"It's important that people be put in a position where their Second Amendment rights are protected, but that they also don't, as a consequence of the laws, unintendedly [sic] put themselves in harm's way."
"The idea that there's this overwhelming additional security in the ownership and carrying concealed and deadly weapons... I think it's the premise, not the constitutional right, but the premise that it makes people safer is one that I'm not so sure of."
(VP Joe Biden on yesterday's edition of CBS News "Face the Nation")
Showing posts with label biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label biden. Show all posts
Monday, April 2, 2012
Monday, March 2, 2009
March on
Popcorn, please: The elected leader of the Republican Party (a black man) and the de facto leader of the Republican Party (a talk-radio personality) are locked in a steel-cage death match. I haven't been this excited about a battle-of-wits since Palin-Biden. Yawn.
Have another: Too-big-to-fail AIG, which sucked up $150 billion in federal bailout money, declared a fourth-quarter loss of $62 billion. Naturally, the government responded to the news by pledging another $30 billion to the insurance giant.
Slip-slidin' away: Today the Dow sloughed off another 300 points, about 4.25%. Last time the index dipped below the 6,800 mark, our younger teenager was barely a toddler.
Just spectacular: Last week I got a long-overdue eye exam and, at my wife's urging, I ordered my new prescription in a pair of oh-so-hip frames. I dunno about this -- I've always said that there's nothing so sad as an old guy trying to look hip.
Sobriety check: For the first time in over a week, I'm not under the influence of NyQuil or DayQuil -- I've had an uncommon amount of trouble ridding myself of this particular common cold. My persistent snuffering didn't keep us from going out to see John Schwab play solo on Saturday night, but it did limit us to one set and two beers.
Change of address? The future of Hineygate, the world's largest tailgate party and a favorite game-day destination for Mrs. KintlaLake and me, is in doubt. At the end of this month, The Ohio State University will assume ownership of the Holiday Inn that's hosted the event since 1983, intending to turn the hotel into a dorm. Our debauchery might have to find a new home.
Have another: Too-big-to-fail AIG, which sucked up $150 billion in federal bailout money, declared a fourth-quarter loss of $62 billion. Naturally, the government responded to the news by pledging another $30 billion to the insurance giant.Slip-slidin' away: Today the Dow sloughed off another 300 points, about 4.25%. Last time the index dipped below the 6,800 mark, our younger teenager was barely a toddler.
Just spectacular: Last week I got a long-overdue eye exam and, at my wife's urging, I ordered my new prescription in a pair of oh-so-hip frames. I dunno about this -- I've always said that there's nothing so sad as an old guy trying to look hip.
Sobriety check: For the first time in over a week, I'm not under the influence of NyQuil or DayQuil -- I've had an uncommon amount of trouble ridding myself of this particular common cold. My persistent snuffering didn't keep us from going out to see John Schwab play solo on Saturday night, but it did limit us to one set and two beers.
Change of address? The future of Hineygate, the world's largest tailgate party and a favorite game-day destination for Mrs. KintlaLake and me, is in doubt. At the end of this month, The Ohio State University will assume ownership of the Holiday Inn that's hosted the event since 1983, intending to turn the hotel into a dorm. Our debauchery might have to find a new home.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Fool me twice...
Eric Holder, nominated by President-elect Barack Obama for Attorney General, is answering questions today from members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Mr. Holder has a lot of explaining to do, notably about his role in Pres. Clinton's eleventh-hour pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich.
Those of us who cherish our individual right to keep and bear arms, guaranteed by the Constitution and affirmed last June by the Supreme Court in its landmark Heller decision, have our own concerns about the nominee.
This morning, committee chair Sen. Patrick Leahy questioned Mr. Holder about his views on the Second Amendment -- specifically, whether he believes that it confers an individual (not a collective) right. Here's the part of his response that was picked up immediately by the media:
I watched the confirmation hearing, and I can tell you what preceded Mr. Holder's perfunctory nod to Heller -- the assertion that he, among many others, had submitted amicus briefs to the high court in staunch opposition to any decision that would affirm an individual right. Today's statement was a clear and unambiguous expression of resistance to "the law of the land," making the prospect of Mr. Holder's confirmation anything but encouraging.
Like his boss-elect, Mr. Holder has a broad interpretation of the Supreme Court's allowance for "reasonable restrictions." His hollow recognition of Heller will unfold to transform the Second Amendment into just another rule that's meant to be broken, a Constitutional right that's there simply for his Department of Justice to trample.
To be clear: With Eric Holder ensconced as our nation's chief law-enforcement officer, carrying the anti-Second Amendment imprimatur of Obama-Biden, our individual right to keep and bear arms will be under attack as never before.
If we're to have a chance at winning the fight, we must embrace both the "eternal vigilance" of Thomas Jefferson and the "Μολὼν λάβε" of Leonidas -- no rest, no quarter, no retreat.
And no excuses.
Those of us who cherish our individual right to keep and bear arms, guaranteed by the Constitution and affirmed last June by the Supreme Court in its landmark Heller decision, have our own concerns about the nominee.
This morning, committee chair Sen. Patrick Leahy questioned Mr. Holder about his views on the Second Amendment -- specifically, whether he believes that it confers an individual (not a collective) right. Here's the part of his response that was picked up immediately by the media:
"The Supreme Court has spoken. That is now the law of the land."Don't be fooled.
I watched the confirmation hearing, and I can tell you what preceded Mr. Holder's perfunctory nod to Heller -- the assertion that he, among many others, had submitted amicus briefs to the high court in staunch opposition to any decision that would affirm an individual right. Today's statement was a clear and unambiguous expression of resistance to "the law of the land," making the prospect of Mr. Holder's confirmation anything but encouraging.
Like his boss-elect, Mr. Holder has a broad interpretation of the Supreme Court's allowance for "reasonable restrictions." His hollow recognition of Heller will unfold to transform the Second Amendment into just another rule that's meant to be broken, a Constitutional right that's there simply for his Department of Justice to trample.
To be clear: With Eric Holder ensconced as our nation's chief law-enforcement officer, carrying the anti-Second Amendment imprimatur of Obama-Biden, our individual right to keep and bear arms will be under attack as never before.
If we're to have a chance at winning the fight, we must embrace both the "eternal vigilance" of Thomas Jefferson and the "Μολὼν λάβε" of Leonidas -- no rest, no quarter, no retreat.
And no excuses.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Prudence or panic?
Ask anyone who owns a gun shop -- business is booming.
Confirming what retailers are saying, the FBI reports logging 108,000 more background checks last month than in October 2007 -- a 15% increase -- and since January those checks are up 8% compared to the first ten months of last year. But the most telling snapshot is the last seven days -- background checks are up 49% over the same period a year ago.
Demand eclipses that seen before Y2K, after 9/11 and in the wake of Katrina. The reason for the run is obvious: Obama-Biden.
It's a fait accompli that the new administration will attack citizens' Second Amendment rights. We know it'll try to make the expired Clinton (nee Biden) Assault Weapons Ban permanent and prohibit the lawful carrying of concealed weapons. We can predict that Obama-Biden will seek to impose 500% higher taxes on firearms, ammunition and parts. It also wants to allow state and local governments to make their own gun-control laws, even if those laws violate the U.S. Constitution.
Whether it's cost-prohibition or outright prohibition, dark days are coming for Americans who cherish our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, thus the commercial feeding frenzy.
Clearly, we're seeing yet another panic-buying phenomenon -- but are we seeing a reasonable reaction? That depends.
Because Obama-Biden poses a very real threat, it's only prudent for citizens to have acquired their firearms-of-choice (etc.) before the administration turns them into unobtanium. So for procrastinators, the unarmed and the under-prepared, there may be little choice but to become part of the present cluster.
For those of us who saw this coming and are adequately prepared, however, it doesn't make much sense to join the panic. Even if we're not ideally ready, with far more pressing economic issues on center stage we can be relatively sure that Obama-Biden won't launch its gun-control agenda right away. Provided the new president can keep an anxious Congress in check, we likely won't see new law in the first 100 days, probably not before the 2010 State of the Union address.
We may have time to wait until demand and retail price-gouging (according to anecdotal reports) have subsided. A window may open after retail prices have ebbed and before wholesale prices increase -- that, it seems to me, would be a better time to buy.
Depending on the item, the source and the price, now still might be a good time for the savvy gun owner to acquire replacement parts and (presumably) soon-to-be-banned items like high-capacity magazines and certain types of ammunition. It's never a bad time to build defensive skills -- having the proper training is a must. And there's never been a better time to support organizations that defend our Second Amendment rights, as I do the National Rifle Association and the Buckeye Firearms Association.
The well-heeled among us will do whatever they like, of course, and those with an "armory mentality" will do whatever they can, with their eyes fixed firmly on TEOTWAWKI.
All of us, though, must recognize that the danger to law-abiding gun owners is clear and present. What we do to prepare ourselves in the face of this imminent threat is up to each citizen.
