Anbruch

Andrew Sullivan Thinks Taxes Are Punishment

2009-02-28T08:50:00.003-06:00

I came from a modest background in another country and arrived in the US with barely a cent of my own money. I've worked hard and earned the American dream - and now have to work for the government for well over half the year (a government that still persecutes me for being an HIV-survivor). Obama will take more of my money - and much, much more in the future. Liberalism believes in punishing hard-working successful people in this manner - and the more you succeed, the more they will punish you.

Me, I always thought taxes were a responsibility. Thinking of taxes as punishment is just weird, and it distracts you from evaluating whether those taxes are being spent responsibly.

Product Placement

2009-02-28T08:39:00.003-06:00

Gail Collins on how advertising is beginning to infiltrate the content on TV:

Lines we never even bothered to think of as lines are being crossed. Last summer in Las Vegas, the anchors on the local Fox station started delivering the news with two prominently placed cups of McDonald’s iced coffee in front of them. A spokesperson called it a “nontraditional revenue source.”It’s only a matter of time before TV reporters conclude interviews with disaster victims by asking if they wouldn’t like a refreshing glass of V-8.

As Collins notes, this stuff has been going on in the movies for a good long time, and when we run around happily emblazoned with corporate advertising on t-shirts, hats and so forth, it's hard to get see the downfall of modern civilization in the display of two cups of McDonald's iced coffee. And really would offering a glass of V-8 be so much more tacky than asking the disaster victims how they felt...

Or You May Go Splat!

2009-02-24T17:00:00.003-06:00

Andrew Sullivan writes:

I will be candid and say my own fear is that the stimulus, although cushioning the worst, may also extend the pain by softening the landing. Sometimes, you get a bigger bounce from a hard landing.

Assuming the hard landing doesn't kill you.

Making the Grade

2009-02-18T07:35:00.005-06:00

The NY Times has an article on grade expectations. Key student quote:

If someone goes to every class and reads every chapter in the book and does everything the teacher asks of them and more, then they should be getting an A like their effort deserves. If your maximum effort can only be average in a teacher’s mind, then something is wrong.

To which I respond: perhaps you possess only average talent in the topic at hand. I think this is one of the great challenges we face: we as a culture apparently believe that people should be able to excel (rather than simply succeed) through hard work alone. It's a nice idea, with egalitarian roots, and work can in fact get you a long way (all the way to competence and success!), but I wonder if we do in fact want to conflate competency and excellence. For if we fail to make the distinction, merit has no place, and without merit, the choice among the competent is merely political: whoever has the influence (usually the money) will get the nod.

Our culture does have a realm where we make this distinction effortlessly, namely, athletics: everyone who has participated in sports knows that you can work your butt off, do everything the coach tells you to, and yet never be anything more than a mediocre performer. We might extend this analogy to the classroom, taking the teacher to be either a personal trainer or a coach. The teacher has two two primary responsibilities: (a) to facilitate your acquisition of knowledge and the development of your native talent in the area of the course content; and (b) to grade performance with respect to the standards of the discipline (competency) and with respect to your peers. As in sports, there will always be cases where native talent wins out over hard work.

The comparison to athletics is apt in another sense: as in sports, you have to do the work if you want to improve; the coach can tell you what to do, but he or she can't do the work for you.

Thrill Ride on Principle

2009-02-17T08:19:00.002-06:00

In both California and Kansas, the GOP seems willing to run the state off a cliff. I'm really fascinated by the politics of this and who is going to end up taking the blame. Of course, it's easy for me to be fascinated (rather than appalled) since I don't live in those states....

Rich Analogy

2009-02-14T20:56:00.001-06:00

I liked the analogy Frank Rich makes in this quote:

This G.O.P., a largely white Southern male party with talking points instead of ideas and talking heads instead of leaders, is not unlike those “zombie banks” that we’re being asked to bail out. It is in too much denial to acknowledge its own insolvency and toxic assets. Given the mess the country is in, it would be helpful to have an adult opposition that could pull its weight, but that’s not the hand America has been dealt.

Is Cheney Relevant?

2009-02-04T10:17:00.002-06:00

Sullivan on Cheney:

He hunkers down to play the Dolchstoss card, preparing to blame the next terror attack on the Obama administration's disavowal of his torture program. It seems to me that regardless of the merits or demerits of his view, it's a remarkable violation of civil norms for a vice-president just out of power to assault his successors and all-but declare them indifferent to public safety. It's deeply divisive, deeply partisan and utterly self-serving. In other words: as cheap as one would expect. And part of what ails conservatism. Yes, they seem to be rooting for failure at home and abroad, because it would help vindicate their own appalling record on both fronts.

Think of Cheney and Limbaugh as the two centers of gravity for the current GOP. A deeply unserious and deeply disturbing pincer movement against the democratic mandate of the new president.

My question: does anybody listen to Cheney any more? Even if something does happen, would any one give Cheney any credence now that he has no power? Personally, I doubt it. The problem: Cheney takes himself far too seriously. Limbaugh, on the other hand, is much more worrisome—even as he is also, as Andrew nicely puts it, "deeply unserious," which is also why he continues to have the power and leverage to matter.

Google Books

2009-02-02T13:15:00.002-06:00

Speaking of Google Books: I actually love the service, even if for many books not all of the pages are available. It was a definite boon when I was tracking down quotations for my latest project. I could just type in a representative portion of the quotation, and, voilà, in about 80% of the cases, the quotation would pop up. No need to run to the library; no need to run to my study!

Yes, of course, I should have kept notes as to where the quotations came from in the first place. But the nature of the project was such that at first it was not going to use citation by page number. Only later was it decided that we would in fact use regular citations, and that meant tracking down page numbers for something like 300 notes. I think Google Books cut the amount of time by at least a factor of 10.

On Being the Road

2009-02-02T12:20:00.001-06:00

Google wants to be it:

Eben Moglen, a law professor at Columbia and a free-culture advocate, puts it this way: if the fight over digitization of books is like horse-and-buggy makers against car manufacturers, Google wants to be the road.

Selling the Seat

2008-12-09T09:26:00.002-06:00

Talk about being brazen, and, well, not very smart.

Not exactly what the Democrats need at the moment...

lolcats essay

2008-11-20T09:06:00.009-06:00

Andrew Sullivan doesn't like this essay on lolcats, but I found it to be a worthwhile read. I think I see what Andrew finds objectionable in it: the bit he quotes on his blog — "the cheeseburger is not really a cheeseburger -- it's a symbol" — is almost a comically silly observation. ("Duh" doesn't even get to surface of what's wrong with it.) But I think that sentence is an anomaly in the essay, one that, to be sure, a decent editor should have caught and asked the author to rethink. If Andrew is right in calling the author on the carpet for it, he should have noted that its presence mars and undoes what might have been a really rather excellent essay on its topic. (That's why the passage is so devastatingly disappointing.) Instead, in just quoting it and labeling it with "Poseur Alert," Andrew suggests that the passage is representative of the essay and the thinking in it, which I don't believe it is.

