Elizabeth Dole Can Kiss My Ass!

Ok, I accept negative campaigning, it's a part of democracy apparently. But come the Hell on. I mean, conservatives this year are getting way out of line. The number of near violent incidents that have occurred at Palin-McCain rallies, the Ashley Todd incident (you know, that woman who claimed she was attacked by an Obama supporter), calling Obama a Muslim-Terrorist-Black Radical-Marxist-Elitist (I don't think you can even be all those things), and now this crap. People, seriously. Face it. The Republicans fucked the pooch over the last 8 years. Bush has beaten the party to within an inch of its life. So I understand that it is hard to win on the issues. It's hard to say, "we'll do things a little different than Bush, but not too much." It's hard to say "we collectively have no new ideas because half the part wants to keep going with Bush policies and the other half wants out completely. " But for Fucks sake. You can't (or at least shouldn't) resort to this kind of lowball politics. I thought Libby Dole was a worthless senator before, now I just think she is an awful human being.

In my view this is just telling of how few ideas and how little the Republican have to offer the country right now. Oh, and if you can't win with issues or smears, I guess you can just try to disenfranchise people. Look at the GOP's attempt to purge voter role's in Ohio. And in Virginia the distribution of flyers claiming that the state assembly had decided to have Democrats vote on November 5th and Republicans on the 4th due (no evidence it was from the VA GOP, though). Ughh...can we get this over with. I shutter think at what will happen next.

Sarah Palin's War on ScienceThe GOP ticket's appalling contempt for knowledge and learning.

In an election that has been fought on an astoundingly low cultural and intellectual level, with both candidates pretending that tax cuts can go like peaches and cream with the staggering new levels of federal deficit, and paltry charges being traded in petty ways, and with Joe the Plumber becoming the emblematic stupidity of the campaign, it didn't seem possible that things could go any lower or get any dumber. But they did last Friday, when, at a speech in Pittsburgh, Gov. Sarah Palin denounced wasteful expenditure on fruit-fly research, adding for good xenophobic and anti-elitist measure that some of this research took place "in Paris, France" and winding up with a folksy "I kid you not."

It was in 1933 thatThomas Hunt Morgan won a Nobel Prize for showing that genes are passed on by way of chromosomes. The experimental creature that he employed in the making of this great discovery was the Drosophila melanogaster, or fruit fly. Scientists of various sorts continue to find it a very useful resource, since it can be easily and plentifully "cultured" in a laboratory, has a very short generation time, and displays a great variety of mutation. This makes it useful in studying disease, and since Gov. Palin was in Pittsburgh to talk about her signature "issue" of disability and special needs, she might even have had some researcher tell her that there is a Drosophila-based center for research into autism at the University of North Carolina. The fruit fly can also be a menace to American agriculture, so any financing of research into its habits and mutations is money well-spent. It's especially ridiculous and unfortunate that the governor chose to make such a fool of herself in Pittsburgh, a great city that remade itself after the decline of coal and steel into a center of high-tech medical research.

In this case, it could be argued, Palin was not just being a fool in her own right but was following a demagogic lead set by the man who appointed her as his running mate. Sen. John McCain has made repeated use of an anti-waste and anti-pork ad (several times repeated and elaborated in his increasingly witless speeches) in which the expenditure of $3 million to study the DNA of grizzly bears in Montana was derided as "unbelievable." As an excellent article in the Feb. 8, 2008, Scientific American pointed out, there is no way to enforce the Endangered Species Act without getting some sort of estimate of numbers, and the best way of tracking and tracing the elusive grizzly is by setting up barbed-wire hair-snagging stations that painlessly take samples from the bears as they lumber by and then running the DNA samples through a laboratory. The cost is almost trivial compared with the importance of understanding this species, and I dare say the project will yield results in the measurement of other animal populations as well, but all McCain could do was be flippant and say that he wondered whether it was a "paternity" or "criminal" issue that the Fish and Wildlife Service was investigating. (Perhaps those really are the only things that he associates in his mind with DNA.)

With Palin, however, the contempt for science may be something a little more sinister than the bluff, empty-headed plain-man's philistinism of McCain. We never get a chance to ask her in detail about these things, but she is known to favor the teaching of creationism in schools (smuggling this crazy idea through customs in the innocent disguise of "teaching the argument," as if there was an argument), and so it is at least probable that she believes all creatures from humans to fruit flies were created just as they are now. This would make DNA or any other kind of research pointless, whether conducted in Paris or not. Projects such as sequencing the DNA of the flu virus, the better to inoculate against it, would not need to be funded. We could all expire happily in the name of God. Gov. Palin also says that she doesn't think humans are responsible for global warming; again, one would like to ask her whether, like some of her co-religionists, she is a "premillenial dispensationalist"—in other words, someone who believes that there is no point in protecting and preserving the natural world, since the end of days will soon be upon us.

Videos taken in the Assembly of God church in Wasilla, Alaska, which she used to attend, show her nodding as a preacher says that Alaska will be "one of the refuge states in the Last Days." For the uninitiated, this is a reference to a crackpot belief, widely held among those who brood on the "End Times," that some parts of the world will end at different times from others, and Alaska will be a big draw as the heavens darken on account of its wide open spaces. An article by Laurie Goodstein in the New York Times gives further gruesome details of the extreme Pentecostalism with which Palin has been associated in the past (perhaps moderating herself, at least in public, as a political career became more attractive). High points, also available on YouTube, show her being "anointed" by an African bishop who claims to cast out witches. The term used in the trade for this hysterical superstitious nonsense is "spiritual warfare," in which true Christian soldiers are trained to fight demons. Palin has spoken at "spiritual warfare" events as recently as June. And only last week the chiller from Wasilla spoke of "prayer warriors" in a radio interview with James Dobson of Focus on the Family, who said that he and his lovely wife, Shirley, had convened a prayer meeting to beseech that "God's perfect will be done on Nov. 4."

This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just "people of faith" but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity.

http://www.slate.com/id/2203120

The only thing scarier than a vice-presidential nominee having these ideas, is that many citizens in the US hold these views.

Some voters 'purged' from voter rolls

From CNN Politics:

"College senior Kyla Berry was looking forward to voting in her first presidential election, even carrying her voter registration card in her wallet.

But about two weeks ago, Berry got disturbing news from local election officials.

"This office has received notification from the state of Georgia indicating that you are not a citizen of the United States and therefore, not eligible to vote," a letter from the Fulton County Department of Registration and Elections said.

But Berry is a U.S. citizen, born in Boston, Massachusetts. She has a passport and a birth certificate to prove it.

The letter, which was dated October 2, gave her a week from the time it was dated to prove her citizenship. There was a problem, though -- the letter was postmarked October 9.

