CNN's Bill Schneider on McCain speech

From CNN:

McCain ends with his biggest themes – sacrifice, and patriotism. And he has the standing to talk about it. But it’s the crowd’s reaction that is disturbing here: the chanting of “USA” continued.

It’s a fighting close, which is intended to be stirring – but I wonder if the call to “fight” turned OFF a lot of voters. People really are tired of fighting.

My view is: it was a simple, and sincere speech that gave testimony and his character, avoiding the divisive social issues – but it did not seem to answer the question, What are you going to do about the nation’s terrible economic problems? His answers seemed very much part of the past: cut spending, cut taxes. He really needs to find a new and bolder economic plan.

Read the rest of this post...

Tom Ridge calls McCain "John Bush"

Read the rest of this post...

REACTIONS TO MCCAIN: This isn't 1988, it's 1992

(Give to Barack Obama by clicking on the box to the left.)

Earlier this week I said that that listening to the convention speeches sounded like a rerun of the 1988 race. After the seeing the Republican Convention in total now, I was wrong. This race isn't like 1988, this is 1992. This isn't a a successful Republican Party seeking a legacy, it's a failed Republican Party bringing out a biography in an attempt to obscure the economic reality from the American people. This convention has been devoid of any ideas that you couldn't have found back in 1992. You even see a campaign picking a fight with the media. (Anyone remember "Annoy the media - reelect Bush"?)

The economy is weak, and the incumbent party either doesn't see it or has no idea on how to fix it. Sound a little like 1992? The same tired old ideas that we've been suffering under over the last eight years have brought about an economy that isn't working for millions of Americans. It's brought us a broken health care system that has more people without health care when the Republicans took office back in 2001. Sound like life in 1992?

Without any ideas, John McCain offered up all he has, biography. He tells a story of a war hero, someone to sympathize with, and then basically says that's all he needs to tell us. And somehow we're supposed to believe that this is maverick? It's not, it's 1992 all over again. Same script, new cast.

Listening to the speeches from the podium and the near mob-like response of the crowd, there is a little more passion than 1992 (except when Buchanan spoke), but when it comes in lines like "drill baby drill" - something George H.W. Bush, also an oilman, would certainly have understood.

Like 1992, the Democratic Party offers America a real agenda to fix the economy, address our health care issues, bring about energy independence & renewable energy, and a credibility to renew America as a leader on the world stage. Not sure that's true? Barack Obama has it all spelled out here (PDF).

At the end end of the day, McCain is trying to convince Americans that a man who is in lock step with George Bush is somehow maverick and going to change America. He is arguing that we should trust him because he's John McCain, not because he has the right ideas, not because he's going to take the country in a different direction. Because he's not - just look at his voting record. There was nothing in McCain's speech tonight that signaled the end of the George W. Bush era. Read the rest of this post...

You want this guy to be president?

Give to Barack Obama by clicking on the box to the left. You guys gave $8,000 in the past several hours. Great work. Now give more :-) Read the rest of this post...

Thursday Night Convention Speeches Live Blog

John @ 11:14 PM: Kelly O'what'shername at MSNBC just reiterated the bull that John McCain is SO reluctant to use his POW experience for political purposes? Oh really, Kelly? Where have you been the past two months? They used the POW thing to explain why McCain has 12 houses and why he cheated at the faith forum. It's been non-stop POW up until about a week ago, when the media started beating McCain up for using it too much. He had the photo of himself as a POW on his spanish-language home page. He calls himself a "hero" on his own Web site. But you claim McCain has been reticent to use his POW status for political purposes. Are you an idiot?

TNR sums it up well:

It's not over yet but this is a very underwhelming speech. Familiar points explained in pedestrian terms. No overarching themes--right now it's sounding like a State of the Union laundry list. Even the crowd in the hall isn't jazzed. This is the sort of reception Tom Ridge got.

Joe @ 11:05 PM: That was a speech only Liz Sidoti and Ron Fournier could love. He's just bad.

Joe @ 11:02 PM: John McCain is amazingly uninspiring. I can't imagine listening to these speeches for the next four years. Seriously.