Phenomena like lolcats are in need of this sort of contemplation (even if the letters to Salon suggest many find contemplation of such object intolerable), and if I don't believe that Dixit quite gets to what's culturally at stake in lolcats, his essay is a better attempt at making sense of their distinct appeal than I have yet seen.

update

Here is a good letter that addresses one of the more important aspects of lolcats not dealt with in Dixit's essay: the grammar:

Let's be clear: the language used in LOLcat captions isn't simply "mangled English". The deliberate misspellings and misuses of words like the verb "to be" reflect the ways in which White folks misunderstand the way Black folks talk in America. Dixit Jay's article may elide any discussion of race, but postings like this one (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_48pIyTbrm4A/Ruc4lWH0clI/AAAAAAAAADE/Xn7698M88ME/s1600-h/I+just+wishes+i+wuz+white..jpg) make it pretty clear that race is very much a factor in these posts.

I don't, in fact, find that the grammar of lolcats particularly resembles Black vernacular English, nor does it seem especially akin to the various entertainment versions thereof. The particular grammatical deformations of lolcats are, however, characteristics of pidgin language in general; the errors are also characteristic of the way children speak. I would argue that any resemblance to the Black English of the entertainment industry stems from the way in which the entertainment industry likewise juvenilized the dialect as part of its juvenilized representation of African Americans. And what lolcats grammar represents, I would contend, is this juvenile relationship to language.

Now, a more interesting point might be that the representations of lolcats are filling an analogous role for the cultural imagination as the representations of Black folks did in earlier generations. And a further question would be to what extent that otherness that is represented in the grammar is necessarily a racialized other and, if it is, to what effect.

But to me, many of these cartoons reflect an unconscious equation, in the mind of their creators, of Black people with animals, and of Black culture (as perceived, or mis-perceived, by people outside of it) as something to be ridiculed.

The author seems to assume that the representation of otherness is necessarily racialized. But it is not clear to me that this is the case; indeed the otherness of lolcats seems deployed as a mirror to reflect back an alienated image of ourselves where we can recognize aspects of ourselves not otherwise visible. This, I take it, is Dixit's point. And it is not necessary to demonize or ridicule the cats in order to see this reflection. Indeed, any ridicule in the humor usual rebounds to us. In any case, it's certainly true that the representation of the African American in the entertainment industry has similarly served this function, so to that extent the comparison of the letter writer is potentially valid. But the question remains as to whether the the representation of otherness must necessarily be racialized?

From another letter, which points to the juvenilizing effects of the language but also sees in that otherness an alienness that can speak truth to power:

I also enjoy the way the "mangling" follows very definite rules and has its own sound and rhythm, almost as if it were poetry, and the way it creates its own reality. Lolspeak plays into our view of cats as furry little anarchists, refusing to follow rules. It reinforces our feelings toward our pets as our "babies". It's playful. And play is a good thing. We don't get enough of it in our lives.

Bonus Stress

2008-11-20T08:03:00.003-06:00

The problem with this idea is that it presumes that executive bonuses are linked directly to performance. While in some cases this is undoubtedly the case, in others, bonuses seem to be more like a regular (albeit variable) aspect of the compensation. That is, many firms seem to give out large bonuses to their executives whether the company performs well or not. Usually the rationale is retention: the company needs to pay these bonuses in order to retain its best talent. But this factor calls into question the premise of the study: namely that high bonuses induce performance-debilitating stress. If high bonus is not directly related to performance, however, it's not clear how, if at all, the bonus might figure into the production of stress.

Help Wanted: A Smart Opposition

2008-11-16T07:53:00.002-06:00

Frank Rich notes that the Obama administration and the Democrats actually need a smart Republican opposition to keep themselves from doing stupid things:

The bad news for Democrats is that these are the exact circumstances that can make Obama cocky and Democrats sloppy. The worse news for the country is that at a time of genuine national peril we actually do need an opposition party that is not brain-dead.

Register the Pets!

2008-11-13T09:29:00.004-06:00

Gail Collins, who rose during the course of the election rose to being one of my favorite columnists:

Georgia has a Senate runoff Dec. 2, and the Democrats have dispatched tons of canvassers to help their candidate, Jim Martin. Martin is a long shot, but we should all be grateful that they’ve found something to do with the Obama campaign workers, who would otherwise have been set loose to wander the country, muttering about change and attempting to register household pets to vote.

All this energy, but no place to channel it effectively at the moment: I think this, not the high expectations per se, is going to pose the real challenge for the Obama administration.

How do you manage it for good?

Balance and the Newpaper Market

2008-11-03T19:56:00.002-06:00

Greenwald on WaPo's Ombudsman Deborah Howell's contention that the WaPo had tilted too far left in this election (as if):

In Howell's view, The Post shouldn't determine its news reporting based on what is factually true. Instead, it should shape its coverage to please this discredited, failed political movement -- in order to sell more papers.

As Greenwald notes, the placing of economics over fact is egregious (though there is no evidence I can see that a more rightward tilt would have sold any more newspapers). Even more troubling: this is the newspaper's ombudsman who is advocating making editorial decisions on the basis of economics rather than conformance to fact.

McCain Pulls a "Sad Grampa"

2008-11-02T08:36:00.002-06:00

Funny as hell, and it makes McCain seem human, but is this a winning strategy? I don't see it.

Obama in a Blowout

2008-11-01T17:27:00.003-05:00

Predictions:

55% Obama
42% McCain
3% Other

The undecideds will not break McCain's way; most of them will simply not vote. Indeed, the likely voter model will be found to have overestimated the likelihood that Republicans would vote.

The youth vote will be about what it was in 2004, but the high turn out among African Americans and general apathy among Republicans will make for the lopsided margin.

These are simply predictions, of course, but I remain convinced that McCain has a greater likelihood of underperforming his polling numbers than overperforming.

Communist Manipesto

2008-10-29T18:48:00.000-05:00

"It works for everything."

Up, because...

2008-10-28T21:44:00.002-05:00

Just because. Don't you love it when the market moves up by 10% and no one has much explanation except lame reasons such as "bargain hunting" and "expectations of a rate cute." As if that could account for a jump of this magnitude. Personally, I found Huffpo's SCREAMING HEADLINE the most honest:

Unpaid Blogging

2008-10-28T09:36:00.002-05:00

I'm with Andrew on this one. Lots of angry people with time on their hands--I don't see a deep recession cutting at all into the free blogging economy.

