Black Centenarian Votes for Obama

Talk about living through change. Born over a century ago, when Blacks didn't have the right to vote and women were treated as chattel, Ann Nixon Cooper has lived through remarkable changes in her life. Left out of electoral process when the suffragettes got the vote for women 88 years ago, because she was Black. Ms. Cooper wouldn't be able to cast a vote for the candidate of her choice until the mid-60's (when she was over 60 years of age).

She's lived through numerous wars, diseases that ravaged the countryside, and blatant, overt racism. She was treated as a second class citizen for a majority of her life. Her husband and sons were only one snide remark, one wayward look from being dragged off to get lynched or killed. She has spent a majority of her life "so far inferior that [she] had no rights which the white man was bound to respect." (Reference. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney)

Well, a few days ago, 106-year-old Ann Cooper went into downtown Atlanta, Georgia and voted for a Black man to become the President of the United States.

Read excerpts of the CNN.com article:

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Ann Nixon Cooper, 106 years old, has seen presidents come and go in her lifetime and has outlived most of them. On a sunny fall morning, she left her weathered but well-kept Tudor home in Atlanta, Georgia, to vote early -- this time for Barack Obama.

The African-American centenarian remembers a time not long ago when she was barred from voting because of her race. Now she hopes to see the day that Obama is elected as the nation's first black president.

"I ain't got time to die," Cooper said with a smile.

"Even if he didn't win, I was happy for him just to be nominated," said the former socialite. "The first black president -- isn't that something, at 106 years old?"

At the Fulton County government center, Cooper was greeted by Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin.

"I thought that I would accompany her today to support her, but also to say to all people that this is a choice we have," Franklin said.

Cooper, in a wheelchair and helped by two caretakers, bypassed the long lines of early voters and headed right to the voting machine. Her 106-year-old hands reached out to the 21st-century touch screen to cast her vote for Obama.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Back at her home, surrounded by the elegance of a bygone era, Cooper clutched the photo albums laid out on her dining room table. The longtime socialite and community leader has called Atlanta home since the 1920s.

She and her late husband, prominent dentist Dr. Albert Cooper, raised four children in this house.

"Our days and nights were just social affairs," she said. The home was a center of Atlanta's black society and the scene of many parties. Celebrities, including the late singer Nat King Cole, dropped in to visit.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Cooper was born in Shelbyville, Tennessee, in 1902. She grew up in Nashville with uncles and an aunt who worked as a domestic for wealthy whites.

She married Albert Cooper in Nashville in 1922, and the couple moved to Atlanta. Three of Cooper's four children have died; her surviving daughter is 83. She has 14 grandchildren living and many great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren.

Read the CNN.com article about 106-year-old Ann Nixon Cooper here.


plez sez: my grandfather lived to the ripe old age of 103! he lived with my family in virginia until he passed away in 1988. my grandfather was born in 1884 - one of sixteen children most of whom would succumb to a typhoid epidemic - on the same dusty and god-for-saken place in north carolina where his parents had been slaves! the last name, mitchell, was given to them by the man who owned them.

i can still remember looking into his eyes and swearing that i could see the pain and hardship of growing up in a racist society. like ann cooper, he lived most of his life as a second class citizen, for most of his life he could not vote, for most of his life he could not look a white person in the eye for fear of reprisal, for most of his life the path of his life was dictated to him and not determined by him.

but for some reason, his life experience didn't leave him bitter or cold. my granddaddy was the warmest, most gentle, and genteel person you would ever meet... he only raised his voice if you said a curse word in his house (that wasn't allowed)! my grandfather had two wives and eleven children (my mother was the youngest). he owned an impressive parcel of land along a dirt road just outside ahoskie, north carolina where he grew tobacco and cotton, and raised chickens and hogs for slaughter. i remember him telling me the story of how Black people weren't even allowed to add up the cost of the grain and feed that they bought in the general store, but he was so good with arithmetic that he would add the cost of everything in his head so he could tell if the store owner tried to cheat him.

he couldn't go to the movie theater with white people, so he made his own music... i remember to this day watching his wrinkled hands playing his old accordion. my mother and her sisters learned how to play the piano and sing.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

i could feel my granddaddy - WALTER MITCHELL - in ms. ann cooper in the CNN piece... and i can see him in heaven on november 4th, sitting in his rocking chair smoking his pipe watching the election returns on CBS television as they announce Barack Obama the 44th president of the united states. and granddaddy would continue to rock in his chair and with a twinkle in his eyes, he would give the slightest hint of his gentle smile.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

OBAMA UPDATE: as of this writing, it appears that Sen. Barack Obama will be leaving the campaign trail to visit his ailing grandmother in Hawaii. Read more...