Confirming what retailers are saying, the FBI reports logging 108,000 more background checks last month than in October 2007 -- a 15% increase -- and since January those checks are up 8% compared to the first ten months of last year. But the most telling snapshot is the last seven days -- background checks are up 49% over the same period a year ago.
Demand eclipses that seen before Y2K, after 9/11 and in the wake of Katrina. The reason for the run is obvious: Obama-Biden.It's a fait accompli that the new administration will attack citizens' Second Amendment rights. We know it'll try to make the expired Clinton (nee Biden) Assault Weapons Ban permanent and prohibit the lawful carrying of concealed weapons. We can predict that Obama-Biden will seek to impose 500% higher taxes on firearms, ammunition and parts. It also wants to allow state and local governments to make their own gun-control laws, even if those laws violate the U.S. Constitution.
Whether it's cost-prohibition or outright prohibition, dark days are coming for Americans who cherish our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, thus the commercial feeding frenzy.
Clearly, we're seeing yet another panic-buying phenomenon -- but are we seeing a reasonable reaction? That depends.
Because Obama-Biden poses a very real threat, it's only prudent for citizens to have acquired their firearms-of-choice (etc.) before the administration turns them into unobtanium. So for procrastinators, the unarmed and the under-prepared, there may be little choice but to become part of the present cluster.
For those of us who saw this coming and are adequately prepared, however, it doesn't make much sense to join the panic. Even if we're not ideally ready, with far more pressing economic issues on center stage we can be relatively sure that Obama-Biden won't launch its gun-control agenda right away. Provided the new president can keep an anxious Congress in check, we likely won't see new law in the first 100 days, probably not before the 2010 State of the Union address.We may have time to wait until demand and retail price-gouging (according to anecdotal reports) have subsided. A window may open after retail prices have ebbed and before wholesale prices increase -- that, it seems to me, would be a better time to buy.
Depending on the item, the source and the price, now still might be a good time for the savvy gun owner to acquire replacement parts and (presumably) soon-to-be-banned items like high-capacity magazines and certain types of ammunition. It's never a bad time to build defensive skills -- having the proper training is a must. And there's never been a better time to support organizations that defend our Second Amendment rights, as I do the National Rifle Association and the Buckeye Firearms Association.
The well-heeled among us will do whatever they like, of course, and those with an "armory mentality" will do whatever they can, with their eyes fixed firmly on TEOTWAWKI.
All of us, though, must recognize that the danger to law-abiding gun owners is clear and present. What we do to prepare ourselves in the face of this imminent threat is up to each citizen.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Here we stand
Today, the sun rose on a different America. Whether that's a good or a bad thing depends on where one stands.
For the incurably simple-minded, this presidential election has ushered-in TEOTWAWKI. They insist that Obama-Biden will be the immediate ruination of our nation, labeling anyone who didn't vote for McCain-Palin stupid, un-American and worse.
My first reaction to that kind of ignorance is that I can't imagine anything so stupid and un-American as insulting the will of The People.
What's lost on these folks is that the fear-and-loathing tactic played a large part in costing McCain-Palin the election -- at the very least, it didn't work. It certainly didn't earn my vote yesterday, and it won't win my support now.
Passionate devotees of President-elect Barack Obama, on the other hand, see yesterday's victory as nothing short of complete salvation, the righting of everything that's wrong with America. They're being just as irrational as their glass-empty counterparts on the right, of course. The reality of presiding over an entire nation will set in soon enough.
No, the truth lies somewhere in between. Both at its best and at its worst, Obama-Biden is a mixed bag.
This morning, the Republican Party must begin to come to grips with the fundamental reason why it lost the presidency and considerable legislative ground: It got caught up in fighting the last political war. Now the party's challenge is to gain a foothold on the new American landscape and fight like hell on that ground, not in some conservative fantasy that no longer exists.
Of greatest concern to me is the threat that the next administration -- along with a like-minded Congress and two or more Supreme Court appointments -- poses to individual citizens' rights under the Second Amendment. The fractious RKBA community doesn't have a second to waste assembling its trademark circular firing squad. Obama-Biden won, in a walk, and it is what it is. We fight where we stand.
And fight we will. Μολὼν λαβέ.
In closing, two thoughts. Speaking as a gray-haired white guy who, as a child, saw firsthand racist evil in the segregated South of the 1960s, I share the pride and joy of every American who celebrates the historic nature of what Barack Obama has accomplished.
And finally, to every American voter who made independent, informed choices -- irrespective of what those choices were -- you have my respect. Sheep, be they red or blue, do not.
We, The People, go forward from here.
For the incurably simple-minded, this presidential election has ushered-in TEOTWAWKI. They insist that Obama-Biden will be the immediate ruination of our nation, labeling anyone who didn't vote for McCain-Palin stupid, un-American and worse.
My first reaction to that kind of ignorance is that I can't imagine anything so stupid and un-American as insulting the will of The People.What's lost on these folks is that the fear-and-loathing tactic played a large part in costing McCain-Palin the election -- at the very least, it didn't work. It certainly didn't earn my vote yesterday, and it won't win my support now.
Passionate devotees of President-elect Barack Obama, on the other hand, see yesterday's victory as nothing short of complete salvation, the righting of everything that's wrong with America. They're being just as irrational as their glass-empty counterparts on the right, of course. The reality of presiding over an entire nation will set in soon enough.
No, the truth lies somewhere in between. Both at its best and at its worst, Obama-Biden is a mixed bag.
This morning, the Republican Party must begin to come to grips with the fundamental reason why it lost the presidency and considerable legislative ground: It got caught up in fighting the last political war. Now the party's challenge is to gain a foothold on the new American landscape and fight like hell on that ground, not in some conservative fantasy that no longer exists.
Of greatest concern to me is the threat that the next administration -- along with a like-minded Congress and two or more Supreme Court appointments -- poses to individual citizens' rights under the Second Amendment. The fractious RKBA community doesn't have a second to waste assembling its trademark circular firing squad. Obama-Biden won, in a walk, and it is what it is. We fight where we stand.
And fight we will. Μολὼν λαβέ.
In closing, two thoughts. Speaking as a gray-haired white guy who, as a child, saw firsthand racist evil in the segregated South of the 1960s, I share the pride and joy of every American who celebrates the historic nature of what Barack Obama has accomplished.
And finally, to every American voter who made independent, informed choices -- irrespective of what those choices were -- you have my respect. Sheep, be they red or blue, do not.
We, The People, go forward from here.
Awake to history
The People have spoken. For better or worse, the echo of our collective democratic voice will ring for generations.
It's a night thick with history, and countless others will write about it with more eloquence and insight than I ever could. I can speak only in my voice, from my perspective.
While I didn't support Sen. Barack Obama, I have the highest respect for his victory. My concerns about the policies he advocates are very real now, but I won't hesitate to assert that Americans elected the better leader.
Sen. John McCain ran a gallant campaign but ultimately a bumbling one. Now the Republican Party has four years to embrace change -- not the cliché campaign slogan, but the new American landscape it can no longer deny exists.
The candidates' concession and acceptance speeches provided a final contrast. In defeat, Sen. McCain spoke to a less-than-capacity crowd of 1,500 gathered on the lawn outside an Arizona hotel. Despite the nominee's sincerity, followers booed his gracious acknowledgment of Sen. Obama and Sen. Joe Biden -- and some even jeered his expression of gratitude to running mate Gov. Sarah Palin.
Sen. Obama held his victory celebration in Chicago's Grant Park, delivering measured remarks to an estimated 200,000 people. When he congratulated Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin on their campaign, his supporters cheered.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is called a clue. It's not just the expected difference between winning and losing -- it's the difference between what worked and what failed, one campaign that set its tone at the top and another that never found its voice.
To wrap up this post, I'll share something I observed in my community this evening. Instead of watching wall-to-wall election-night coverage, my wife and I got haircuts (seriously) at a local shop owned by a friend of ours. We left the house about 15 minutes after the polls closed and returned around 9:30pm, traveling to and from on an always-busy four-lane thoroughfare.
We had the road to ourselves -- it was eerie, like driving at 3am on a Sunday morning. In a state that went for Obama-Biden and a county that swung for McCain-Palin, it seemed that everyone but us was home watching the returns come in.
American history was made tonight, and no one wanted to miss a minute of it. Regardless of my personal political leanings, I'm glad I was alive to see it.
It's a night thick with history, and countless others will write about it with more eloquence and insight than I ever could. I can speak only in my voice, from my perspective.
While I didn't support Sen. Barack Obama, I have the highest respect for his victory. My concerns about the policies he advocates are very real now, but I won't hesitate to assert that Americans elected the better leader.
Sen. John McCain ran a gallant campaign but ultimately a bumbling one. Now the Republican Party has four years to embrace change -- not the cliché campaign slogan, but the new American landscape it can no longer deny exists.