Circular Firing Squad

2008-10-24T23:54:00.002-05:00

Mark McKinnon, former McCain ad-man and advisor, who wisely sat out the campaign:

If you really want to see what ‘going negative’ is in politics, just watch the back-stabbing and blame game that we’re starting to see. And there’s one common theme: Everyone who wasn’t part of the campaign could have done better.

Wild Ride

2008-10-24T08:13:00.001-05:00

Looks like another wild ride on Wall Street today. Futures market hit its floor, foreign markets down around 8%. It's going to be ugly at the opening bell.

Dream Team

2008-10-22T21:30:00.001-05:00

Palin/Bachman 2012

I see that the GOP pulled their funding from Bachman and that her opponent has managed to raise over $1 million since the Outburst. I would so dearly love to see her lose.

Spinning the Wardrobe

2008-10-22T21:15:00.003-05:00

This one is good.

I saw the RNC statement on Gov. Palin’s $150,000 clothing bender on the RNC's tab. . . . some other possible spin lines for the RNC.

What you sneering critics in the liberal MSM fail to see here is… a Jobs Program! Saks floorwalkers, cashiers, a team of sweating porters to haul the merchandise from the store to the motorcade… chiropractors to treat those porters. Sarah Palin knows how to create jobs!

What’s the difference between a Pit Bull and a Hockey Mom? You can feed a pit-bull for 483 years with 150 grand.

Still cheaper than Mitt Romney’s hair products. We’re saving money here…

William Ayres is a terrorist!

New ad slogan: “Clothes for Gov. Palin? $150,000. Time machine to go back two months to late August and ask what the Hell were Schmidt and Davis thinking when they cooked up this idea and sold it to McCain? Priceless.”

Did we mention that William Ayres is a terrorist!

Oddly, given that Murphy is a GOP strategist, it doesn't have the feel of gallows humor. I don't sense that he is feeling at all sorry for his old boss.

Rx vs. OTC

2008-10-21T19:41:00.002-05:00

Thomas Edsell ends with this curious comparison:

The net effect will be that Obama's average on RCP will, in just a day, shoot up from a 5.7 point lead to an 8.1 point lead. Obama supporters will be able to put away, at least for now, their Rolaids, while McCainiacs will have to double their dosage of Wellbutrin, Paxil and Zoloft.

Grover Norquist Is an Idiot

2008-10-21T19:26:00.002-05:00

I'm just saying:

McCain's choice of Palin brought his polling numbers above Obama's--until McCain endorsed the Bush bailout. Palin draws large crowds and has energized Reagan Republicans, gun owners, women and people of faith. Obama knows this and has his surrogates trashing Palin with a "sack the quarterback" strategy most recently joined in by Colin Powell. She is an asset and the most consequential VP candidate in a generation.

Polling Issues

2008-10-21T19:21:00.002-05:00

Marc Ambinder asks:

If white men are moving significantly to Sen. McCain, as seen in a lot of the IVR polls and a few phone polls (PPP in FL, Rasmussen Nat'l Tracking, Morning Call Tracking in PA, FoxNews/Rasmussen Tracking in FL), why have most of the national tracking polls failed to pick up the movement?

Maybe because white men are not in fact moving significantly to McCain? Vice versa, movement in the other demographic categories is more than counteracting any movement by white men.

Sullivan on Lowry on Powell

2008-10-21T14:05:00.002-05:00

Sullivan sees it:

Let me see if I've got this right: Powell is wrong because McCain was "desperately trying to find something that worked as his poll numbers tanked." That's Lowry's idea of leadership? Suddenly you realize why Bush went so awry. They all think like Lowry. All they care about is politics, not policy.

One is tempted to say: "duh"—except that would be to disregard the policy that drives the politics: cut taxes and hire your own.

Crazy Polls

2008-10-21T10:34:00.003-05:00

Crazy result in both Zogby (O 50, M 42) and GWU/Battleground (O 48, M 47) this morning. Fortunately, they are moving in opposite directions, which makes it relatively easy to discount both as outliers. Actually, the composite tracking has been fairly stable over the past 10 days, with Obama hovering about a point off his high and McCain slightly more than a point above his low.

I would say Obama has about a 6% lead, on the order of 52% O, 46% M, 2% other. If we correct for the Diebold Effect, the final poll results would look something like 50.5% O, 47.5 % M, 2% Other.

Early Voting

2008-10-21T10:30:00.002-05:00

So I voted today. The polling station was busy, though they had enough machines on hand that I didn't have to wait in line.

Campaign Music

2008-10-20T09:22:00.002-05:00

Michael Cohen uses McCain's selection of campaign music as his opening gambit to his discussion of McCain's latest stump speech:

You can tell a lot about a presidential campaign and its supporters by the songs played at their campaign rallies. From Bill Clinton’s “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow” by Fleetwood Mac to George Bush’s “Only in America” by Brooks and Dunn, the most effective campaign songs offer listeners a clear sense of a campaign’s key messages.

For John McCain, the selections at his first rally after the final presidential debate spoke volumes about both the state of the campaign and the predisposition of the candidate: Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believing” and, as Mr. McCain entered the gymnasium in Downingtown, Pa., the theme from “Rocky.” Mr. McCain may be down in the polls, but if his soundtrack yesterday was any indication, he is not going down without a fight.

Sticking Out Your Neck

2008-10-19T21:15:00.003-05:00

Andrew Sullivan summarizing his discussion with Chris Matthews:

As I said on Chris Matthews this morning, this race has tightened a bit already and will probably tighten again. But it is also possible that the race could widen, and defy the final polls - in Obama's direction.

Well, yes, I think we can surely agree that the race will tighten or widen—or perhaps stay just right where it is. Very gutsy call there, Andrew, very gutsy.

Voting Problems in West Virginia

2008-10-19T17:29:00.003-05:00

The Sunday Charleston Gazette-Mail reports that a number of voters are experiencing trouble with the electronic voting machines.

I fear the so-called Bradley Effect will be used to cover up fraud on electronic voting.

Smith Dinner

2008-10-17T08:51:00.003-05:00

McCain should be using this as the basis of his stump speech. Seriously, he is so much more appealing. Even a kind word for Obama at the end.

Laugh of the Day

2008-10-17T08:23:00.000-05:00

Larison:

There is an idea circulating out there that the killer combo of Joe the Plumber and “spread the wealth” may save the election for McCain. Now you might say that this just whistling past the graveyard, but that doesn’t do it credit. This is really more like four-part harmony singing in a freshly-dug grave as the dirt is being piled on.