"It was the most bizarre thing. I immediately called my mother and asked her to send me my birth certificate, and then I was like, 'It's too late, apparently,' " Berry said.

Berry is one of more than 50,000 registered Georgia voters who have been "flagged" because of a computer mismatch in their personal identification information. At least 4,500 of those people are having their citizenship questioned and the burden is on them to prove eligibility to vote.
Experts say lists of people with mismatches are often systematically cut, or "purged," from voter rolls.

It's a scenario that's being repeated all across the country, with cases like Berry's raising fears of potential vote suppression in crucial swing states.

"What most people don't know is that every year, elections officials strike millions of names from the voter rolls using processes that are secret, prone to error and vulnerable to manipulation," said Wendy Weiser, an elections expert with New York University's Brennan Center for Justice.

"That means that lots and lots of eligible voters could get knocked off the voter rolls without any notice and, in many cases, without any opportunity to correct it before Election Day."

Weiser acknowledged that "purging done well and with proper accountability" is necessary to remove people who have died or moved out of state.

.
.
.

So someone like Kyla Berry will be allowed to cast a provisional ballot when she votes, but it's up to county election officials whether those ballots would actually count.

Berry says she will try to vote, but she's not confident it will count.

"I know this happens, but I cannot believe it's happening to me," she said. "If I weren't allowed to vote, I would just feel like that would be ... like the worst thing ever -- a travesty.""

(Full Story at: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/26/voter.suppression/index.html)

I wish everyone spent as much time trying to run the country in the best way possible, as they seem to spend trying to "work the system" to win elections, pass legislation, etc. Often times simply winning becomes the important issue, instead of the reasons to want to win in the first place.

Political Bombshell: Obama Launched Political Career from Friedrich Engels' Parlor

So, the word on the street is Obama has moved from Socialist to Marxist. A few months ago he was the most liberal senator in the Democratic party, then his programs were socialism, now he is a full on Marxist. (I also wonder how he can be a Marxist and radical Muslim...hmmm?).

Anyway, as much as it pains me to do so, I am posting the "bombshell" that has been has been all the rage on Drudge and Foxnews. The headline is usually something like "Obama bombshell" or "Obama Exposed" and the story suggests he is favoring a radical redistribution of wealth (ala Marxist-style governance) through the courts.

Now, if you listen to the story, even this POS edited youtube post that is all I can track down, what he says is not quite what the headline suggests. He is discussing rights in legalistic terms, using the concepts of positive and negative rights. Negative rights are what the US constiution primarily covers. These are the "freedoms from": freedom from government persecution, freedom from abuse, etc.

Obama states that even despite the Civil Rights movement expanding these rights and the Warren Court working actively to enhance and protect them, the Constitution and the US legal system do not do much to protect "positive rights." These represent a class a rights based on what governments must do "for people." See the distinction? In the US, there has never been much effort to bind the government to certain acts that it must do for people. In human rights legal theory, this would be things like the right to education, the right to healthcare, and yes, the right to some baseline standard of living and quality of life.

Is this Marxism? Well, probably in the same way that Ronald Reagan was a Fascist. As much as I like to claim he was, there is a wide sea between Reagan and Mussolini. And there is quite a bit of distance between Obama's economic plans and Marxism.

All the same, here is the link. If anyone can track down the original in full that would be awesome. This 4 minute clip is just one statement in a larger discussion about civil rights and the role of the government.

***************************************
An amendment: I recently came across a link to the full transcript and one for the full audio. I have removed the edited post that has been bandied about on rightist shows and blogs. Here are the link (one to Foxnews of all places):

Audio (look for Jan 18th): http://www.wbez.org/audio_library/od_rajan01.asp

Text: http://www.foxnews.com/urgent_queue/#50041ecb,2008-10-27

"Nailin' Paylin"

Sarah Palin is officially a legend! Hustler Video is shooting a porn with a look-alike titled "Nailin' Paylin." The spelling is sic and so is Hustler. You betcha!

The faux Sarah is Lisa Ann, who "will be nailing the Russians who come knocking on her back-door." In another scene -- a flashback -- "young Paylin's creationist college professor will explain a 'big bang' theory even she can't deny!"

There's also a threeway with Hillary and Condoleezza look-alikes.

The video is in pre-production, but is being fast tracked for release before the election.

(Never thought I would post an article from TMZ... click here for the original)

Obama: McCain is to Bush as Robin is to Batman

From CNN Political Producer Chris Welch

Obama compared Pres. Bush and McCain to Batman and Robin.

ALBUQUERQUE, New Mexico (CNN) – Barack Obama took his comparisons of John McCain and President Bush one step further Saturday night at a rally in New Mexico, implying the two Republicans are like the duo of Batman and Robin.

"John McCain suggested that he would be the one to change George Bush's policies," Obama said, before adding that if that were to happen it'd be "like Dick Cheney attacking George Bush."

"It's like Robin getting mad at batman. John McCain hasn't been a maverick. He's been a sidekick when it comes to George Bush's economic policies.”

Earlier in the weekend, Obama said running mate Joe Biden had said McCain criticizing Bush would be "like Tonto getting mad at the Lone Ranger."

Biden never actually said that — but he has made similar references using Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

The Illinois senator heads to battleground Colorado for events Sunday.

Nana-nana-nana-nana...McCain! Pretty old for a boy wonder dontcha think? Any other suggestions for whose sidekick McCain might be? Usually they are much younger, wards for example, so it would be more likely that it is someone much older than McCain. Maybe Nick Fury. He must be about 130 by now.

Block the Vote

Will the GOP's campaign to deter new voters and discard Democratic ballots determine the next president?

ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. & GREG PALAST

• Video: Behind the Story With Kennedy Jr. and Palast

These days, the old west rail hub of Las Vegas, New Mexico, is little more than a dusty economic dead zone amid a boneyard of bare mesas. In national elections, the town overwhelmingly votes Democratic: More than 80 percent of all residents are Hispanic, and one in four lives below the poverty line. On February 5th, the day of the Super Tuesday caucus, a school-bus driver named Paul Maez arrived at his local polling station to cast his ballot. To his surprise, Maez found that his name had vanished from the list of registered voters, thanks to a statewide effort to deter fraudulent voting. For Maez, the shock was especially acute: He is the supervisor of elections in Las Vegas.

Maez was not alone in being denied his right to vote. On Super Tuesday, one in nine Democrats who tried to cast ballots in New Mexico found their names missing from the registration lists. The numbers were even higher in precincts like Las Vegas, where nearly 20 percent of the county's voters were absent from the rolls. With their status in limbo, the voters were forced to cast "provisional" ballots, which can be reviewed and discarded by election officials without explanation. On Super Tuesday, more than half of all provisional ballots cast were thrown out statewide.