Joe @ 11:00 PM: What does this line mean?: "I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else's." Did he really not love his country before that? Sure sounds that way. Most Americans I know love their country. A lot. Even without being a prisoner in someone else's.

John @ 10:56 PM: Yes, John McCain was a prisoner of war. He was tortured. That was 40 years ago. Today, people are worried about their jobs, not about Vietnam. What is John McCain going to do to fix the economy today? We have no idea.

Joe @ 10:52 PM: "I hate war" is a great line. But, in January of 2002, McCain was screaming "Next up, Baghdad." We never did finish that first war in Afghanistan, which is one word and war never mentioned by McCain. We're in a war, and the man who hates war never mentions it.

Joe @ 10:46 PM: I do chuckle when I hear McCain talk about technology...any kind of technology. Someone obviously wrote this speech for him, but it sounds like he really doesn't know what he's talking about. He just knows he's supposed to say it. And, does he know that a Republican was president for the past eight years. Just because he doesn't say Bush's name, doesn't mean Bush hasn't run the country.

Rob @ 10:43: From a Republican friend: The old McCain is gone - who is this guy?

Rob @ 10:40: Fear fear fear, it's the same playbook as 2004. Painting a future with Barack Obama as something to fear is Rove in full effect.

Rob @ 10:39 Lost their trust? ABC just this week showed Tom Delay drinking it up, cigar and all, with fat cats. You can't gain back trust that way.

Joe @ 10:39 PM: John McCain gets his health insurance through the Senate. He gets government funded health care. When he bitches that "bureaucrats" will stand before you and your doctor, it shows how out of touch he is. Insurance company bureaucrats do that to Americans every single day. Not to Senators, but to real people. Every day.

John @ 10:36 PM: Just read the rest of the speech, Joe got a copy. There is no substance at all in this speech, zero. You'll be surprised to hear that McCain will go on at length about his time as a POW - because, remember, he doesn't use it for political purposes, ever. But as for substance, there is none. NONE. Wow. This is kind of weird. Okay he just talked about activists judges and hinted at abortion. This is right-wing jingoism. WHERE IS THE SUBSTANCE? He thinks he's Ronald Reagan. He's no Ronald Reagan. Hell, Palin's speech was better than this. Hey, tax cuts - now there's an original idea.

Joe @ 10:33 PM: Wow. I know this isn't a news flash, but McCain is boring -- and a bad speaker. Now, he's only talking about himself. But, this speech is just one cliche after another. There is NO substance whatsoever.

John @ 10:31 PM: I didn't fight, however, the banks. I helped them and got into a lot of trouble as a result.

John @ 10:29 PM: Yeah, he doesn't listen to special interests, that's he dumped Lieberman and Ridge as his VPs when the religious right went nuts last week.

Rob @ 10:27 PM: It's 10:27 and we're still hearing only about more personal biography. There has not yet been one thing offered up to the American people as a solution to our nation's problems. And regarding the protesters, if they can't handle the security at their own convention... how can we expect them to handle security in Washington?

John @ 10:26 PM: She worked with her nose?

John @ 10:24 PM: Hmmm 20 minutes in and no mention of the economy. Yikes, seems there are multiple protesters inside. How did they get floor passes? Looks like the protesters may have rattled McCain. Time will tell.

Joe @ 10:18 PM: First, he manages to mention Bush without saying his name. More importantly, the horrible green back drop is back. How did they swing that one?:


John @ 10:12 PM: Three times they mentioned that he was a POW. In case you didn't know.

Joe @ 10:10 PM: That 1992 Clinton slogan, "It's the economy, stupid" is being written for the GOP in 2008, "It's the economy that the Republicans are stupid about." Seriously, NO ONE is really talking about the economy.

John @ 10:06 PM: Funny, I thought John McCain said he didn't really love his country until he was 31 years old. Oops, they left out his divorce. Never mind.

Joe @ 9:59 PM: This deserves its own post later, but in case you missed it earlier, the GOP ran actual footage of the 9/11 attacks, which the Boston Globe calls "The death of a taboo":

The September 11 precedent was one of the few surviving campaign-season taboos. It is survived by direct comparisons of one's opponents to Hitler.