Flag Pin

2008-10-16T18:20:00.003-05:00

So where is Santorum's flag pin if he thinks it's such a big deal?

McCain doesn't wear one either.

Joe, the Plumber Guy

2008-10-16T17:37:00.002-05:00

ttujoe offers the following fact check on the father of Joe the Plumber:

Robert M. Wurzelbacher, son-in-law of Keating, was 37 years old in 1991 when federal charges were filed against Keating. It appears that he has addresses in Phoenix and Coronado, CA.

The Robert M. Wurzelbacher of Milford, OH, a heavy donor to GOP candidates, is 83 years old and retired. They're not the same person.

Digging to see if this guy is a plant or a hypocrite is a good idea. But I think it's equally important to know the link before idle speculation.

I'm actually rather relieved. This was starting to sound like another bad sitcom episode.

Obama's Decision

2008-10-16T09:52:00.003-05:00

Obama has a decision to make: does he bank the win or go for a mandate? Of course, going for a mandate would mean that he actually has a clear idea of what he wants to do when he's elected, which I'm not sure he does.

I'm guessing he just banks the win.

Where Did This Come From?

2008-10-16T09:35:00.002-05:00

This is one weird prediction map for the election.

Staying Afloat

2008-10-16T09:06:00.002-05:00

Robert Reich makes this excellent point:

But this story leaves out one very important fact. Since the year 2000, median family income has been dropping, adjusted for inflation. One of the main reasons the typical family has taken on more debt has been to maintain its living standards in the face of these declining real incomes.

It's not as if the typical family suddenly went on a spending binge --- buying yachts and fancy cars and taking ocean cruises. No, the typical family just tried to keep going as it had before. But with real incomes dropping, and the costs of necessities like gas, heating oil, food, health insurance, and even college tuitions all soaring, the only way to keep going as before was to borrow more. You might see this as a moral failure, but I think it's more accurate to view it as an ongoing struggle to stay afloat when the boat's sinking.

Obama Ad

2008-10-16T08:55:00.002-05:00

The use of reaction shots in this one is particularly well done. It manages to transfer McCain's disdain for Obama to the middle class, so that attacks on Obama become attacks on the middle class.

Reality Check

2008-10-16T08:30:00.002-05:00

Glenn Greenwald is correct to warn of the coming Democratic tsuanami:

Nonetheless, it's worth underscoring -- in fact, it's vital to keep in mind -- that the option of politically empowering Democrats is the opposite of a panacea. The Democratic Party structure in Washington, and particularly its leadership in Congress, is more corrupted and destructive than anything else there is -- with the exception of the right-wing faction that has been running the country for the last eight years. Contrary to the inane conventional Beltway wisdom that bipartisanship is oh-so-tragically scarce, Democrats as an entity have, over and over, passively acquiesced to, and frequently actively enabled and participated in, many of the worst abuses of the last eight years. Their leadership in Congress is corrupt and craven to the bone in many of the same ways the GOP leadership has been -- and they're about to be far more entrenched and their power far less checked.

Obama, who is basically a consensus centrist, will be vulnerable in such a situation, especially since he hasn't really articulated any broad principles of policy to which the rest of the Democratic leadership will need to conform.

Debate Verdict

2008-10-15T21:23:00.005-05:00

For whatever reason, I didn't think either of Obama or McCain were particularly sharp tonight. Not that it matters. Obama didn't make a major mistake, so it's not a game changer. McCain didn't explode, so the race is not over. The pundits will probably give this one to McCain, simply to keep things interesting, though I think the instapolls will once again go to Obama.

Update Best snarky debate summary

Are We Having Fun Yet?

2008-10-15T18:03:00.002-05:00

Wrong Track

2008-10-14T17:30:00.003-05:00

In the face of economic upheaval in the United States, a record 89 percent of Americans now say the country has pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track while just 7 percent of Americans say the country is going in the right direction, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll.

Gotta wonder about those 7%.

You're Out!

2008-10-14T13:53:00.004-05:00

Does this mean Buckley gets to avoid the circular firing squad? Or is he a casualty?

I must say that I'm rather enjoying watching the Right act like the Left for a change.

Down, Down, Down, Down, Down

2008-10-14T13:47:00.002-05:00

Will the excitement never end?

In a Subjunctive Mood

2008-10-14T10:21:00.002-05:00

From the NY Times style book:

If the bill were passed, taxes could go down (not was passed, because it is still just a hope).

I think this is incorrect reasoning. True, the bill has not yet passed; but it might. In that sense, it is not contrary to fact in the strong sense of "If I were you..."—always an impossibility. Thus, the subjunctive here should (I think) be reserved only for a bill whose passage seems reasonably unlikely. Note: this is a confusing example because the relationship between the bill and taxes is also conditional.

It's Latin To Me

2008-10-12T10:11:00.005-05:00

When's the last time that we had an op-ed column in a major newspaper printed in Latin?

Bellum Gallium

Manes Julii Caesaris paucis diebus aderant — “O, most bloody sight!” — cum Ioannes McCainus, mavericus et veteranus captivusque Belli Francoindosinini, et Sara Palina, barracuda borealis, qui sneerare amant Baracum Obamam causa oratorii, pillorant ut demagogi veri, Africanum-Americanum senatorem Terrae Lincolni, ad Republicanas rallias.

Rabidi subcanes candidati, pretendant “no orator as Brutis is,” ut “stir men’s blood” et disturbant mentes populi ad “a sudden flood of mutiny,” ut Wilhelmus Shakespearus scripsit.

Cum Quirites Americani ad rallias Republicanas audiunt nomen Baraci Husseini Obamae, clamant “Mortem!” “Amator terroris!” “Socialiste!” “Bomba Obamam!” “Obama est Arabus!” “Caput excidi!” tempus sit rabble-rouseribus desistere “Smear Talk Express,” ut Stephanus Colbertus dixit. Obama demonatus est tamquam Musulmanus-Manchurianus candidatus — civis “collo-cerviciliaris” ad ralliam Floridianam Palinae exhabet mascum Obamae ut Luciferis.

Obama non queretur high-tech lynching. Sed secreto-serventes agentes nervosissmi sunt.

Vix quisque audivit nomen “Palinae” ante lunibus paucis. Surgivit ex suo tanning bed ad silvas in Terram Eskimorum, rogans quis sit traitorosus, ominosus, scurrilosus, periculosus amator LXs terroris criminalisque Chicagoani? Tu betchus!

“Caeca ambitio Obamana,” novum rumorem Palina McCainusque dixit. “Cum utilis, Obama laborat cum amatore terroris Wilhelmo Ayro. Cum putatus, perjuravit.” McCainianus bossus maximus Francus Keatinx vocat Obamam, “plebeium,” et ut iuvenum snifferendum cocaini minimi (“a little blow.”)