This November, what happened to Maez will happen to hundreds of thousands of voters across the country. In state after state, Republican operatives — the party's elite commandos of bare-knuckle politics — are wielding new federal legislation to systematically disenfranchise Democrats. If this year's race is as close as the past two elections, the GOP's nationwide campaign could be large enough to determine the presidency in November. "I don't think the Democrats get it," says John Boyd, a voting-rights attorney in Albuquerque who has taken on the Republican Party for impeding access to the ballot. "All these new rules and games are turning voting into an obstacle course that could flip the vote to the GOP in half a dozen states."

Suppressing the vote has long been a cornerstone of the GOP's electoral strategy. Shortly before the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Paul Weyrich — a principal architect of today's Republican Party — scolded evangelicals who believed in democracy. "Many of our Christians have what I call the 'goo goo' syndrome — good government," said Weyrich, who co-founded Moral Majority with Jerry Falwell. "They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. . . . As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."

Today, Weyrich's vision has become a national reality. Since 2003, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, at least 2.7 million new voters have had their applications to register rejected. In addition, at least 1.6 million votes were never counted in the 2004 election — and the commission's own data suggests that the real number could be twice as high. To purge registration rolls and discard ballots, partisan election officials used a wide range of pretexts, from "unreadability" to changes in a voter's signature. And this year, thanks to new provisions of the Help America Vote Act, the number of discounted votes could surge even higher.

Excerpted from http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/23638322/block_the_vote/print.

Please read the rest there.

This shit bothers the fuck out of me. Guess I will be a poll watcher on election day. And this is why EVERYONE should vote early. Don't wait. Don't wait especially if you registered this year.

If there is a problem you can get it taken care of before the polls close. If you show up on the 4th and your name isn't there you MAY get to cast a provisional ballot, but the likelihood is it will never be counted. Seriously, go early. Short lines. Poll workers that are not yet frustrated. It is awesome. And what may be a perk to some, lots of hardline Republicans hate early voting because it allows all those working class folks and minorities with rigid hourly schedules to go vote. So if you want to stick it to them, not that I advocate that, then vote early. VOTE EARLY!

U.S. pilot was ordered to shoot down UFO

By Peter Griffiths

LONDON (Reuters) - Two U.S. fighter planes were scrambled and ordered to shoot down an unidentified flying object (UFO) over the English countryside during the Cold War, according to secret files made public Monday.

One pilot said he was seconds away from firing 24 rockets at the object, which moved erratically and gave a radar reading like "a flying aircraft carrier."

The pilot, Milton Torres, now 77 and living in Miami, said it spent periods motionless in the sky before reaching estimated speeds of more than 7,600 mph.

After the alert, a shadowy figure told Torres he must never talk about the incident and he duly kept silent for more than 30 years.

His story was among dozens of UFO sightings in defense ministry files released at the National Archives in London.

In a written account, Torres described how he scrambled his F-86 D Saber jet in calm weather from the Royal Air Force base at Manston, Kent in May 1957.

"I was only a lieutenant and very much aware of the gravity of the situation. I felt very much like a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest," he said.

"The order came to fire a salvo of rockets at the UFO. The authentication was valid and I selected 24 rockets.

"I had a lock-on that had the proportions of a flying aircraft carrier," he added. "The larger the airplane, the easier the lock-on. This blip almost locked itself."

At the last moment, the object disappeared from the radar screen and the high-speed chase was called off.

He returned to base and was debriefed the next day by an unnamed man who "looked like a well-dressed IBM salesman."

"He threatened me with a national security breach if I breathed a word about it to anyone," he said.

The documents contain no official explanation for the incident, which came at a time of heightened tension between the West and the Soviet Union. Planes were on constant stand-by at British bases for a possible Soviet attack.

The files blame other UFO sightings on weather balloons, clouds or normal aircraft. Torres said he had been waiting 50 years for an explanation.

"I shall never forget it," he told the Times. "On that night I was ordered to open fire even before I had taken off. That had never happened before."

UFO expert David Clarke said the sighting may have been part of a secret U.S. project to create phantom aircraft on radar screens to test Soviet air defenses.

"Perhaps what this pilot had seen was some kind of experiment in electronic warfare or maybe it was a UFO," he said. "Something very unusual happened."

The files are online at: www.nationalarchives/ufos

From: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49J4RO20081020?sp=true

I love that the pilot actually uses the phrase "I felt like a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest."

Colin Powell endorses Obama

Saying the Democratic nominee could "not only electrify our country but electrify our world," Colin Powell crossed party lines this morning and announced his support for Barack Obama.

Powell made his announcement on "Meet the Press." He said he had no plans to campaign for Obama.

Offering an extended rationale before making his preference known, the former Secretary of State said he had only come to his decision in recent weeks in what he called the campaign's "final exam."

Powell praised Obama as a "transformational figure" who he has gotten to know in the past two years

But Powell made plain that his decision to back the Democrat was as much motivated by what he saw from McCain and the GOP as anything Obama had said or done, using much of his explanation to express unhappiness about the campaign of a man he's known for 25 years.

Powell, who last year gave the Arizona senator's campaign the maximum $2,300, criticized McCain's response to the economic crisis

"Almost every day he had a different approach to the problems we were having," Powell observed.

The former Army general and moderate Republican also repeatedly expressed concern about the GOP's "rightward shift," using the selection of Sarah Palin for vice president as an example.

Palin, Powell said flatly, is not qualifed because she's not ready to be president -- the primary role of the vice president .

Powell, a native son of New York City, also knocked one of Palin's signature lines. "Not just small towns have values," he said.

He also took issue with the GOP campaign's decision to focus on 60s-era radical Bill Ayers.

"Sen. McCain says he’ s a washed-up old terrorist then why does he keep talking about him?" Powell asked, calling the use of Ayers "demagougery

McCain, appearing on Fox News Sunday, sought to minimize the endorsement by noting his support from other former Secretaries of State and retired military flag officers.

"This doesn’t come as a surprise," McCain said. "But I'm also very pleased to have the endorsement of four former Secretaries of State...and I'm proud to have the endorsement of well over 200 retired generals and admirals. I respect and continue to respect and admire Secretary Powell."

From politico.com: http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/1008/Colin_Powell_endorses_Obama.html

Wow. There was speculations for a couple of weeks, but it still comes as a surprise.

God got served...

Morning Edition, October 16, 2008 · Nebraska state Sen. Ernie Chambers sought an injunction against God last year for widespread death and destruction. Judge Marlon Polk threw out the suit, saying there's no way to properly notify the defendant. You can't serve papers on a suspect with no address. Chambers says he may appeal. He says God is aware of the charges because he is all-knowing.

Hehehe....Thanks James.

