," said Paul Thomsen, director of policy and... * * *HUFFPOST'S BIG NEWS PAGES Indiana Judge: GOP Poll Watchers Violated Court Order On Foreclosure Lists On The Ground 2008
Dem Pollster: "I've Never Been Less Worried" Election 2008 Coverage
Lieberman: 'I Fear' That 'America Will Not Survive' If Dems Get 60 Senate * * * * * * *Post Comment You must be logged in to comment of this article. Log in or Create an account
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
View Comments: Newest First Oldest First HuffPost's Picks
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (14 pages total) (Page 1 of 14)
- + FatherKindly See Profile I'm a Fan of FatherKindly I'm a fan of this user permalink
In my polling place the problem was not with partisan hanky-panky but with an age raddled volunteer who couldn't work her touch-screen computer and therefore she could not verify the legitimacy of registered voters. She first told me that I was not registered to vote, then told me that I was at the wrong polling place (she didn't know how to find the right one) and then told me I needed a specialized voting machine made for the hearing disabled (I am not hearing disabled). I stood my ground and called over her supervisor whoc corrected her errors in seconds while she pawed at his arm saying, "Let me do it! Let me do it!"

After I had successfully voted (and not with a provisional ballot) I passed her post on my way out and found her quarreling with an apparently fit thirty-something whom she was informing that, since he was hearing disabled, needed to go to another precinct with specialized equipment to cast his vote.

I immediately returned home (upstairs in the same building as the polling place) and reported her to the Board of Elections. I went back a while later and she was gone.
Posted 05:42 PM on 11/04/2008
- + judesedit See Profile I'm a Fan of judesedit I'm a fan of this user permalink
If they steal this election again, we MUST march on Washington! No excuses. No way can we let another illegitimate administration destroy this country even more. America speak out!
Posted 05:37 PM on 11/04/2008
- + taquinas See Profile I'm a Fan of taquinas I'm a fan of this user permalink
The system needs to be revised that if you're a born or naturalised citizen you should be able to vote. Not be registered where some can disqualify you. Biometric scans have developed so much that they can be used. People worried about privacy need not vote. Either way how much privacy do you have when you have to register to vote? If you're independent both parties call/bug you. If people are made to use a thumb print to sign documents and checks at banks it can be used to cast a vote. Easy and fast.
And while we're trading nuclear secrets with India maybe we can learn something from their election process. Information about their "Electronic voting machines" is proven to work in the biggest democracy in the world. It's from the a world country but is simple and the final results out in 2-3 hours after the close of the election. What went wrong here in the U.S. is the federal government let the States make a business out of it, letting private companies run the show. Therefore the whole election is at risk.
Posted 05:35 PM on 11/04/2008
- + just4shiggles See Profile I'm a Fan of just4shiggles I'm a fan of this user permalink
Apparently whoever took Tim's name off of the list didn't know who he was. If not that, they might want their 15 minutes of embarrassment like backward B girl! We will definitely be hearing from Tim a lot in the future about this little incident. Get em Tim!!!
Posted 05:35 PM on 11/04/2008
- + ernieson See Profile I'm a Fan of ernieson I'm a fan of this user permalink
Purple fingers in Iraq were given more support in their voting rights by our government than citizens of our own country. How many citizens, unlike Tim Robbins, just give up and do not pursue their voting
right when denied?
Posted 05:34 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Ron1951 See Profile I'm a Fan of Ron1951 I'm a fan of this user permalink
Congratulations to Tim Robbins for standing up for his constitutional right to vote in a free election. He stood up for what he believes in and espouses on any given opportunity. We need more people who stand up for their voting rights like this.

But obviously, we need a better system of voting in this country. The situation Tim faced down was just ridiculous. I wonder who took his name off the rolls? I hope he takes the time, energy, and money necessary to get to the bottom of this. Somehow I suspect he will. Good for him!
Posted 05:33 PM on 11/04/2008
- + remtom46 See Profile I'm a Fan of remtom46 I'm a fan of this user permalink
Think about people trying to vote and are not movie starts like Tim Robbins
Posted 05:27 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Tyrione See Profile I'm a Fan of Tyrione I'm a fan of this user permalink
``This is what you have to do to vote... I had to go down to see a judge... My name was not on the roll, and I'm not the only one. According to workers, 30 people in 5 hours had been taking off the rolls. You can do the math on that. 6 per hour, per district across America...''
No wonder this country is so indebted. This guy's mathematical analysis skills are attrocious. His grasp of Probability and Statistics for a non-linear set of equations is ZERO.
Please, if you lose, get the hell out of here and move to Italy. You'll love the tax rates.
Posted 05:27 PM on 11/04/2008
- + IowaCali See Profile I'm a Fan of IowaCali I'm a fan of this user permalink
His skills are "attrocious" are they? And your spelling is great.
Posted 05:31 PM on 11/04/2008
- + OhComeOnNow See Profile I'm a Fan of OhComeOnNow I'm a fan of this user permalink
What do you expect from someone who comments primarily on celebs articles...
Posted 05:40 PM on 11/04/2008
- + KoolBreez See Profile I'm a Fan of KoolBreez I'm a fan of this user permalink

Way to go Iowa.
Posted 05:40 PM on 11/04/2008
- + minapod See Profile I'm a Fan of minapod I'm a fan of this user permalink
I went to my old poling place to get a sticker today. I became a mail in voter two years ago after they changed my polling place after twenty years at the same location. Sadly, the manager of my old polling place was a hostile, rude and aggressive fellow who was ordering everyone around, poll workers, voters and myself, causing a lot of bad feelings. He did give me my sticker though!

I went home and called the City Clerk and filed a complaint against him. If citizens must put up with intimidation and other bad experiences while attempting to vote it certainly decreasing numbers of voters next time around. That's why I vote from home and drop it in the slot at the local post office, with a "lick and a promise" it gets to the right place and my votes are recorded properly. I'm sad you had to go through that Tim, and everyone else who is having problems voting today - not for the meek or weak at heart!
Posted 05:24 PM on 11/04/2008
- + FrictionSoul See Profile I'm a Fan of FrictionSoul I'm a fan of this user permalink
Do you have the serial number of your ballot? Out here in Colorado we have them so we can track them via the County Clerk's website.
Posted 05:31 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Ourrias See Profile I'm a Fan of Ourrias I'm a fan of this user permalink
Hopefully, with Obama in office and Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress (with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate) we wil FINALLY get a uniform, national voting law that every state secretary of state in this nation will be compelled to follow to the letter.

Paper ballots ONLY.

Addresses confirmed by tax return filing with simple change of address notification.

No more caging, no more vote suppression, no more voter intimidation.

Is this asking TOO MUCH?!?!?
Posted 05:23 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Carolab See Profile I'm a Fan of Carolab I'm a fan of this user permalink
WE DO NOT NEED A NATIONAL, FEDERAL VOTING LAW. THE REASON WE ARE IN THIS MESS IS BECAUSE OF A FEDERAL LAW (HAVA) IN THE FIRST PLACE!! IT WAS CRAFTED BY INDICTED OHIO CONGRESSMAN BOB NEY.

IT WAS DESIGNED TO HELP REPUBLICANS CHEAT.

VOTING IS A LOCAL PROCESS. IT SHOULD STAY THERE.

AND WE SHOULD VOTE WITH PAPER AND HAND COUNT THOSE VOTES.

JEESH!!!
Posted 05:25 PM on 11/04/2008
- + FrictionSoul See Profile I'm a Fan of FrictionSoul I'm a fan of this user permalink
You've got that totally mixed up. HAVA ensures that that the GOP can cheat, yes, but it also ensures that local places get to do it how they see fit. We're the only democracy on the planet without uniform voting rights.

Yes we should vote with paper ballots and hand count those votes, but shouldn't that be a nationwide/uniform voting process, so that voting is the same everywhere?
Posted 05:34 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Carolab See Profile I'm a Fan of Carolab I'm a fan of this user permalink
Now, tell me again, Republicans, WHO is CHEATING?
Posted 05:22 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Zahzy See Profile I'm a Fan of Zahzy I'm a fan of this user permalink
Same thing happened to me. Purged. Had a letter from the register-recorder. Proper I.D....My polling place is IN my condo building! Same place I've voted for the last six years. Where I voted for the primary election. And all of a sudden...I don't exist.
Posted 05:21 PM on 11/04/2008
- + VeroucaSalt See Profile I'm a Fan of VeroucaSalt I'm a fan of this user permalink
Are you registered as a Dem?
Posted 05:26 PM on 11/04/2008
- + RoXXanne See Profile I'm a Fan of RoXXanne I'm a fan of this user permalink
Whooohooo, they clearly picked the wrong guy to f*ck with! LOL

I saw Tim Robbins on Bill Maher's Real Time, actually WARNING people about these sort of tricks!
05:20 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Carolab See Profile I'm a Fan of Carolab I'm a fan of this user permalink
YEAH AND THE SCRUBBING OF LEGITIMATE DEMOCRATIC VOTERS IS ONLY PART OF THE PICTURE.

ADD TO IT THE RIGGED MACHINES...AND THE RIGGED COURTS.

REPUBLICANS CHEAT. THEY DON'T "WIN" ELECTIONS.

PERIOD.
Posted 05:27 PM on 11/04/2008
- + xsquid See Profile I'm a Fan of xsquid I'm a fan of this user permalink
Gee, could this be karma coming back to bite Robbins in the butt after he backstabbed Ralph Nader in 2004??

Sure looks like it.
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:18 PM on 11/04/2008
- + Carolab See Profile I'm a Fan of Carolab I'm a fan of this user permalink
IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN PARTISAN SCRUBBING OF DEMOCRATIC VOTERS--ESPECIALLY ACTIVISTS LIKE ROBBINS.

CHEATING BY REPUBLICANS.

PERIOD.
Posted 05:28 PM on 11/04/2008
- + johnqsittinzen See Profile I'm a Fan of johnqsittinzen I'm a fan of this user permalink
No, doesn't look like that at all. Pay attention to the big picture, not your quibbling personal issues with the celebrity personality. Is it karma for everyone who is being mysteriously purged from their home district and being offered a provisional ballot as an adequate substitute?
05:22 PM on 11/04/2008
- + salsmom See Profile I'm a Fan of salsmom I'm a fan of this user permalink
what a horrible concept - voting provisionally - he is a US citizen who has voted in that same district for years. maybe we should have all US senators be told that their vote today is a provisional vote and see how fast the election laws are changed.
Interesting to see. SRH
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/04/tim-robbins-polling-place_n_141029.html
* * * * * * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 4th, 2008, 04:49 PM

* * * * * * *
Republican Right Crying "Election Fraud" Already!
By
Bill Hare
11/04/2008 03:39:18 PM EST
They fear that the handwriting was on the wall with the heavy Democratic Party registration coupled with gigantic voter turnouts.

The response by the perpetual deniers of the Republican Right is in current evidence as the future scripts of Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are being written.

Fox News is devoting huge attention to allegations that Black Panther members are standing with nightsticks at one Philadelphia voting precinct and seeking to intimidate white voters they find suspicious. In the clip I viewed there was not one shred of video evidence revealing anyone standing outside the precinct intimidating anyone.

Meanwhile World Net Daily and Free Republic are joining the mounting chorus of shrieks that fraud is in the air. One report exists of two voters being "challenged" in North Dakota.

On the Free Republic site one blogger seeking anonymity with an obviously created name is claiming freedom attainment. "For the first time" in this individual's life that person is casting a straight Republican ticket vote from the top to the bottom of the ballot. The reason is that "my former party" is riddled with "sexism."

Oh yes. The Republican right has been so supportive of equal pay for equal work and highly tolerant of a woman's right to choose. Dare we question the authenticity of these disclosures by a newly liberated Republican?

It is heartening to see that the Republican right is so committed to ethics in balloting. This is sited as the reason why roadblocks have been established, to keep the system honest. Meanwhile it is the Democratic Party and Obama that represent a corrupted system.

These were the same individuals who in 2000 lauded Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris as a beacon of liberty and showered her with more acclaim at Bush's inaugural activities than the designate selected by a 1-vote Supreme Court majority.

There is also a racist-tinged article on the Free Republic site revealing how the nation's money will run out in a future nanny state featuring welfare handouts presided over by Obama and the Democrats.

Free Republic's definition of freedom has never resonated with that which I gleaned from my reading of history and the citizens who generated it. Katherine Harris, for one, never made the grade.

I haven't seen or heard anything about any of this article, but if Hate Media is saying and doing such as this, how terrible of them. They know full well they stand the liklihood of inciting violence, and should they, it is on their heads.

No wonder people working to get out the vote, and those who are working to insure a fraud and intimidation free vote were urging we voters take video cameras with us to the polls.

Hearing and seeing such as this? In the United States? What in the world have we come to? I wouldn't have ever believed we would see times such as these. SRH
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2008/11/4/153918/493 * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 4th, 2008, 06:25 PM

:: :: :: :: ::
McCain Campaign
Pushes Black Panther StoryBy
Tommy Christopher
Nov 4th 2008 5:00PM
Update: I have confirmed, with a Philadelphia police spokesman, that both men were members of the New Black Panther Party, and that the man with the nightstick was asked to leave. He complied, and no charges were filed.