Cum Primus Dudus, spousus Palinanus, culpari attemptaret “Centurionem-Gate,” judices Terrae Santae Elvorumque castigat gubernatricem Palinam de abusu auctoritatis per familiam revengendum.

Tamen Sara et Ioannes bury Obama, not praise him. Maverici, ut capiunt auxilium de friga-domina, hench-femina, Cynthia McCaina Birrabaronessa, (quae culpat Obamam periculandi suum filum in Babylonia), brazen-iter distractant mentes populares de minimissimis IV 0 I K.ibus, deminutione “Motorum Omnium,” et Depressione Magna II.0. Omnes de Georgio Busio Secundo colossale goofballo. “V” (because there’s no W. in Latin) etiam duxit per disastrum ad gymnasium.

Gubernatrix (prope Russia) Palina, spectans candidaciam MMXII, post multam educationem cum Kissingro et post multam parodiam de Sabbatis Nocte Vivo atque de Tina Feia, ferociter vituperat Obamam, ut supralupocidit (aerial shooting of wolves) in Hyperborea.

Vilmingtoni, in Ohionem, McCain’s Mean Girl (Ferox Puella) defendit se gladiatricem politicam esse: “Pauci dicant, O Jupiter, te negativam esse. Non, negativa non sum, sed verissima.” Talk about lipsticka in porcam! Quasi Leeus Atwater de oppugnatione Busii Primi ad Dukakem: “non negativus, sed comparativus.”

And the beginning of a translation (by David M. Johnson):

THE BATTLE OF GALL

Shades of Julius Caesar--“O most bloody sight!” John McCain, maverick, veteran, and Indochine prisoner of war, together with Sara Palin, the boreal barricuda, love to sneer at Barack Obama for his oratory. But at Republican rallies they attacked the African-American senator from the Land of Lincoln like true demagogues.

The candidates, raving attack-dogs (with apologies to our canine readers) pretend that they are “no orator as Brutus is”, as they “stir men’s blood” and rouse the minds of the people to “a sudden flood of mutiny,” as Shakespeare wrote.

When American citizens at Republican rallies hear the name of Barack Hussein Obama, and shout out “Death!” “Terrorist-lover!” “Communist!” [surely no one in the mob would be so moderate as to yell “Socialist”, especially in French--ed.] “Bomba Obama!” “Obama is an Arab!” and “Off with his head!”, it’s time for the rabble-rousers to stop the “Smear Talk Express”, as Stephen Colbert has called it. Obama is demonized as an Islamo-Manchurian candidate--at a Florida Palin rally a citizen in a cervical collar (really? But what the hell else would collo-cerviciliaris mean?--ed.] held up a mask of Obama as the devil.

Obama does not complain about this high-tech lynching. But the secret service agents are rather nervous.

Hardly anyone had heard the name “Palin” a few months ago. She arose from her tanning bed deep in the forests of Eskimo Land, and asked who this traitorous, ominous, scurrilous, dangerous lover of the 60’s, terror, and the Chicago mob was. You betcha!

“The blind ambition of Obama,” runs the new story by Palin and McCain. “When it’s useful, Obama works with the terrorist William Ayers. When he’s asked about it, he lies.” McCain party boss Frank Keating calls Obama a guy from the hood and notes that as a young man he sniffed a little blow.

When the First Dude, Palin’s spouse, tried to attack Trooper-Gate, the judges of the Land of Santa and the Elves castigated Governor Palin for her abuse of power in pursuit of revenge for her family.

But Sara and John come to bury Obama, not to praise him. The mavericks, with the help of their ice-maiden henchwoman, Cynthia McCain, Baroness de Beer (who blames Obama for endangering her son in Iraq), brazenly distract the minds of....

Another translation here.

Hockey Mom Gets Booed

2008-10-11T19:59:00.002-05:00

Sarah Palin makes the ceremonial puck drop at a Flyers game and the fans let her have it. (Note the Obama-Biden signs in the crowd behind her.) The whole thing is rather surreal.

Larison on McCain's Ethics

2008-10-08T09:19:00.003-05:00

Daniel Larison disembowels McCain:

According to this odd view, if someone is not very proficient at lying and smearing his opponents and gives the impression that even he knows what he’s saying is nonsense, that somehow proves that he is honest and decent at heart. The correct view is exactly the opposite–if McCain knows the truth, doesn’t really believe what he’s saying and tells lies unconvincingly, that is evidence of the far deeper corruption of the man. Instead of being badly misguided or misinformed, he willfully says things that he knows have no merit or that he knows are unworthy of anyone in his position. In short, being a bad smear artist does not make someone ethical or honorable; it makes him unethical and incompetent.

I'm going to hate it when Larison returns to the principled conservative opposition and starts directing his very impressive, very incisive analytical skills against the Obama administration and Democratic congress.

On the other hand, I much prefer smart opponents to stupid opponents, even if they make it more difficult to get things done, because smart opponents force you to be smarter, whereas stupid opponents almost force you to act stupidly. And if it is to succeed, the next administration is going to have to act very smart indeed.

The final 10%

2008-10-08T08:51:00.001-05:00

You have to wonder about those who are satisfied.

Brokaw—Debate's Big Loser

2008-10-07T21:05:00.002-05:00

Did Brokaw suck tonight or what?

Having Faith in We, the People

2008-10-07T13:40:00.003-05:00

Andrew Sullivan writes:

I have faith in the American people. They'll see through this to what we need, and make the best choice available. They made the right choice in the 1930s, unlike many other nations. They will make the right choice again. If I didn't have that faith, I wouldn't have the hope I feel.

I wish I had that faith. Personally, I have rarely experienced anything but disappointment in We, the People, who always seem to fall to the power of distraction. So far, this election campaign has been different, whether that is because of Obama's skill, McCain's incompetence, or a combination of both is yet to be decided. In any case, distraction does seem to have lost some of its usual power.

Of course, there is nothing like a major financial meltdown to fix one's attention.

Minnesota Senate Race

2008-10-04T12:31:00.002-05:00

Ok, trying to make sense of this poll, which came out today versus this one, which came out yesterday. They are almost mirror opposites, with Franken up by 9 in one, Coleman up by 10 in the other; about all they agree on is that the third party candidate, Barkley, is picking up substantial support (18 vs. 19 percent). This really makes you wonder how their methodologies could be so different as to be well outside the margin of error on either end. Clearly, someone had a poor sample or poor correction algorithm!

Now, Just Disappear

2008-10-03T08:35:00.002-05:00

Let's hope that Palin did just well enough in the debate last night that we won't have to hear anything more about her for the rest of the campaign. That would be a victory for everyone. Because, really, she's just one huge distraction from the important issues. The more Palin is the focus of attention, the less these issues get covered.