Here is the link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95774693

Obama's 'Diplomacy' Wins a Republican Endorsement

By Adam Graham-Silverman, CQ StaffWed Oct 15, 1:37 PM ET

The ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee parted ways with his party's presidential nominee Wednesday by endorsing Democrat Barack Obama's approach to diplomacy.

In a lengthy speech at the National Defense University, Indiana Sen. Richard G. Lugar weighed the benefits of talking to foreign leaders, including U.S. enemies, against other actions, such as military force. The issue marks one of the sharpest divides between Obama and John McCain, who has called the Democratic nominee naive for suggesting that he would sit down with leaders such as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Lugar, however, praised Obama, noting that isolation often does not resolve contentious issues.

"He correctly cautions against the implication that hostile nations must be dealt with almost exclusively through isolation or military force," Lugar said in a prepared remarks released before his speech. "In some cases, refusing to talk can even be dangerous."

Lugar, however, said McCain is right to warn that "there are times when diplomatic approaches to rogue regimes have little efficacy." But he cited North Korea, which was just removed from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terror, as a diplomatic success story and urged more contact with Syria and Iran.

This is not the first time Lugar and Obama have seen eye-to-eye on foreign policy issues. Lugar noted back in July that he was "pleased" to have worked with Obama on nuclear proliferation issues after an Obama ad ran mentioning Lugar by name.

Lugar also used his speech to underscore his concern that U.S. foreign policy has become too reactive.

"If most U.S. foreign policy attention is devoted to crises fomented by hostile regimes, we are ceding the initiative to our enemies and reducing our capacity to lead the world in ways that are more likely to affect our future," Lugar said.

Ummm...wow. I am not sure what to say. That was unexpected.

On an unrealted note, where the Hell is everyone? This blogging thing is no fun when there isn't anyone to debate. Come on Beck! Where is the view from the other side? Pope? Where is the hard-nosed critique of everyone's arguments? Your pessimistic view of the world? Matt...well, you did post that animated UDHR thing, so that was consistent with your overall random and enjoyable contributions. And Trevor...well, your absense is pretty much par.

Three 2008 Nobel Laureates In Science Endorse Obama

Barack Obama's campaign will announce today that three 2008 Nobel laureates in Science have added their names to a list of 62 Nobel winners endorsing the Democratic candidate for president: Martin Chalfie of Columbia University, Roger Tsien of the University of California at San Diego, and the University of Chicago's Yoichiro Nambu.

An Open Letter to the American People

This year's presidential election is among the most significant in our nation's history. The country urgently needs a visionary leader who can ensure the future of our traditional strengths in science and technology and who can harness those strengths to address many of our greatest problems: energy, disease, climate change, security, and economic competitiveness.

We are convinced that Senator Barack Obama is such a leader, and we urge you to join us in supporting him.

During the administration of George W. Bush, vital parts of our country's scientific enterprise have been damaged by stagnant or declining federal support. The government's scientific advisory process has been distorted by political considerations. As a result, our once dominant position in the scientific world has been shaken and our prosperity has been placed at risk. We have lost time critical for the development of new ways to provide energy, treat disease, reverse climate change, strengthen our security, and improve our economy.

We have watched Senator Obama's approach to these issues with admiration. We especially applaud his emphasis during the campaign on the power of science and technology to enhance our nation's competitiveness. In particular, we support the measures he plans to take – through new initiatives in education and training, expanded research funding, an unbiased process for obtaining scientific advice, and an appropriate balance of basic and applied research – to meet the nation's and the world's most urgent needs.

Senator Obama understands that Presidential leadership and federal investments in science and technology are crucial elements in successful governance of the world's leading country. We hope you will join us as we work together to ensure his election in November.

Signed by 62 Nobel winning or nominated scientists

From: http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/10/three_2008_nobe.html

Also see this site for Chalfie's recorded message to voters as well as all of the signatories.

Hmmm....wonder if this is partly because Palin is a throwback that still is unsure about what causes global warming, opposes to stem cell research, and her posseses a general animosity toward the educated "elite" (such as scientists). On that last note, I read a really interesting piece from the New Republic (yes, Beck, I know it is a Liberal rag) about her long-standing distrust of and distaste for educated opinions and people with "degrees." Pretty scary stuff. But for some reasonmany people like "gut instinct" politicians more than those that think things through and apply logic or "science". Why is that?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Animated

To celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, CH friend and colleague Seth Brau recently completed the rather daunting task of bringing the words to life with motion graphics. The result is on one hand elegant — using a two-tone palette, linear — and on the other an experimental take on scale, the use of typography and symbolism.

Given complete creative freedom and a little over a month's time, Seth used a mix of After Effects and Illustrator to seamlessly connect the 30 articles of the document into a captivating piece. In this case, no plan was the best plan. Seth comments, "There were times when I had no idea what I was going to do for the next section of the document. I would churn out something that I would hate but in that process I would come up with the idea, layout or imagery for something I ended up developing and liking."

To recreate the feeling of an older document Seth chose a simple color palette of black against a textured tan and kept it modern with Helvetica. "Originally, I hoped using to a two-color scheme would simplify the process but it actually ended up making things harder because creating single color imagery, especially when it's the the same color of the text, was very challenging." He proved up to the challenge, creating a dynamic flow between the text and the morphing illustrations that impels the viewer to follow along. Using the text itself as a graphic element that shifts and plays across the screen, both pays homage to the original document and cleverly blurs the line between words and images. The melodic music, "Minds Awake," by Rumspringa off Cantora Records is also nice touch.

Originally written by Eleanor Roosevelt 60 years ago, it's astonishing that less than five percent of the world even knows that the document exists. The message rings particularly true now and we're proud to be associated with Seth, whose work enhances the Declaration of Human Rights with his motions graphics to spread the word to both the younger and older generations.

http://www.coolhunting.com/archives/2008/10/the_universal_d.php

This is a great presentation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Rage rising on the McCain campaign trail

CNN) -- With recent polls showing Sen. Barack Obama's lead increasing nationwide and in several GOP-leaning states, some Republicans attending John McCain-Sarah Palin campaign rallies are showing a new emotion: rage.

At a rally in Minnesota on Friday, a woman told McCain: "I don't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's an Arab."

McCain shook his head and said, "No ma'am, no ma'am. He's a decent family man...[a] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues. That's what this campaign is all about."

One man at the rally said he was "scared of an Obama presidency." McCain later told the man he should not fear Obama.

"I want to be president of the United States, and I don't want Obama to be," he said. "But I have to tell you, I have to tell you, he is a decent person, and a person that you do not have to be scared as President of the United States."

McCain's response was met with boos from the crowd.

When asked about these outbursts, McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said that he didn't know who those people were and if they were there as supporters or to disrupt the rallies.

A day earlier, the same type of hostility toward Obama was evident at McCain-Palin rallies.