Rob @ 9:56 PM: I think America would like to believe Cindy is a genuine person, but all they need to know about the real Cindy is right here, back in 1999

What McEachern and the others didn't know was that, far from being a simple, honest admission designed to clear her conscience and help other addicts, Cindy McCain's storytelling had been orchestrated by Jay Smith, then John McCain's Washington campaign media advisor. And it was intended to divert attention from a different story, a story that was getting quite messy.

Sound familiar?

Joe @ 9:47 PM: Cindy, Cindy, Cindy. She knows her husband is honorable, because, why would she think otherwise. It's the other Mrs. McCain who learned he wasn't. I am in no position to comment on Cindy's attire (although I suspect Princess Sparkle Pony will.)

Rob @ 9:40 PM: Republicans have stood up here all night telling us that they are better to protect America. Should something happen to John McCain, can anyone tell me that Sarah Palin is REALLY ready to sit across the table from Vladimir Putin? Of all the people he's met in his life this is the person he's going to trust with the nation's security? No, Palin was a purely political decision - picked to appease the Religious Right. In the one decision we've had to judge John McCain since he became the nominee, he's not made a decision to protect the country, he made a rash political decision. That's not a man who's putting his country first, or a man who will keep America safe.

We will be live blogging the rest of the night. Read the rest of this post...

AP's bias toward McCain is tilting other media coverage. Has the article praising McCain's speech already been written?

Got this email from an astute reader -- and I have to agree:

I was talking to my wife about the coverage of the Palin speech and noticed that the coverage changed from extremely positive to balanced and skeptical throughout the day. She blamed the Associated Press, which has been so biased toward the Republican ticket. AP's articles, which are pumped out quickly, get picked up everywhere -- and drive the initial coverage. When the rest of the media finally had time to fully and fairly analyze the speech and response, the coverage became more based in reality. It is a shame that the AP is now like this. You expect this from Fox News, but the AP is supposed to be the AP.

Well, AP used to be AP. Now, AP's Washington bureau is run by Ron Fournier -- and he almost went to work for John McCain's campaign.

Last week, almost before Obama had finished his speech, AP's Charles Babington pumped out a hatchet job. Watch how quickly the article praising McCain gets published tonight. It's probably already written. You know Sidoti and Fournier fought over who got to write it. Read the rest of this post...

Hey, Lindsey Graham is speaking!

And who says the Republicans don't celebrate diversity? Read the rest of this post...

McCain is now doing local TV shows to circumvent the national media

A little birdie tells us that John McCain is setting up all sorts of interviews on local TV interviews this weekend in order to circumvent having to talk to the national press. (McCain thinks all the media now hates him - which is funny, since a few months ago he called them his "base" ).

McCain must think that local TV shows are pretty dumb, and that they won't ask him about his running mate's ethical scandals, her lie during her convention speech that she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere (she actually supported it), her lie that she visited Ireland, her lie that the media uncovered the story of her unwed pregnant daughter when in fact it was John McCain who leaked the story to Reuters, her claim that living near Russia counts as national security expertise, the claim that Wasilla with population 7,000 is just like running New York City, her latest ruse pulling the "sexism" card because she simply isn't qualified to answer serious questions on serious issues.

John McCain is counting on local TV being dumb so he doesn't have to face the hard questions about his mental state in choosing someone as unfit as Sarah Palin to lead our nation during wartime. Also, since McCain has been looking pretty bad lately, and avoiding major press conferences, doing a TV interview on local TV means only having to spend, what, a minute at a time talking to a reporter. Even if McCain is ill, or has no more energy left, he can eek out a minute-long TV interview and convince people that he's still a vital 60-something. But he's not. He's 72 and has had 4 bouts of cancer. And he's looking very bad lately. That's why we're so worried about Sarah Palin. Dan Quayle was an idiot, but at least Bush (the father) was young and healthy. John McCain is neither. Read the rest of this post...