The Debate

2008-10-02T21:33:00.001-05:00

She wins, because she didn't come off as completely uncredible. But Biden had a very good second half of a debate, and Palin really started falling apart at the end. But the bar was set SOOOOOOOOO low....

The Right Learns from the Left

2008-10-02T16:39:00.002-05:00

How to eat your own... I wouldn't be overly upset except that cogent criticism from the Right is just as important to a well-functioning government as cogent criticism from the Left.

Mail That One In

2008-10-02T14:28:00.002-05:00

Anyone want to take a stab at writing Bill Kristol's post-debate assessment of the debate, the one where Palin's adequate performance tonight will be spun into brilliance and ratifies McCain's sound judgment?

Really, I don't know why anyone takes that man seriously.

Suspend Again

2008-09-30T11:06:00.004-05:00

McCain is floating yet another suspension of his campaign. I suppose that is one way to cancel Palin's debate—though at this point the bar has been set so low I don't see how she can't succeed.

The Market and the Bailout

2008-09-30T10:53:00.002-05:00

Seems to me that the uptick on the stock market today has pretty much doomed any chance of passing the bailout. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? It's hard to say—though I still think the risk of doing nothing vastly outweighs doing something and the window for doing something before the election is rapidly closing.

Earmarks

2008-09-28T17:10:00.002-05:00

I'm glad someone put the data into pie chart form. Cutting earmarks will get you roughly nowhere in terms of cutting the deficit. The basic problem is that we can't hope to cut substantively into the deficit from the spending side without cutting into what most consider core programs.

Maybe someday we can have a responsible debate about our priorities with respect to spending and taxes. But not yet.

And I don't blame the politicians on this. No I blame us, We the People, who for more than two decades have been convinced that we can get something for nothing. Yes, politicians have been telling us that we can get by simply through cutting "waste." But we are the ones who have believed them and voted for them. If we didn't vote for politicians who say such silly stuff, the politicians would quit saying. So, no, it's our fault: we've preferred make-believe to acting like responsible adults.

One of the disappointments of this campaign has been that neither McCain nor Obama believes that We, the People are responsible enough to weigh hard choices. That's why both of them were so painful in handling the economic portion of the debate on Friday. Neither wanted to say what both knew to be true—this bailout is going to limit radically what they can do as President and it's almost certainly going to mean a higher deficit, painful spending cuts and higher taxes. The trifecta. Woohoo.

Strategy and Tactics

2008-09-28T15:55:00.002-05:00

The comment by McCain that Obama doesn't understand the difference between strategy and tactics struck me at the time as odd. It was, I think, a revealing comment, particularly given that McCain is a military man. Because one thing that has been abundantly clear about McCain's campaign for the past week is that it has been almost exclusively tactical. This seems to be partly constitutional—McCain's belief in himself as a maverick and his need to display that leads toward an emphasis on tactics. But it is partly situational as well—the fundamentals of the campaign do not really favor him, so he has constantly been fighting from a defensive position and he's been trying to find the tactics that will break himself out.

If we compare the two campaigns, we would have to grant that McCain has had a tactical advantage in terms of initiative if nothing else. The Obama campaign has not proved particularly deft reacting tactically. I would say they have been very pedestrian, in fact. Fortunately, this has not (yet) proved a liability, and in some respects it may well have saved them from overreacting to some of McCain's stranger tactical moves.

Obama's tactics, though pedestrian, are reinforced—indeed leveraged—by an excellent strategic command. In fact, the Obama campaign's control of the strategic level has generally allowed them easily absorb any tactical loss to McCain.

It is also worth mentioning logistics; if campaign workers, local headquarters, voter registrations, etc. are any guide, this is another level at which Obama seems to enjoy something of an advantage.

With the strategic and logistic advantage, the Obama campaign seems to be content to slowly grind away. It's not particularly pretty; it's certainly not dashing; but at the moment at least it does seem to be working.

Today's Ads

2008-09-27T14:43:00.004-05:00

ok, I don't get this one.

To me this almost seems to do Obama a favor, the "no" at the end coming almost as a non-sequitur—Obama is not ready to lead because he agrees with John McCain?

Obama's new ad today is innocuous, B-level work:

Update

Here's another new ad by McCain. This one attempts to use Biden against Obama. Generally, I think it works though it's not clear to me how well people will be able to fill in the gaps of Biden's comments.

Why McCain Won the Debate

2008-09-27T08:53:00.002-05:00

Or did he?

In any case, the MSM and blog consensus seems to be that McCain won narrowly but that Obama held his own, giving each a measure of victory. Of course, this is exactly what anyone who thought about it would have written as the most likely scenario before the debate—that is, presuming that neither candidate made a significant error. The point is that as soon as you step away from the spin zone of those who are going to declare their candidate the winner no matter what happened in the actual debate, the tendency is to not make any assessment that runs counter to the consensus that McCain is the master of foreign policy. What we are seeing in the reax is a lot of such riskless assessment that might as well have been written up before the debate.

This tells me that the MSM and the blogs don't really have a clue as to how to score a close debate.

Palin Speaks!

2008-09-25T15:25:00.001-05:00

Palin actually responded to reporters questions today. Finally. Maybe now we can get around to duly ignoring her just like Biden.

Obama's New Ad

2008-09-25T14:56:00.004-05:00

The simplicity of this one is a nice change. The mise-en-scène is a bit odd, though—the open doors in the background, the out of focus books on the left edge, the slow dolly into the room that occurs over the span of the commericial. I guess I wasn't certain what "feel" they were going for.

Youth Soccer

2008-09-25T14:22:00.002-05:00

JON STEWART: . . . The press is 6-year-olds playing soccer; nobody has a position, it's just ''Where's the ball? Where's the ball? Sarah Palin has the ball!'' [Mimes a mob running after her.] Because they can only cover one thing.

That made me giggle. The full story.

When Columnists Are Idiots, What Should Readers Do?

2008-09-25T12:11:00.001-05:00

I'm just asking.

Are the Numbers Real?

2008-09-24T21:23:00.003-05:00

Does McCain know something we don't? Otherwise, why is he acting like someone who is 15 points behind in the polls?

These are increasingly desperate measures he's trying, and not at all the sort of thing you'd expect of someone who is down only a couple of points at this point in the race. So either the polling numbers he is seeing are a lot worse than the ones we are seeing or Obama has gotten seriously inside of McCain's head.

Drama Queen

2008-09-24T16:28:00.001-05:00

I just can't imagine what kind of president this man will make. Talk about high maintenance. I'm just saying.