Dave reported earlier on videos that have surfaced featuring 2 men standing in front of a polling place in Philadelphia, one of whom brandished a nightstick. There's a new video, below, of police confronting the men. According to Fox, the unarmed man is an official poll watcher.

Disturbingly, the McCain campaign is pushing the story, sending out a memo to all press. The full memo is here, but here's an excerpt:

In Philadelphia, PA, Black Panthers Are Intimidating Voters By Standing Outside Of A Polling Station While Holding A Night Stick. Fox News' Rick Leventhal: "I do not even know where to begin, but we have reached a polling place in the city of Philadelphia. One of the two black panthers who was allegedly blocking the door is standing right over here, [and] accused us of intimidating voters because we were here with a camera and microphone. He did not answer questions, other people here have confirmed that another person in black panther attire was holding a night stick and apparently the concern was that they were intimidating people who were trying to go inside to vote. A republican poll observer actually called the police, the police were here and we miss[ed] them, they came and left." (Fox News; "America's Newsroom 2008," 11/4/08)
None of these reports provide any proof that these men are Black Panthers, that I'm aware of. If some exists, I'd like to see it.

The memo goes on to detail a precursory statement from several days ago, from a New Black Panther Party spokesman: (click through)
Go on-site for link's photo's, YouTube, etc. Just click here:
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/11/04/mccain-campaign-pushes-black-panther-story/?icid=200100397x1212433106x1200760650
The New Black Panther Party Promised To "Protect Its Interest" On Election Day. "We will not allow some racists and other angry whites, who are upset over an impending Barack Obama presidential victory, to intimidate blacks at the polls,' Muhammad said. Most certainly, we cannot allow these racist forces to slaughter our babies or commit other acts of violence against the black population, nor our black president.' Muhammad added, "We must organize to counter and neutralize these threats using all means at our disposal. This is a great time for our people, and we must ensure that peace prevails for our people.'" (Tyrone Tony Reed, Jr., "New Black Panthers Visit Alamo," Jackson Sun, 11/2/08)
It seems highly irresponsible of the McCain campaign to push such an inflammatory story, on the strength of one unidentified individual's actions. This is especially true given that the man in question was immediately escorted, compliantly, away.

I'll watch this story for updates.

Tommy Christopher co-hosts "Unusable Signal",on BlogTalkRadio, Tues through Thurs at 10pm, and Fri, and Sat at 11pm. (Eastern) Click here for the Unusable Signal homepage.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Unusable-Signal
The comments are something to see, the bigotry and ignorance is astounding in this day and age. For gods sake we aren't living in some third world country, even though many of the comments sure do look as though we are. I think in so many ways, the people in this country are regressing, progress isn't anything they seek or strive for, in politics or in themselves for that matter. The McCain campaign has capitalized on voters basest fears and their ignorance, the Palin/McCain campaign has been an insult to those who are better educated and caring. Because of Sarah Palin alone, I couldn't vote for him, due to the myriad of problems the Sic Em Sarah woman brings to the table.

A newsbreak just in says that the Obama/Biden ticket has taken Vermont I believe and McCain/Palin, Kentucky. No surprise there. And that a Democrat has taken a Virginia senate seat. Susan Collins (R) has defeated Tom Allen (D) in Maine.

I have to say, those fellows with nightsticks weren't thinking too straight, regardless if they are New Black Panthers or not. Just what is it they are they trying to do? Insure the McCain/Palin ticket draws in white voters in droves? Standing about with nightsticks? Another dumb move. One incident doesn't make it a movement, that's for certain, but I don't like it happening, as it's a provocation, and a windfall for McCain/Palin in many aspects.

I keep hoping that violence doesn't become any sort of factor in this hard fought race. I know there's been a lot of fear's being played on and what seems to be an attempt to incite violence from the McCain camp, especially in Sarah Palins flaming rhetoric, but it's died down quite a bit as she became more and more of a joke. But this? What will it cause? Hopefuly, nothing. I do hope that nothing drastic will happen. and I have to believe that any voter with a lick of sense won't be deterred in how they vote by any of this. The ticket of Barack Obama & Joe Biden isn't a threat; no way. They're a promise of better things to come. SRH

TJ, THE CLINTONITE5:14PMNov 4th 2008

THINGS TO COME!
IF OBAMA WINS.. BYE TO OUR COUNTRY
THATS WHO WILL RULE
TERRORISTS AND BLACK PANTHER.
OBAMA DOES NOT HAVE TO SUPPORT THEM
THEY HAVE AXE TO GRIND AND THEY WILL GRIND IT..
WELL, GOOD LUCK TO THE MEDIA.
THEY GOT OBAMA ELECTED IF HE WINS.
IF

PCL5:30PMNov 4th 2008

TJ:
Yes, if.

gris truse5:34PMNov 4th 2008

AIN'T THOSE OLD "EVIL" BLACK PANTHERS ARE NOW IN THEIR LATE 60'S AND 70'S HMMMMM THEM OLD FARTS WOULD BE REALLY DANGEROUS THESE DAYS....... BUT HELL, A DAMN BIGOTED REPUKIST WOULD CALL 2 YR OLD BLACK BABY BOYS WHITE WOMEN RAPISTS...

IBELINDA25:43PMNov 4th 2008

WHAT SORRY ASS MOTHER FUKERS. WHAT ELSE ARE YOU GOING TO COME UP WITH. NOBODY CARES ABOUT THAT SHET BUT YOU RACIST BASTARDS. AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED THATS OLD CRAP AND HE (OBAMA) WASN'T EVEN OLD ENOUGHT TO BE INVOLVED WITH THAT CRAP. WHAT ABOUT THE ECONOMY? THATS THE REAL ISSUE. THE OLD FART SURE ISN'T GOING TO BE MUCH HELP WITH OUR ECONOMY. HE HAS NO CLUE WHATS GOING ON IN THE AVERAGE AMERICAN HOME. HE COULD CARE LESS. HIS ONLY INTEREST IS GETTING IN THE WHITEHOUSE TO HELP OUT HIS CRONIES. OBAMA IS OUR NEXT PRESIDENT LIKE IT OR NOT. MOVE OVER ASSHOS AND MAKE ROOM FOR THE MAN WHO CAN GET US OUT OF THIS SHET. BYE MCINSANE, GO HOME AND ENJOY THE REST OF YOUR LIFE IN ONE OF YOUR 7 HOUSES. FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE!
BAROCK OBAMA!

jan5:44PMNov 4th 2008

My God, McCain is being a jerk down to the last second. Every time I think he can't get any lower, that his fans can't get any stupider, lo and behold.

JVZaccaro5:46PMNov 4th 2008

A VOTE FOR CHANGE!

To date, the Obama campaign has experienced:

A 20 year relationship with a radical religious mentor who said “God Damn America”

Active ACORN voter registration fraud investigations in 15 states.

$150 million of questionable campaign funds collected in September.

Financial fraud related to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

A list of friends that would keep him from qualifying as his own Secret Service bodyguard.

A personal commitment to end the American Coal Industry.

Voter intimidation by Black Panthers in Philadelphia.

A running mate who says Obama will be “tested with a crisis” within 6 months.

Is this the CHANGE Americans want? YOU must decide and YOU must VOTE.

Mat5:47PMNov 4th 2008

Once I could have supported McCain. I respected him. But he went wrong somewhere along the line.That Palin, who wants some right wing zealot as vice president? Not me. Had enough of that with Cheney. The lies. I've never seen any campaign try to stir up so much FEAR since Lyndon Johnson. McCain is saying "don't vote for me because I'm a good man with good ideas, vote for me 'cause the other guy is really scary ". I want ideas and hope for a better future, not more scare stories. Sorry McCain, you blew it.

simpsontrucking5:52PMNov 4th 2008

Why cant you show the whole damn thing. Tommy you are biased as they come.PPL go to youtube the whole video is on there. McCain didnt report it fox did dumdass

mike bruno6:35PMNov 4th 2008

once again you liberals must be blind or just plain ignorant.. it was on fox news and there were two, one was holding a nightstick and was escorted away the other seemed like he had a third grade education,or at least needed a dentist lol.. but you wouldnt have seen it on msnbc so i guess u dont believe anything that would be true reporting would you? vote mccain

lobo1211486:36PMNov 4th 2008

IBELINDA2,
Your either a Ghetto Queen with a computer, No brains and in need of spell check software or a Wigger needing the same.
I don't know which one is worse. Either way your the kind of people Obama counts on for support. His class warfare approach is a typical socialist ploy.The economic meltdown has its roots in previous administrations, both Democratic and Republican. It was Bill Clinton who sold the unions down the river with NAFTA. If Obama gets in office and the Dems control both houses, WHO are you going too blame if things don't improve fast enough for you? Maybe that's what this country needs, 4 years of socialism lite and then they might realize that different isn't always BETTER!

bob6:40PMNov 4th 2008

Yeah, let's not concentrate on the two jackasses attempting to intimidate voters.

Let's worry about the McCain camp making mention of it.

Tommy, if this was two guys at a polling place in Mississippi wearing white hoods and holding baseball bats you'd be condemning them as extremist McCain supporters and suggest they represented the whole lot.

Bettybb7:00PMNov 4th 2008

Why was a man with a weapon allowed to remain outside a polling booth for over an hour? Why weren't the police called immediately? Why was he not arrested?

What with the Dem county in VA trying to invalidate servicemen's ballots, and now this voter intimiation, it appears that the Dems are going to be the bad guys this election.

Sal7:01PMNov 4th 2008

HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE OF MCCAIN TO ADDRESS SUCH A DISGUSTING DISPLAY OF RACISM. I HOPE THAT A GROUP OF SPOOKS FUCK YOU IN THE ASS AND YOUR LIBERAL FREIDNS TOO. YOU AND YOUR FAMILY MUST BE A GROUP OF PIECES OF SHIT. NO I AM NOT A RACIST JUST LIVE LIFE WITH MY EYES OPEN. YES YOU ARE A SHITTY COLUMNIST AQND A TOTAL 0.

Sal7:01PMNov 4th 2008

MCCAIN'S SIDE IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO REPORT SUCH A THING? I HOPE THAT A GROUP OF SPOOKS FUCK YOU IN THE ASS. YOU ARE A TROUBLE MAKING PIECE OF SHIT.

waggonnerjoe7:03PMNov 4th 2008

I'D BEAT THAT BLACK PANTHER ASS

Trae Fennell7:04PMNov 4th 2008

I wish the so called BLACK PANTHERS would have came down to Alabama and tried to intimidate our voters! Of course fear mongers won't go where they cant scare people because they are too scared themselves!

JohnBoy7:04PMNov 4th 2008

just send in the klan, the panthers will scatter like the cockroaches they are.

PCL7:06PMNov 4th 2008

JohnBoy7:04PMNov 4th 2008
just send in the klan, the panthers will scatter like the cockroaches they are.
--------------------------------------------------------------
I really doubt that--I noticed that the panthers don't wear sheets to hide behind.
Just an observation.

jhnlkrnbch7:09PMNov 4th 2008

you black raicests still don't get it "" IT'S ONLY TRASH,OR LIES IF IT ISN'T TRUE ""ALL THE OBOMA CONNECTIONS ARE PROVEN FACTS.NO LIES,ALL THE TRASH ABOUT MCCAIN -PAILIN ARE LIES JUNK THAT HAVE NO CONNECTION AT ALL.IF YOU BLACKS WANT WHAT OBOMA AND HIS DIRT FRIENDS ARE ABOUT TO GET STEP UP NOW SO WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE TOMORROW OR ARE YOU GONNA TRY TO HIDE AND BLEND INTO THE PUBLIC LIKE YOURE PUNK FRIENDS...

brianguy7:09PMNov 4th 2008

who else would brandish a nightstick at a polling place, dressed in all black militant gear than the NEW BLACK PANTHERS????

idiot. do your homework... nice 'reporting'

| 1 | 2 | 3 | Most Recent | Next 20 Commentshttp://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/11/04/mccain-campaign-pushes-black-panther-story/?icid=200100397x1212433106x1200760650 [B]:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Saundra Hummer

November 4th, 2008, 08:20 PM

IIIIIIIIIIIII
Politico.com Breaking News:
Barack Obama has won Iowa, AP reports.

For more information...http://www.politico.com
Obama takes commanding lead
By
Bill Nichols
November 4, 2008
10:07 PM EST
Barack Obama was on the verge of becoming the nation's first African-American president Tuesday night and Democrats picked off four Senate seats - moving the party toward unified power in Washington.

Obama's victories in Ohio and Pennsylvania - a red state and a Democratic-leaning state McCain hoped to peel off - gave the McCain campaign a painfully narrow path to the White House.

Obama also took Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey,New York, Michigan, Minnesota, Rhode Island and Wisconsin.

McCain posted victories in West Virginia, Utah, Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, North Dakota, Tennessee, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wyoming. Indiana and Virginia — two normally red states Obama hoped to steal away — remained too close to call, as did Florida and even McCain's home state of Arizona. The tightness of those states was more bad news for McCain.