Does Kelly O'Donnell work for NBC or the McCain campaign?

Just wondering. Kelly O'Donnell apparently thinks her job is to regurgitate McCain talking points and spin. She doesn't filter anything or provide any context. She just spits out what the McCain crew tells her. I've noticed this for months, but it's especially bad at the convention.

Watch out Liz Sidoti, you've got competition. I bet Kelly knows what McCain's favorite donuts are and how he likes his coffee, too. And, to be fair, Kelly obviously wants to stay on the invite list for bbqs at the McCain estate, too. Read the rest of this post...

Results of Palin's speech? Obama raised $8m, RNC raised $1m

Hey, that hurts. I'm feeling greedy. Let's show General Palin what she's up against. You can give to Barack Obama via the box to the left, just click and it'll take you to the page where you can donate securely. I've upped to the fundraising goal to $50,000. Crazy perhaps, but let's see where it gets us. Read the rest of this post...

A Feminist Defines the Bounds

Listening to commentators like Cokie Roberts on television and talking with plenty of women since the Palin announcement, I've heard a lot of things that show a frustration with the national reaction to Sarah Palin.

A lot of the criticism of Palin has been non-issues related - can she be a good mother and a VP, who is going to take care of the baby, etc. Those questions have made me uncomfortable as well. I've worked with plenty of working moms in my day and each of them work out with their spouse who takes care of the kids and how. For me, that's not something I'm going to judge.

But the reality is that on the issues, Palin isn't fighting for women any more than Phyllis Schlafly was when she opposed the ERA. Palin is just another soldier of the Religious Right.

In today's LA Times, stalwart feminist Gloria Steinem defines the boundaries of what she thinks is fair criticism of Palin and what's not:

Here's the good news: Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women -- and to many men too -- who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the "white-male-only" sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

But here is even better news: It won't work. This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere. It's not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It's about baking a new pie.

Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for -- and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs."....

So let's be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Palin's value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

Take a read of the rest. Read the rest of this post...

Obama answers questions from a group of reporters. Will McCain and Palin ever do that? Ever?

Jed has video of Obama answering questions from reporters.



Joe Biden did a round of talk shows this morning. The Democratic ticket has been answering questions about issues. That's something the Republicans are avoiding at all cost.

So, here's the question: How much longer will the McCain campaign keep McCain and Palin from talking to the media. And, by media, I don't mean FOX or Rush or any of the other GOP owned and operated outlets. McCain has been avoiding his old friends in the press (and he's mad at them) -- and they're not letting reporters anywhere near Palin. This weekend, you will see Obama, Biden and even McCain on Sunday shows. But, no Palin.

Because now the McCain campaign is being mean to the press, the political reporters and pundits will dutifully back down as they always do. They all miss the old days riding around on the bus with McCain, eating at his barbeques, bringing him his favorite donuts (come on, Liz Sidoti, you know you miss it).

I'm betting we will NEVER see video of Sarah Palin spontaneously answering questions like Obama did today. Anyone want to bet? Read the rest of this post...

McCain campaign: Palin won't do any interviews, she's just going to read speeches from now on

Well there's another McCain talking point out the window, about how speeches do not a president make. I guess now they do.

And, if reading speeches off a teleprompter were the only requirement for being commander in chief of the US armed forces, then yes Sarah Palin reading a series of speeches written for her would be enough. But it's not enough, and it suggests that McCain thinks Palin is an idiot who can't even answer a simple question from the media, or the American public (or worse, she she's so tainted by scandal, they refuse to put her out there at all). It's downright disturbing how the McCain campaign is handling Palin and her growing list of scandals/controversies. They seem to be hoping that they can trick the American people into liking her, without giving them any real substance. Possibly because she has no real substance. Then again, they're refusing to put John McCain out there for any questions either. Kind of makes you wonder if he's still healthy enough to be commander in chief, or if the campaign is hiding something about John McCain's health and that's why they won't let him do any more press conferences (remember, McCain is 72 years old and has had at least 4 bouts of cancer).

Jake Carney of TIME gets into this more in depth:

According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads.