Solution to the Meltdown

2008-09-23T16:36:00.002-05:00

A tax cut of course. The only question is what took the GOP so long to get here. I mean there was a time when a tax cut was the solution to every problem. Clearly, the GOP is off its game.

Choose Your Poison

2008-09-23T14:57:00.004-05:00

I found this amusing. Even more amusing: there seems to be little difference to the site depending on what you check. So there you go: you have the appearance of self-identification, but it's really meaningless.

It's just so maverick.

When a Lapel Pin Is Just Not Enough

2008-09-23T14:31:00.003-05:00

Or maybe McCain is just compensating for not wearing a flag on his lapel. Really, why doesn't the press cover the issues that matter!

Understanding the Deal

2008-09-23T12:33:00.002-05:00

What I don't get is why Paulson and Bernanke think having the government overpaying for the bad debt is a good idea. (Krugman's latest bit here.) That is, why are they resisting the idea of an equity stake?

Of course, an equity stake would mean that we have in essence nationalized the financial sector, and nationalization seems a boogey man to the right (but also to the libertarians). At some level, I understand the alarm. But really is nationalizing the financial sector to the tune of a trillion bucks give or take so much worse than sticking the public sector with the bad debt? (Which will prove once again that the government only knows how to lose money, right?)

In any case, I'm not seeing the downside of the equity stake spelled out, and if Paulson and Bernanke want this blank check they need to do some serious explaining.

Obama Ad

2008-09-23T12:23:00.004-05:00

Not sure what the point of this ad is. If I were the McCain campaign, I certainly wouldn't mind having my candidate associated with upbeat music and a sunny locale. IMHO, the only effective thing about the ad was the pair of sunglasses, and that because they underscore a deceitful character. Unfortunately, the ad seems even incoherent on that count.

This is definitely C team work.

Headlines

2008-09-23T09:53:00.004-05:00

Ok, if you are going to go with this headline, you need a more appropriate picture. Something that shows McCain, like, losing his head.

Joe's Got a Message Problem

2008-09-23T09:40:00.001-05:00

Really, Biden ought to know better. Sometimes, I swear he seems to channel his inner McCain.

Stupid Politics

2008-09-23T09:23:00.003-05:00

Not sure what the point of this article is. The logic of the argument seems to be that, because racism exists, democrats would be in better position had they NOT selected an African American as their presidential candidate. Assigning blame makes for really stupid politics; it's an even stupider basis for a political column, especially in the midst of a campaign.

How to Vote

2008-09-22T19:33:00.003-05:00

Andrew Sullivan writes:

I can still see Obama's flaws and where I disagree with him. But my political judgment, honestly held, proudly expressed, is that destroying this Republican party is essential if this country and the world are going to recover from our current morass.

I hope that Andrew also believes that Obama would do a better job governing than McCain. Otherwise he has no business voting for Obama. That, I take, is Larison's point.

Catching Up

2008-09-22T19:03:00.003-05:00

Last week while I was doing the Grand Experiment, I missed reading the blogs, so I caught up over the weekend. It's odd how little you miss, when you check out the way I did. In any case, I agree with Mickey Kaus that whining is bad form. But I disagree completely that dwelling on McCain's lies is a losing strategy. Attacking the lies has been exactly the right approach; it's only misfired when discussion of the lies has taken the form of whining. In other words, it's the whining that is the problem, not the topic of lying.

Burying the Lede

2008-09-19T08:09:00.006-05:00

What does it say that a site that covers the Daily Show and this extraordinarily humble blog are the top hits on Google searches for "circular talk express"? By all rights, this search should be directed to the Daily Show site. But, no, the Show's site buried the lede. I know it was the punchline, but even so...

I don't know, somehow this all seems so representative of the state of the campaign coverage—the most incisive coverage is done through the "fake" news channels and late night monologues, but even those sources seem incapable of making the most of their own best insights.

Grand Experiment, Day 5

2008-09-19T08:09:00.002-05:00

More varied headlines in this morning's paper. The Wall Street meltdown continues to lead and there is a picture of the aftermath of Ike (but no story). The campaign is treated only with three very small stories inside. The longest of the three deals with McCain's call to fire the head of the SEC. It did not give a good impression of McCain since he seemed to be singling out Cox (the SEC chair) as a scapegoat. At least that's how it came across to me. Lord knows how We, the People respond to it. The two other articles were very short: two paragraphs on Todd Palin refusing to testify and suggesting that Troopergate will be inconclusive until after the election (duh) and another two paragraphs on Biden saying it is the patriotic duty of the rich to pay more taxes. Overall, I couldn't help but come away uneasy about the coverage today.

The op-ed page was full of campaign politics today. One essay argued that Obama's Spanish language campaign is very deceitful, another that the Obama campaign has been sexist in its treatment of Palin (including recycling the whole "Obama called Palin a pig" thing). No doubt this was "balance" for having run a somewhat positive assessment of Obama yesterday. (So you counter positive Obama with negative Obama rather than positive McCain? Whatever.) And a third column decried the number of false rumors circulating on the internet about both candidates. Overall, my general impression was that everyone is lying, and you can't really trust what anyone says about anything. If this is indeed the impression We, the People are getting, then we're going to see an awful lot more lying, because the costs of doing so are negligible.

Rally Image

2008-09-18T13:22:00.002-05:00

Another odd image of McCain on the stump. Here, it looks to me like he is attending a faith healing. Seems like it is illustrating a positive campaign story—though to me, it seems that both McCain and Palin are just reading scripts these days. Which is why both can say things, without blinking as Palin would put it, that flatly contradict both reality and themselves.

Circular Talk Express

2008-09-18T11:56:00.007-05:00

From Tuesday night: the "Circular Talk Express." This has the potential to draw blood.

And a close-up:

Update

Here is the clip itself: the Circular Talk Express is at the very end of the clip (c. 4:58):

Grand Experiment, Day 4

2008-09-18T11:20:00.002-05:00

The front page of the local paper was dominated by the Wall Street mess. There was also a small story on Ike and the attack on the US Embassy in Yemen. Inside there were two campaign articles, one on economics, the other immigration. According to the second article, the Spanish-language campaign is pretty nasty, with both campaigns freely stretching the truth. The other article spent a large amount of space discussing Obama's proposals and McCain came across as missing in action. Editorial page didn't mention the election, though three of the op-ed columns did. None of them made much of an impression, though the headlines seemed to favor Obama. Overall, my impression is that someone glancing over the paper would have come away with a slightly better impression of Obama than McCain.

See, they both lie

2008-09-17T17:48:00.004-05:00

At least that what's implied by the headline of Katharine Q. Seelye's column. I have no idea if that's what her article argues, since the whole point of the experiment is to feign distraction, but these sorts of titles and teasers suggest why the idea that the McCain campaign is lying is not gaining traction.