Colin Powell Endorses Sen. Barack Obama

"I think he is a transformational figure, he is a new generation coming onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Sen. Barack Obama."
- Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said on NBC's "Meet the Press"

Gen. Colin Powell holds a unique place in American politics. He was a very successful general in the US Army and veteran of the Vietnam War. He has served the administrations of numerous Presidents (Joints Chief of Staff for Clinton, National Security Advisor for Bush 41, and Secretary of State for Bush 43). A one-time short-lister for President in 2000, he is one Black American who unabashedly still defines himself as a moderate Republican.

Well, on the Sunday edition of NBC's "Meet the Press," Colin Powell - in probably the most lucid and complete reasoning that plezWorld has heard - detailed the reasons why he has decided to endorse (and vote) for Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) as the next President of the United States.

Colin Powell's Endorsement of Barack Obama:



Transcript of Powell comments after NBC's "Meet the Press":

Reporter: Do you think that Sen. Obama will be a better transitional president than potentially Sen. McCain?

Colin Powell: I think that Sen. Obama brings a fresh set of of eyes, a fresh set of ideas to the table. I think that Sen. McCain, as gifted as he is, is essentially going to execute the Republican agenda, the orthodoxy of the Republican agenda with a new face and with a maverick approach to it. And he'd be quite good at it. But I think we need more than that. I think we need a generational change. And I think Sen. Obama has captured the feelings of the young people of America and is reaching out in a more diverse, inclusive way across our society. Watch Powell tell why he supports Obama »

Reporter: Could you talk to us about when your decision was made final? When did you finally set your heart on Sen. Obama?

Powell: I have been watching, as I said [on "Meet the Press"], for a long time, and then, within the past couple of months, I really said, you know, you just can't keep watching. You've got to kind of settle down.

And frankly, it was in the period leading up to the conventions, and then the decisions that came out of the conventions, and then just sort of watching the responses of the two individuals on the economic crisis. It gave me an opportunity to evaluate their judgment, to evaluate their way of approaching a problem, to evaluate the steadiness of their actions. And it was at that point that I realized that, to my mind, anyway, that Sen. Obama has demonstrated the kind of calm, patient, intellectual, steady approach to problem-solving that I think we need in this country.

Reporter: Mr. Secretary, there were a number of chinks in your own armor, actually, because of the lead-up to the Iraq war and the events. How much did that play into your decision about this? And will it be taken perhaps by some, because of your previous high-profile position, won't it be taken by some as a repudiation of the Iraq war?

Powell: I don't know why. The Iraq war is the Iraq war. We now see that things are a lot better in Iraq. Maybe if we had put a surge in at the beginning, it would have been a lot better years ago, but it's a lot better now, and we can see ahead to where U.S. forces will start to come out. And so, my concern was not my past or what happened in Iraq, but where we're going in the future. My sole concern was where are we going after January 20 of 2009, not what happened in 2003.

I'm well aware of the role I played. My role has been very, very straightforward. I wanted to avoid a war. The president agreed with me. We tried to do that. We couldn't get it through the U.N. and when the president made the decision, I supported that decision. And I've never blinked from that. I've never said I didn't support a decision to go to war.

And the war looked great until the 9th of April, when the statue fell, everybody thought it was terrific. And it was terrific. The troops had done a great job. But then we failed to understand that the war really was not over, that a new phase of the war was beginning. And we weren't ready for it and we didn't respond to it well enough, and things went very, very -- very, very south, very bad.

And now it's starting to turn around through the work of Gen. Petraeus and the troops, through the work of the Iraqi government, through our diplomatic efforts, and I hope now that this war will be brought to an end, at least as far as American involvement is concerned, and the Iraqis are going to have to be responsible for their own security and for their own political future. ...

Reporter: Sir, what part did McCain's negativity play in your decision, the negative tone of the campaign?

Powell: It troubled me. We have two wars. We have economic problems. We have health problems. We have education problems. We have infrastructure problems. We have problems around the world with our allies. So those are the problems the American people wanted to hear about, not about Mr. Ayers, not about who's a Muslim or who's not a Muslim. Those kinds of images going out on Al-Jazeera are killing us around the world.