"When you have an Obama, [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and the rest of the hooligans up there going to run this country, we have got to have our head examined. It's time that you two are representing us, and we are mad. So, go get them," one man told McCain at a town hall meeting in Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Another man was more pointed.

"And we're all wondering why that Obama is where he's at, how he got here. I mean, everybody in this room is stunned that we're in this position," another man said at Thursday's rally.

"I'm mad. I'm really mad. And what's going to surprise you, it's not the economy. It's the socialists taking over our country," one said. Watch more of the anger at the rallies »

McCain urged his supporters to be respectful of Obama.

"We want to fight and I will fight. But we will be respectful," he said. "I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments. I will respect him and I want everyone to be respectful, and let's make sure we are.

Excerpted from CNN.com

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/mccain.crowd/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Given the rancor of the Palin rallies, I am glad McCain has the integrity to call his supporters out on their "fears" of Obama and the tenor of their comments about him. Even after receiveing boos from a crowd of supporters, McCain called for a respectful campaign and for respect for Senator Obama. While his TV ads hardly reflect his attitude, I applaud Sen. McCain for such a public statement. Nice to see he still has some shred of integrity.

And in other news, let me applaud Trevor for registering to vote.

Sarah Palin Unleashed....or at least Unhinged

By Dana Milbank

Barack Obama, she told 8,000 fans at a rally here Monday afternoon, "launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist!" This followed her earlier accusation that the Democrat pals around with terrorists. "This is not a man who sees America the way you and I see America," she told the Clearwater crowd. "I'm afraid this is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country." The crowd replied with boos.

McCain had said that racially explosive attacks related to Obama's former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, are off limits. But Palin told New York Times columnist Bill Kristol in an interview published Monday: "I don't know why that association isn't discussed more."

Worse, Palin's routine attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness. In Clearwater, arriving reporters were greeted with shouts and taunts by the crowd of about 3,000. Palin then went on to blame Katie Couric's questions for her "less-than-successful interview with kinda mainstream media." At that, Palin supporters turned on reporters in the press area, waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse. Others hurled obscenities at a camera crew. One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, "Sit down, boy."

McCain's swoon is largely out of his control, the result of an economic collapse that ignited new fears Monday when the Dow Jones industrial average closed below 10,000 for the first time in four years. That's why his lead in Florida polls, which once reached as high as 15 points, has turned into a three-point deficit.

But the campaign has reacted with recriminations (the St. Petersburg Times reported that the Florida Republican Party chairman, after questioning Palin's aptitude, was told that he couldn't fly on her plane) and now Palin's rage.

The angry GOP vice presidential nominee even found a way to blame the market decline on the yet-to-be-enacted tax policies of the yet-to-be-elected Obama.

"If you turn on the news tonight when you get home, you're gonna see that, yah, this is another woeful day in the market, and the other side just doesn't understand -- no!" she said at an afternoon fundraiser at the home of mutual fund giant Jack Donahue. "Especially in a time like this, you don't propose to increase taxes. The phoniest claim in a campaign that's full of them is that Barack Obama is going to cut your taxes."

Of course, Obama never promised to cut taxes for people at $10,000-a-plate lunches in air-conditioned tents on waterfront compounds. And the crowd -- among them New York Jets owner Woody Johnson -- reacted without applause to Palin's Joe Six-Pack lines. After they didn't strike up the usual "Drill, baby, drill" or "USA" chants, Palin, rattled, read hurriedly through the rest of her speech.

The reception had been better in Clearwater, where Palin, speaking to a sea of "Palin Power" and "Sarahcuda" T-shirts, tried to link Obama to the 1960s Weather Underground. "One of his earliest supporters is a man named Bill Ayers," she said. ("Boooo!" said the crowd.) "And, according to the New York Times, he was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and our U.S. Capitol,' " she continued. ("Boooo!" the crowd repeated.)

"Kill him!" proposed one man in the audience.

Palin also told those gathered that Obama doesn't like American soldiers. "He said that our troops in Afghanistan are just, quote, 'air-raiding villages and killing civilians,' " she said, drawing boos from a crowd that had not been told Obama was actually appealing for more troops in Afghanistan.

Excerpted from the Washington Post (an elitist yet somehow mainstream news source)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/06/AR2008100602935.html?referrer=emailarticle

This sort of thing really concerns me. Palin is stoking hatred and demonizing not only her opponent but the media. Partly it's funny: Sound like an idiot on national television? Can't string a sentence together? Damn, it must be that gotcha journalism of the elitist mainstream media 'doncha know.' Your party can't put together a decent message to attract voters? Your opponent must be a terrorist. He must hate American troops. His pastor wants to kill whitey. For Christ's sake. This is repugnant. The Obama camp is not totally immune here. They have used their fair share of dirty politics. But so far they haven't stoked hatred, and their crowds have not called for violence or used racially epithets.

I would think that responsible candidates, ethical candidates would nip such behavior from their supporters fast. Say, for example, "no, no, supporters, we don't like our opponent or his policies, but this is America and we don't resort to that sort of thing, to violence, to hate speech." While I would not hold her responsible for the crowd's actions or comments, she is abetting their behavior. And if she isn't calling them out, that says something about her character. Sad.

McCain would buy bad homeowner mortgages

By JIM KUHNHENN
Associated Press Writer

John McCain's proposal to buy up bad home mortgages would use nearly half the $700 billion from the recent Wall Street bailout package to assist Americans directly, instead of indirectly by rescuing the nation's financial markets.

The Republican presidential candidate announced during Tuesday's debate that he would order the federal government to spend $300 billion in federal funds to buy the mortgages and allow financially troubled homeowners to keep their houses.

Democratic nominee Barack Obama last month sounded a similar theme, proposing that the government consider taking such a step.

But McCain's approach was far more categorical.

"I would order the secretary of the Treasury to immediately buy up the bad home-loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes — at the diminished values of those homes — and let people be able to make those payments and stay in their homes," he said.

The proposal, which he called the American Homeownership Resurgence Plan, is as much a policy plan for the future as it is a political tactic for the present.

The economy has been a key factor in helping Obama pull ahead of McCain nationally and in key battleground states. What's more, Americans reacted with helpless outrage at the need for a $700 billion rescue for the country's financial institutions.

Many Republicans voted against the package, objecting to its size and to government intervention in the free market economy. McCain's step would represent an even greater role for government and potentially an even greater financial loss.

McCain made clear he would use the plan to distinguish himself not only from his rival but also from President Bush, an increasingly unpopular figure as the economy sinks.

"It's my proposal," McCain said. "It's not Sen. Obama's proposal. It's not President Bush's proposal."

As conceived by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and as passed by Congress, the rescue package would be used primarily to purchase mortgage-backed securities. It would allow, but not require direct purchase of mortgages. Under McCain's plan, the Treasury would be required to rework mortgages directly with homeowners whose houses were losing value.