Democrats picked up Senate seats in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Mexico and New Hampshire.

"We like what we see," chief Obama strategist David Axelrod told CNN.

Polls has closed in dozens of states by 10 p.m. - hours after Obama, Joe Biden, McCain and Sarah Palin cast their ballots along with millions of other Americans. It was the culminating act in a two-year-long process that will result in a new president-elect to lead a nation living under the shadow of two wars and a transcendent economic crisis.

Exit polls showed a country ready for change and fearful of economic uncertainty. Six in 10 voters rated the economy as their top concern — potentially good news for Obama, whom polls have consistently shown connecting with voters on that issue.

At stake were two historic firsts: the possibility of the nation’s first black president, should Obama win, and the country’s first female vice president, in the event of a McCain-Palin victory.

See Also
Things to watch on Election Day
25 key counties to watch
Networks ready Election Night gizmos
&
Go on-site for photo's, links, other articles of interest, etc.

In Congress, Democrats also hoped to widen their advantage by roughly 20 seats in the House and believed a 60-seat, filibuster-resistant majority in the Senate was within the party’s grasp. In addition to all 435 House seats, 35 Senate seats were up for grabs as well as 11 gubernatorial races.

So far, Democrats have added four seats to their majority and hoped for more. Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, as expected, handily defeated another former governor, Jim Gilmore. Democrat Kay Hagan defeated incumbent Sen. Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina. In New Hampshire, former governor Jeanne Shaheen defeated incumbent Sen. John Sununu. And in New Mexico, Democrat Tom Udall won the
seat held by retiring Republican Pete Domenici.

One piece of good news for Republicans: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell won a tough re-election battle in Kentucky.

In the House, Democrats had picked up 3 seats by 10 p.m.

Both tickets ended their general election showdown with a final sprint across an array of battleground states — many of them traditionally redder than the McCain campaign would like.

Tuesday morning, it was up to the respective get-out-the-vote teams and, finally, to the bulk of the nation’s voters to have the final say. Anecdotal evidence indicated a huge turnout in both parties, with long lines the norm at polling place after polling place.

Heavy turnout was reported both inside and outside the battleground states, with some election officials predicting rates exceeding 80 percent.

Broken machines, long lines and polling places opening late caused problems across the East Coast and Midwest this morning, according to voting rights advocates. But no widespread problems were reported.

Obama joined the nation's earliest voters Tuesday. "I voted," he said, holding up the validation slip he was handed after turning in a ballot at his Chicago neighborhood's precinct. He planned a final campaign event in nearby Indiana before speaking to a massive evening rally in Chicago.

Obama was accompanied by his wife and two young daughters. "The journey ends," Obama told reporters, "but voting with my daughters, that was a big deal."

In Delaware, Biden went to the polls with his elderly mother.

In Phoenix, McCain left his high-rise condominium to cast a ballot at a nearby church before preparing to fly to Colorado and New Mexico for events in two crucial battleground states. He gave supporters a thumbs-up sign and was in and out of the polling place within minutes.

After stops in Colorado and New Mexico, a subdued McCain came back to talk to reporters on his campaign plane. His wife, Cindy, had tears in her eyes. "Well, my friends, this is our last flight on this airplane together, so I just wanted to stop back," he said. "We've had a great time and I wish all every success. Look forward to being with you in the future. Thanks very much."

Palin returned to Wasilla, Alaska — the tiny city where she once served as mayor — to vote. "Here in Alaska, where we've cleaned up the corruption and we've taken on some self-dealing and self-interests, we've been able to really put government back on the side of the people," Palin told reporters after voting. "I hope, pray, believe I'll be able to do that as vice president for everybody in America, helping to transform our national government, too."

Polls showed Obama a clear favorite — but an unyielding McCain camp continued to insist it was closing the gap and warned against counting out a candidate who has always run best when his chances for success seemed bleakest.

In Democratic circles, there was a kind of queasy confidence mixed with a fatalism that the party has so often snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

If there is a clear victor by Tuesday night, Wednesday could bring a rapid transition, given the staggering magnitude of the economic slowdown and continued volatility on Wall Street.

Aides in both campaigns have hinted they could move forward with White House staff choices or perhaps even a nominee for Treasury secretary within days.

But for a few more hours on Tuesday, there was the uncomfortable limbo known only to politicians and their staffs and followers on Election Day.

Given the challenges that the country faces and the stark differences between the candidates, there was a palpable sense in the nation that this is an election that will truly matter.

“I think most people understand this is not just a choice between candidates,” former President Bill Clinton said after voting Tuesday morning in Chappaqua, N.Y. “It’s a choice between philosophies."

Jeanne Cummings, Lisa Lerer and Amie Parnes contributed to this story.
© 2008 Capitol News Company, LLC
Go on-site for photo's, related articles, etc.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15253.html IIIIIIIII

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 12:48 AM

<><><><><><><>
Troops hope Obama brings them home responsiblyBy
Tim Cocks
Wednesday, Nov 5, 2008
2:24am EST

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Watching election results that showed Barack Obama would be their new commander-in-chief, U.S. soldiers in Iraq said they hoped he would fulfill his promise to bring them home quickly and responsibly.

Breakfast was already being served in Baghdad on Wednesday morning when Tuesday's polls closed back home, and at Forward Operating Base Prosperity all eyes in the 2nd Brigade Combat Team of the 101st Airborne were on the dining hall's giant TVs.

Someone whooped when NBC called the election, but mostly the troops sat in rapt silence, eyeing their new president while eating their eggs.

"What soldier's going to say they don't want to go home? I have a wife and four kids. I want to go home. But one thing we all want is to make sure the friends we lost over here weren't for nothing," said Captain Ryan Morrison, from Colorado Springs.

"We have to pull out responsibly. I have the feeling he wants to do it responsibly," he said.

Obama has pledged to pull U.S. combat troops out of Iraq within 16 months of taking office, a promise that seemed bold when he first made it last year but now coincides roughly with the timetable favored by Iraq's government.

"I'm excited. He's going to be president and he's going to pull us from over here," said Sergeant First Class Norman Brown.

"If McCain had won we'd be over here for years, and I mean years and years. I reckon even people here don't want us here."

With levels of violence falling -- last month saw the fewest violent deaths among both Iraqi civilians and U.S. troops since the war began -- Iraqis increasingly express their hope that the force of more than 150,000 U.S. troops can leave soon.

"I as an Iraqi am asking Obama to keep his promises about the withdrawal of the U.S. security forces from our land," said Baqi Naqid, a Baghdad journalist. "We don't need an occupation."

IRAQI GOVERNMENT NEGOTIATES WITHDRAWAL
The Iraqi government is negotiating a security pact with the outgoing administration of President George W. Bush that would require U.S. troops to exit by the end of 2011. But some Iraqis still fear violence may return if U.S. troops leave too rapidly.

"They came on a mission. They should complete it. There should be 100 percent security before they leave," said Baghdad housewife Um Saba, 58. She said she preferred the Republicans for supporting an increase of troops last year that she credited with helping to curb violence.

Among U.S. troops, political loyalties were divided and debate spirited during the long campaign. African American soldiers described Obama's victory as inspirational.

"It gives me hope that anybody can accomplish anything no matter what your race, color or creed," said Los Angeles native Staff Sergeant Andre Frazier, adding he hoped it would improve the U.S. image abroad.

"We're going to get back to where we were as a nation before the turmoil kicked in, in terms of other nations not seeing us as we are," he said.

There was also a great deal of support for Obama's defeated rival John McCain, whose own war record makes him popular in a military that socially tilts toward the right.

"I supported McCain because he's closer to the constitutional values I believe in and because he clearly supports the military," said another soldier from Colorado who asked not to be named when giving his political preference in uniform. "But in the end it doesn't matter. We'll serve whoever is the commander in chief."

(Additional reporting by Aseel Kami; Writing by Peter Graff; Editing by Jon Boyle)
© Thomson Reuters 2008. All rights reserved.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsONE/idUSTRE4A441P20081105
<><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 10:33 AM

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Rosa Parks sat
so Martin Luther King could walk,
so Barack Obama could run,
so Americans can fly. ~ ~ ~
French journalist on Charlie Rose quoting a woman voter.
She was one of the supporters of Obama out to take part in the process of voting.
An unknown source.
Beautiful. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 11:50 AM

* * * * * The End of International Law?By
Robert Dreyfuss
November 04, 2008 - -"The Nation" -- -10/28/2008 -- A parallel new Bush doctrine is emerging, in the last days of the soon-to-be-ancien regime, and it needs to be strangled in its crib. Like the original Bush doctrine -- the one that Sarah Palin couldn't name, which called for preventive military action against emerging threats -- this one also casts international law aside by insisting that the United States has an inherent right to cross international borders in "hot pursuit" of anyone it doesn't like.
They're already applying it to Pakistan, and this week Syria was the target. Is Iran next?

Let's take Pakistan first. Though a nominal ally, Pakistan has been the subject of at least nineteen aerial attacks by CIA-controlled drone aircraft, killing scores of Pakistanis and some Afghans in tribal areas controlled by pro-Taliban forces. The New York Times listed, and mapped, all nineteen such attacks in a recent piece describing Predator attacks across the Afghan border, all since August. The Times notes that inside the government, the U.S.Special Operations command and other advocates are pushing for a more aggressive use of such units, including efforts to kidnap and interrogate suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders. Though President Bush signed an order in July allowing U.S. commando teams to move into Pakistan itself, with or without Islamabad's permission, such raids have occurred only once, on September 3.

The U.S. raid into Syria on October 26 similarly trampled on Syria's sovereignty without so much as a fare-thee-well. Though the Pentagon initially denied that the raid involved helicopters and on-the-ground commando presence, that's exactly what happened. The attack reportedly killed Badran Turki Hishan al-Mazidih, an Iraqi facilitator who smuggled foreign fighters into Iraq through Syria. The Washington Post was ecstatic, writing in an editorial:

"If Sunday's raid, which targeted a senior al-Qaeda operative, serves only to put Mr. Assad on notice that the United States, too, is no longer prepared to respect the sovereignty of a criminal regime, it will have been worthwhile."
Is it really that easy? To say: We declare your regime criminal, and so we will attack you anytime we care to? In its news report of the attack into Syria, the Post suggests, in a report by Ann Scott Tyson and Ellen Knickmeyer, that the attack is raising cross-border hot pursuit to the level of a doctrine:
"The military's argument is that 'you can only claim sovereignty if you enforce it,' said Anthony Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 'When you are dealing with states that do not maintain their sovereignty and become a de facto sanctuary, the only way you have to deal with them is this kind of operation,' he said."

The Times broadens the possible targets from Pakistan and Syria to Iran, writing (in a page one story by Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker):

"Administration officials declined to say whether the emerging application of self-defense could lead to strikes against camps inside Iran that have been used to train Shiite 'special groups' that have fought with the American military and Iraqi security forces."

That, of course, has been a live option, especially since the start of the surge in January, 2007, when President Bush promised to strike at Iranian supply lines in Iraq and other U.S. officials, including Vice President Cheney, pressed hard to attack sites within Iran, regardless of the consequences.

On October 24, I went to hear Mike Vickers, the assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, speaking at the Washington Institiute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a pro-Israeli thinktank in Washington. He spoke with pride about the vast and growing presence of these commando forces within the U.S. military, noting that their budget has doubled under the Bush administration and that, by the end of the decade, their will more than 60,000 U.S. forces in this shadowy effort. Here are some excerpts of Vickers' remarks:

"If you look at the operational core of our Special Operations Forces, and focus on the ground operators, there are some 15,000 or so of those -- give or take how you count them -- these range from our Army Special Forces or our Green Berets, our Rangers, our Seals, some classified units we have, and we recently added a Marine Corps Special Operations Command to this arsenal as well. In addition to adding the Marine component, each of these elements since 2006 and out to about 2012 or 2013 has been increasing their capacity as well as their capabilities, but their capacity by a third. This is the largest growth in Special Operations Force history. By the time we're done with that, there will be some things, some gaps we need to fix undoubtedly, but we will have the elements in place for what we believe is the Special Operations component of the global war on terrorism.
"Special Operations Forces, I think through this decade and into the next one, have been and will remain a decisive strategic instrument. ... "

"There's been a very significant -- about a 40 or 50 percent increase in operational tempo and of course more intense in terms of the action since the 9/11 attacks. On any given day that we wake up, our Special Operations Forces are in some sixty countries around the world. But more than 80 percent or so of those right now are concentrated in the greater Middle East or the United States Central Command area of responsibility -- the bulk of those of course in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Notice what he said: operating in 60 countries.

Of course, the very invasion of Iraq was illegal in 2003, and it flouted international law. So some may say, these cross-border raids are small potatoes. But they're not. This is a big deal. If it becomes a standard part of U.S. military doctrine that any country can be declared "criminal" and thus lose its sovereignty, then there is no such thing as international law anymore.