And we have got to say to the world, it doesn't make any difference who you are or what you are, if you're an American, you're an American. And this business, for example, of the congressman from Minnesota who's going around saying, "Let's examine all congressmen to see who is pro-America or not pro-America" -- we have got to stop this kind of nonsense, pull ourselves together and remember that our great strength is in our unity and in our diversity. And so, that really was driving me.

And to focus on people like Mr. Ayers and these trivial issues, for the purpose of suggesting that somehow Mr. Obama would have some kind of terrorist inclinations, I thought that was over the top. It was beyond just good political fighting back and forth. I think it went beyond. And to sort of throw in this little Muslim connection, you know, "He's a Muslim and, my goodness, he's a terrorist" -- it was taking root. And we can't judge our people and we can't hold our elections on that kind of basis.

So, yes, that kind of negativity troubled me, And the constant shifting of the argument. I was troubled a couple of weeks ago when in the middle of the crisis, the [McCain] campaign said, "We're going to go negative," and they announced it, "We're going to go negative and attack [Obama's] character through Bill Ayers." Now I guess the message this week is, "We're going to call him a socialist, Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have."

Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who paid them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there is nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more, who should be paying less. And for us to say that that makes you a socialist, I think is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate.

I don't want my taxes raised. I don't want anybody else's taxes raised. But I also want to see our infrastructure fixed. I don't want to have a $12 trillion national debt, and I don't want to see an annual deficit that's over $500 billion heading toward a trillion. So, how do we deal with all of this?

Reporter: Are you still a Republican?

Powell: Yes.

Reporter: Have you conveyed your decision to Sen. Obama?

Powell: Calls are being made. Thank you.

Read the New York Times article on the Colin Powell endorsement here.


Read the CNN.com account of the Colin Powell endorsement: article and transcript.


plez sez: another endorsement that speaks to sen. john mccain's erratic leadership, lack of judgement, the negative campaign ads, the deceit in the robo-calls from the mccain camp, and the selection of gov. sarah palin as his running mate.

all republicans of sound mind continue to scratch their collective heads in wonderment as to how john mccain would put the security of this country in the hands of a "bimbo!"

Update on Barack Obama Newspaper Endorsements

Over the past week, a number of editorial boards of prominent newspapers representing the largest metropolitan areas in the United States have endorsed the presidency of Sen. Barack Obama. In addition to the large metro areas, Obama has also received numerous endorsements in newspapers that represent the battleground states in this years election (see The Record for editorials in Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia).

CNN.com has even acknowledged the number of conservative newspapers that have endorsed Sen. Obama.

The Chicago Tribune (in over 100 years) has never endorsed a Democratic nominee for president, so it is quite groundbreaking that they would rubberstamp their US Senator (they didn't even endorse Adlai Stevenson - of Illinois - when he ran against Dwight Eisenhower).

Chicago Tribune editorial board's endorsement:

Tribune endorsement: Barack Obama for president
2:33 PM CDT, October 17, 2008

However this election turns out, it will dramatically advance America's slow progress toward equality and inclusion. It took Abraham Lincoln's extraordinary courage in the Civil War to get us here. It took an epic battle to secure women the right to vote. It took the perseverance of the civil rights movement. Now we have an election in which we will choose the first African-American president . . . or the first female vice president.

In recent weeks it has been easy to lose sight of this history in the making. Americans are focused on the greatest threat to the world economic system in 80 years. They feel a personal vulnerability the likes of which they haven't experienced since Sept. 11, 2001. It's a different kind of vulnerability. Unlike Sept. 11, the economic threat hasn't forged a common bond in this nation. It has fed anger, fear and mistrust.

On Nov. 4 we're going to elect a president to lead us through a perilous time and restore in us a common sense of national purpose.

The strongest candidate to do that is Sen. Barack Obama. The Tribune is proud to endorse him today for president of the United States.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

On Dec. 6, 2006, this page encouraged Obama to join the presidential campaign. We wrote that he would celebrate our common values instead of exaggerate our differences. We said he would raise the tone of the campaign. We said his intellectual depth would sharpen the policy debate. In the ensuing 22 months he has done just that.

Many Americans say they're uneasy about Obama. He's pretty new to them.