The candidates' concession and acceptance speeches provided a final contrast. In defeat, Sen. McCain spoke to a less-than-capacity crowd of 1,500 gathered on the lawn outside an Arizona hotel. Despite the nominee's sincerity, followers booed his gracious acknowledgment of Sen. Obama and Sen. Joe Biden -- and some even jeered his expression of gratitude to running mate Gov. Sarah Palin.
Sen. Obama held his victory celebration in Chicago's Grant Park, delivering measured remarks to an estimated 200,000 people. When he congratulated Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin on their campaign, his supporters cheered.That, ladies and gentlemen, is called a clue. It's not just the expected difference between winning and losing -- it's the difference between what worked and what failed, one campaign that set its tone at the top and another that never found its voice.
To wrap up this post, I'll share something I observed in my community this evening. Instead of watching wall-to-wall election-night coverage, my wife and I got haircuts (seriously) at a local shop owned by a friend of ours. We left the house about 15 minutes after the polls closed and returned around 9:30pm, traveling to and from on an always-busy four-lane thoroughfare.
We had the road to ourselves -- it was eerie, like driving at 3am on a Sunday morning. In a state that went for Obama-Biden and a county that swung for McCain-Palin, it seemed that everyone but us was home watching the returns come in.
American history was made tonight, and no one wanted to miss a minute of it. Regardless of my personal political leanings, I'm glad I was alive to see it.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Decided
In March, I looked forward to "a national conversation between Sen. Obama and Sen. John McCain." I knew that these two very different candidates would present the American electorate with a clear choice, and I was optimistic that they'd conduct their campaigns with more decency than we've seen in recent years.
I got the matchup I wanted, but my optimism appears to have been a bit cockeyed.
While I favored Sen. Barack Obama's nomination, I was never destined to cast a general-election vote for him. Still, his campaign has been superior to his opponent's in every way that matters: tactics and strategy, messages and media, principle and leadership. The judgment and steady temperament he's demonstrated are far better suited to high office than the GOP nominee's long legislative résumé and erratic behavior.
None of that allays my very real concerns about an Obama presidency, but the Democratic nominee has earned my respect. His policies and political philosophy simply prevent him from earning my vote.
Sen. McCain has been, to put it mildly, a disappointment, throwing his honor and the last of his dignity on the pyre of his candidacy. After vowing to run a respectful campaign and to quash irrelevant attacks on his opponent, he's allowed a disturbing and dangerous tone to run wild for months. Sure, he tried to stuff the genie back into the bottle a few weeks ago, but he turned it loose again when his campaign started hemorrhaging support from the noisy right.
He's revealed gross cynicism, displayed questionable temperament, exercised shockingly poor judgment and generally has shown me that he's not fit to lead. Worst of all, he chose a running mate who herself is neither fit nor qualified.
Along the way, Sen. McCain lost his voice, along with my trust, my respect and my vote.
Incidentally, I'm not the least bit swayed by arm-twisters demanding that I vote for McCain-Palin, else I be in-league with gun grabbers and entitlement addicts. Bullshit -- that sort of "you're with the terrorists" fear mongering is a sheepish endorsement of the status quo.
Obama-Biden surely would take us farther away from what's best for our country, but it'd be naive of me to view McCain-Palin as some sort of inoculant against assaults on our Second Amendment rights, exploding entitlements and socialized capitalism. Whichever wins, we'll be fighting the same battles with our bloated government.
The end of preventing an Obama-Biden victory doesn't justify my voting for a politically, ethically and intellectually corrupt ticket -- but just as I won't cast that token defensive vote, I won't cast a vote out of protest, either. This isn't about indignation.
It's about my country. It's about my kids.
Come Wednesday morning, I'll look my spawns in the eye and tell them that my vote stood for the same things I stand for. The values that I drum into their teenage heads will ring true. The next time they hear me say that power belongs to The People and that the Constitution still means something, they'll know that there's honor in backing up their words with actions, even when those actions are unpopular.
The two-party monopoly has failed our nation. I've know that for years and, for once, I'm not going to blink on Election Day. This time I won't make a reflexive choice, another cowardly capitulation to a lesser evil that takes America farther down the same self-destructive road.
That's why on Tuesday I'll cast one independent citizen's vote for Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr.
To do otherwise not only would blaspheme my sacred American privilege -- it'd be an insult to the country I'll leave to my children.
I got the matchup I wanted, but my optimism appears to have been a bit cockeyed.
While I favored Sen. Barack Obama's nomination, I was never destined to cast a general-election vote for him. Still, his campaign has been superior to his opponent's in every way that matters: tactics and strategy, messages and media, principle and leadership. The judgment and steady temperament he's demonstrated are far better suited to high office than the GOP nominee's long legislative résumé and erratic behavior.
None of that allays my very real concerns about an Obama presidency, but the Democratic nominee has earned my respect. His policies and political philosophy simply prevent him from earning my vote.
Sen. McCain has been, to put it mildly, a disappointment, throwing his honor and the last of his dignity on the pyre of his candidacy. After vowing to run a respectful campaign and to quash irrelevant attacks on his opponent, he's allowed a disturbing and dangerous tone to run wild for months. Sure, he tried to stuff the genie back into the bottle a few weeks ago, but he turned it loose again when his campaign started hemorrhaging support from the noisy right.
He's revealed gross cynicism, displayed questionable temperament, exercised shockingly poor judgment and generally has shown me that he's not fit to lead. Worst of all, he chose a running mate who herself is neither fit nor qualified.
Along the way, Sen. McCain lost his voice, along with my trust, my respect and my vote.
Incidentally, I'm not the least bit swayed by arm-twisters demanding that I vote for McCain-Palin, else I be in-league with gun grabbers and entitlement addicts. Bullshit -- that sort of "you're with the terrorists" fear mongering is a sheepish endorsement of the status quo.
Obama-Biden surely would take us farther away from what's best for our country, but it'd be naive of me to view McCain-Palin as some sort of inoculant against assaults on our Second Amendment rights, exploding entitlements and socialized capitalism. Whichever wins, we'll be fighting the same battles with our bloated government.
The end of preventing an Obama-Biden victory doesn't justify my voting for a politically, ethically and intellectually corrupt ticket -- but just as I won't cast that token defensive vote, I won't cast a vote out of protest, either. This isn't about indignation.
It's about my country. It's about my kids.
Come Wednesday morning, I'll look my spawns in the eye and tell them that my vote stood for the same things I stand for. The values that I drum into their teenage heads will ring true. The next time they hear me say that power belongs to The People and that the Constitution still means something, they'll know that there's honor in backing up their words with actions, even when those actions are unpopular.
The two-party monopoly has failed our nation. I've know that for years and, for once, I'm not going to blink on Election Day. This time I won't make a reflexive choice, another cowardly capitulation to a lesser evil that takes America farther down the same self-destructive road.
That's why on Tuesday I'll cast one independent citizen's vote for Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr.
To do otherwise not only would blaspheme my sacred American privilege -- it'd be an insult to the country I'll leave to my children.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Local color
Barbara West, an anchor with ABC affiliate WFTV in Orlando, asked Sen. Joe Biden this question during an interview last Thursday:
She said later that she was simply asking "tough questions," and she's won praise from the far right for her performance. There's only one problem with that: Ms. West didn't ask tough questions -- she asked laughable questions. She must've quaffed an entire keg of high-test right-wing Kool-Aid before regurgitating it in front of the cameras.
A critical viewing of her subsequent interview with Sen. John McCain, conducted today, leaves no doubt about what Ms. West has been drinking.
Voters, by and large, don't care about the whole Marxism thing. If they cared enough to actually learn about it, they'd know that what Sen. Barack Obama is proposing isn't Marxism. They'd understand that Ms. West, disguised as a news anchor, was trafficking in extremist buzz-words and GOP talking points, nothing more.
Did I mention that Ms. West is married to a Republican spin doctor?
I'm no fan of Sen. Biden and I won't be voting for the Obama-Biden ticket, but I know partisan idiocy when I see it. I'll go out on a limb here and suggest that Ms. West, typical of a "personality" languishing in middle age and stuck doing the 5:30am newscast in a local market, probably doesn't know Karl from Harpo.
And she'll probably have her own FOX News show before Christmas.
"You may recognize this famous quote: 'From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs.' That's from Karl Marx. How is Sen. Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?"Sen. Biden, smiling broadly, responded:
"Are you joking? Is this is a joke? Or is that a real question?"The rest of the five-minute interview was, let's say, contentious.
She said later that she was simply asking "tough questions," and she's won praise from the far right for her performance. There's only one problem with that: Ms. West didn't ask tough questions -- she asked laughable questions. She must've quaffed an entire keg of high-test right-wing Kool-Aid before regurgitating it in front of the cameras.
A critical viewing of her subsequent interview with Sen. John McCain, conducted today, leaves no doubt about what Ms. West has been drinking.