Wallace's bash-the-media exercise has its merits as a campaign tactic. It certainly rallies the base. But the base won't lift McCain to 50% in November. More importantly, in her smug dismissal of the media's role in asking questions of the candidates, Wallace was really showing contempt not for reporters, but for voters. I bet there are a lot of undecided voters out there who were intrigued by Sarah Palin last night, but who don't yet know enough about her -- what she believes, what she knows -- to be comfortable with the idea of her as vice president of the United States. It's important to them to know if Palin can handle herself in an environment that isn't controlled and sanitized by campaign image makers and message mavens. Maybe she can, maybe she can't. As far as Wallace is concerned, it's none of their -- or your -- business.

Read the rest of this post...

GOP staged fake military funeral for their convention

Sick sick sick. When the Republicans said they support the troops, I never knew they meant the imaginary ones. Though, as DKos reminds us, this isn't the first time the Republicans used fake troops to bolster their image - in fact, John McCain's mentor, George Bush, did it for his election 2004 as well. Read the rest of this post...

CATO slams Palin's record of tax increases on Big Oil

CATO calls it "uninspiring" and I'd be shocked if any old-fashioned Rockefeller Republican (if any even exist today) is impressed with Palin's tax policy which includes taxes, including windfall tax provision to Big Oil just like Obama. However, in the case of Obama, McCain attacked Obama and drew comparisons to the Carter plan. If Palin is an energy expert, as the Republicans are saying, aren't they confirming Obama's plan?

More from CATO on Palin's tax increase policy while governor of Alaska. I don't have a problem with her taxing Big Oil but I'm guessing fiscal conservatives might take issue with her $1.5 billion dollar tax increase on Big Oil. Since John McCain is now 72 years old and has had four bouts of cancer, are the Republicans saying that they want a heavy tax-and-spend VP to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? Really?

Palin supported and signed into law a $1.5 billion tax increase on oil companies in the form of higher severance taxes. One rule of thumb is that higher taxes cause less investment. Sure enough, State Tax Notes reported (January 7): “After ACES was passed, ConocoPhillips, Alaska’s most active oil exploration company and one of the top three producers, announced it was canceling plans to build a diesel fuel refinery at the Kuparuk oil field. ConocoPhillips blamed the cancellation on passage of ACES [the new tax]. The refinery would have allowed the company to produce low-sulfur diesel fuel onsite for its vehicles and other uses on the North Slope, rather than haul the fuel there from existing refineries.”

There are good reasons for an oil-rich state to tax oil production, but a fiscal conservative would usually use any tax increase to reduce taxes elsewhere. Perhaps I’m missing something, but I see no evidence that Palin offered any major tax cuts. She did propose sending $1.2 billion of state oil revenues to individuals and utility companies in the form of monthly payments to reduce energy bills, but that sounds like welfare to me, not tax cuts.

Read the rest of this post...

McCain cancels Habitat for Humanity Photo Opp

Something about being photographed around a "house" is now freaking Mr. McCain out. Or perhaps it's being seen around all those "community organizer" types. If McCain actually saw what community organizers do, how they help needy people in communities, he might have to repudiate all the nasty stuff that came out of his convention last night. And rather than do that, McCain figures it's better to just diss Habitat for Humanity. In any case, Cindy would have nothing to wear to the event anyway - I mean, you can't really wear a $300,000 outfit to a barn raising. Read the rest of this post...

Maybe McCain simply can't remember what he said two months ago

Sad. Now McCain is attacking Obama for something McCain himself did in July. Oops.

Read the rest of this post...

Cindy McCain thinks Palin is "a babe" - but that's not sexist

Uh huh.

Speaking to Diane Sawyer, Cindy McCain blasted the overall coverage of Palin as sexist -- and specifically an Us Weekly cover headlined "Babies, Lies and Scandal."

"I think it's insulting," McCain told Sawyer. "I think it's outlandish. And for whatever reason, the media has decided to treat her differently, because, I believe, because she's a woman."

While McCain believes sexism has fueled much of the criticism against Palin, she didn't disagree with conservative commentator and radio host Rush Limbaugh's assertion of the governor.