It was unclear — either from McCain's remarks or from the backup materials provided by the campaign — how such a massive plan would be administered. Though McCain, a budget hawk and critic of rising federal spending, did concede one point. "Is it expensive? Yes," he said.

Under the plan, the government would buy failing mortgages from homeowners and provide new fixed-rate mortgages. As a policy matter, the plan would likely have greater support among Democrats than Republicans. Economists with the liberal Center for American Progress have been pushing a similar idea for some time.

A background paper provided by the campaign said the plan "could be implemented quickly as a result of the authorities provided in the stabilization bill, the recent housing bill, and the U.S. government's conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

It also said it could require Congress to raise the government's borrowing limit.

The Treasury's current plans for the money, however, could be well under way by the time a new administration is sworn in next year, leaving fewer options for a new administration.

The bailout package gives the secretary of the Treasury great latitude to deal with financial markets and address the current credit crunch. Ostensibly, the department would have the authority to intervene directly and help homeowners.

In fact, at a news conference on Sept. 24, Obama said, "we should consider giving the government the authority to purchase mortgages directly instead of simply purchasing mortgage-backed securities."

Days later, in a news release, he said he would "encourage Treasury to study the option of buying individual mortgages like we did successfully in the 1930s."

"Senator Obama has been consistently calling for policies that would buy up mortgages and restructure them so that families can stay in their houses," Obama economic adviser Jason Furman said. "He continues to support that and believes Treasury should use its authority in whatever way it can to bring about that goal, including buying mortgages directly."

McCain has tried to portray himself as an activist in the midst of the financial crisis. He temporarily suspended his campaign to return to Washington and has depicted Obama as a more timid leader.

"Until we stabilize home values in America, we're never going to start turning around and creating jobs and fixing our economy and we've got to get some trust and confidence back to America," McCain said.

Original Article

I should be a frelling Senator...

Dennis Kucinich on the Democrats’ Bailout Betrayal

by Chris Hedges

For Original Article Click Here

The passing of the $850-billion bailout pulled the plug on the New Deal. The Great Society is now gasping for air, mortally wounded, coughing up blood. It will not recover. It was murdered by the Democratic Party.

We are on our own. And don't expect any help from Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who lobbied hard for the bill and voted for it. Ignore their rhetoric. Look coldly at the ballots they cast against us. We, as citizens, have only a handful of representatives left in Washington, most of whom were left sputtering in rage and frustration on the House floor. The sad irony is that some of them were Republican.

"This was the largest single act of class warfare in the modern history of this country," Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who led the fight in the House against the bailout, told me by phone from Cleveland. "It is a direct attack on the American people's ability to be able to stabilize their homes and their neighborhoods. This single vote will define the careers of everyone. We are back to taxation without representation, to markets that are openly rigged."

"We buried the New Deal," he said of the vote. "Instead of Democrats going back to classic New Deal economics where we prime the pump of the economy and start money circulating among the population through saving homes, creating jobs and building a new infrastructure, our leaders chose to accelerate the wealth of the nation upwards. They did so in a way that was destructive of free-market principles. They ripped away all the familiar moorings. We are in an uncharted sea where the traditional roles of the political parties are being switched. The Democrats have unfortunately become so enamored and beholden to Wall Street that we are not functioning to defend the economic interest of the broad base of the American people. It was up to the Republicans to protect not just a so-called free market but the American taxpayer and attempt to block this. This is an outrage. This was democracy's Black Friday."

Obama arrived on the Senate floor Brutus-like to thrust a knife into the back of the working and middle class. He lobbied hard for the bill. He did so, according to some who met with him on Capitol Hill, because he feared that if he opposed the bailout and it triggered a market collapse it could cost him the election. Better to placate the thieves on Wall Street than stand up for the masses of enraged and swindled citizens.

Obama's betrayal is the betrayal of the Democratic Party. The Democrats gave us the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, which ripped down the firewalls that were put in place by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act. The 1933 act, designed to prevent the kind of meltdown we are now experiencing, established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC). It set in place banking reforms to stop speculators from hijacking the financial system. With Glass-Steagall demolished, and the passage of NAFTA, the Democrats, led by Bill Clinton, tumbled gleefully into bed with corporations and Wall Street speculators. They achieved fundraising parity with the Republicans. They used institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as a welfare gravy train. The Democrats, including Obama, are as compromised as the Republicans.

Obama's voting record in the Senate is in line with the corrupt Democratic mainstream, including Biden, who works on behalf of corporations and especially the credit card industry. Obama knows where power lies in the United States. It is not with the citizens, who with ratios of 100 to 1 pleaded with their representatives in Washington not to loot the national treasury to bail out Wall Street investment firms. Power lies with the corporations. These corporations, not us, pick who runs for president. You cannot be a candidate without their blessing and money. These corporations, including the Commission on Presidential Debates, a private corporation, determine who gets to speak and what issues candidates can or cannot challenge, from universal, not-for-profit, single-payer health care to Wall Street bailouts to NAFTA. If you do not follow the corporate script you become as marginal and invisible as Ralph Nader or Bob Barr or Cynthia McKinney.

Obama has always served his corporate masters. He opposed Rep. John Murtha's call for immediate withdrawal from Iraq and supported continued funding for the war. He voted in July 2005 to reauthorize the Patriot Act. He did not support an amendment that was part of a bankruptcy bill that would have capped credit card interest rates at 30 percent. He opposed a bill that would have reformed the notorious Mining Law of 1872, which allows mineral companies to rape federal land for profit. He did not back the single-payer health care bill HR 676, sponsored by Kucinich and John Conyers. He advocates the death penalty and nuclear power. He backed the class-action "reform" bill-the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA)-that was part of a large lobbying effort by financial firms, which make up Obama's second-biggest single bloc of donors. CAFA would effectively shut down state courts as a venue to hear most class-action lawsuits. Workers, under CAFA, would no longer have redress in many of the courts where these cases have a chance of defying powerful corporations. CAFA moves these cases into corporate-friendly federal courts dominated by Republican judges.

Obama's support for the bailout, however, is his most egregious betrayal. He had a brief, shining moment to prove he could lead, to capitalize on a popular revolt that cut across the political spectrum. He never attempted to address or mobilize the aspirations and passions of the vast majority of Americans. He was as craven, servile and cowardly as the party he represents. He returned to the campaign trail after Friday's vote as a slick and polished sales representative for our corporate state, telling us to calm down and accept the inevitable.

"Some of the most powerful speeches against this were given by members of the Republican Party who are on the political right," Kucinich said. "They did a superb job in poking holes in the underlying assumptions of the bailout. They say what they believe. Give me somebody who says what they believe and I can figure out how to get them to a new place. When people say one thing and do another it is very hard to be able to move a debate."