Voters, by and large, don't care about the whole Marxism thing. If they cared enough to actually learn about it, they'd know that what Sen. Barack Obama is proposing isn't Marxism. They'd understand that Ms. West, disguised as a news anchor, was trafficking in extremist buzz-words and GOP talking points, nothing more.
Did I mention that Ms. West is married to a Republican spin doctor?
I'm no fan of Sen. Biden and I won't be voting for the Obama-Biden ticket, but I know partisan idiocy when I see it. I'll go out on a limb here and suggest that Ms. West, typical of a "personality" languishing in middle age and stuck doing the 5:30am newscast in a local market, probably doesn't know Karl from Harpo.
And she'll probably have her own FOX News show before Christmas.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Laugh tracks
It's time to bow to the absurd.
There's a television ad running statewide here, promoting the re-election of an Ohio Supreme Court Justice, and I can't help laughing every time I see it. The ad begins,
At the national level, of course, there's no shortage of material that strains gravitas, let alone credibility -- take, for example, a new McCain-Palin television commercial that opens with Sen. McCain asking the viewer,
And with most polls showing McCain-Palin running behind, it's been amusing to see the campaign and its supporters thrash about like the de-limbed Black Knight of Monty Python fame -- "'Tis but a scratch! Only a flesh wound!"
In particular, this whole "socialism" thing is a hoot. Never mind that the sources of this neoconservative epithet know about as much about socialism as Gov. Sarah Palin knows about foreign affairs. I mean, when they find out that Michelle Obama signed a $447 room-service receipt for lobster, caviar and champagne, they don't know if they're supposed to be angry or not. Talk about being in a round room.
No, the punch line of the socialism joke is that Sen. McCain -- along with the Bush administration, Sen. Barack Obama and 335 other members of the 110th Congress -- just engineered the greatest act of socialism in American history: the trillion-dollar corporate bailout.
Funny, isn't it, how neither campaign brings that up?
Ultimately, humor yields to reality, and I have to face the fact that most of these laughable stunts will actually work. Considering what's at stake in this election, that's not the least but funny -- it's downright scary.
There's a television ad running statewide here, promoting the re-election of an Ohio Supreme Court Justice, and I can't help laughing every time I see it. The ad begins,
"Evelyn Stratton, daughter of missionaries..."Really, now, is that the first thing I need to know about a jurist? I get that politics is all about pandering, but I reserve the right to chuckle when it's that obvious.
At the national level, of course, there's no shortage of material that strains gravitas, let alone credibility -- take, for example, a new McCain-Palin television commercial that opens with Sen. McCain asking the viewer,
"The last eight years haven't worked very well, have they?"Aside from the obvious "Well, duh," it tickles me that the GOP nominee didn't start fleeing Pres. Bush until last Wednesday's debate. At this late date it's hard for me to keep a straight face while watching Sen. McCain suddenly try to feel our national pain.
And with most polls showing McCain-Palin running behind, it's been amusing to see the campaign and its supporters thrash about like the de-limbed Black Knight of Monty Python fame -- "'Tis but a scratch! Only a flesh wound!"
In particular, this whole "socialism" thing is a hoot. Never mind that the sources of this neoconservative epithet know about as much about socialism as Gov. Sarah Palin knows about foreign affairs. I mean, when they find out that Michelle Obama signed a $447 room-service receipt for lobster, caviar and champagne, they don't know if they're supposed to be angry or not. Talk about being in a round room.
No, the punch line of the socialism joke is that Sen. McCain -- along with the Bush administration, Sen. Barack Obama and 335 other members of the 110th Congress -- just engineered the greatest act of socialism in American history: the trillion-dollar corporate bailout. Funny, isn't it, how neither campaign brings that up?
Ultimately, humor yields to reality, and I have to face the fact that most of these laughable stunts will actually work. Considering what's at stake in this election, that's not the least but funny -- it's downright scary.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Local roundup
Gasoline, 35% offMost of the country saw their record-high gas prices around mid-July, but central Ohio's spike came about a month ago in the wake of the "Ike Lite" windstorm. The unexpected regional squeeze briefly had us paying more than $4.00 for a gallon of regular unleaded.
At least we avoided a Nashvillian panic, and prices have fallen steadily since.
Just 30 days later, local stations are charging in the $2.60 range, the least we've paid in 18 months -- still no bargain, but we'll take it. No telling how long our "fortune" will last.
Top-ten BuckeyesWhen the first quarter of Saturday's game ended with Ohio State up 21-0 on the Spartans, I couldn't help wondering, "Who are these guys in the silver helmets, and what have they done with my Buckeyes?"
That beat-down of Michigan State, along with a last-minute win over Wisconsin two weeks earlier, went a long way toward helping Buckeye Nation forget the humiliating loss to USC. And yesterday brought a pleasant surprise -- when the first BCS rankings came out, the 7-1 Buckeyes were ranked #9.
Hope springs, Saturday beckons...bring on Penn State!
Life on the battlegroundI used to live in an irrevocably blue state, a place where presidential candidates spent little money and seldom came a-calling. Eight years later and 700 miles west, I feel like I ought to be on a first-name basis with the McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden advance teams.
I can't escape the barrage of ads filling my mailbox, ringing my phone and blanketing the airwaves. If I weren't a political junkie, I'd probably pay a three-month visit to Vermont, or maybe some other minor Electoral College prize. Even so, all this attention is getting to be a bit much.
On the bright side, living in a so-called "battleground state" means that I get to see the candidates' true colors -- that is, they're revealing the lengths to which they'll go (or the depths to which they'll dive) to win 20 electoral votes.
I think it was a former head of IBM who often said, "The higher a monkey climbs, the more he shows his ass." As Election Day draws closer, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Joe Biden are keeping their political pants pulled up, while Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin, without apparent shame, are desperately mooning Ohio voters.
Blog blotter
We were visited by the season's first freeze last night, with temps dropping into the high 20s, bringing an end to this year's homegrown bounty. It was our best garden yet, yielding flavor for our table and lessons for next year. I'm not resisting the change-of-season, though -- the crisp air feels great.
On Wednesday morning, our older spawn will make an appearance in traffic court. I remember getting my first speeding ticket -- and the suspended license, and the traffic school, and having to be chauffeured around by my parents. It made enough of an impression on me that I haven't been pinched since. (knock wood) Time will tell if the experience "takes" on this particular 16-year-old.I'm not ready to say that an Obama-Biden administration is a certainty, but the odds against it grow longer by the day and the alternative brings me little comfort. Given the implications for my Second Amendment rights, I did a quick inventory and, just as I thought, the KintlaLake household is prepared for the prospect. If the worst happens, we'll consider packing up and moving to Montana -- seriously.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Signs of the Apocalypse II
Rumors of a GM-Chrysler merger.
General Motors shares gaining more than 60% in just three days -- but still trading at a paltry $6.50, off 85% from a year ago.
A world that includes Al Gore, Ralph Nader and Sarah McCain Palin Ciptak, and a world without Charlton Heston, George Carlin and Paul Newman.
Citizen slackers complaining about celebrity activists.
"The Original Mavericks."
Light beer, drive-thru flu shots, and The Indoor.
Four U.S. Supreme Court justices who actually believe that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution doesn't guarantee an individual citizen's right to keep and bear arms.
The name of "Mickey Mouse" appearing on a voter-registration form submitted by ACORN.
ACORN, Swift Boat Vets, MoveOn, RightChange and every other §527, union and church that shields its politics with its tax status.
Citizens who object to Joe Biden saying that wealthier Americans paying higher taxes is the "patriotic" thing to do, but who evade paying their own taxes -- and yet reap benefits paid for by those of us who do.
John McCain being booed by at his own rally because he called for "a respectful campaign."
An American company closing a plant and moving its operations outside the U.S. -- and then requiring its lame-duck employees to train their overseas replacements.
American taxpayers funding the government's corporate bailout so that banks can afford to foreclose, at great loss, on homes owned by American taxpayers -- that is, a bank foreclosing a mortgage and then auctioning the property for less than half the market value, a tactic made possible because the bank got a taxpayer-funded bailout and the taxpaying homeowner didn't.
"It will take time for our efforts to have their full impact, but the American people can have confidence about our long-term economic future."
The Electoral College.
"I call on my opponent to repudiate..."
General Motors shares gaining more than 60% in just three days -- but still trading at a paltry $6.50, off 85% from a year ago.
A world that includes Al Gore, Ralph Nader and Sarah McCain Palin Ciptak, and a world without Charlton Heston, George Carlin and Paul Newman.
Citizen slackers complaining about celebrity activists.
"The Original Mavericks."
Light beer, drive-thru flu shots, and The Indoor.
Four U.S. Supreme Court justices who actually believe that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution doesn't guarantee an individual citizen's right to keep and bear arms.
The name of "Mickey Mouse" appearing on a voter-registration form submitted by ACORN.
ACORN, Swift Boat Vets, MoveOn, RightChange and every other §527, union and church that shields its politics with its tax status.