"We're the ones with a babe on the ticket," Limbaugh said.

"She is. She's lovely. I think she's beautiful," McCain said in response to the comment.

This, from Miss Buffalo Chip. Read the rest of this post...

Jon Stewart: GOP was against claiming sexism before they were for it

Read the rest of this post...

Fired Alaskan Official Says Palin Hasn't Been Truthful

From ABC News:

The fired Alaskan official, whose dismissal has become the subject of a state senate committee's investigation of Gov. Sarah Palin, has told ABC News that she has not been entirely truthful on the matter.

In a telephone interview Wednesday, Walt Monegan, the former Alaskan Public Safety Commissioner, said he was dismissed because he refused to fire the Governor's former brother-in-law, a state trooper.

"I believe I was fired because of, primarily the reason of her former brother-in-law," Monegan said. "I think that my unwillingness to take special action against her former brother-in-law was not well received."

Monegan says he believes that the Governor has not told the truth about what happened.

"I think there are some questions now that, coming to light about how transparent and how honest she wants to be," Monegan said.

The allegation against the Governor, which she denies, is that she wanted her former brother-in-law fired and pushed the Monegan to do it.

Palin has said she did nothing wrong and that she fired Monegan over a disagreement with him on budget priorities.

But the head of the state senate committee, a Democrat, now investigating the allegations says it smacks of abuse of power.

"You should never use your public office to settle a private score," said Sen. Hollis French. "And that's what the legislature is looking into, to what degree did the Governor's personal family relationship inject or get introduced into her work as Governor."

Read the rest of this post...

Why the media should apologize

Brilliant article by Roger Simon at Politico:

On behalf of the media, I would like to say we are sorry.

On behalf of the elite media, I would like to say we are very sorry.

We have asked questions this week that we should never have asked.

We have asked pathetic questions like: Who is Sarah Palin? What is her record? Where does she stand on the issues? And is she is qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

We have asked mean questions like: How well did John McCain know her before he selected her? How well did his campaign vet her? And was she his first choice?

Bad questions. Bad media. Bad....

[W]e should never have strayed into the other stuff. Like when The Washington Post recently wrote: “Palin is under investigation by a bipartisan state legislative body. … Palin had promised to cooperate with the legislative inquiry, but this week she hired a lawyer to fight to move the case to the jurisdiction of the state personnel board, which Palin appoints.”

Why go there? What trees does that plant?

Fourth, we should stop making with all the questions already. She gave a really good speech. And why go beyond that? As we all know, speeches cannot be written by others and rehearsed for days. They are true windows to the soul.

Unless they are delivered by Barack Obama, that is. In which case, as Palin said Wednesday, speeches are just a “cloud of rhetoric.”

Read the rest of this post...

Cindy McCain wore a $300,000 outfit to the convention

Oh. My. God.

Read the rest of this post...

Palin bombs with voters in Michigan: "I was completely underwhelmed. She was a Republican novelty act with a sophomoric script. "

The pundits were giddy about Sarah Palin last night. But, they were all in the convention hall with the frenzied GOPers. And, as noted below, they're all upset because McCain is mad at them, so they went overboard.

On the other hand, real Americans weren't so overwhelmed. Check out these comments from a focus group conducted by the Detroit Free Press (in that key swing state of Michigan):

“I was completely underwhelmed. She was a Republican novelty act with a sophomoric script. It was not even a speech I would expect for a someone running for the local PTA, much less for vice president.”

-- George Lentz, 66, Southfield independent

“Who is Sarah Palin? I'm sorry but I still don't know anymore about this young lady tonight than I did last night ... The way it looks to me, she's the Republican vice presidential nominee for one reason: because Hillary wasn't selected.”

-- Mike Kosh, 38, West Bloomfield independent

"Sarah Palin is a self-described ‘pitbull with lipstick.’ She spent little time helping Americans learn who she is. She is a cool, poised speaker, but her speech contained few statements about policy or the party platform. … I am not convinced that Palin's experience as a mayor or governor in Alaska meet the qualifications to be vice president much less one stroke or heart attack away from being commander in chief.”