When Defense Secretary Robert Gates was asked about this, here's what he said, as quoted in the Post article cited earlier:

"'We will do what is necessary to protect our troops,' Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said in Senate testimony last month, when asked about the cross-border operations. Under questioning, Gates said that he was not an expert in international law but that he assumed the State Department had consulted such laws before the U.S. military was granted authority to make such strikes."

Not an expert in international law? He'll leave it to the State Department? And this is the guy that Barack Obama's advisers say ought to stay on at the Pentagon under an Obama administration?

Click on "comments" below to read or post comments

Comments (37) Comment (0) Go on-site to gain access to the NUMEROUS links within this article and to view comments or post your own thoughts. Just click on the following link:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
* * * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 12:02 PM

* * * * * Bush's Last 100 Days the Ones to Watch
By Jesse Jackson

November 4, 2008 "Chicago Sun-Times" -- The air crackles with anticipation. Fingers are crossed. It gets hard to breathe. Hope, for so long locked in a closet, begins pounding on the door.

And throwing caution to the wind, many already are talking about Barack Obama's first 100 days. Will he move directly to the Apollo investment agenda, providing money to refit buildings, implement the use of renewable energy and generate jobs in the drive to reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Will he put forth a comprehensive health-care plan or begin by covering all children? Will workers finally be given the right to organize once more? How will he handle mortgage relief and/or help cities burdened by poverty?

But even as our minds, against all discipline, look beyond this day to the possible victory and change, we'd better start paying attention to another 100 days -- President Bush's last months in office.

Bush and Vice President Cheney represent a failed conservative era -- and they know it. As the administration moves into its last 100 days, there seems to be a flurry of activity: regulations to forestall Obama's new era of accountability; a flood of contracts to reward friends and lock in commitments; a Wall Street bailout that is pumping money out the door.

Consider: Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is handing out $350 billion to the banks, drawing a special circle around nine banks -- including Goldman Sachs, the firm he previously headed -- as clearly too big to fail. The money apparently has no conditions, even though the entire purpose was to get the banks to start lending once more to one another and to companies and individuals.

Now it appears that banks plan to hoard the cash, to use it to help pay for mergers with other healthy banks (not weak ones), or to pay out dividends and bonuses. And Paulson, instead of publicly rebuking them, has let it be known that mergers would be a good thing.

Instead of getting the banking system working for small businesses and people again, our money is being used to consolidate the strength of a few megabanks.

There has been a rapid increase in military outlays over the last few months. Is the Pentagon being called on to help bolster the economy -- and perhaps McCain -- in these final weeks? Or, more likely, is the Pentagon pumping out money to reward its friends and lock in spending before the new sheriff gets to town?

The Washington Post reports that the White House is "working to enact an array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before President Bush leaves office in January."

About 90 new rules are in the works, and at least nine are considered "economically significant" because they would impose costs or promote societal benefits that exceed $100 million annually. Many will make changes that the new administration will find it hard to reverse for years to come. More emissions from power plants; more exemptions from environmental-impact statements; permission to operate natural gas lines at higher levels of pressure -- the changes could be the last calamities visited upon us by the Bush administration.

Congress -- the old one, not the new one just elected -- comes back into special session right after the election. Representatives Henry Waxman and John Conyers would be well advised to convene special hearings to try to curb what Bush has cooked up for his last 100 days. Let's not let the new dawn that is possible be dimmed by clouds left over from an old era that has failed.

© Copyright 2008 Digital Chicago, Inc Click on "comments" below to read or post comments Comments (62) Comment (0)
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
* * * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 01:30 PM

* * * * * * *
Hallelujah! And Now, The Work Begins
By
Robert Borosage
Created 11/05/2008 - 7:10am
Americans wake today to a new dawn, a new possibility.

You don't have to drink the Kool-Aid to appreciate how extraordinary this is. We will look at one another with new eyes. We are a better, bigger, more generous, more optimistic people than many—particularly Karl Rove's acolytes in the McCain campaign—assumed.

The world will also look at America with new eyes. For a shining moment, we will be once more that city on the hill, the example of a free people choosing a remarkable new leader. A similar choice—the son of a native born woman and an African—could not happen in Europe, in Japan, in China or much of Asia. Amazing grace.

It wasn't easy. It took a candidate of remarkable intelligence, discipline and ease, organizing a truly exemplary campaign. It took the worst financial catastrophe since the Great Depression and the worst foreign policy debacle in Iraq since Vietnam. It took the self-immolation of Republican John McCain. It took Americans deciding not to fall for the old politics of division—not this time.

But this victory is grounded in far more than the campaign or the candidate. This is a country disfigured by slavery from the start. The Constitution even dictated that slaves would count as three-fifths of a person for apportionment (even though they couldn't vote). A century and a half of slavery; 100 years of legal apartheid, known as segregation; a slow and hard struggle to overcome.

Yet this same country was founded on an idea—that all men (and now women) are created equal, endowed with inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That same Constitution that counted slaves as less than human guaranteed the right to speech and assembly, freedom of and freedom from religion. Each generation has been given the opportunity and the mandate to struggle to extend freedom and to make America better.

Many sacrificed; many died to get to this day. Barack Obama, as he knows, stands on the shoulders of giants. So this is a time to celebrate ourselves and to honor those who came before. Hallelujah!

And now the work begins. Obama inherits the desert—with the situation far more dire than many, even now, understand. Manufacturing is at levels not seen since the deep recession in 1980. Consumers are cutting back spending. The banking system is still reeling from losses and shocks. The recession now has gone global. Homeowners have lost $5 trillion in housing values.

So forget about the routine chattering-class babble about how America is a "center right" nation and Obama must "govern from the center." (For a good mashup of quotes from ThinkProgress, go here. [1] David Sirota tracks the "center-right watch" from ourfuture.org, here.) [2] With independents and moderates looking more Democratic and liberal on issue after issue, the claim that this is a center-right nation was misleading even before this election. Americans are voting for a northern, liberal, Ivy League-educated, African-American, former college professor to be president, someone who campaigned on raising taxes on the wealthy, affordable health care for all, investing in new energy, getting out of Iraq and against trickle down economics. Conservative nation?

Govern from the center? Americans voted overwhelmingly for change. And to be successful, Obama will have to be bold. In reality, the center has moved. Wall Streeter Robert Rubin now is for a large, deficit-financed fiscal stimulus. Conservative Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Christopher Cox now tells us "self-regulation" doesn't work, and calls for re-regulating the banks. Alan Greenspan admits his ideology blinded him to reality—or at least that he got it wrong. "We're all populists now," says Will Marshall, a leader of the Democratic Leadership Council, the Wall Street wing of the party.

Mandates are not given; they are claimed. Majorities do not form; they are forged. The center is not frozen; it is molded by events, moved by leaders and movements.

But this Beltway clamor about the center serves as a warning to progressives. The entrenched forces of the status quo are already in motion. Obama takes office as the Reagan era comes to a close, bankrupted by its own failures. But change, as Obama says, isn't easy. He said in Chicago Tuesday night: [3]

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. ... There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president. And we know the government can't solve every problem.

But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And, above all, I will ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation, the only way it's been done in America for 221 years—block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand."

Even the best presidents need to be pushed to act. Even the most calcified Congresses can be driven to move. The best of the New Deal—Social Security, the Wagner Act that gave workers the right to organize, fair labor standards that gave us the weekend—came not from Roosevelt's first 100 days, but two years later, in what became known as the Second New Deal. That was driven in large part by an active and mobilized labor movement, and by the growing political threat posed by a populist left—Huey Long, Father Coughlin, Francis Townsend—that gave Roosevelt both reason and excuse to move. "I agree with you," Roosevelt reportedly told labor's Sidney Hillman. "Now go out, and make me to do it."

Obama will need that same kind of pressure. We will need to build an independent progressive movement to push for reform, to challenge those who stand in the way. So celebrate. And then get ready to work.

Links:
[1] http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/04/center-right-watch/
[2] http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008114503/center-right-nation-watch-mark-penn-edition
[3] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/05/AR2008110500013_pf.html
Published on OurFuture.org
(http://www.ourfuture.org)

1825 K Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20006
202-955-5665 (tel) | 202-955-5606 (fax) | www.ourfuture.org * * * * * * * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 02:47 PM

. . . . . Debunked:
Ten Conservative Myths
About
National Security
By Sara Robinson
Created 09/12/2008 - 1:59am
Published on OurFuture.org

(http://www.ourfuture.org)Summary:
In the seven years since the U.S. was hit by a terrorist attack, a few of the myths promulgated in those first few years have hardened firmly into a new conventional wisdom—some so stubbornly that you often won't even find progressives questioning them any more. The time has come to call out a few of these persistent myths that are still being taken as fact and start firing back on them.

True confession: I was terrified on 9/11—for all the right reasons.

I wasn't afraid of the terrorists. There are plenty of countries where people have lived for decades under the constant threat of unholy acts of terror—and yet people still get on buses and subways and airplanes, and life goes on. I'd like to think that Americans are at least as courageous as Israelis or Indonesians. Our "land of the free and home of the brave" mythos insists we should be. So I was damned if I was going to respond to the crisis by giving into irrational fears and thereby, as we used to say, "let the terrorists win."

No, what I was really afraid of was that too many of my fellow Americans would forget the lessons of their own history—that they'd lose track of who we are and where we've been and what we're made of. I knew there was a real possibility that this time, we'd fail to live up to our reputation for cool, calm clarity in the face of crisis, and instead be goaded into taking counsel of our fears. I feared the bad choices that would inevitably follow if we stampeded down that road. And I dreaded that it would be the soul death of the country I loved.
The Ten Myths"Islamofascism" is our biggest national security threat. [1]
We're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here. [2]
Military solutions are the only effective national security solutions. [3]
What we're doing is working; we haven't had another 9/11. [4]
"Law enforcement" approaches to terrorism don't work. [5]
We don't need allies; we can do this on our own. [6]
You don't negotiate with dictators. [7]
National security spending is different from pork-barrel spending on other programs. [8]
Airport security is critical to our anti-terrorism effort. [9]
It's always necessary to give up our civil liberties in a time of war. [10]Go on site to see numbered links.

I hate having been right about this, though I can hardly blame average citizens for succumbing to the sirens of chaos. Americans trying to make correct sense of the new reality found their efforts stymied everywhere they turned. With the White House distorting intelligence to sell a war, corporate opportunists fanning the coals of panic to heat up vast new business opportunities, media editors milking the drama to keep their ratings high, and terrified hordes quick to shout "treason" whenever anyone dared to question the path we were taking, it was hard for even thoughtful Americans to locate the truth of the matter. And as long as confusion reigned, the terrorists really did keep winning.

Seven years later, as the miasma dissipates, more and more of us are able to calm down, take a step back, draw a big, cleansing breath and start to sort things out more rationally. Unfortunately, though, a few of the myths promulgated in those first few years have hardened firmly into a new conventional wisdom—some so stubbornly that you often won't even find progressives questioning them any more. The time has come to call out a few of these persistent myths that are still being taken as fact and start firing back on them.

1. "Islamofascism" is America's biggest national security threat.
Not hardly. This is the hot new idea among far-right demagogues who literally can't define who they are without a devil to contrast themselves against, and military hawks looking for an excuse to keep the military-industrial complex's big all-night party rolling in the bleary morning-after of a post-Cold War world. But, as the Center for American Progress notes in this article [11], it's a dangerous meme that disables our ability to think clearly, and it will almost certainly lead us into even more catastrophic misadventures.

To begin with, "Islamofascism" itself is an impossible idea, and those who promote it betray a fundamental political ignorance. True fascism can only occur within an industrialized nation-state, few of which exist in the Islamic world. And many of our most intransigent problems with terrorism come from the opposite problem: modern terrorists have no state affiliations, and are thus free to drift across international borders with fluid ease. Defeating them means coming to grips with this fact. Calling them "fascists" makes it that much harder to grasp.

Worse, "Islamofascism" suggests that the Muslim world is some kind of vast monolithic conspiracy, equal in might and will to the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany back in the day—and that's another dangerous delusion. Just like Christianity, Islam covers a widely diverse range of cultures and political attitudes. In fact, the overwhelming majority of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims are not jihadis, and consider terrorism abhorrent. Turning one-quarter of the world's people into The Enemy will blind us to the subtle but critical distinctions within Islam. It will doom us to serious blunders, alienate potential allies, and cost us important opportunities to make real inroads against terrorism.

Spencer Ackerman suggests the term "anti-Western Salafist jihadism" as a replacement. Less catchy, perhaps, but more specific and not nearly so fraught with wrong assumptions that can cloud our thinking.

Having dispatched "Islamofascism," though, the more important point remains: Anti-Western Salafist jihadism isn't even America's biggest security threat. It's on the short list—but so are global pandemics, loose nukes, our dependence on foreign energy, the catastrophic effects of climate change, the U.S.'s vast and bloated national debt, and our growing helplessness at producing essential goods for ourselves. As long as we're mired in an endless war to "defeat Islamofascism," we're going to remain weak, distracted, and grossly unprepared for the other serious security threats we face.