Citizens who object to Joe Biden saying that wealthier Americans paying higher taxes is the "patriotic" thing to do, but who evade paying their own taxes -- and yet reap benefits paid for by those of us who do.
John McCain being booed by at his own rally because he called for "a respectful campaign."
An American company closing a plant and moving its operations outside the U.S. -- and then requiring its lame-duck employees to train their overseas replacements.
American taxpayers funding the government's corporate bailout so that banks can afford to foreclose, at great loss, on homes owned by American taxpayers -- that is, a bank foreclosing a mortgage and then auctioning the property for less than half the market value, a tactic made possible because the bank got a taxpayer-funded bailout and the taxpaying homeowner didn't.
"It will take time for our efforts to have their full impact, but the American people can have confidence about our long-term economic future."
The Electoral College.
"I call on my opponent to repudiate..."
Point of agreement
"What a beautiful part of the world you all live in." (Sen. Joe Biden, speaking today in Lancaster, Ohio)
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Friend or foe?
John Lewis was born a sharecropper's son. In the 1960s, he played a prominent and active role in the civil-rights movement, enduring dozens of arrests and suffering countless beatings. John Lewis is now Rep. John R. Lewis, a Democrat elected by the citizens of Georgia's 5th District to the U.S. House of Representatives.
With all due respect to the long, difficult and admirable road he's traveled, Rep. Lewis is still John Lewis, Civil Rights Icon -- and that, for better or worse, means that the incendiary issue of race infuses (or is imposed upon) everything he says.
Yesterday, Rep. Lewis issued a statement saying that he's "deeply disturbed by the negative tone of the McCain-Palin campaign."
Many of us are; many of us have said so. But when John Lewis says so -- and when he draws parallels with the civil-rights era, especially when he compares the toxic air of McCain-Palin rallies to the "atmosphere of hate" cultivated by former Alabama Gov. George Wallace -- it's bound to provoke a defensive response.
Sen. John McCain took exception to the idea that his campaign "could be compared to Gov. George Wallace, his segregationist policies and the violence he provoked," calling the accusations "unacceptable" and asserting that they have "no place in this campaign." Naturally, he called on Sen. Barack Obama to "repudiate" what Rep. Lewis said.
"Sen. Obama does not believe that John McCain or his policy criticism is in any way comparable to George Wallace or his segregationist policies," said Obama-Biden -- but the campaign's statement went on to say that "John Lewis was right to condemn some of the hateful rhetoric that John McCain himself personally rebuked...as well as the baseless and profoundly irresponsible charges from his own running mate...."
Enough already with the dueling statements -- it's time to call this the way it is.
Rep. Lewis, for his part, spoke like he'd forgotten who he is. He couldn't possibly have been unaware that he was lobbing racially charged grenades into a climate that's already strayed too far from issues that should preoccupy the candidates. Rep. Lewis is no freshman -- he should've known better.
Sen. McCain's indignation, however, is only so credible. His campaign has relied on and, in the case of Gov. Sarah Palin and other surrogates, actively encouraged flamethrowing. Only recently has Sen. McCain tried to douse the fires.
Oddly enough, McCain-Palin actually does beg a parallel to George Wallace, although not specifically in terms of fostering outright racism.
"I don't have much strategy," Gov. Wallace once said of his 1972 bid for the Democratic nomination. "I'm just putting the hay down where the goats can get it."
In my view, that's an eerily apt description of McCain-Palin’s quiet tolerance of supporters' fear and hatred.
Finally, how does Sen. Obama come out of this weekend's back-and-forth? Only with a pressing need to control the damage -- most of which, ironically, was inflicted by a friend, not a foe.
With all due respect to the long, difficult and admirable road he's traveled, Rep. Lewis is still John Lewis, Civil Rights Icon -- and that, for better or worse, means that the incendiary issue of race infuses (or is imposed upon) everything he says.
Yesterday, Rep. Lewis issued a statement saying that he's "deeply disturbed by the negative tone of the McCain-Palin campaign."
Many of us are; many of us have said so. But when John Lewis says so -- and when he draws parallels with the civil-rights era, especially when he compares the toxic air of McCain-Palin rallies to the "atmosphere of hate" cultivated by former Alabama Gov. George Wallace -- it's bound to provoke a defensive response.
Sen. John McCain took exception to the idea that his campaign "could be compared to Gov. George Wallace, his segregationist policies and the violence he provoked," calling the accusations "unacceptable" and asserting that they have "no place in this campaign." Naturally, he called on Sen. Barack Obama to "repudiate" what Rep. Lewis said.
"Sen. Obama does not believe that John McCain or his policy criticism is in any way comparable to George Wallace or his segregationist policies," said Obama-Biden -- but the campaign's statement went on to say that "John Lewis was right to condemn some of the hateful rhetoric that John McCain himself personally rebuked...as well as the baseless and profoundly irresponsible charges from his own running mate...."
Enough already with the dueling statements -- it's time to call this the way it is.
Rep. Lewis, for his part, spoke like he'd forgotten who he is. He couldn't possibly have been unaware that he was lobbing racially charged grenades into a climate that's already strayed too far from issues that should preoccupy the candidates. Rep. Lewis is no freshman -- he should've known better.
Sen. McCain's indignation, however, is only so credible. His campaign has relied on and, in the case of Gov. Sarah Palin and other surrogates, actively encouraged flamethrowing. Only recently has Sen. McCain tried to douse the fires.
Oddly enough, McCain-Palin actually does beg a parallel to George Wallace, although not specifically in terms of fostering outright racism.
"I don't have much strategy," Gov. Wallace once said of his 1972 bid for the Democratic nomination. "I'm just putting the hay down where the goats can get it."
In my view, that's an eerily apt description of McCain-Palin’s quiet tolerance of supporters' fear and hatred.
Finally, how does Sen. Obama come out of this weekend's back-and-forth? Only with a pressing need to control the damage -- most of which, ironically, was inflicted by a friend, not a foe.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Dong-ding, dong-ding...
Beginning last weekend, McCain-Palin rallies have taken on a decidedly negative, desperate tone -- pouring from the candidate and his running mate, from local officials invoking "Barack Hussein Obama" and from increasingly angry supporters hurling cries of "Terrorist!" and "Kill 'im!" against Sen. Obama.
It's the sort of ugliness that can happen when a foundering campaign is running out of time. And Sen. John McCain, who long ago vowed to run "a respectful campaign," did nothing to throttle the tide of ignorance and vitriol -- until yesterday.
At a town-hall event in Lakeville, Minnesota, an audience member told Sen. McCain, "Frankly, we're scared. We're scared of an Obama presidency."
Sen. McCain responded, "I have to tell you he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as President of the United States."
The crowd rewarded their candidate with a chorus of boos.
Another supporter, an older woman, told Sen. McCain, "I don't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's an Arab."
Sen. McCain, shaking his head emphatically, took back the microphone and replied, "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, and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not."
An even louder round of groans and boos.
"No, no. I want everyone to be respectful. And let's make sure we are."
More booing.
"We want to fight and I will fight. But we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments. I will respect him."
"Booooooooooo..."
Sen. McCain is in double trouble of his own making. On the one hand, his right-wing base doesn't want to be respectful -- they want to be angry, they want to be afraid, they want to absolutely hate the liberal-evil opposition. These folks are sustained by the inflammatory rhetoric of talk radio, and dammit, they expect the same on the stump. The bloodier the meat, the better they like it.
By attempting to diffuse the dark atmosphere he's allowed to gather around his campaign, however, Sen. McCain risks losing his grip on this fragile base -- which may not be all that significant in terms of numbers, but at this point the GOP ticket needs every vote it can get.
McCain-Palin's recent negative push, on the other hand, reportedly cost it support among independent and undecided voters -- me, for example -- who are far more crucial to its chances. No doubt that's why Sen. McCain is trying to un-ring this disturbing bell.
Either way, and despite belatedly honorable intentions, Sen. McCain now further exposes himself to Obama-Biden's charges of being "erratic" and exercising questionable judgment. Not good, perhaps even no-win.
Speaking for myself, it was encouraging to catch a brief glimpse of a John McCain who's worthy of my respect. Between now and November 4th, we'll see if he means what he said, if his calls for a more respectful tone extend beyond a few rallies and through the rest of his campaign.
Time is short. I'll be watching.
It's the sort of ugliness that can happen when a foundering campaign is running out of time. And Sen. John McCain, who long ago vowed to run "a respectful campaign," did nothing to throttle the tide of ignorance and vitriol -- until yesterday.
At a town-hall event in Lakeville, Minnesota, an audience member told Sen. McCain, "Frankly, we're scared. We're scared of an Obama presidency."
Sen. McCain responded, "I have to tell you he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as President of the United States."
The crowd rewarded their candidate with a chorus of boos.
Another supporter, an older woman, told Sen. McCain, "I don't trust Obama. I have read about him and he's an Arab."