So let us honor, in our moment of defeat, the handful of elected officials who valiantly defied their party leaderships in the House to stage a remarkable revolt that at first succeeded. Kucinich is one. There were others-Brad Sherman, Marcy Kaptur, Peter DeFazio, Lloyd Doggett and Robert C. "Bobby" Scott. They are about all that is left of the old Democratic Party, the party that once looked out for the poor and the working class. Send them a note of thanks. They deserve it. And if you live in their districts make sure you get to the polls in November. They did not sell you out.

"We had two take-it-or-leave-it propositions and the second one was worse than the first," Kucinich said, referring to the plan that came loaded with pages of tax cuts. "Tax cuts are antithetical to a bailout. We never solved the problem. There were never any hearings on the bill. This premise, that we could prop up the stock market with a $700-billion investment and create some liquidity, was flawed. The problem is that banks do not want to loan to each other. It is not a liquidity problem. Banks are afraid they are going to collapse in short selling. There is a war going on between security firms and banks. Banks are under assault. They are not loaning. The dynamic is driven by the Accounting Standards Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Fed."

The root of the financial crisis, as critics of the bailout plan point out, is that millions of homeowners cannot pay their mortgages. The bailout, as the market decline on Friday following the vote illustrated, does not address the crisis. It solves nothing for the 10 million Americans who face foreclosure. It solves nothing for the growing numbers of unemployed and underemployed. It may well be the equivalent of tossing $850 billion of taxpayer money (including $150 billion in tax cuts) into a furnace and watching passively as our economy continues its plunge.

"We face a perfect financial storm," Kucinich warned. "The elements are the deficit spending for the war of 3 to 4 trillion dollars, the trillion and more tax cuts, the war itself and the lack of serious investment in the country. We are being hollowed out. We are going to see more unemployment and more people losing their homes. With $700 billion we could have made a real investment in the country, in jobs, in infrastructure and in homes. Instead, we got robbed."

Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C.


Amen Denny! This is exactly what I was saying is the problem here. Ugh. I doubt the Bailout stops our steady march into recession. Why would it? It merely secures those at the highest rungs of the ladder, who are still not necessarily going to lend money out because the WORLD MARKET is in a down turn. All this has done is secure them! McCain and Obama both royally screwed this one and all of us not at the very top! Thanks A-holes!

BTW thanks to my friend J.J. for sending me this article.

Rolling Stone Article

Here is a link to a Rolling Stone article about McCain. It is not flattering and in many respects frightens the BeJesus out of me. I can't vouch for the accuracy, and it certainly seems that the reporter/writer is no McCain fan. That said, given that it is being published in such a well-read periodical, I would think that the editors must have fact checked every minor detain in order to avoid libel charges. The article covers his time in the Naval Academy, his early military, history of womanizing and crashing planes (seriously, 3 planes?), willingness to use friends to advance his career, and his unsteady, erratic termperament. Some scary stuff. But judge for yourself.

Here is a brief excerpt:

"HE IS HOTHEADED"

During his 1992 campaign, at the end of a long day, McCain's wife, Cindy, mussed his receding hair and needled him playfully that he was "getting a little thin up there." McCain reportedly blew his top, cutting his wife down with the kind of language that had gotten him hauled into court as a high schooler: "At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt." Even though the incident was witnessed by three reporters, the McCain campaign denies it took place.

......................

In the Senate — where, according to former GOP Sen. Bob Smith, McCain has "very few friends" — his volcanic temper has repeatedly led to explosive altercations with colleagues and constituents alike. In 1992, McCain got into a heated exchange with Sen. Chuck Grassley over the fate of missing American servicemen in Vietnam. "Are you calling me stupid?" Grassley demanded. "No, I'm calling you a fucking jerk!" yelled McCain. Sen. Bob Kerrey later told reporters that he feared McCain was "going to head-butt Grassley and drive the cartilage in his nose into his brain." The two were separated before they came to blows. Several years later, during another debate over servicemen missing in action, an elderly mother of an MIA soldier rolled up to McCain in her wheelchair to speak to him about her son's case. According to witnesses, McCain grew enraged, raising his hand as if to strike her before pushing her wheelchair away.

........................

Last year, after barging into a bipartisan meeting on immigration legislation and attempting to seize the reins, McCain was called out by fellow GOP Sen. John Cornyn of Texas. "Wait a second here," Cornyn said. "I've been sitting in here for all of these negotiations and you just parachute in here on the last day. You're out of line." McCain exploded: "Fuck you! I know more about this than anyone in the room." The incident foreshadowed McCain's 11th-hour theatrics in September, when he abruptly "suspended" his campaign and inserted himself into the Wall Street bailout debate at the last minute, just as congressional leaders were attempting to finalize a bipartisan agreement.

At least three of McCain's GOP colleagues have gone on record to say that they consider him temperamentally unsuited to be commander in chief. Smith, the former senator from New Hampshire, has said that McCain's "temper would place this country at risk in international affairs, and the world perhaps in danger. In my mind, it should disqualify him." Sen. Domenici of New Mexico has said he doesn't "want this guy anywhere near a trigger." And Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi weighed in that "the thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine. He is erratic. He is hotheaded."

McCain's frequently inappropriate humor has also led many to question his self-control. In 1998, the senator told a joke about President Clinton's teenage daughter at a GOP fundraiser. "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?" McCain asked. "Because her father is Janet Reno!"

Here is a link to the article in its entirety:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/23316912/makebelieve_maverick/print

Truth=Disqualification for Presidency?

PALIN SAYS:

(CNN) — Sarah Palin said Friday several of Barack Obama's comments about the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have been "reckless" and disqualify the Illinois senator for consideration as the next commander-in-chief.

The comments are among the Alaska governor's most pointed to date regarding the Democratic presidential candidate's readiness to serve and come one day after she aggressively jousted with Democratic VP nominee Joe Biden.

"Some of his comments that he has made about the war…I think, in my world, disqualifies someone from consideration as the next commander-in-chief," Palin told Fox News Friday. "Some of the comments he's made about Afghanistan, what we are doing there, supposedly just air-raiding villages and killing civilians — that's reckless."

Palin was referring to an answer Barack Obama gave at a August 2007 town hall meeting with New Hampshire voters, during which the Illinois senator was asked whether he had plans to shift U.S. troops out of Iraq to other terrorist hotspots like Afghanistan.

"We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there," Obama said of the U.S.'s mission in Afghanistan.

Those comments were immediately seized by GOP critics. The Republican National Committee sent out a press release shortly after calling them "offensive," and demanding he apologize. The McCain campaign has also highlighted the comments several times this campaign season.