We can provide some assurance. We have known Obama since he entered politics a dozen years ago. We have watched him, worked with him, argued with him as he rose from an effective state senator to an inspiring U.S. senator to the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions. He is ready.

The change that Obama talks about so much is not simply a change in this policy or that one. It is not fundamentally about lobbyists or Washington insiders. Obama envisions a change in the way we deal with one another in politics and government. His opponents may say this is empty, abstract rhetoric. In fact, it is hard to imagine how we are going to deal with the grave domestic and foreign crises we face without an end to the savagery and a return to civility in politics.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This endorsement makes some history for the Chicago Tribune. This is the first time the newspaper has endorsed the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

The Tribune in its earliest days took up the abolition of slavery and linked itself to a powerful force for that cause--the Republican Party. The Tribune's first great leader, Joseph Medill, was a founder of the GOP. The editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles. It believes that government has to serve people honestly and efficiently.

With that in mind, in 1872 we endorsed Horace Greeley, who ran as an independent against the corrupt administration of Republican President Ulysses S. Grant. (Greeley was later endorsed by the Democrats.) In 1912 we endorsed Theodore Roosevelt, who ran as the Progressive Party candidate against Republican President William Howard Taft.

The Tribune's decisions then were driven by outrage at inept and corrupt business and political leaders.

We see parallels today.

The Republican Party, the party of limited government, has lost its way. The government ran a $237 billion surplus in 2000, the year before Bush took office -- and recorded a $455 billion deficit in 2008. The Republicans lost control of the U.S. House and Senate in 2006 because, as we said at the time, they gave the nation rampant spending and Capitol Hill corruption. They abandoned their principles. They paid the price.

We might have counted on John McCain to correct his party's course. We like McCain. We endorsed him in the Republican primary in Illinois. In part because of his persuasion and resolve, the U.S. stands to win an unconditional victory in Iraq.

It is, though, hard to figure John McCain these days. He argued that President Bush's tax cuts were fiscally irresponsible, but he now supports them. He promises a balanced budget by the end of his first term, but his tax cut plan would add an estimated $4.2 trillion in debt over 10 years. He has responded to the economic crisis with an angry, populist message and a misguided, $300 billion proposal to buy up bad mortgages.

McCain failed in his most important executive decision. Give him credit for choosing a female running mate--but he passed up any number of supremely qualified Republican women who could have served. Having called Obama not ready to lead, McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. His campaign has tried to stage-manage Palin's exposure to the public. But it's clear she is not prepared to step in at a moment's notice and serve as president. McCain put his campaign before his country.

Obama chose a more experienced and more thoughtful running mate--he put governing before politicking. Sen. Joe Biden doesn't bring many votes to Obama, but he would help him from day one to lead the country.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

McCain calls Obama a typical liberal politician. Granted, it's disappointing that Obama's mix of tax cuts for most people and increases for the wealthy would create an estimated $2.9 trillion in federal debt. He has made more promises on spending than McCain has. We wish one of these candidates had given good, hard specific information on how he would bring the federal budget into line. Neither one has.

We do, though, think Obama would govern as much more of a pragmatic centrist than many people expect.

We know first-hand that Obama seeks out and listens carefully and respectfully to people who disagree with him. He builds consensus. He was most effective in the Illinois legislature when he worked with Republicans on welfare, ethics and criminal justice reform.

He worked to expand the number of charter schools in Illinois--not popular with some Democratic constituencies.

He took up ethics reform in the U.S. Senate--not popular with Washington politicians.

His economic policy team is peppered with advisers who support free trade. He has been called a "University of Chicago Democrat"--a reference to the famed free-market Chicago school of economics, which puts faith in markets.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Obama is deeply grounded in the best aspirations of this country, and we need to return to those aspirations. He has had the character and the will to achieve great things despite the obstacles that he faced as an unprivileged black man in the U.S.

He has risen with his honor, grace and civility intact. He has the intelligence to understand the grave economic and national security risks that face us, to listen to good advice and make careful decisions.

When Obama said at the 2004 Democratic Convention that we weren't a nation of red states and blue states, he spoke of union the way Abraham Lincoln did.

It may have seemed audacious for Obama to start his campaign in Springfield, invoking Lincoln. We think, given the opportunity to hold this nation's most powerful office, he will prove it wasn't so audacious after all. We are proud to add Barack Obama's name to Lincoln's in the list of people the Tribune has endorsed for president of the United States.