2. We're fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here.
False. The image here is that Iraq is some kind of roach hotel for global terrorism. The truth is, it's become the international finishing school where a new generation of terrorists is getting a front-line, real-time education against the American war machine—and perfecting low-tech ways to close the gap against a high-tech army.

The U.S. official National Intelligence Estimate concludes that the war in Iraq has made new Islamic radicals where none existed before, greatly increasing the terror threat around the world. The number of significant terrorist incidents worldwide has risen every year of the war. In a bipartisan survey of national security experts last year, the consensus found that that the war in Iraq is making the world more dangerous for Americans. (To be fair, this same panel is a bit more upbeat this year, but still thinks the war is a grave mistake.) In the meantime, al-Qaida has regrouped in Pakistan, and is back at full strength—while we've suffered more than 35,000 casualties and spent more than $550 billion, while alienating friends around the world.

"Fighting them there" hasn't been nearly the solution we were promised it would be. But too many of us were eager to buy into that promise, because we'd already been sold on another persistent myth:

3. Military solutions are the only effective national security solutions.
Wrong. So wrong that Boston University professor Andrew Bacevich (who is nobody's liberal) has written an entire book [12] on America's dangerously naïve faith in the military as the only viable solution to everything that ails us.

Which is ridiculous, when you consider all the things military force can't do. Smart bombs won't stop global warming. Battlefield nukes won't cure pandemics. Air strikes won't reduce our reliance on foreign energy sources. Sending in the Marines is no way to reduce the national debt. As we saw above in No. 1, terrorism is just one of a number of real national security threats we're facing—and as we'll see, it's not even clear that that the military is the right answer there, either.

On the other hand, there's a surprising level of consensus among security experts on both the left and right on what real, effective national security would look like:

. We need to beef up our intelligence agencies—in a way that's consistent with the Constitution—so they can monitor terrorist groups and keep dangerous technologies out of their hands.
. We need to provide consistent and effective domestic security around ports, chemical plants, and other high-risk targets—something that should have been done immediately after 9/11, but is still largely neglected.
. We need to revisit our national infrastructure for disaster preparedness and response. Whether it's floods or fires, evacuation or epidemic, insurgents or industrial accidents, we will be more secure if we have a well-planned, coordinated response, and trained people prepared and in place to handle it.
. We need our friends. Diplomacy, alliances, international cooperation, intelligence sharing and police work are the essential tools for pre-empting real threats to our security.
. We need to become more self-sufficient. Asked by the Foreign Policy Index to rate strategies for strengthening the nation’s security, 55% of Americans listed “Becoming less dependent on other countries for our supply of energy. Only 17% said “Attacking countries that develop weapons of mass destruction” would enhance our security.
America has very few problems that can best be solved by military means—and a great many problems that require us to look for other strategies.

4. But—what we're doing is working! After all, we haven't had another 9/11...
True, we haven't—but not for the reasons you think. Which leads us to another myth....

5. Everybody knows that "law enforcement" approaches to terrorism don't work.
False. They do work. In fact, they're about the only thing that really does work. Every single terrorist plot that's been prevented since 9/11—both the serious ones, and the ones that were "more aspirational than operational"—were prevented through good old-fashioned police and intelligence work.

Taking the wide view, the fateful choice to send in soldiers rather than international cops turned out to be a major win for the terrorists. Conservative blogger Steve Chapman explained it this way: [13]"By framing the fight as a global war, we have helped Osama bin Laden and hurt ourselves. Had we treated him and his confederates as the moral equivalent of international drug lords or sex traffickers, the organization might not have the romantic image it has acquired. By exaggerating the potential impact, we also magnified the disruptive effect of any plots, which is just what the terrorists seek."

6. We don't need allies: we can do this on our own. Besides, moral authority doesn't matter when you have superior firepower.
More fatal hubris. One of the more noxious side effects of American exceptionalism is that we cling stubbornly to the idea that we're the only country on earth that matters and owe nothing to anyone else.

That wasn't even true back in 1776, when Thomas Jefferson duly noted the new nation's obligation to have "a decent respect" for "the opinions of mankind" in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. It's considerably less true now that we are so dependent on so many for so much. Insisting that we can go it alone in this deeply interconnected world—where our oil comes from the Saudis, our cars come from the Japanese, and our money and everything else comes from China—is very much like a headstrong 14-year-old who insists that they don't need Mom and Dad for anything—except maybe housing and food and an allowance and a ride to the mall.

And that's about how Americans look to the rest of the world whenever we strike this "I'll do it myself, so there" posture: immature, petulant, spoiled and ignorant of all the ways we depend on the family of nations for our continued well-being. Yes, we're big and strong and capable of doing tremendous damage if we get angry. But we can only throw that weight around for so long—by and by, the other nations will band together to find alternatives to dealing with us, and may even start actively looking for ways to knock us down to size. In some places, this is already happening, and it's not in our long-term interest for it to continue.

It's time for us to remember our grown-up manners and return to our seat at the global family table.

7. Negotiating with "irrational" dictators is pointless, and a sign of weakness.
Catastrophically dumb. Conservatives condemn the idea of presidents talking to their counterparts from "enemy" countries, but 67 percent of Americans disagree, according to a June 2 Gallup poll [14]. "Large majorities of Democrats and independents, and even half of Republicans, believe the president of the United States should meet with the leaders of countries that are considered enemies of the United States," the poll says. Fifty-nine percent of Americans, for example, would support the U.S. president meeting with the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

If FDR could confer with Stalin and JFK could negotiate with Khrushchev and Nixon could go to China and sit down with Mao, there's no reason whatsoever our current president can't arrange a meeting with Ahmedinejad. Bush's refusal to do this is a sign of his essential smallness of character and the narrowness of his worldview. The problem with all ideologues is that once they decide that "you're with us or against us," then no further discussion—let alone compromise—with the other side is possible. That's a dangerous trait in a president, and one we should watch out carefully for in the future.

8. Government spending on national security is different than pork-barrel spending on other programs.Another myth busted. Recall [15] that when the Republicans controlled Congress, they devised a formula that diverted security money from high-risk (and mostly liberal) states like New York and California to lower-risk (and mostly conservative) places like Wyoming and Nebraska. This made no logical sense from a security standpoint—the only explanation was that the Republican Congress was using 9/11 as an excuse to dole out pork.

Homeland security has grown up to become one of the biggest pork barrels in American politics. Security professionals are quick to point out [16] that too many of these efforts aren't designed to provide objectively effective security—in fact, as we'll see below, many of them are based on flawed assumptions about how effective security works. Instead, the contracts are written in such a way that the only way to fulfill them is to funnel our tax dollars into the pockets of well-connected conservative cronies. The upshot is that we spend more than we should, and get less real protection than we deserve.

And perhaps worst of all: Seven years of this unregulated, unfocused spending has created a booming new industry that can only survive as long as it keeps selling us on new threats to fear—which has long-term implications for our entire national culture.

9. Airport security is a critical part of our anti-terrorism effort.

True, but not as true as it should be. Security experts are still deeply concerned about at least two big holes in the system that make the high drama of the passenger screening area into nothing much more than a farce.

The first one is that we're still not adequately inspecting air cargo. Any competent engineering student can make and ship a timed bomb, which is why the 9/11 Commission Report insisted on aggressive inspection of all air cargo. At this point, most airports are doing random profiling and screening of parcels; but it's a far cry from the careful one-by-one inspection being given to people and luggage traveling on the same plane. In 2007, the Transportation Security Administration spent $5 billion inspecting passengers and luggage, and just $55 million on cargo going on the same planes. Cargo inspectors comprise less than 1 percent of the TSA workforce. Feeling safer yet?

The other security hole big enough to fly another 9/11 through comprises the various programs that allow crew members, frequent fliers, people with security clearances, and other "trusted travelers" to bypass inspection. As Bruce Schneier points out [17], these programs are based on the dangerous myth that terrorists match a particular profile, and that we can somehow pick terrorists out of a crowd if we only can identify everyone and get them all on watch lists.

Schneier, who has consulted with the TSA, is emphatic [18] that dividing the world into "trusted travelers" and people on watch lists creates more security problems than it solves. "Most of the 9/11 terrorists were unknown and not on any watch list. Timothy McVeigh was an upstanding U.S. citizen before he blew up the Oklahoma City Federal Building. Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel are normal, nondescript people. Intelligence reports indicate that al-Qaida is recruiting non-Arab terrorists for U.S. operations." Furthermore, if you create a low-inspection loophole in the system, would-be terrorists will aim for that loophole—and are more likely to get through it. The only way to prevent this is to throw out the watch lists and inspect everyone—no exceptions.

Schneier and other airline security experts will tell you that most of the safety gains since 9/11 come about through just two developments: hardening cockpit doors, and passengers who now know that they may have to fight back. "Everything else—Secure Flight and Trusted Traveler included—is security theater," writes Schneier. "We would all be a lot safer if, instead, we implemented enhanced baggage security—both ensuring that a passenger's bags don't fly unless he does, and explosives screening for all baggage—as well as background checks and increased screening for airport employees."

10. It's always necessary to give up our civil liberties in a time of war.

Wrong. So horribly wrong, in fact, that my very conservative eighth-grade civics teacher wouldn't have graduated a kid who failed this part of the exam. She put the fear of the Founders in us, along with a clear sense of our obligations and rights as citizens. There hasn't been a day since 9/11 that I haven't mourned the fact that America has not produced nearly enough Mrs. Hermans.

Last night, I was watching NBC's presentation of "9/11: As It Happened," a two-hour summary of its coverage that awful morning seven years ago. At one point, late in the broadcast, Tom Brokaw made a comment: "We are a country at war now....we're going to have to reconsider some of the freedoms we now enjoy." The smoke of the towers was still rolling up the streets of Manhattan, and NBC's senior anchor was already declaring a new era in which patriotic Americans must be willing to surrender their liberty for security. I was left wondering how someone who wouldn't have made it out of eighth grade at Home Street School ended up in a national anchor spot—and remembering all over again just what it was on that day that made me so deeply, truly afraid for my country.

Lincoln suspended habeus corpus during the Civil War, and FDR claimed extraordinary powers for himself during World War II—but neither of them ever tried to argue that being at war was a natural excuse for suspending the entire Bill of Rights. In fact (as we have seen) the more dangerous the times, the more important those liberties become. In times of huge social transformation or economic upheaval, when everything else is up for grabs, our worldview and our values—the internal qualities that define who we are, the things nobody can ever take away from us—move to the front and center. Everything else can go up in smoke; but as long as we hold onto those core beliefs, we will be able to survive the worst, and find everything we need within us to rebuild the world anew.

The Declaration and the Constitution are the defining documents of our country, expressing the central ideals that determine who we are. If we abandon those ideals, we will simply cease to be American—and, perhaps, lose the chance of ever restoring America again. If we are truly concerned about national security, this is, beyond a doubt, the worst thing we could ever allow to happen.

1825 K Street, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20006
202-955-5665 (tel) | 202-955-5606 (fax) |
www.ourfuture.org

Links:
Go on-site for them, they are numerous and interesting.
Go on-site to gain access to this article and numerous others, as well as photo's, links, etc. Just click this URL:
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008093712/firing-back-ten-myths-about-national-security
. . . . . . . . . . .

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 03:07 PM

* * * * * * *
The Pits: Georgia's GOP Swipes the Peach State
by
Greg Palast
for SuicideGirls.com
November 5, 2008

The evil little &*%$'s are doing it again.

Even as they drown in the anger of platoons of pissed-off voters, Republican operatives are swiping ballots with both hands.

Ground zero is Georgia. It's here where the sick little vulture named Saxby Chambliss won the US Senate seat six years ago by calling his Democratic opponent, a guy who'd lost three limbs in Vietnam, a friend of Osama bin Laden.

There's no way in hell that Chambliss can slime his way back into the Senate in the face of over half a million newly registered voters (Black and young - 69% for Obama) without jacking them out of their votes. That's what the Republicans are up to. Right now. As we speak.

Over 50,000 the new voters in Georgia have been blocked from voting by using a nasty little new law, the Help America Vote Act signed by George Bush. (Bush is helping us vote - look out!)

I just got this from Christina Rush in the Peach Pit state:

............"They really have stolen my vote and I don't know what to do about it at this late stage. I just found out 2 days ago that I do not exist on the voters rolls in Georgia. I have disappeared. After calling 866-OUR VOTE and the Secretary of State (for GA), it has been determined that the last vote I was accounted for was the 1996 General Election. That's awfully strange to me, considering that I voted in the recent Primaries and that last two General Elections (2000 and 2004)."

............"Everyone is 'very sorry' this is happening, but no one can tell what I can do to make my vote count for THIS election. The only advice I've been given is to fill out a new voters registration form and I'll be eligible for any future elections, just not THIS one."

............"So, what can I do except tell anyone and everyone who will listen?"
And no one is going to listen to you or the other 50,000 dumped voters in Georgia.

But here's the good news: it won't save them. The GOP is toast. Paint the White House black and blue and Congress the same hue.

But the steal in Senate races may allow the GOP to savage, obstruct, sabotage President Obama's ability to repair the damage of eight years of looting by the unelected junta of the Bush regime. They begin with the theft of the Georgia Senate seat, now heading into a run-off.