AP FACT CHECKER SAYS:

(AP) A check of the facts shows that Western forces have been killing civilians at a faster rate than the insurgents have been killing civilians.

The U.S. and NATO say they don't have civilian casualty figures, but The Associated Press has been keeping count based on figures from Afghan and international officials. Tracking civilian deaths is a difficult task because they often occur in remote and dangerous areas that are difficult to reach and verify.

As of Aug. 1, the AP count shows that while militants killed 231 civilians in attacks in 2007, Western forces killed 286. Another 20 were killed in crossfire that can't be attributed to one party.

No doubt Obama's comments do little to boost morale among the troops. And surely they paint the US in a rather negative light-but let's face, you invade two countries in two years and either directly or indirectly cause the deaths of dozens of thousands of civilians, you are going to get bad press.

No, the bigger issue I have is that according to Palin and some other GOP stalwarts and assinine commentators, telling the truth is a "disqualification" for the presidency. God forbid that a candidate would say: "We f*%&ed up and need to change strategy to fewer innocent people die." The facts are the US is killing more civilians in Afghanistan than Taliban insurgents. Is it somehow better to ignore that figure? Or to claim it just isn't true? Or is it better to admit error and try to change for the better? Man, the GOP sure likes to throw around that personal responsibility stuff when it comes to Wall Street and banking, but hates to apply the same standard to the US military.

Sources:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/03/palin-says-obama-comments-disqualify-him-for-the-presidency/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/14/AR2007081400950.html

Bailout: Senate to vote Wednesday

The bailout package adds new provisions - including raising the FDIC insurance cap. Democratic sources tell CNN that they expect bipartisan support.

By CNNMoney.com staff

Last Updated: October 1, 2008: 4:12 AM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Senate plans to vote on the $700 billion bank rescue plan Wednesday evening - two days after the House failed to pass it.

The bill adds new provisions - including raising the FDIC insurance cap to $250,000 from $100,000 - and will be attached to an existing revenue bill that the House also rejected Monday, according to several Democratic leadership aides.

The vote is scheduled for after sundown, in observance of Rosh Hashanah. Republican presidential nominee John McCain, R-Ariz., and Democratic nominee Barack Obama, D-Ill., and his running mate Joe Biden, D-Del., confirmed that they would be present for the vote.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., announced the plan Tuesday.

"Senate Democrats and Republicans believe it is essential that we work quickly on this important legislation to restore confidence to our financial system and strengthen the economy," Reid said in a statement.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said the administration welcomes the "modified bill" and the scheduled vote.

Democratic sources told CNN that they expect bipartisan support.

Earlier Tuesday, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair asked Congress to allow her agency to increase the $100,000 limit per account that has been in place since 1980. To do so would help restore confidence in the markets, she said. Bair did not say what she thinks the new limit should be.

The revised bailout bill also includes a "Mental Health Parity" provision, which would require health insurance companies to cover mental illness at parity with physical illness.

Because the bill must originate in the House, the Senate is attaching the rescue plan to a bill that deals with renewable energy tax incentives. This would allow the Senate to vote before the House.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said that House leaders are discussing ideas offered by other lawmakers about how to modify the bill defeated on Monday. "House Democrats remain strongly committed to a comprehensive bill that stabilizes the financial markets, restores confidence, and protects taxpayers," she said.

Round 1 failed

The bailout package, a collaboration of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and leaders from both parties, was rejected by the House in a 228-205 vote Monday. Two-thirds of Republicans and about one-third of Democrats voted against the bill.

Following the defeat, the Dow Jones industrial average dropped 777 points, its biggest one-day point decline ever. The decline of nearly 7% was the largest percentage decline since the Black Monday crash of 1987.

But stocks rallied Tuesday, with the Dow jumping 485 points on bets that Congress will pass a version of the government's $700 billion package.

The bill, if approved, would allow the federal government to buy troubled mortgage-related investments from financial institutions, freeing them up for lending in a bid to pull the economy out of its credit freeze.

Proponents of the bill believe it would prevent the United States from sliding into a serious financial crisis, but opponents saw it as an unbearable burden to taxpayers and a rescue for Wall Street.

The Bush administration and key lawmakers had regrouped on Tuesday and vowed to push ahead. "Unfortunately, the measure was defeated by a narrow margin," President Bush said in a brief televised address at the White House. "I'm disappointed by the outcome, but I assure our citizens, and citizens around the world, that this is not the end of the legislative process."

The House is adjourned and not scheduled to return to session until Thursday at noon.

Bush pushed hard for lawmakers to act. "Our economy is depending on decisive action from the government," he said. "The sooner we address the problem, the sooner we can get back on the path of growth and job creation. This is what elected leaders owe the American people, and I am confident that we'll deliver."

On Tuesday, Bush spoke to Obama and McCain about the financial crisis, according to Fratto. The presidential candidates "offered ideas and reaffirmed what they have said publicly - that this is a critical issue that needs to be addressed," Fratto said.

CNN's Jessica Yellin and Ted Barrett contributed to this story.  

First Published: September 30, 2008: 9:07 AM ET

I'm going to have to be very honest here: Like many of our own lawmakers have admitted, I just don't feel that I know enough about the nitty gritty details of the problem to take a sound, educated opinion on this bailout. On the one hand, I know that letting the U.S. Economy (and the world economy that is tied to it) go into the shitter = bad. On the other hand, the free market economist in me desperately wants to see some of these companies suck it up, and eat the shit sandwiche they made. If you don't execute safe business practices, and your business tanks as a result, too effing bad. 

But.... if there is ever a case for government intervention in the market, wouldn't this be it? When hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people's homes and livelihoods are on the line, I can hardly say that it's a bad thing for the government to step in and say "we won't let you fall."

I mean, 700 billion. 700 billion. We're talking about offering a "loan" to corporations that have run their own businesses into the ground, the size of which is a number usually expressed in freakin' scientific notation in my circles. It's unfathomable, especially at a time when we're already spending unprecidented amounts of money on other government projects (like a little one in that place called Iraq). 

So... is it better to better to try and patch up a shattered leg, risk infection and making the problem worse? or just cutting it off, crossing our fingers, and hoping we'll be able to adapt to the changes, and be stronger for it in the future?

At the moment, most Americans seem to be telling their congressmen they don't want this bailout... And many don't dare vote against the will of their constituants this close to an election. But does the average American really understand the implications of letting these financial institutions fail? Hell, do I? 

I just don't know. My gut tells me that the bailout is just wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. 

But it's also telling me that the ramifications of not pursuing this course could be far worse than sulking over  offended sensibilities. Whatever the case, I want... no, MUST... see accountability included in this bill before I ever give it my support. No golden parachutes. No blank checks. Protect the victims of this crap first, not the financial institutions who gambled and lost. And the taxpayers must get every dime back, plus interest.