Jindal vs. Palin?

In this candid, and entertaining blog call Dynamist, a woman named Virginia writes:

Now I may have to go back to being a Republican, to gear up for the struggle between the Jindal-Daniels wing and the Palin-Huckabee wing of the party.

What a great quote, and what a fascinating race that would be to watch develop. A Jindal vs. Obama election would be epic, and truly fascinating to watch.

I would never join the Republicans, but I admit, it would be tempting to actively participate in the debates they will surely have in the next year or two.

Meanwhile, we can enjoy the infancy of Obama's presidency, and see if he can resist the tug-of-war with his own party to drag him far to the left. I predict Obama shows Democrats how to truly govern with wisdom, pragmatic tactics and careful consideration of all points of view.

A lesson the Clintons didn't learn at first, and suffered in congress shortly afterward because of it.

...

Dowd: Schmidt is the Scapegoat

Maureen Dowd reminds me of that English teacher that would scold you for a dangling participle, and then force you to read Catcher in the Rye. Maureen Dowd doesn’t really editorialize, she muses, and usually in a way that condescends, rather than inform.

While she may difficult to read, (and seems like the kind of woman that would immediately wash her hands after you were formally introduced), she is required reading for anyone interested in US politics. She is required reading, because like it or not, she often sets the agenda for a news cycle.

She and others (such as Matt Drudge), are shepherd crooks in the sheep pastures of American media. They are important, because in this age, our media seeks sparks with which to launch the next 24-hour fire. Dowd, Drudge (and a few others) often provide those sparks.

Maureen’s editorial today is one of several that are already writing the John McCain obituary before the results are even tabulated. It was as usual, quite sardonic, but it did highlight one scapegoat for McCain’s current situation that I’d also like to highlight: Steve Schmidt.

She writes this about him in her latest editorial:

In the end, “The Bullet,” or “Sarge,” as McCain calls his replacement campaign manager Steve Schmidt, was the one who did the shackling, turning the vibrant and respected McCain into a shell of his former self. Schmidt abruptly cut off the oxygen supply to McCain’s brain. No more of the oldest established, permanent floating crap game of press confabs. No more audiences that weren’t vetted for friendliness. No more of McCain’s trademark insouciant mocking the process even as he participated in it.
--Maureen Dowd

If McCain goes down in a ball of flames, (as many are predicting) then Schmidt is indeed scapegoat #1.

I believe the morale of McCain's campaign will be: you can’t run a Karl Rove campaign during a recession. Schmidt failed to see that obvious truth, and may have damaged the Republican brand for years because of that blunder.

One other small note: I think the word "insouciant", is the kind of adjective only a Thesaurus should ever print. :)

...

Conservative Litmus: George Will

Do you want to know if you're a genuine conservative? If you demand a conservative litmus test, personally, I'd leave the final verdict to George Will.

His verdict on Sarah Palin is not a good one. This editorial from him is outstanding reading.

My two favorite quotes from this are below and my commentary follows:

Did McCain, who seems to think that Palin's never having attended a "Georgetown cocktail party" is sufficient qualification for the vice presidency, lift an eyebrow when she said that vice presidents "are in charge of the United States Senate"?
-- George Will

Later in the article George Will attacks the scapegoat tactics, that have demonized Obama's fund raising:

Why is it virtuous to erect a dam of laws to impede the flow of contributions by which citizens exercise their First Amendment right to political expression? "We're now going to see," McCain warned, "huge amounts of money coming into political campaigns, and we know history tells us that always leads to scandal." The supposedly inevitable scandal, which supposedly justifies preemptive government restrictions on Americans' freedom to fund the dissemination of political ideas they favor, presumably is that Obama will be pressured to give favors to his September givers. The contributions by the new givers that month averaged $86.
-- George Will

MY COMMENT: Palin was a farcical pick, a "sugar rush" that provides instant momentum for McCain's campaign, but then crashed and burned when it was obvious that even the most basic question from the press (say a question like "what newspapers do you read?"), had her stumbling for words, and struggling to deliver a single coherent sentence.

On campaign financing, Will makes superb commentary, but missed why McCain is making noise on this issue. While we all agree, public financing of presidential campaigns, need to go the way of the dodo (public financing does far more harm than good), the reason why McCain is raising the issue isn't because he defends public financing, it is because it is setting the stage for the inevitable Republican response to this election.

That response will be: fraud, fraud, fraud.

Obama's campaign financing will receive massive scrutiny in the weeks ahead, and his use of e-Commerce to raise hundreds of millions, will be called into question, and there will be enough odd cases of fraud, that the cry that his entire victory was fraudulent will sadly gain traction in the press.

Still, Will's commentary is laser sharp in the above editorial, and ends on a "delicious" piece of trivia about potato chips. It's worthy reading, from a worthy voice in our political landscape.

...