-- Ilene Beninson, 52, Berkley independent

“Nothing worked for me. I found her barrage of snide remarksand distortions to be a major turn off. She is not a class act. The most important point she made is that she will be an effective attack dog.”

-- Jan Wheelock, 58, Royal Oak independent

“Sarah got as much applause as Hillary did, and had a friendly, appealing appearance.
Her delivery style reminded me of a high school valedictorian who also might have been a cheerleader. I thought she would appear more professional, more stateswomanly. She's no match for Joe Biden.”

-- Joellen Gilchrist, 64, Beverly Hills independent

Ouch. Read the rest of this post...

It takes two right wing Republicans to take on Rachel Maddow -- or NBC is just trying to be extra nice to the GOP because McCain is mad

No doubt, Rachel Maddow is amazing. Apparently, NBC has decided that to balance a panel with Rachel, they need two Republicans. This morning, Rachel was joined by former George H.W. Bush staffer Joe Watkins and former George W. Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson. Sure Rachel more than held her own, but is this what we should expect from NBC from here on out?


There is another more nefarious reason NBC is stacking panels with GOPers. The network execs are probably scared of McCain. He's mad at the media so NBC is over-compensating:

When Republicans gathered at Madison Square Garden to celebrate President Bush’s second nomination four years ago, Senator John McCain gathered at a restaurant uptown with some of the biggest stars in journalism to celebrate his birthday. Among those mingling over cocktails and fine French food with Mr. McCain and his wife, Cindy, were Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, Bob Schieffer, Maureen Dowd, Tim Russert — “our people,” as an old campaign hand reminisced on Wednesday.

Those there that night now feel as if they are living in some sort of alternate reality in the Xcel Energy Center here, where Mr. McCain is to accept the Republican nomination on Thursday.

The convention has already included some of the most intense attacks against journalists by a campaign in memory, with Mr. McCain’s aides accusing them of biased, sexist and generally unfair coverage of his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.

Read the rest of this post...

Jobless claims jump to 440,000

Another sign of trouble for the GOP economy. Most are forecasting even more unemployment, more trouble on Wall Street and more housing foreclosures as the year goes on. If this is what McCain thinks is "great progress" I would hate to see the bad times. Read the rest of this post...

Sarah stretches the truth: The natural gas pipeline lies

This really is vintage Bush/Rove. Just make things up and hope the media doesn't cover it. NBC's Chuck Todd said last night, "The speech was very thin on substance." What we're learning is that the thin substance Palin did discuss -- including the Bridge to Nowhere -- just wasn't fact-based. She lied. From the Anchorage Daily News, this one is a whopper:

PALIN: "I fought to bring about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history. And when that deal was struck, we began a nearly forty billion dollar natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence. That pipeline, when the last section is laid and its valves are opened, will lead America one step farther away from dependence on dangerous foreign powers that do not have our interests at heart.

THE FACTS: Palin implies that construction has begun on a major natural gas pipeline from the top of Alaska into Canada. That is not correct.

In fact, no building has begun and actual construction is years away, if it ever happens. This summer the Alaska Legislature, at Palin's request, passed a bill under which the state will issue a "license" to a Canadian energy company, TransCanada Corp., and pay it up to $500 million as an incentive to someday build this enormous project, which Alaska politicians have long sought with little success. The license is not a construction contract, and federal energy regulators have not yet approved the project.

Palin also puts the price tag for the project at $40 billion, an exaggeration. This is roughly $10 billion more than most cost estimates industry players and consultants have made to date.

Just make up a lie and repeat over and over and over. That's the GOP strategy. We'll be hearing about this pipeline ad nauseum. Although, in the next incarnations, Sarah will tell us how she was out there building the pipeline herself -- with Todd, of course. Read the rest of this post...

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Well, that was some night, huh.

Is Rudy insane? His speech was nasty, vicious, somewhat incoherent and just weird. I'm sure we'll have more on Rudy later today. But, he morphed into Pat Buchanan last night. That was the 2008 version of the angry, hate-filled speech Buchanan gave in 1992.