Copyright © 2008, Chicago Tribune

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution sits in the middle of red state Georgia (with a Republican governor and 2 US Senators), but Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) is getting pushed by upstart Democratic opposition in Jim Martin and with a large Black voting population, there is some talk of Sen. Barack Obama possibly turning this red state blue.

Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorial board's endorsement:

Obama is the choice
Sunday, October 19, 2008

The 44th president of the United States will take office in an uncertain and dangerous time for this country. The challenges we face both overseas and here at home are complex and unfamiliar, and the road ahead is likely to be very different from the road we have traveled to get here.

Leading the country in such a time will require someone of intellect, creativity, honesty and passion for those traits that have made America great. That person is U.S. Sen. Barack Obama.

In the past eight years, the policies and ideologies that have animated the Bush administration have proved disastrous in almost every field of endeavor, from foreign policy to economics to relatively straightforward tasks such as responding to natural disasters. As a consequence, President Bush’s approval rating is as low as or lower than that of any other president in the history of polling.

Naturally, both Obama and his opponent, U.S. Sen. John McCain, have promised to take the country in a new direction. Both are honorable men fully qualified and competent to be president.

McCain, however, faces a hurdle in his claim to be an agent of change because he shares a political party with Bush. To offset that fact, McCain has wisely chosen to campaign on his reputation as a maverick, a reputation that he once fully deserved.

However, in his current role as Republican nominee, McCain has yet to explain how most of his proposed policies and approaches differ from those of the current president. From deregulation of Wall Street and tax cuts that favor the richest 5 percent of Americans to a more aggressive foreign policy, McCain’s approach now reflects the same Republican orthodoxy that has governed this country since 2000. Time and again, he has been offered chances to explain how his philosophy differs from that of the current president, and he has not been able to do so.

And it’s not just a matter of policies. A third term under another Republican president would inevitably be populated by much the same cast of GOP staffers, executives and bureaucrats that has run Washington for so long and with such disastrous results. McCain’s campaign staff illustrates that problem perfectly because it is populated by many of the same people who ran previous Bush campaigns. They are also still trying to run the same basic Republican playbook that the party has used since 1980.

In fact, the competence of McCain’s campaign staff is itself cause to question the candidate’s executive abilities. To some degree, the rigors of creating and running a campaign organization can be a test of the skills needed to create and run an administration. And even many Republicans acknowledge that the McCain campaign has been poorly organized and erratic, lurching from one crisis to another without the sense of a strong hand at the tiller.

Columnist William Kristol, a longtime McCain backer, calls the McCain campaign “close to being out–and–out dysfunctional,” concluding that “its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic.”

And of course, the most unfortunate evidence of that “strategic incoherence and operational incompetence” was McCain’s selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, a person utterly unprepared for the high post in question.

The contrast with the campaign run by Barack Obama could not be more stark. More than a year ago, when he was still a long shot without much money, Obama somehow managed to attract a staff talented and disciplined enough to defeat Hillary Clinton and the Clinton machine in the Democratic primaries. It has since gone on to demonstrate a great deal of political discipline, skill and innovation, running a 21st century campaign that appeals to 21st century America.

Different challenges require different strengths. Obama has demonstrated a calm, thoughtful leadership style that fits this time and this challenge well. He has laid out a wiser, more measured approach toward foreign policy that elevates diplomacy and negotiation while reserving the use of force if necessary to protect this country and its allies in a dangerous world. He understands that international respect and admiration can’t be forced at gunpoint.

Economically, Obama is better equipped to deal with a rapidly changing global situation, and his policies focus directly on the problems confronting the American working and middle classes. His tax plan, for example, proposes to cut taxes on 95 percent of American households while raising taxes only on households with an income of more than $250,000. That plan may have to be adjusted in light of a harsh new fiscal reality, but it demonstrates where Obama’s instincts and values lead him.

The same is true of his health-care proposal. It requires a comprehensive approach, including financial assistance to help small businesses buy insurance for their employees. It would also require large employers that do not offer health insurance to help their workers with the cost of buying insurance on their own.

Those are new approaches, crafted by a new generation of leaders drawn to Obama by the chance to write their own chapter in the American story. Their time has come. His time has come. Obama is a leader of rare potential, and that’s precisely what the job of our 44th president demands.