* * *
I've been studying the purge of voters and the blockade of new registrants all year with my co-investigator, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Here's what we know is happening: While Obama is brushing his tux for his Inaugural, several million votes are getting disappeared. We're awaiting the count on provisional ballots, those bouncing baloney ballots they give to the purge, The raw data is ill-making. We predicted a six-million vote heist and we're looking grimly accurate. Visit our site, www.GregPalast.com, to get the full report as the numbers come in - the totals of the UNcounted you won't see on the CNN website.
***********
Sign up to receive the Greg Palast's investigative reports for BBC Television and Rolling Stone Magazine at:

http://www.GregPalast.com

Palast is a Nation Institute/Puffin Foundation Writing Fellow in investigative reporting. * * * * *

Saundra Hummer

November 5th, 2008, 06:11 PM

:: :: :: :: :: BAN TALK RADIO?

REALLY NOW!

Newsmax is saying more crazy things, and even more now, since this article was written, as it's spinning and reeling from yesterdays loss at the polls.

They aren't capable of being real. "Fairness" isn't a word they should be using, nor is fairness a thought they're capable of embracing. A level playing field? It's not anything they can bear thinking of. A divergent thought? How liberal of us. We're not allowed to play ball in their yard? Frankly, who would feel the need to anyway. It's more fun finishing a thought without a Rush Limbaugh, or a Bill O'Riley being able to interrupt and scream, us leaving them no recourse but to grin and bear it. Their tirades are never ending it seems. We know we aren't on the same thought wave or air wave. We can blog, and post, saying our piece and those who are wanting to throw out the chaff, the talk radio/tv media nonsense, can, taking up, and blogging a sensible view, if they so choose, without dissention, without having the bullies not letting our voices be heard. Like on the view, Elisabeth Hasselbeck believes the louder and more animated she becomes, that she's getting her point across. Poor child, all logic has illuded her. The girl is nice, attractive, and obviously intelligent, she is likeable, however, logic as well as common sense aren't her strong suites when it comes to what she thinks she knows about political actions. Has she ever even heard of, or tried for that matter, to have an open mind? We know where a lot of hate mongers on talk radio are coming from, .... It's their bread they're buttering, as no one else is as dense about the issues as poor Elisabeth. The Hannity's and the O'Rilley's are making money hand over fist with their nonsense, poor Elisabeth, she's just a true believer. There's the difference.

Now the writers at NewsMax are claiming that Barack Obama and Senator Schumer are going to ban talk radio.

Newsmax has become so accustomed to the Cheney Bush administration's abuse of our constitiution that they must believe the abuses are destined to continue to happen without so much as a hiccup once Barack Obama and Joe Biden take up the reins of power. I for one don't believe we will ever see such abuses ever again; not in our lifetimes. If I'm proven wrong, I'll be the first to admit it. I just don't see it happening, as these are two honest and decent men; men who have other's interests at heart, not just their own selves, not as Cheney and Bush have had; the war machine's; special interest groups; Blackwater and Big Oil. There are others of course, but this paints a clear enough picture. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are made of different stuff; the right stuff I believe.

Here is part of NewsMax's ludricous newsletter. Each time they send one out it is full of the wildest claims, and such hate mongering that if there weren't true believers out there, people who drink their Kool Aid, their articles would be down right hilarious. Talk about skewed to play to stupidity. They have the art of that down pat. Too bad it isn't truth they're so into. They could then be part of the solution, instead, they are part of the problem. SRH The Battle for Talk Radio:
Powerful Foes Want to End the Gabfest
The 2008 election has been decided and one thing is clear: the enemies of talk radio are firmly in control of the White House and Congress. Sen. Chuck Schumer and his fellow Democrats are promising an all-out attack on talk radio.

With a new "Fairness Doctrine" backed by an Obama White House, political talk, as we know it, will end.

If these forces of darkness win, Rush, Imus, Hannity, Savage, Beck, and dozens of other major hosts will be muzzled by using federal regulations to control political talk.

So, what's their plan of attack?

As Newsmax magazine reveals in its just-released special report, "The Battle for Talk Radio," leading liberals in Congress, the Democratic presidential candidates, and even some Republicans speak openly of their plans to end conservative talk radio using federal regulations.

Their weapon: a revived Fairness Doctrine, which would once again require stations to air divergent points of view — a clever ruse that makes station owners leery of airing controversial talk-radio hosts fearing law suits and federal sanctions.

With a new Fairness Doctrine, you could see many top conservative radio hosts canned.

This Newsmax special report also features an exclusive interview with Fox News host Bill O'Reilly who tells Newsmax there is no question a plan is being hatched. "The far-left kooks will try, but they will fail," O'Reilly says.
:: :: ::

Saundra Hummer

November 6th, 2008, 11:34 AM

<><><><><><><>
THE PROGRESS REPORT
November 6, 2008 by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Ali Frick, and Ryan Powers
ELECTION '08
The Center-Right Myth
On Tuesday, President-elect Obama resoundingly defeated Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), delivering a mandate for Obama's progressive policy agenda. Obama ran on the most progressive platform of any presidential candidate in at least 15 years, "including a promise of universal health care coverage, a dramatic transformation to a low-carbon economy, and a historic investment in education." Nevertheless, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), whose party suffered tremendous losses Tuesday, insisted, "Democrats should not make the mistake of viewing Tuesday’s results as a repudiation of conservatism," adding, "America remains a center-right country." Similarly, Newsweek's Jon Meacham wrote an Oct.19 cover story titled "America The Conservative." In fact, some pundits are illogically arguing that both President Bush's 2004 election and Obama's 2008 election are proof that the country leans conservative. But the progressive direction of the country, symbolized in Tuesday's victory, is clear. Just prior to the election, 85 percent of Americans said they thought country was seriously off track. As Media Matters observed, "It is difficult to find an issue on which the public is more conservative now than it was 20 years ago."

THE PUNDITS' CLAIMS: An extensive list of conservative and mainstream pundits are claiming that the country is "center-right." Meacham wrote in his cover story that America "is more instinctively conservative than it is liberal" (he admitted that his argument was "probably going to look dumb, or at least out of step, for many months to come"). MSNBC's Joe Scarborough said on Oct. 29, "It is a center right country," particularly "on economic issues." Bill O'Reilly yesterday said, "America is still a center right country, even though the folks voted left last night." After the 2006 elections, pundits used the same argument. "These Democrats that were elected last night are conservative Democrats," said CBS' Bob Schieffer. "In Key House Races, Democrats Run to the Right," wrote the New York Times. In fact, the class of 2006, which came to power in part due to public disapproval of the Iraq war, was remarkably progressive, favoring raising the minimum wage, opposing Social Security privatization, and promoting "fair trade."

PROGRESSIVE BY THE NUMBERS: On Tuesday, the country both rejected conservative ideology as well as embraced new, progressive priorities. The latest Pew Research poll showed that only 25 percent of the public agrees with the centerpiece of the conservative tax program: making Bush's tax cuts permanent. The public also agrees by 58 percent to 35 percent that the government should guarantee "health insurance for all citizens even if it means raising taxes." Exit poll data showed that 60 percent of voters were worried about rising health care costs and that 66 percent of those people backed Obama. A majority of Americans also want to expand environmental protections, increase the minimum wage, recognize same-sex marriage, and end the Iraq war, to name a few. Yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) explained that the center of the country is progressive.

MANDATE DOUBLE-TALK: Pundits also are claiming that Obama's margin of victory does not give him a mandate for progressive change. Columnist Robert Novak wrote yesterday that Obama "neither received a broad mandate from the public nor the needed large congressional majorities." But in 2004, as Bush crowed about his "political capital," Novak argued that Bush's narrow victory was "of course" proof of a conservative mandate. Winning 52.4 percent to McCain's 46.3 percent, Obama's popular vote margin stands at 7,401,289 -- more than twice Bush's 2004 vote margin -- and he netted 63 more electoral votes than Bush. Novak also dismissed the 57-seat Democratic Senate majority (with two more seats potentially up for grabs). But conservativism's so-called 2004 "mandate" netted only four new seats, for a total of 55.

UNDER THE RADAR
ECONOMY -- OBAMA PLANS GREEN ECONOMY 'LISTENING TOUR' BEFORE INAUGURATION: Dan Kammen, the director of the Renewable & Appropriate Energy Laboratory at U.C. Berkeley and a top adviser to President-elect Barack Obama, told E&E News that Obama may conduct a nationwide "listening tour" to allow his team to hit the ground running for a green recovery. According to Kammen, "the incoming Obama team is considering a listening tour "in an attempt to build momentum for its policies and legislative plans." Last month, Obama told Time's Joe Klein that an "Apollo project" for a "new energy economy" is would be a "No. 1 priority when I get into office." In the 75 days before Obama takes office, he will have to weigh in on other environmental issues, like an economic stimulus package that includes funding for infrastructure projects "in a way that reduces our dependence on foreign oil, [and] creates good green jobs in America." Also - in what may be his first major act as President-elect on the international stage -- Obama has pledged to send a team of representatives to the next round of international climate negotiations, which take place in PoznaÅ„, Poland, in December.

POLITICS -- PALIN 'DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT AFRICA WAS A CONTINENT': Fox News's Carl Cameron reported last night on the latest revelations in the strained relationship between Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) during their campaign for the White House. According to Cameron, Palin had "real problems with basic civics, government structures, municipal, state, and federal government responsibilities. She didn't know the nations involved in the North American Free Trade Agreement." More astonishingly, Palin "didn't understand...that Africa was a continent and not a country" and asked senior McCain aides "if South Africa wasn't just part of the country as opposed to a country in the continent." In addition, Newsweek reports that Palin spent far more on clothing than the $150,000 reported last month. According to a preview by Politico's Mike Allen, "McCain's top advisers privately fumed at what they regarded as her outrageous profligacy." The New York Times reports today that "one of the last straws for the McCain advisers" in their strained relationship with Palin came just days before the election when Palin took a call from whom she thought was French President Nicolas Sarkozy but was actually a prank by Canadian radio hosts.

GAY RIGHTS -- LAWSUITS AND UNCERTAINTY FOLLOW CALIFORNIA'S PASSAGE OF PROPOSITION 8: In California on Tuesday, 52 percent of the electorate voted in favor Proposition 8, enshrining into law that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." Though the high-profile ballot measure does not bar civil unions in the state, its passage casts doubt on the status of "17,000 same-sex unions performed in the state" since same-sex marriages were declared legal by the State Supreme Court in May. Before the measure was passed, some legal commentators speculated that the law could "retroactively invalidate all same-sex marriages performed in the state." Giving some solace to same-sex couples in the state, California Attorney General Jerry Brown said yesterday that while he will "defend the law as enacted by the people," he will also "oppose any effort to use Proposition 8 to nullify the thousands of same-sex marriages recorded since the Supreme Court ruling took effect in June." In the short time since Proposition 8 passed, gay rights supporters have already filed three lawsuits asking the state's Supreme Court to overturn the measure. All three lawsuits are arguing that "the anti-gay-marriage measure was an illegal constitutional revision -- not a more limited amendment, as backers maintained -- because it fundamentally altered the guarantee of equal protection."

THINK FAST
The number of Americans receiving unemployment benefits reached a 25-year high, jumping by 122,000 to 3.84 million in late October. It is the "highest level since late February 1983," according to the Labor Department.

Yesterday, after a wrap-up meeting with his campaign advisers in the morning, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) talked about what he’ll do next. "He's thinking about the future and getting engaged with the Senate again," senior adviser Charlie Black said. McCain plans to focus on "Iraq, Afghanistan and the other foreign policy issues."

Cabinet rumors: Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) says he isn't interested in becoming Secretary of State. Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, who is reportedly being considered for health secretary, says he'd consider a potential position. Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers is a leading contender to return to that post.

Joe Biden is eyeing Walter Mondale -- not Dick Cheney -- as a vice presidential role model. "Mondale, who served under President Jimmy Carter in the 1970s, was consulted on almost every appointment and had access to the same documents as the president." "Biden will be more interested in carrying out the Obama agenda as opposed to his own agenda," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA).

Yesterday, talk show host and LGBT activist Ellen DeGeneres put out a statement saying she is "saddened beyond belief" that California voters approved a ban on marriage equality. Gay marriage backers have also filed three lawsuits asking the California Supreme Court to overturn Proposition 8. More » Go on-site to view.

A group of conservative power brokers are meeting today in Virginia to "discuss the future of the movement and the GOP." Convened by Brent Bozell, head of the right-wing Media Research Center, the meeting will include "roughly twenty leaders" and "conservative political and media strategists."

71 million: Number of viewers who tuned into election night television coverage on Tuesday, according to Nielsen. In 2004, 59.2 million viewers tuned in as President Bush defeated Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), and 61.6 million watched the election-night coverage of Bush and Al Gore in 2000.

Fearing a terrorist attack during the presidential transition, "Homeland Security officials are working with Congress to ensure that the Senate moves quickly to confirm a key Cabinet nominee." The top senators on the Senate Homeland Security Committee are now arguing "that the DHS secretary must be bumped up to top priority, and the secretary should be confirmed on or close to Inauguration Day."