And, Palin has been taught well by her GOP handlers. Lying is fine. Attacking is the norm. Don't worry about substance. I don't know how anyone outside of that auditorium could think she's truly capable of being second in command. But, that's what John McCain thinks.

This convention has such a creepy, disturbing feel to it. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it just feels creepy. I really don't like having this group of people in my life - even if it's just on tv and in the news for now. Actually, it feels like Pat Buchanan's crew has taken over the whole GOP. The right wing theocrats rule -- and they're not very tolerant.

Start threading and expect another wild day... Read the rest of this post...

Federal Reserve warns on economy, inflation

That's probably before they knew Sarah Palin brought a Target to Wassila, Alaska. Just imagine what she could do in Washington if she participates in a third Bush term.

The Federal Reserve's new snapshot of business conditions, released Wednesday, underscored the toll the housing, credit and financial debacles are having on the economy and the challenges likely to be faced by the next president. Problems are expected to persist into next year.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues are all but certain to leave a key interest rate alone at 2 percent when they meet next on Sept. 16 and probably through the rest of this year.

Given the fragile state of the economy, the Fed isn't in a hurry to boost rates to fend off creeping inflation. A growing number of analysts believe the economy is likely to hit another dangerous rough patch later this year as consumers and businesses curtail their spending even more.

Heading into the fall, economic activity continued to be slow, the Fed said. Businesses described the climate as "weak" or "soft" or "subdued."

Consumers, the lifeblood of the economy, showed caution. Shoppers "concentrated on necessary items and retrenchment in discretionary spending," the Fed observed.

Read the rest of this post...

GOP: Palin has seen the light on earmarks, no word on windfall taxes for Big Oil

Uh huh, sure. So she was for pork before she was against pork? After a whopping two years? Gosh, how could we not gobble up that line in light of the other scandals tied to the Governor of Alaska?

Leaders of the congressional Republican campaign against parochial pet projects in spending bills joined the party's aggressive campaign to promote the vice-presidential candidacy of Sarah Palin on Wednesday, labelling the Alaska governor a "reformed earmarker," who could be trusted to help trim wasteful spending from federal budgets.

"When it comes to earmarks, McCain-Palin is a reformer's dream and a pork-barreler's nightmare," Rep. Jeb Hansarling of Texas said at a hastily-arranged news conference.

"There's one person in this race who's actually vetoed earmarks, and her name is Gov. Sarah Palin," said Hensarling, who chairs the Republican Study Commission, a group of fiscally conservative House members.

Are they saying John McCain is a proponent of earmarks? Of course, I also was stuck on the "group of fiscally conservative House members" line because I must have missed that group during the GOP control of the House. Obviously not a very popular group. What they also surprisingly missed is the fact that she raised taxes on business in Alaska by $1.5 billion and instituted a windfall profits tax on Big Oil, just like Obama has suggested. Palin's windfall profit tax on big oil collected a total of $6 billion in its first year. So is the "fiscally conservative" group now supporting windfall profit taxes on Big Oil? Help. I'm so confused. Read the rest of this post...

Harry Reid's office responds to Palin's "shrill and sarcastic political attacks"

During the big speech tonight, Sarah Palin took a swipe at Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid because like so many people, Reid can't stand John McCain. Not sure if she knows who Harry Reid is, but it was in the speech that was written for her. Anyway, Reid's office responded (via email):

Jim Manley, spokesman for Senator Reid: "Anyone who knows Senator Reid knows he never backs down when he's fighting for what's right and that he always stands up to John McCain when he is wrong. Shrill and sarcastic political attacks may fire up the Republican base, but they don't change the fact that a McCain-Palin administration would mean four more years of failed Bush-Cheney policies."

In our live blog of the Palin speech, I wrote "Thanks for telling the world that Harry Reid can't stand John McCain, Sarah. That's one reason we love Harry Reid. (p.s. You might want to talk to John McCain's GOP Senate colleagues. They can't stand him. They really hate him. His temper scares them. You'll find that out soon enough, no doubt.)" Read the rest of this post...