(It's not gaining traction, right?).

Grand Experiment, Day 3

2008-09-17T08:04:00.002-05:00

Again, no campaign news on page 1 of the local paper. Ike and the financial meltdown are covered instead. Inside, there is a short article on how the economy has become the dominant the concern of the campaigns. No mention of Obama "scoffing" here. The editorial page mentioned that Petraeus was leaving the Iraq command; it said the surge had worked for the most part, but didn't really mention the presidential campaign. I was a bit surprised about that. On the Op-ed side, there were reprints of two editorials on Palin's performance in the ABC interview, one (sort of) positive (Chicago Trib), the other negative (NY Times). In the context, the Times editorial came off as a bit shrill.

Unfortunately, McCain wins this round.

Headline Battle

2008-09-16T19:17:00.001-05:00

McCain “toughens talk,” whereas Obama “scoffs at McCain’s proposals” according to the online NY Times headline writers. I ask you: Who won that battle of words, the one who is tough or the one who scoffs?

Colbert's Mad Libs

2008-09-16T10:22:00.003-05:00

Unlike Stewart, Colbert was hitting on all cylinders last night. "The Word" was particularly good:

From McCain campaign press-guidelines: "How dare you question John McCain on [noun that is bothering you], when he was a POW he didn't have [same noun]."

Grand Experiment, Day 2

2008-09-16T09:41:00.003-05:00

So, no politics on page 1 of the local paper today. It's all about Ike and Lehman Bros. There was a short article about how the economy is becoming the key issue of the election. (Who knew? I thought it was lipstick.) The editorial page mentioned the campaign only obliquely with respect to the Wall Street meltdown, and there was a confused op-ed on taxes that said the tax plans of Obama and McCain are both irresponsible, though Obama's is somewhat less so, and that McCain's ads have distorted Obama's position on taxes. But, as I said, the column came across as confusing, and the impression that it left me with is that we're in a heap of trouble no matter which of these two losers is elected, but we'll probably be just a little bit less bad off with Obama's plan. Now, don't get on me for not reading carefully—the whole point of this little experiment is to read casually and see what impression I'm left with.

Man, John Stewart was lame last night. Judging from the premise of the opening monologue, I think Stewart knew he was lame. He was reduced to faux-drooling over Palin.

In any case, this does not bode well, as it suggests he doesn't know really what to do about McCain's lying any more than does the MSM.

Number Game

2008-09-16T09:27:00.002-05:00

This is a fun test. I first ran 100 trials and managed 85%, and then did another 25 trials and did 92%. I found I had the most success when I let my mind go completely and just went with feeling. But I also had to stay focused: when my attention wandered, I made some amazingly egregious errors. I also clearly learned how to perform better as I went along, so if the talent is indeed innate, accessing it and putting it to instrumental use is susceptible to some degree of training. I mention this only because I can see results from tests like this feeding into debates of gut vs. intellect.

Grand Experiment

2008-09-15T19:29:00.003-05:00

I'm checking out from the election coverage for a week—no NY Times, no WaPo, no NPR ... especially no blogs. My goal is to figure out what sort of information/message a reasonably distracted person might be getting about the election. I'll issue reports as they come.

Let's start with this mornings paper. A lot about the hurricane; the Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers situation is also on the front page along with a small campaign article. Inside, there is a big article about Obama's $66 million haul. None of the opinion pieces addressed the campaign directly, but there was an editorial about candidate fashion choices.

Lying All the Time

2008-09-14T20:57:00.002-05:00

McCain's lies should at this point be obvious to everyone, even those who are barely paying attention. The coverage of the matter by the MSM has been adequate, if not terrible brave. If people are nevertheless willing to support McCain for the presidency, then this means that they do so knowing full well that he is an inveterate liar. The question to ask is: why they would support such a character for presidency? Or to put it the other way around: what do they fear or at least distrust more than a liar?

While I believe along with Andrew Sullivan that the "actual truth matters in the world," I also think that all bets are off when you are talking about a 50 day campaign. So I hope that the American people do not want to live with four years under the leadership of lies, I can't say that I have his faith.

I still think this coming week will be decisive for determining the political success of McCain's gambit of lies. If next Sunday the polls continue in their current state and we have another week of political attention deficit disorder, then I'll be very pessimistic.

SNL Routine

2008-09-14T11:29:00.002-05:00

This actually came off to me as more about Hillary Clinton's resentment than Sarah Palin's inexperience, and I was surprised that the portrayal of Palin did not insinuate dishonesty, but rather opted for provincial cluelessness (e.g., being able to see Russia from her house). The stereotype SNL seems to be playing with is the Rube, a characterization that heavily favors McCain imho. If the monologue jokes this week continue in this direction that will spell trouble, as it means that provincialism is trumping (and mitigating) the dishonesty as the dominant component in the Palin public character.

Stay the Course

2008-09-12T22:44:00.002-05:00

I'm with Andrew Sullivan on this one.

Obama tries to hit McCain for being out of touch. I really think he doesn't need to go there. The McCain campaign is imploding. Do nothing but stay calm and focused on the issues.

The happy warrier—that seems to me to be the effective image Obama has been striking, and it's beginning to pay dividends. So Obama needs to just take care of himself, play the humor perhaps, but spare the ridicule.

Get on Message, Joe!

2008-09-10T17:20:00.003-05:00

If you are going to say things like this, then undoubtedly you were the wrong pick.

Damn it. Get on message, Joe!

In Fairfax

2008-09-10T15:07:00.004-05:00

A most peculiar picture.

Picture from here.

Idea for an Ad

2008-09-10T14:41:00.002-05:00

(clip of Cindy McCain at convention)

Cindy McCain's Convention Attire:

Oscar de la Renta dress: $3,000
Chanel J12 White Ceramic Watch: $4,500
Three-carat diamond earrings: $280,000
Four-strand pearl necklace: $11,000–$25,000
Shoes, designer unknown: $600

Having American taxpayers fund her wardrobe:
PRICELESS.

(clip of McCain laughing)

Courtesy MissMudd

Actually, there are some other good ideas in the main post and comments to this article.

Was Hillary the Ticket?

2008-09-10T14:11:00.004-05:00

Politico asks whether having Hillary Clinton on the ticket would have "Palin-proofed" the Democratic ticket. As with all counterfactuals, it's a rather silly question. My answer is that it obviously would have changed the dynamics, and it would have made it unlikely that McCain would have selected Palin. But McCain would probably have found another angle to play, probably something to do with the Clintons, and we'd all be blaming Obama for not having chosen somebody like Biden.