Sen. McCain, shaking his head emphatically, took back the microphone and replied, "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, and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not."An even louder round of groans and boos.
"No, no. I want everyone to be respectful. And let's make sure we are."
More booing.
"We want to fight and I will fight. But we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments. I will respect him."
"Booooooooooo..."
Sen. McCain is in double trouble of his own making. On the one hand, his right-wing base doesn't want to be respectful -- they want to be angry, they want to be afraid, they want to absolutely hate the liberal-evil opposition. These folks are sustained by the inflammatory rhetoric of talk radio, and dammit, they expect the same on the stump. The bloodier the meat, the better they like it.
By attempting to diffuse the dark atmosphere he's allowed to gather around his campaign, however, Sen. McCain risks losing his grip on this fragile base -- which may not be all that significant in terms of numbers, but at this point the GOP ticket needs every vote it can get.
McCain-Palin's recent negative push, on the other hand, reportedly cost it support among independent and undecided voters -- me, for example -- who are far more crucial to its chances. No doubt that's why Sen. McCain is trying to un-ring this disturbing bell.
Either way, and despite belatedly honorable intentions, Sen. McCain now further exposes himself to Obama-Biden's charges of being "erratic" and exercising questionable judgment. Not good, perhaps even no-win.
Speaking for myself, it was encouraging to catch a brief glimpse of a John McCain who's worthy of my respect. Between now and November 4th, we'll see if he means what he said, if his calls for a more respectful tone extend beyond a few rallies and through the rest of his campaign.
Time is short. I'll be watching.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Signs of the Apocalypse
Joe Biden owns two shotguns, John McCain went an entire debate without saying "maverick," and Vanderbilt's football team is 5-0.
The U.S. government spends $85 billion to bail out AIG, learns that the company used $443,000 of that money for a spa weekend, and the next day hands AIG another $38 billion.
Paying $3.25 for a gallon of gas is a bargain, and investing in a money-market fund is a risk.
Lou Dobbs.
Bottled water, ethanol subsidies, hybrid pickup trucks, and the two-party system.
"Fair and balanced."
More conservative outrage over Barack Obama's middle name than over the government's trillion-dollar corporate bailout.
The decriminalization of illegal immigration, and the socialization of capitalism.
Cindy McCain's $500,000 convention wardrobe, and John McCain's $300 billion proposal that the government buy all bad mortgages.
The People's Republic of California.
"The fundamentals of our economy are strong."
Gun owners who support Obama-Biden, and gun owners who believe that a vote for McCain-Palin will guarantee our Second Amendment rights.
Incumbents.
Placing a higher value on a lapel pin than on judgment.
Sarah Palin.
Insisting that candidates be specific -- and then actually believing what they say.
"I approved this message."
The U.S. government spends $85 billion to bail out AIG, learns that the company used $443,000 of that money for a spa weekend, and the next day hands AIG another $38 billion.
Paying $3.25 for a gallon of gas is a bargain, and investing in a money-market fund is a risk.
Lou Dobbs.
Bottled water, ethanol subsidies, hybrid pickup trucks, and the two-party system.
"Fair and balanced."
More conservative outrage over Barack Obama's middle name than over the government's trillion-dollar corporate bailout.
The decriminalization of illegal immigration, and the socialization of capitalism.
Cindy McCain's $500,000 convention wardrobe, and John McCain's $300 billion proposal that the government buy all bad mortgages.
The People's Republic of California.
"The fundamentals of our economy are strong."
Gun owners who support Obama-Biden, and gun owners who believe that a vote for McCain-Palin will guarantee our Second Amendment rights.
Incumbents.
Placing a higher value on a lapel pin than on judgment.
Sarah Palin.
Insisting that candidates be specific -- and then actually believing what they say.
"I approved this message."
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Debate II: The Bingo Card
Since last night's Presidential debate covered no new substantive ground, we might as well entertain ourselves by scoring what the candidates did (and didn't) say. To that end...
- Began a sentence with "Well": Obama 13, McCain 12.
- Began a sentence with "Look": McCain 4, Obama 4.
- Mentioned Pres. Bush: Obama 10, McCain 5.
- Mentioned Vice Pres. Cheney: McCain 1, Obama 0.
- Mentioned Sen. Biden: McCain 0, Obama 0.
- Mentioned Gov. Palin: McCain 0, Obama 0.
- Mentioned Iraq: Obama 8, McCain 7.
- Mentioned Osama bin Laden: Obama 7, McCain 1.
- Mentioned al Qaeda: McCain 3, Obama 3.
- Mentioned the Taliban: McCain 3, Obama 2.
- Called his opponent "Senator": Obama 45, McCain 31.
- Referred to his opponent by first name: Obama 1, McCain 0.
- Referred to his opponent as "that one": McCain 1, Obama 0.
- Addressed audience as "my friends": McCain 19, Obama 0.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Desperate? Darn tootin'!
Late last night, I was basking in the afterglow of my Buckeyes' come-from-behind win over the band-less Badgers, a classic punch-in-the-mouth Big Ten football game. Surfing from Dispatch.com to ESPN.com and finally over to SI.com, I inadvertently clicked on the CNN logo, launching the headline story: "Palin hits Obama for 'terrorist' connection."
What a buzz-kill.
At a time when these candidates have no shortage of relevant issues to talk about, McCain-Palin has resorted to pandering to gullible voters with the myth of Sen. Barack Obama's "relationship" with Weather Underground co-founder Bill Ayers -- a contention roundly debunked many months ago.
It's the latest in a string of desperate moves by the GOP, intended to divert support away from Obama-Biden. The campaign seems to be ignoring, however, that these frantic ploys will work only if votes shift directly to (or turn out specifically for) McCain-Palin. With polls indicating growing support for the Democratic ticket, it could be that McCain-Palin's negative attacks are having precisely the opposite effect.
See, I'm one of those people who won't vote for Obama-Biden, period, and given a choice between a Democratic or a Republican victory, I'd prefer (reluctantly and by default) that Sen. John McCain be elected the next President of the United States -- but McCain-Palin keeps giving me reasons not to cast a so-called "defensive vote."
It's no secret that I view Sen. McCain's choice of Gov. Sarah Palin as an egregious tactical "hail Mary" and nothing more. Instead of being asked to consider a running mate who's actually qualified, American voters have been treated to a bad remake of Fargo -- a winking, babbling, you-betcha darlin' who makes Dan Quayle look like the second coming of Ronald Reagan.
On September 25th, Sen. McCain announced that he'd temporarily suspended his campaign to devote all of his time, energy and "influence" to the corporate-bailout legislation -- a transparent political antic that completely backfired when House Republicans went south and the markets followed. I won't get into Sen. McCain's dishonorable conduct surrounding the announcement itself, but let’s not forget his proposal that the first Presidential debate be pushed back by a week and the Vice Presidential debate scheduled for that day be postponed indefinitely -- for obvious reasons.
Then last week, McCain-Palin confirmed that it'd no longer spend time or resources in Michigan, all but conceding the state to Obama-Biden. For a campaign short of funds, it'd seem to be a reasonable decision -- except for the message it sends to voters enduring similarly dire economic conditions. Strategically, it was a terrible move.
And now McCain-Palin is coming back with the discredited Ayers canard -- what's next? The reappearance of Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Incriminating photos of those fake columns at the Democratic convention? Sen. McCain pledging to serve only one term? The mind reels.
If I object to Washington's spin-dominated culture and decry the lack of honor in government, and yet I support a ticket that relies so heavily on stunts, half-truths and disinformation, my vote is no less corrupt. Simply not being Obama-Biden isn't good enough for me.
Right now, McCain-Palin doesn't deserve my vote. Short of suffering a sudden spasm of integrity, the Republican ticket has no chance of earning it.
What a buzz-kill.
At a time when these candidates have no shortage of relevant issues to talk about, McCain-Palin has resorted to pandering to gullible voters with the myth of Sen. Barack Obama's "relationship" with Weather Underground co-founder Bill Ayers -- a contention roundly debunked many months ago.
It's the latest in a string of desperate moves by the GOP, intended to divert support away from Obama-Biden. The campaign seems to be ignoring, however, that these frantic ploys will work only if votes shift directly to (or turn out specifically for) McCain-Palin. With polls indicating growing support for the Democratic ticket, it could be that McCain-Palin's negative attacks are having precisely the opposite effect.See, I'm one of those people who won't vote for Obama-Biden, period, and given a choice between a Democratic or a Republican victory, I'd prefer (reluctantly and by default) that Sen. John McCain be elected the next President of the United States -- but McCain-Palin keeps giving me reasons not to cast a so-called "defensive vote."