Khalidi "Scandal" is Last Straw

I personally don’t agree with some of Mr. Khalidi’s views, and I confess he argues for the Palestinian cause with great fervor. I also confess he has criticized Israel for failing to work towards a two-state solution. However, this does not make him a terrorist, nor does it link him to the PLO and it certainly does not make him an anti-Semite.

To make matters even more deplorable, John McCain chaired a committee which handed half-a-million dollars to an organization which Khalidi founded, so this campaign pointing any suspicious fingers towards him is utterly hypocritical.

There are several other aspects of this charade that bother me:

1) The idea that anyone with Palestinian heritage is somehow ‘un-American’, anti-Semitic or connected to the PLO is ridiculous.

2) The fact such serious accusations can be leveled by a presidential campaign with no proof, is unacceptable. I blame the media for this, for providing validity to the story, instead of clearly reporting the facts. Mainstream media has to stop merely being an echo chamber for campaign managers (both left and right).

3) Even worse, the insinuation that because Obama appeared at a banquet with Khalidi, means Obama is also in league with the PLO and is working to destroy Israel, is a new low.

4) Why hasn’t McCain criticized “Joe the Plumber” for suggesting, a vote for Obama would mean the “death of Israel”?

There was a time I had great respect for John McCain, but that is no longer the case, after this garbage. I really hope the Republicans get their soul back in future elections, because their current status and desperate tactics are beneath all of us.

Anti-Semitism is a serious charge that should never be reported by the media without definitive proof. The phrase “he will bring the death of Israel” is a phrase that must be substantiated immediately by a campaign, or withdrawn and apologized for profusely.

Goodbye John McCain, good riddance, your biggest failure is you actually made the wing nuts at DailyKOS seem like they were right all along, by running the lowest presidential campaign in history.

If you have any doubt of Khalidi, I invite you to watch the following debate he has with a former Israeli ambassador. And again, while you may not agree with some of his points of view, at least concede he argues his case reasonably, as any American should be permitted to do in a free society...

Rovian Tactics RIP?

It seems that this time around, (if polls are to be believed), that “Rovian” tactics are simply out of date. There have been many editorials of late that discuss “what went wrong”. Putting aside these editorials are jumping the gun a little, I think it is still it’s a worthy discussion.

My favorite editorial on this topic recently can be found here.

My favorite quote in this editorial comes at the end…

Two years ago, I wrote a book imploring the Republican Party not to follow its worst elements off a cliff—not to evolve, in short, into an insular party with little-to-no appeal outside of the rural, the southern, the Evangelical. As the McCain campaign flames out in a ball of Rovian disgrace, scorching the center in an attempt to fire up the base, it's difficult to reach any other conclusion than that the battle for the soul of the Republican Party has been lost.
- Ryan Sager

MY COMMENT: As much as I wish this election to put a stake in the "energize the base" politics of Rove and Kristol, I have a feeling, we haven't seen the last of this gang. They are plotting their triumphant return to power in 2012 already I am sure.

...

Score Another Point for Brooks

For the second day in a row David Brooks scores a worthy quote. I don't always agree with this man, but this quote is precisely how I feel right now:

I have nothing against partisanship, but I do have something against self-deception. In the final months of a campaign large majorities in the country simply shut off all information that doesn’t confirm their own candidates superior virtue and intelligence. I’m amazed at the number of pundits I see who are simply campaign mouthpieces. I’m amazed at the bloggers who have lost all independence and are simply operatives.
-- David Brooks, New York Times

I challenge anyone who reads this to dial up a site that contradicts your established point of view and give it a read. If you are left-wing, dial up Michelle Malkin, Hugh Hewitt or the National Review. If you are right-wing, dial up Markos, Huffington or "The Nation".

For us independents, this is a daily exercise, trying to read both partisan hype-machines, and then attempting to discern the truth amongst the cheerleaders and echo chambers.

It's not easy, but it is what responsible voters do.

...

No Shame in Science

Christopher Hitchens is the kind of editorialist many people loathe. He is loathed by some, because he is both a conservative and an atheist, he’ll cross any party line when it suits him, and because he can make eccentric arguments with great cunning and reason. Now, I don’t always agree with Hitchens but there are times he writes with great clarity and wisdom, and this is one of thos times.

My favorite quote from his latest editorial is:

This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured.
-- Christopher Hitchens

A link to the full article is here

My comment: One of many positive possibilities from this election is that fiscal conservatives who value civil liberties more than religious dogma, might finally get their lungs back in the Republican party.

If Republicans would simply diminish their slander of science and secularism, this would make them a far more attractive political party for many independent voters.

However, if Sarah Palin is dragged out of the Alaska wilderness and is offered to voters again in 2012, the Republicans will officially become a farce. The choice belongs to Republicans and it will be interesting to see which way they turn.

...

David Brooks is Right

David Brooks.

DailyKOS rails against him, and questions his intelligence. Republican cheerleaders have ostracized him, for refusing to tow the party line.