CentCom Commander Gen. David Petraeus "has decided to reduce the number of U.S. combat brigades in Iraq from 15 to 14 about six weeks earlier than planned, as a result of dramatically lower violence there." A brigade from the 10th Mountain Division "was scheduled to go to Iraq in its place will instead deploy to Afghanistan."

Ryan Crocker hosted 250 Iraqi officials at the first event in the new American embassy in Baghdad, which cost half a billion dollars and has not yet officially opened. He reminded his guests, "Our president today is George Bush, and he will be our president for the next two and a half months," and said the size of the embassy reflects America's long-term "commitment to democracy in Iraq."

And finally: Juror 11 is ready to tell all. This person was one of the jurors in the corruption trial of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), who was eventually found guilty on seven felony counts. Now, this juror has decided to start a blog, telling how he or she became Juror 11 and the story behind the missing juror: "Through out the trial and deliberations I had to check my emotions at the door and reserve my comments, but now that it is over let the flood begin!"

GOOD NEWS
"The percentage of Americans who voted in this year's historic presidential campaign appeared to reach the highest level in four decades."

STATE WATCH
CALIFORNIA: "California's voters decided to spend billions of dollars on public projects, including a high-speed rail system and hospitals for children."

FLORIDA: "An obscure ballot initiative in Florida intended to end a legacy of bias against Asian-Americans was defeated Tuesday, apparently because voters incorrectly assumed it would prevent illegal immigrants from owning property."

CIVIL RIGHTS:"Opponents of same-sex marriage scored resounding victories in Arizona and Florida on Election Day."

BLOG WATCH
THINK PROGRESS: The world reacts to President-elect Barack Obama: "A new deal for a new world."

WONK ROOM: Seizing on the health care mandate.

OPEN LEFT: The pluralist coalition manifests.

RAW STORY: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says she is "especially proud" of President-elect Obama's victory.

DAILY GRILL

"[Obama] neither received a broad mandate from the public nor the needed large congressional majorities."
-- Columnist Robert Novak, on President-elect Barack Obama's 7.5 million popular vote margin win, 11/05/08
VERSUS
Q: Bob Novak, is 51 percent of the vote really a mandate?

[B]NOVAK: Of course it is. It's a 3.5 million vote margin.
-- Novak, on President Bush's 2004 re-election, 11/06/04 <><><>The research team that brings you The Progress Report and ThinkProgress.org needs fall interns!

http://www.thinkprogress.org
This is only a summary, so go on-site to view the complete article and to gain access to the many links within this newsletter. They are also asking for fall interns.http://www.thinkprogress.org<><><><><><><>

Saundra Hummer

November 6th, 2008, 11:58 AM

I I I I I I IGreat ExpectationsBy
Al Meyerhoff
November 6th, 2008
10:50am ET
End climate change. End the war. End Wall Street corruption. Achieve universal health care. Rebuild trust in government. Given the election results, this is just some of what is now expected by Barack Obama's supporters, especially progressive Democrats and the young. Time for a Newer Deal. A New Frontier. A New Agenda. A Mandate for Change.

The other drums are beating too, of course. Don't overreach. Govern from the center. And yet there are those pesky expectations. Democrats, significantly including those chairing critical House committees, have been waiting for this moment for decades.

So what exactly will be the Obama agenda? Who will set it? How will it be accomplished with the many often disparate interests within the Democratic Party and Obama's far broader electoral base? Given past failures—on both the left and the right—can he bring about lasting change?

Now pundits debate not if but why Karl Rove failed. How will Obama avoid this fate? These are the conversations that must be had over the coming weeks.Much has been made of the sizable majorities the Democrats will now hold in Congress. But the Senate is still not filibuster-proof; and many Senate Democrats are decidedly "blue dog." In 2001, President George W. Bush claimed a broad mandate (despite having lost the popular vote by more than half a million votes—the audacity of nope). The GOP next took both houses of Congress, yet spent much of their time seeking to "save" a brain-dead woman and promoting a brain-dead idea, privatizing social security.

Before that, there was the Clinton administration—when Democrats, as now, controlled Congress. Yet with only 44 percent of the popular vote and a House leadership atrophied from 40 years in the majority, the Clinton agenda was stymied. Within two years, the GOP would sweep both houses and announce its own "Contract With America," most also never actually adopted. Change isn't easy. We lost LBJ's War on Poverty. Even the Reagan Revolution sputtered and now has brought a counter-revolution; regulation is back. The pendulum swings.

Some are saying the best Obama analogy is 1933. That was a heady time for change, especially those famed First Hundred Days. In accepting the nomination, Franklin Delano Roosevelt put his goals eloquently: "Throughout the nation men and women forgotten in the political philosophy of Government look to us here for guidance and for more equitable opportunity to share in the distribution of national wealth [uh oh]...I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people. This is more than a political campaign. It is a call to arms."

Employing a Brain Trust of insiders and outsiders, FDR's New Deal accomplished a great deal—empowering unions, creating jobs, establishing Social Security. Yet even the New Dealers were not entirely successful. Many reforms were tossed out by the Supreme Court, repealed by a subsequent Congress or came undone by later deregulation.

Obama has sounded his own call to arms, that "fierce urgency of now." "Now" has come. While some of the challenges Roosevelt confronted remain with us—the power of Big Business, the maldistribution of wealth—we are not (at least not yet) facing a national economic collapse and 25 percent unemployment. Yet in some respects what confronts the Obama administration is equally daunting: the continuing shock waves of globalization, the loss of the nation's industrial base, a deepening recession, massive deficits and a nearly $10 trillion national debt, the health care crisis, climate change, two wars, terrorism—such challenges could overwhelm any administration, even one backed by a broad based coalition and a unified Congress.

A common goal of any new presidency is to create just such a governing coalition. Few have achieved it. Witness Karl Rove. After the Bush re-election, he touted the 60 million votes Bush received as beating Reagan at his best. Then came Katrina, immigration and the rest.

Now pundits debate not if but why Rove failed. Direct mail guru Richard Vigurie claims Rove took the Republican Party so far to the left (no, really) with his deficits and leaving no child behind as to render him "the architect of George W. Bush's betrayal of the conservative cause." Others decry Rove's scorched earth tactics alienating those in Congress on both sides of the aisle. How will Obama avoid this fate? By reaching consensus now among the major segments of his new coalition on what to achieve, how and by when—providing the foundation for his own First Hundred Days.

To do so, his own Brain Trust will need a truly large brain. Perhaps drilling offshore (or in ANWR) will be the price required for a comprehensive energy policy. Perhaps trial lawyers will need to reform their own house to achieve corporate accountability. Perhaps a carbon tax will be required to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Perhaps unions will need to eliminate discrimination in their midst to achieve The Employee Free Choice Act. Perhaps American consumers cannot afford to own that new house or car or boat on credit.

Perhaps not.

These are the conversations that must be had over the coming weeks to make the extraordinary promise of this new administration a reality.

Movers and shakers on the right—the NRA, the Chamber of Commerce, pro-lifers and religious fundamentalists—have often (not always) done a fair job at coalition politics. Yet despite years with allies in power, many of their objectives—ending abortion, gay marriage and gun control (admittedly they got close)—remain unrealized. Nor has their ilk disappeared—especially the business community, happy to help "reform" Wall Street. On the left, there are literally thousands of advocacy organizations, many in competition with each other for their own constituency (think labor) and in conflict with others for limited resources. Who speaks for seniors? For children? For working men and women? For minorities? For the environment? Can they find common ground? These will be a critical questions in determining Obama's success.

After the 2004 Bush re-election, Republican Party chief Ken Mehlman said, "something fundamental has...happened. [The Republican Party] is in a stronger position that at any time since the Great Depression." That lasted four years. So is this election truly a "realignment" of American politics? Decidedly maybe. As one historian put it recently, "2008 certainly smells like a critical election." The opportunities are there. The public demands change and with sufficient leadership this time, real change—systemic change—may truly come.

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008114506/great-expectations
http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2008/10/31/83731/548
Al Meyerhoff is a civil rights/labor/consumer/environmental lawyer in Los Angeles. This was originally published in The Huffington Post. We know who will be fighting this newly elected administration, and their force is monsterous. Monsterous in size, and intent. There is of course, big oil, the energy czars, pharmaceuticals, the war machine. and on. and on it goes. Not to mention outside forces which newly elected administrations are always tested by. Of course established long sitting administrations have always had to deal with the unforseen as well. So do we think of what lays ahead of Barack Obama and Joe Biden as an easy job? It isn't, and with radical right wing opposition, the task is multiplied beyond belief. God Speed Barack Obama and Joe Biden. You have our best wishes. I can't imagine the job that lies ahead. It's a terrible mess you're left with to straigten out. We, who love this country, are behind you 100%. SRH I I I I I

Saundra Hummer

November 6th, 2008, 12:11 PM

^^^^^^^WHAT WE COULD DO WITH $700 BILLION
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Posted by Jim Hightower
Listen to this Commentary

With his usual keen insight, George W recently offered this comment about the Wall Street collapse: “Anyone who makes bad decisions should fail.”

One wonders if he ever looks in the mirror.

His own bad decisions aside, however, he’s now rushing up to Wall Street bankers who made terrible decisions and is stuffing their pockets with billions of our tax dollars to keep them from failing. Sending an even worse moral message, Bush is attaching no strings to this reward for incompetence and malfeasance. The bankers do not even have to use the bailout money to increase business and consumer loans that would help our economy. Instead, generous George lets them apply the windfall as they see fit – they can fatten their own banks’ balance sheets, buy up other banks – or even use it to pay fat dividends to themselves (it's estimated that $250 million from the bailout will go to such executive dividends this year alone).

And these are people who’ve been trying to tag Barack Obama as a socialist! We’re talking about at least $700 billion here, coming right out of our public treasury. Imagine if that sum was invested for public purposes – what could it achieve?

We could repair all of America’s deteriorating bridges, roads, and levees – projects that would create a million or more good jobs.

We could launch a “Green Deal” to make all of America’s homes and buildings energy efficient – all of FDR’s New Deal public works projects, for example, cost only half as much as Bush’s Wall Street bailout.

We could replace the Hubble telescope, put a new international space station into orbit, and launch a new Apollo-style exploration of our planetary system – all for less than the bailout’s cost.

You might recall that we've always been told that there’s no money to do such big American projects. Really? Then where did they find that $700 billion they're now handing out to Wall Street?

“Raising the Grades: Small Steps for Big Improvements in America’s Failing Infrastructure,” www.asce.org, 2008.

“No Magic From the GOP,” The Washington Post, October 11, 2008.

“This Bailout Doesn’t Pay Dividends,” The New York Times, October 21, 2008.

“Oh, what the government could do with the financial bailout billions,” Associated Press, October 2008.

http://jimhightower.com//node/6641

Jim Hightower, All Rights Reserved
-2006Copyright Saddle-Burr Productions, 1996-2006

I like to listen to Jims articles, as he has a great way with words, so listen to him for a much better experience, and take, on what it is he's talking about.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

Saundra Hummer

November 6th, 2008, 02:43 PM

:: :: :: :: ::
Is The Nightmare Over Yet?By Timothy V. Gatto
06 November, 2008
Countercurrents.org

Last night, when President-Elect Obama gave his speech in Chicago, I was duly impressed. However, the next U.S. President was a bit off on the true facts about his rise in the Democratic Party and his eventual nomination. He talked about two years ago, when he had no sponsors or endorsements, that the way ahead seemed like an impossible dream. I know this sounds very uplifting, that Barack Obama could come out of nowhere, defeat the Clinton political machine and then the Republican vote-tampering syndicate and end up getting elected to the Oval Office. This truly sounds like a dream come true, but it really didn’t happen that way, and I’d like to explain why. I’m not writing this to defame the President-Elect, but to educate the American people on the political process in this country.

I have been following this election from the start. I knew that Barack Obama would be the Democratic nominee before the first vote was cast in the Democratic Primaries. How could I possibly have figured that out? I did it by simply looking at corporate contributions from The Center for Responsive Politics and their website at opensecrets.org. It didn’t take a political genius to figure out the fix was in. I only had to look at where Goldman-Sachs and other investment bankers were donating too. For the first time in 12 years, the bankers and other key donators to political parties were betting on a Democrat.

So where does that leave us? It simply means that by the time most Americans realized who the prime movers and shakers were out there, the stage was already set. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. I believe that most Americans have become keenly aware of what drives corporate politics in this country, and where that leaves the average citizen. President-Elect Obama ran a brilliant campaign and managed to get grassroots support for his candidacy. He has inspired many young people to care about the direction of this country, and he has proven that change is still possible in, and those things alone are enough to command respect. This new President will not owe anyone anything, but the naming of Rahm Emanuel as the President’s Chief of Staff shows how ingrained Obama is in the Democratic Party. I wonder when Kucinich and Gravel were tossed out of the debates, is this the reward? I’d like to know if this was the DNC working behind the lines. I guess we will never know.