It's no secret that I view Sen. McCain's choice of Gov. Sarah Palin as an egregious tactical "hail Mary" and nothing more. Instead of being asked to consider a running mate who's actually qualified, American voters have been treated to a bad remake of Fargo -- a winking, babbling, you-betcha darlin' who makes Dan Quayle look like the second coming of Ronald Reagan.On September 25th, Sen. McCain announced that he'd temporarily suspended his campaign to devote all of his time, energy and "influence" to the corporate-bailout legislation -- a transparent political antic that completely backfired when House Republicans went south and the markets followed. I won't get into Sen. McCain's dishonorable conduct surrounding the announcement itself, but let’s not forget his proposal that the first Presidential debate be pushed back by a week and the Vice Presidential debate scheduled for that day be postponed indefinitely -- for obvious reasons.
Then last week, McCain-Palin confirmed that it'd no longer spend time or resources in Michigan, all but conceding the state to Obama-Biden. For a campaign short of funds, it'd seem to be a reasonable decision -- except for the message it sends to voters enduring similarly dire economic conditions. Strategically, it was a terrible move.
And now McCain-Palin is coming back with the discredited Ayers canard -- what's next? The reappearance of Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Incriminating photos of those fake columns at the Democratic convention? Sen. McCain pledging to serve only one term? The mind reels.
If I object to Washington's spin-dominated culture and decry the lack of honor in government, and yet I support a ticket that relies so heavily on stunts, half-truths and disinformation, my vote is no less corrupt. Simply not being Obama-Biden isn't good enough for me.
Right now, McCain-Palin doesn't deserve my vote. Short of suffering a sudden spasm of integrity, the Republican ticket has no chance of earning it.
Friday, October 3, 2008
No harm done
Now that was worth watching.
Last night's vice-presidential debate in St. Louis didn't resolve anything, really, nor did it supply us with answers we didn't have. Still, it was an intriguing event.
Gov. Sarah Palin, in the wake of disastrous interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, was cast the role of political tourniquet. Fortunately for the GOP, the Gov. Palin who showed up for this debate was confident and well-prepared.
She didn't attempt to undo her running mate's missteps over the last ten days, nor did she try to erase our memory of her own bubble-headed answers to softball questions. She stood firm and assured, representing her ticket's positions with conviction -- that is, she did what she had to do.
At his core, Sen. Joe Biden is still that smart-ass kid from Scranton, born with a razor wit and brains to match, but on the national stage he's been prone to Olympian gaffes and fits of inappropriate candor. He managed to suppress that part of his personality and concentrated on showcasing his knowledge and experience.
Like Gov. Palin, and with aplomb, Sen. Biden did exactly what he had to do.
Because I come from an independent and undecided perspective, and because I've coached people for similar public appearances, I watched this debate differently than most Americans. Unencumbered by party, ideology or affinity, I looked at Gov. Palin and Sen. Biden fundamentally as debaters and, thinking critically, as prospective occupants of the Oval Office (which is the point of the audition).
Emerging from three days of intense preparation in Sedona, Gov. Palin showed herself to be an excellent student -- she did as she was told. From her opening statement and throughout the debate, however, it was clear that all that coaching was imposed on her. She was positively mechanical.
In terms of substance, she drew reflexively (and obviously) on talking points and not from a reservoir of understanding. More than once she steered away from answering a question and, skirting the brink of non sequitur, toward a more comfortable subject.
Apparently Gov. Palin was advised to lean heavily on her "folksy" persona -- but she came across less like "Jo Sixpack" and more like Barney Fife in drag.
(I fully expected to hear a "dag nabbit" at some point. I got a "doggone it" instead. And what the hell is up with all the winking?)
I'm sure that Gov. Palin really is a "down-to-earth gal," but last night her folksiness seemed programmed -- which it was, of course. The problem was that it showed.
It's certain that Sen. Biden underwent his own pre-debate immersion therapy, but given his experience, he didn't need to be coached on substance. He was advised about what to say (and what not to say), along with matters of style, and then turned loose.
Sen. Biden tends to be verbose, and that got him into trouble when he engaged in unnecessary rebuttals, three situations that begged for him to "just shut up." The mistakes weren't fatal and he did make his points -- they were just points that didn't need making.
That aside, and in stark contrast to his Republican counterpart, Sen. Biden looked comfortable, confident and genuine without appearing programmed. While I disagree with many of his policies and positions, I can say that Sen. Biden gave a brilliant performance. In my opinion, speaking as a communications professional, it was among the best I've ever seen.
I watched the entire debate on CNN, and again the network displayed real-time reactions of undecided voters. (Those "dial testers," by the way, were in the hands of 30 of my neighbors, just up the road from my home.) This time, instead of tracking by party affiliation, the scrolling lines followed the responses of men versus those of women. Beyond the gender differences we'd expect, it was interesting to watch what did and didn't work for each candidate.
Whenever Sen. Biden engaged in "Senate-speak" or otherwise got wordy, reactions fell flat; when he went negative on the Republican ticket, those undecided Ohio voters responded in-kind, although not drastically. His high marks appeared to be higher and more sustained than Gov. Palin's, and his lows were relatively brief and less precipitous.
Most surprising was how often Gov. Palin's answers, even on hot-button conservative issues, barely budged the graphs. When she attacked or went aw-shucks on us, reactions went down sharply; even invoking the word "maverick" (six times) met with negative responses. Fascinating.
After 90 minutes, and in my view, Gov. Palin had salvaged her reputation and slowed the bleeding -- she stopped dragging down the ticket (until her next encounter with the mainstream media, anyway). Sen. Biden, on the other hand, demonstrated that he's more knowledgeable, more competent and better suited for the job of President of the United States -- in a walk.
Last night's vice-presidential debate in St. Louis didn't resolve anything, really, nor did it supply us with answers we didn't have. Still, it was an intriguing event.
Gov. Sarah Palin, in the wake of disastrous interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric, was cast the role of political tourniquet. Fortunately for the GOP, the Gov. Palin who showed up for this debate was confident and well-prepared.She didn't attempt to undo her running mate's missteps over the last ten days, nor did she try to erase our memory of her own bubble-headed answers to softball questions. She stood firm and assured, representing her ticket's positions with conviction -- that is, she did what she had to do.
At his core, Sen. Joe Biden is still that smart-ass kid from Scranton, born with a razor wit and brains to match, but on the national stage he's been prone to Olympian gaffes and fits of inappropriate candor. He managed to suppress that part of his personality and concentrated on showcasing his knowledge and experience.
Like Gov. Palin, and with aplomb, Sen. Biden did exactly what he had to do.
Because I come from an independent and undecided perspective, and because I've coached people for similar public appearances, I watched this debate differently than most Americans. Unencumbered by party, ideology or affinity, I looked at Gov. Palin and Sen. Biden fundamentally as debaters and, thinking critically, as prospective occupants of the Oval Office (which is the point of the audition).
Emerging from three days of intense preparation in Sedona, Gov. Palin showed herself to be an excellent student -- she did as she was told. From her opening statement and throughout the debate, however, it was clear that all that coaching was imposed on her. She was positively mechanical.
In terms of substance, she drew reflexively (and obviously) on talking points and not from a reservoir of understanding. More than once she steered away from answering a question and, skirting the brink of non sequitur, toward a more comfortable subject.
Apparently Gov. Palin was advised to lean heavily on her "folksy" persona -- but she came across less like "Jo Sixpack" and more like Barney Fife in drag.
(I fully expected to hear a "dag nabbit" at some point. I got a "doggone it" instead. And what the hell is up with all the winking?)
I'm sure that Gov. Palin really is a "down-to-earth gal," but last night her folksiness seemed programmed -- which it was, of course. The problem was that it showed.
It's certain that Sen. Biden underwent his own pre-debate immersion therapy, but given his experience, he didn't need to be coached on substance. He was advised about what to say (and what not to say), along with matters of style, and then turned loose.
Sen. Biden tends to be verbose, and that got him into trouble when he engaged in unnecessary rebuttals, three situations that begged for him to "just shut up." The mistakes weren't fatal and he did make his points -- they were just points that didn't need making.
That aside, and in stark contrast to his Republican counterpart, Sen. Biden looked comfortable, confident and genuine without appearing programmed. While I disagree with many of his policies and positions, I can say that Sen. Biden gave a brilliant performance. In my opinion, speaking as a communications professional, it was among the best I've ever seen.
I watched the entire debate on CNN, and again the network displayed real-time reactions of undecided voters. (Those "dial testers," by the way, were in the hands of 30 of my neighbors, just up the road from my home.) This time, instead of tracking by party affiliation, the scrolling lines followed the responses of men versus those of women. Beyond the gender differences we'd expect, it was interesting to watch what did and didn't work for each candidate.
Whenever Sen. Biden engaged in "Senate-speak" or otherwise got wordy, reactions fell flat; when he went negative on the Republican ticket, those undecided Ohio voters responded in-kind, although not drastically. His high marks appeared to be higher and more sustained than Gov. Palin's, and his lows were relatively brief and less precipitous.