So in other words, he annoys both extremes of the spectrum, which in my eyes, means he's probably doing something right.

Well, he did something right with his Sunday editorial I thought, my favorite quote is below:

...some of us hoped McCain would take sides in the debate now dividing the G.O.P. Some Republicans believe the G.O.P. went astray by abandoning its tax-cutting, anti-government principles. They want a return to Reagan (or at least the Reagan of their imaginations). But others want to modernize and widen the party and adapt it to new challenges. Some of us hoped that by reforming his party, which has grown so unpopular, McCain could prove that he could reform the country. But McCain never took sides in this debate and never articulated a governing philosophy..."
-- David Brooks

The full editorial is here.

The "Fraud" Narrative Gains Momentum

I continue to harp about the inevitable Republican response to an Obama victory, which I predict will be: fraud, fraud, fraud!

We saw initial seeds planted last week for this narrative, and now we see mainstream slowly taking the bait.

A key quote from this article in the Washington Post:

Donors to the Obama campaign using false names such as Doodad Pro and Good Will gave $17,375 through 1,000 separate donations, with no sign that they immediately tripped alarms at the campaign. Of more concern, Cairncross said, are reports that the campaign permitted money from 123 foreign nationals to enter its accounts.
-- Matthew Mosk, Washington Post

As someone with a decade of electronic commerce experience in my career, I can tell you, there will be many examples of "suspicious" donations in Obama's campaign.

It won't matter that there was a serious effort to thwart the fraud, or that the vast majority of the contributions were probably legal, or that Obama was clearly the preferred candidate.

No, the narrative will be, that America's first black president, used "Chicago-style" politics to steal the presidency.

Sean Hannity is writing his first diatribe on this topic already, to be delivered within 24-hours of an Obama victory.

What is the left doing in anticipation of this? Nothing, they are popping champagne, laughing at SNL skits and saying stupid things like "leave nothing on the road, nothing".

It will be giddy cheerleaders versus a savvy, media-driven narrative to discredit the left's largest political gain in decades. I think it will be the cheerleaders that might end up "on the road:, if they don't start acting now to counter these accusations.

...

A Worrisome Mess

A quote worthy of repeating, (and even shouting from rooftops if you have the energy):

We can go to the moon, split atoms to power submarines, squeeze profits from a 99 cent hamburger and watch football highlights on cell phones. But the most successful democracy in human history has yet to figure out how to conduct a proper election. As it stands, the American voting system is a worrisome mess, a labyrinth of local, state and federal laws spotted with bewildered volunteers, harried public officials, partisan distortions, misdesigned forms, malfunctioning machines and polling-place confusion.
-- Michael Sherer, Time Magazine

I have warned for a while now, how the outcome of this election will likely bring thunderous cries of “voter fraud”. If Obama wins, the validity of his victory be called into question, primarily because our election technology and voter audit procedures are sadly lacking.

Think of it: the first African-American President will have his legitimacy questioned, merely because our procedures can be called into question. That's just tragic, and we have only ourselves to blame.

We should be pushing our leaders for reform of our electoral process, and provide a means by which we can all track our individual vote, and ensure it was recorded correctly.

The full diatribe from Michael can be seen here.

...

McCain Finally Finds a Message

Andrew Romano of Newsweek writes an interesting analysis of the McCain campaign, suggesting that they have finally found a message that might work against “Obama Mania”.

You can find the article here.

I agree with the editorial only in part.

While I agree capitalizing on Joe Biden’s incredibly stupid remark in Seattle is political platinum; I am not so sure the “Joe the Plumber” message is working.

I suspect most voters are a little fatigued with "Joe the Plumber" already. Not to mention, that most of us in the middle class, don’t see a pending tax cut to our returns as “spreading the wealth”, we see it as necessary relief to shelter ourselves from the impending recession.

To be blunt: I want that tax cut, and I don’t consider myself a “socialist” just because I’d like a little relief, from this current economic climate.

However, I think Romano is right that Biden's inane comment earlier this week, provides a means whereby McCain can score points on foreign policy.

...

Si Se Puede!

Clinton supporters claimed the Latino vote was one of Obama’s greatest weaknesses (among others), but as usual, the Clintons were wrong:

“Latinos make up 32.4% of registered voters in New Mexico, 11.4% in Nevada and 9.9% in Colorado. The institute examined data from eight polling firms and found that Obama's lead over McCain in Nevada would be 42.4% to 40.7% without Latino voters -- a difference that's within the margin of error. Include Latino voters, however, and Obama's lead grows to 50%, versus 43% for McCain.”
– Marjorie Miller, LA Times

The original/full article can be found here.

My comment: If things continue to tighten in Pennsylvannia and McCain continues to lead (and therefore win) Ohio and Florida, then these Latino voters in Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado could well decide who is president of the United States.

...