One message we must bring to the new administration is that the American People won’t forget about the crimes and policies that Bush and the neo-cons put forth that changed the direction and the conscience of this nation. The draconian laws such as The Military Commissions Act of 2006, The FISA Law, The Patriot Act and many Presidential Executive Orders and signing statements that enabled Bush and Cheney to operate outside the boundaries of American and International Law must be investigated. The reason for this is a moral one. The facts are that if we the people do not hold the Bush Administration accountable for the things they did during their term, we are also responsible.

Over 1.2 Million Iraqi’s died because of Bush’s hubris and his lies. Over 4,000 American servicemen and women in Iraq lost their lives on a lie. There is just so much that we as citizens should stand for. Ignoring the violation of laws both American and International is tantamount to becoming co-conspirators or accomplices of those that knowingly broke those laws. I urge people in this country not to let Bush and his minions off the hook. I can understand that most people just want to go back to a semblance of normality (whatever that is). The law is the law and we cannot decide to selectivity prosecute only those that followed orders. To stop a renegade administration from ever doing what the Bush Administration has done since 2001 is reason enough to prosecute.

I wish Barack Obama the best and I hope he is more liberal than he let on in the presidential race. I support him 100% and hope that we will come together as a people and understand that we must keep one eye open in the future. What happened over the last eight years should never happen again. I pray that January 20th of next year will mean the end of this eight year nightmare of giving up our liberty for temporary security.

Timgatto@hotmail.com

http://liberalpro.blogspot.com

http://www.countercurrents.org/gatto061108.htm :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Saundra Hummer

November 6th, 2008, 03:21 PM

:: :: :: :: :: :: ::A CHORUS OF JOY,
A FEELING OF DISBELIEF: DID IT HAPPEN?
First Posted 6 PM Wednesday.
WATCH THIS: NEWS DISSECTOR UNDER PRESSURE TO JOIN THIS BATTLE
THE WORDS OF LANGSTON HUGHES 1902-1967
Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed -
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.READERS REFLECT ON OBAMA’S WIN
OBAMA’S CHALLENGES, PICKS TEAM
CELEBRATE GOOD TIMES, COME ON
Here’s a song to get us going today:
Memo to Langston Hughes in the Great Beyond: Maybe America IS Becoming America Again.
THE WHOLE COUNTRY WAS WATCHING
What a night last night. Nielson reports: From 8:00 p.m. to 11:00 ET the average audience was 78.5 million viewers. This compares to 59.2 million in 2004 and 61.6 million in 2000.
THE FIFTH OF NOVEMBERAnd yet as we consider the moment we are in, do remember the history of this day, Nov 5, the day Guy Fawkes tried to blow up Parliament in England
“Remember, Remember
The fifth of November,
The gunpowder treason and plot.
I know of no reason
Why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.”
We, all of us, may have blown up the American political system, non-violently. And by the way, had it not worked, there was a contingency ESCAPE plan in the works.
CONGRATULATIONS POURING INI have had letters from Denmark, Bulgaria and Indonesia and from across this country, an outpouring of words to accompany the outpouring of emotion.

We have to remember and deepen the meaning of November 4th, a day many of us never expected in our life times. It brought me back to Election Day l994, sitting in the headquarters of the African National Congress, a building which right wing racists had tried to blow up, sitting with the late Joe Slovo as South Africa went to the polls for the first time> He was one of Nelson Mandela’ s closest comrades, formerly the most wanted man in the old South Africa, labeled a terrorist and worse and there he was on the eve of the big change, telling me that he had to “pinch myself to remember I am not dreaming.”

I have been receiving moving letters today, reflective letters that can help us savor this moment in time and reflect on its meaning. One of them came from a South African describing a visit that Barack Obama made to Robben Island, the prison to which Mandela and his fellow liberation fighters were condemned.
M&G: MANDELA WRITES OBAMA“Your victory has demonstrated that no person anywhere in the world should not dare to dream of wanting to change the world for a better place,” Mandela said in a letter to Obama.

“We note and applaud your commitment to supporting the cause of peace and security around the world. We trust that you will also make it the mission of your presidency to combat the scourge of poverty and disease everywhere.

“We wish you strength and fortitude in the challenging days and years that lie ahead. We are sure you will ultimately achieve your dream of making the United States of America a full partner in a community of nations committed to peace and prosperity for all.”
RE RE RE REMBEMBERAnother letter is from the photographer Steve Cagan in Celeveland who I traveled with to Vietnam while the war raged in l974:
” This morning, I heard a description of the victory party in Chicago last night on the radio. A reporter for National Public Radio described Jesse Jackson standing in the crowd, “tears streaming down him face.” “Well, of course,” I thought, “How could he not be overwhelmed?”

Tuesday I spent the day as a poll watcher for the Democrats, observing two precincts in Cleveland’s near west side. I left the house before 5 AM and spent the entire day in the polling place, arriving at the house of friends to watch the results for a while after 9 PM. On the drive back to my area, I was listening to National Pubic Radio. Of course, I was pleased to hear that Obama was apparently headed for victory, but it was just short of my friends’ house, when NPR called the state of Ohio for Obama for Ohio, that I lost control, and sat in the car crying, And the truth is, I’ve been crying off and on ever since. Why has this been so emotional for me?

First, perhaps the most important personal element is something the press has perhaps noted, but not given the attention it deserves: Obama’s victory is the culmination of the Civil Rights and Black Power movements. The 50s and 60s were important and formative years for us, and our personal experiences—as the ideals and values that led us into those activities and were strengthened by our participating in them—naturally inform our understanding of the meaning of this election.

I can’t think about Obama without remembering being a high school student and riding my bike to monitor the Woolworth picket lines in the Bronx. Last night and today I’ve been thinking about all the marches, the picket lines, the sit-ins, the arrests. I’ve been thinking particularly about a night in 1967, the night before the Kentucky Derby, when we sat and sang civil rights songs for hours in a big African-American church in Louisville. We had arrived from Bloomington, Indiana, with a group of fellow graduate students from Indiana University to support demonstrations around the Derby for fair-housing rights in Louisville, and while the leaders met in an office, hundreds of people clapped and sang for hours. Finally, we students were sent off to occupy the first places on the lines at the racetrack. Of course, we were arrested immediately…

That was a period of an overwhelming optimism about the future—we KNEW we were on the verge of a new world, a world we were helping to create. In later years, of course, that optimism was cruelly beaten down, in a period that began with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 and, we all hope, ended yesterday.

So the strongest reason for all the emotion I’m feeling is that while in the most important sense this electoral victory is only the opening of a door which Obama and the Democrats (and all of us) may or may not actually walk through, still both symbolically and materially this election is indeed the culmination of a struggle of decades. If my arithmetic is correct, Obama wasn’t even born when the students sat down at that lunch counter—and certainly not when Rosa Parks sat down—but his election is the culmination of a stage in the struggle for justice and humanity that started back then, and that for some of us has been a central theme of our lives. How can we not weep for joy at that?”
RECONCILIATION: IS IT POSSIBLE?Da’ud X Mohammad writes from Oregon where I held forth today over the airwaves of KBOO Radio in Portland:
The great poet Charles Bukowski wrote “good weather is like good women - it doesn’t always happen, and when it does it doesn’t always last.”* * * * *On this morning after, I remembered back to Bobby Kennedy’s 1968 victory speech at the Ambassador Hotel in LA like it was yesterday, and the excitement we all shared in, in our hope of taking his campaign from California all the way to the White House… and then the gunshots rang out broadcast live on local TV ended it all, ’til last night.

Just as “the shuttle Columbia began breaking up over California minutes before it disintegrated in the skies over Texas” broke the spell of 9/11, Barack’s speech last night finally jolted us from stupor of the unresolved JKF and Dr. King, and Bobby, and Malcolm assassinations.

The election of Barack is the implied promise of justice for all like a sword that cuts both ways. Maybe some who would have otherwise gone to jail arbitrarily won’t anymore. Some who might have otherwise escaped justice might instead be found guilty of their white collar and war crimes and be dealt with accordingly.

And to the likes of such losers as Joe Scarborough, Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh, take note that President Mwai Kibaki declared Thursday a national holiday in Kenya.

“BRINGING BACK OUR AMERICA”Janet Rogozinski writes from Maryland:
On November 4, 2008, the American people proved to themselves, their country and the world, that, Yes they can take back control of their country. It took the energy and commitment of Americans across this great land, and many in far reaches of this planet coming together as one voice for one shared purpose, electing an American President who we can believe in and trust to steward this nation and our people. But, the challenge now is to keep this spirit of commitment, the job for all of us began last night, when President-Elect Barack Obama said, “The Victory belongs to us and the challenges we face are the greatest in our life time….the road ahead is long and the climb will be steep, but we as a people we will get there….each of us must pitch in…..We rise and fall as one nation…this is our moment….this is our time….and out of the many, we are one”.

And, as my friend Kate reminded me this morning, “One nation, under G-d, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

My message to all of you who believed along with me, when I sought early support for Obama, NOW WE HAVE TO KEEP THIS GREAT COUNTRY!!!! Each American needs to participate and give back. To get us back on track, Obama cannot do it alone. He couldn’t win an election alone, he can’t make the change we need alone.

A terrible plane crash in the middle of Mexico City last night, was a reminder of the violence that shakes our close neighbor and ally, Mexico. The life of a dedicated government officials were taken in a flash, with likely culprits, the devastating drug traffickers who have spread violence across the country. A war continues in Iraq and Afghanistan. We continue to lose sons and daughters. Jobs are being lost as we speak. The halls of our hospitals and emergency rooms are filled with people fighting for their lives, many uninsured, over worked healthcare workers, physicians doing the best they can. The schools of this great land have a lot of catching up to do. We need to give like we gave to win this election. We the people need to be put back on the agenda.

Yes we did, last night and now we can today.

Thank you very much for believing, hoping and contributing, now let’s begin to make this country work again by the people. for the people and of the people.

This is the first day of a new beginning. Time to get to work.
JEWS REJECT LIEBERMAN, GO OBAMAFor those in my tribe, there was more good news:
Obama Wins, Jews Got Over ObamaphobiaWednesday November 5, 2008 - By Rabbi Brad Hirschfield
Jewish voters went with their consciences and not with their fears in selecting Barack Obama as the next President of the United States. Exit polling indicates that about 77% of the Jewish vote went to Obama, which is a wonderful thing.

It’s wonderful, not because we know for certain that Obama will be a better President than John McCain would have been. We do not - though now that he is elected, we all better hope he will be at least as good. It’s wonderful because these numbers indicate that Jewish voters brought their usual voting values with them into the booth and not simply a great deal of baseless fear or racist suspicion.

The 76% is in line with past elections, indicating that Jewish voters did not change political course, despite earlier indications that they would do so in this election. It’s not that I necessarily believe Jewish values and Democratic values are more in line with each other. In fact, I believe that the tradition which I follow is bigger than can be contained within the policies of any one party, and wiser than any single candidate.
IT WAS A REVOLT, NOT AN ELECTION
Writes William F. Brabenec:
”Yesterday wasn’t an election for a new president.

For most Americans, black skin had little to do with the event.

Yesterday was a revolt.

Tuesday was a classic revolution.

Instead of muskets firing powder and shot, Americans Tuesday fired their .50 caliber ballots. They stormed the precincts and raised the original American flag over every polling booth in the land.

Americans revolted against Corporate America and against Wall Street and against the Federal Reserve and against Big Pharm and against the Power Elite and against Big Money and against all the social leaches who suck the financial blood from the 95% of people in this great land who struggle every day to live.

Americans didn’t vote for President Obama because he was black. Americans didn’t really vote for a president. They revolted – once again – to be free.

O say, can you see our flag finally flying without the dollar signs of corporatism in place of the stars! Without the banner of Empire flying over the White House! It’s been a long time coming. But it’s here.

Now, let’s put our house in order and clean, reload and cock our ballots for the next attack.

And there will be a next one.
MILES RAPPOPORT OF DEMOS:I woke up this morning feeling an enormous sense of pride. I am deeply proud of President-Elect Obama. He ran a campaign that was so much more than political strategy. He inspired people to vote, to volunteer, to contribute, to engage civically in a way that seemed all but impossible just moments ago. All of us at Demos applaud him, and we look forward to working with him as he confronts the incredible array of challenges that our country faces.

I also feel proud of the American electorate. We turned out in record numbers, in many cases braving long lines and other problems to be part of this historic moment. We have crossed an enormous racial barrier. And rejecting cynicism and division, we have given Obama a mandate to deal boldly with our problems, and an even greater gift: our trust and hope.
ROBERT BOROSAGE:
“Hallelujah! And Now, The Work BeginsAmericans wake today to a new dawn, a new possibility. You don’t have to drink the Kool-Aid to appreciate how extraordinary this is. We will look at one another with new eyes. We are a better, bigger, more generous, more optimistic people than many — particularly Karl Rove’s acolytes in the McCain campaign — assumed.
FT: THE WORLD REACTS–REPORTS FROM 20 COUNTRIES
Posted in Daily Dissections by: Danny Go on-site for links within this article by clicking on the following URL:
http://www.newsdissector.com/blog/:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::