Most surprising was how often Gov. Palin's answers, even on hot-button conservative issues, barely budged the graphs. When she attacked or went aw-shucks on us, reactions went down sharply; even invoking the word "maverick" (six times) met with negative responses. Fascinating.
After 90 minutes, and in my view, Gov. Palin had salvaged her reputation and slowed the bleeding -- she stopped dragging down the ticket (until her next encounter with the mainstream media, anyway). Sen. Biden, on the other hand, demonstrated that he's more knowledgeable, more competent and better suited for the job of President of the United States -- in a walk.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Ike & the like
Most Americans can't imagine what it's like to stare down the barrel of Hurricane Ike, now taking aim on the Texas Gulf Coast.
I know I can't.
Sure, I lived in southern New England when Gloria -- the most-hyped storm in history -- came ashore as a weak Category 2 hurricane just 20 miles south of my home in 1985. I remember walls shaking, trees falling, lights winking and the eerie calm of the eye passing overhead.
Compared to Ike, Gloria was a nursery rhyme.
Forecasters say that Ike will arrive on Galveston Island early tomorrow morning as a Category 3 hurricane. By the time it reaches the Houston metropolitan area, 40 miles inland, it may still pack a Category 2 wallop. Coastal communities are expecting a 20-foot storm surge, and some areas already are under water. Ike's cloud shield, edge-to-edge, measures a staggering 900 miles.
As I watch a different weather system drop rain outside my window, a thousand miles from Galveston, Ike is just another news story -- except that it'll interrupt 25% of America's oil-refining capacity, 20% of domestic oil production and 15% of our natural-gas production, not to mention the temporary shutdown (at least) of numerous big chemical plants.
So while I keep the people of Galveston and Houston in my thoughts, I'll be equally mindful of the storm's impact on our punch-drunk economy. We seem capable of absorbing these painful blows, provided they're thrown one at a time, but what'll we do if they start coming in flurries?
* * *
I should've bought gas last week.
I don't drive much these days, and I've let my tank (and my fuel cache) drift toward empty while watching prices fall. In just the last 24 hours, they've jumped by 20 cents a gallon around here.Lazy, optimistic, and not terribly smart.
* * *
On Wednesday, Sen. Joe Biden said -- out loud and publicly -- that Sen. Hillary Clinton "might have been a better pick" for Sen. Barack Obama's running mate.
And yesterday, when asked by ABC's Charlie Gibson if she agrees with the "Bush Doctrine" -- the well-known policy of striking preemptively before being attacked -- Gov. Sarah Palin did her best impression of a moose in the headlights.
You just can't make this stuff up.
* * *
As I said on Wednesday, I've joined the ranks of the undecided, stepping back from my decision to vote for McCain-Palin. Reaction from readers, friends and family has been strong, to say the least, and overwhelmingly negative.
For the most part, I've been told that not voting for McCain-Palin would be "stupid" -- that's what we say, of course, about people who disagree with us. Democrats say it about Republicans. Conservatives say it about liberals. We have bookstores full of titles like Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot, and If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans.
No wonder our country is stuck in reverse.
The 2008 presidential election will be my ninth, so I'm not exactly naive about the dynamics of a close race. I know that if I don't vote for McCain-Palin, I could be handing the equivalent of two votes to Obama-Biden -- especially significant in the so-called "battleground state" of Ohio, thanks to the Electoral College.
The McCain-Palin campaign's intellectual bankruptcy finally drove me to question the wisdom of casting a "defensive vote" against Obama-Biden, especially in light of my clear disagreement with the GOP ticket on issues like abortion rights, the U.S. occupation of Iraq and fiscal policy. I realized that I'd become part of an opposition flock of red sheep, and I'm not sure that's the best way for me to exercise my sacred privilege on November 4th.
If I do decide to vote for a minor-party candidate, I'd be leaving the flock in pursuit of a far greater good, as I perceive it, acknowledging that an Obama presidency isn't the most sinister threat to my country's future.
In terms of sentiment, I'd be standing with a majority of Americans who believe that the two dominant parties have broken more than they've fixed. In terms of action, however, I'd be decidedly in the minority, and frankly, that's a scary place to be. But as natural-gas wildcatter John Masters said,
"You have to recognize that every 'out-front' maneuver is going to be lonely. But if you feel entirely comfortable, then you're not far enough ahead to do any good. That warm sense of everything going well is usually the body temperature at the center of the herd. Only if you're far enough ahead to be at risk do you have a chance for large rewards."(It occurs to me that political poseurs McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden might want to consult Mr. Masters before invoking buzzwords like "maverick" or "change.")
We need fundamental and revolutionary change, not the cosmetic, dime-store variety proposed by the two big campaigns. It won't happen in a single election, but it has to start somewhere.
It might as well start with me.
* * *
Less than 36 hours from now, my #5 Ohio State Buckeyes will play the top-ranked USC Trojans in the Los Angeles Coliseum.OSU running back "Beanie" Wells, arguably the team's best player, is still nursing an injured foot and has been listed as "doubtful" for the game. USC presents enough of a challenge with Wells in the lineup, and if he's on the sidelines...
I'm going to end this post here -- it's damned near impossible to type with all my fingers crossed.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Makeup test
Ok, class, let's review.
Ad-libbed during her speech at the Republican National Convention and repeated countless times since then, Gov. Sarah "Hockey Mom" Palin has said,
Pull-eeze.
To start with, "putting lipstick on a pig" is a common colloquial expression, used often in political rhetoric to demean a proposal lacking credibility. Sen. McCain invoked it when he criticized Sen. Hillary Clinton's universal-healthcare plans.
Besides, the first to equate Gov. Palin to an ill-tempered quadruped wearing face paint was the Governor herself.
And to anyone who claims to be defending Gov. Palin's feminine honor, but who wouldn't have done likewise for Sen. Clinton: Sit down and shut up.
The longer Gov. Palin struts and frets upon our national stage, the clearer it becomes that Sen. McCain's choice of a running mate was a cynical one. That cynicism is well-founded, of course -- for proof, look no further than today's hot political topic.
The people now falling at the feet of Gov. Palin are the same ones who disparage others for joining Sen. Obama's "cult of personality" -- just as superficial, equally impressionable -- making Sen. McCain's cynical choice look positively brilliant.
Red or blue, sheep are sheep.
For me, the test is this: Do I want to be associated, in any way, with a mindless flock? I mean, I can tolerate the occasional insult to my intelligence, as partial payment for some greater good, but I have my limits.
I've said previously that I won't vote for the gun-grabbing, entitlement-happy Obama-Biden ticket, and I stand by that. I've also said that I favor, reluctantly and by default, McCain-Palin.
As of today, count me among the undecided. Somebody alert the pollsters.
I will vote on November 4th. And as much as I'd hate to squander this precious American right on a minor-party candidate with no shot at winning, I'm going to begin researching what I've been ignoring -- starting with Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr.
Ad-libbed during her speech at the Republican National Convention and repeated countless times since then, Gov. Sarah "Hockey Mom" Palin has said,
"You know, they say the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick."At a campaign event yesterday, Sen. Barack Obama said this about Gov. Palin's and Sen. John McCain's talk of "reforming" Washington:
"You can put lipstick on a pig -- it's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called 'change' -- it's still gonna stink."Predictably, McCain-Palin surrogates -- and a stunningly large number of otherwise misogynistic conservatives -- are waxing apoplectic over Sen. Obama "playing the gender card."
Pull-eeze.
To start with, "putting lipstick on a pig" is a common colloquial expression, used often in political rhetoric to demean a proposal lacking credibility. Sen. McCain invoked it when he criticized Sen. Hillary Clinton's universal-healthcare plans.
Besides, the first to equate Gov. Palin to an ill-tempered quadruped wearing face paint was the Governor herself.
And to anyone who claims to be defending Gov. Palin's feminine honor, but who wouldn't have done likewise for Sen. Clinton: Sit down and shut up.
The longer Gov. Palin struts and frets upon our national stage, the clearer it becomes that Sen. McCain's choice of a running mate was a cynical one. That cynicism is well-founded, of course -- for proof, look no further than today's hot political topic.
The people now falling at the feet of Gov. Palin are the same ones who disparage others for joining Sen. Obama's "cult of personality" -- just as superficial, equally impressionable -- making Sen. McCain's cynical choice look positively brilliant.
Red or blue, sheep are sheep.
For me, the test is this: Do I want to be associated, in any way, with a mindless flock? I mean, I can tolerate the occasional insult to my intelligence, as partial payment for some greater good, but I have my limits.
I've said previously that I won't vote for the gun-grabbing, entitlement-happy Obama-Biden ticket, and I stand by that. I've also said that I favor, reluctantly and by default, McCain-Palin.
As of today, count me among the undecided. Somebody alert the pollsters.
I will vote on November 4th. And as much as I'd hate to squander this precious American right on a minor-party candidate with no shot at winning, I'm going to begin researching what I've been ignoring -- starting with Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