— Jay Bookman (jbookman@ajc .com) and Cynthia Tucker(cynthia@ ajc.com), for the editorial board.

The Los Angeles Times broke a decades long ban on presidential endorsements. Their board points to the temperment and character of Sen. Barack Obama as to why he receives their endorsement.

LA Times editorial board's endorsement:

Barack Obama for president
He is the competent, confident leader who represents the aspirations of the nation.
October 19, 2008

It is inherent in the American character to aspire to greatness, so it can be disorienting when the nation stumbles or loses confidence in bedrock principles or institutions. That's where the United States is as it prepares to select a new president: We have seen the government take a stake in venerable private financial houses; we have witnessed eight years of executive branch power grabs and erosion of civil liberties; we are still recovering from a murderous attack by terrorists on our own soil and still struggling with how best to prevent a recurrence.

We need a leader who demonstrates thoughtful calm and grace under pressure, one not prone to volatile gesture or capricious pronouncement. We need a leader well-grounded in the intellectual and legal foundations of American freedom. Yet we ask that the same person also possess the spark and passion to inspire the best within us: creativity, generosity and a fierce defense of justice and liberty.

The Times without hesitation endorses Barack Obama for president.

Our nation has never before had a candidate like Obama, a man born in the 1960s, of black African and white heritage, raised and educated abroad as well as in the United States, and bringing with him a personal narrative that encompasses much of the American story but that, until now, has been reflected in little of its elected leadership. The excitement of Obama's early campaign was amplified by that newness. But as the presidential race draws to its conclusion, it is Obama's character and temperament that come to the fore. It is his steadiness. His maturity.

These are qualities American leadership has sorely lacked for close to a decade. The Constitution, more than two centuries old, now offers the world one of its more mature and certainly most stable governments, but our political culture is still struggling to shake off a brash and unseemly adolescence. In George W. Bush, the executive branch turned its back on an adult role in the nation and the world and retreated into self-absorbed unilateralism.

John McCain distinguished himself through much of the Bush presidency by speaking out against reckless and self-defeating policies. He earned The Times' respect, and our endorsement in the California Republican primary, for his denunciation of torture, his readiness to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and his willingness to buck his party on issues such as immigration reform. But the man known for his sense of honor and consistency has since announced that he wouldn't vote for his own immigration bill, and he redefined "torture" in such a disingenuous way as to nearly embrace what he once abhorred.

Indeed, the presidential campaign has rendered McCain nearly unrecognizable. His selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate was, as a short-term political tactic, brilliant. It was also irresponsible, as Palin is the most unqualified vice presidential nominee of a major party in living memory. The decision calls into question just what kind of thinking -- if that's the appropriate word -- would drive the White House in a McCain presidency. Fortunately, the public has shown more discernment, and the early enthusiasm for Palin has given way to national ridicule of her candidacy and McCain's judgment.

Obama's selection also was telling. He might have scored a steeper bump in the polls by making a more dramatic choice than the capable and experienced Joe Biden. But for all the excitement of his own candidacy, Obama has offered more competence than drama.

He is no lone rider. He is a consensus-builder, a leader. As a constitutional scholar, he has articulated a respect for the rule of law and the limited power of the executive that make him the best hope of restoring balance and process to the Justice Department. He is a Democrat, leaning further left than right, and that should be reflected in his nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is a good thing; the court operates best when it is ideologically balanced. With its present alignment at seven justices named by Republicans and two by Democrats, it is due for a tug from the left.

We are not sanguine about Obama's economic policies. He speaks with populist sweep about taxing oil companies to give middle-class families rebates that of course they would welcome, but would be far too small to stimulate the economy. His ideas on taxation do not stray far from those put forward by Democrats over the last several decades. His response to the most recent, and drastic, fallout of the sub- prime mortgage meltdown has been appropriately cautious; this is uncharted territory, and Obama is not a master of economic theory or practice.

And that's fine. Obama inspires confidence not so much in his grasp of Wall Street finance but in his acknowledgment of and comfort with his lack of expertise. He will not be one to forge far-reaching economic policy without sounding out the best thinkers and practitioners, and he has many at his disposal. He has won the backing of some on Wall Street not because he's one of them but because they recognize his talent for extracting from a broad range of proposals a coherent and workable program.

On paper, McCain presents the type of economic program The Times has repeatedly backed: One that would ease the tax burden on business and other high earners most likely to invest in the economy and hire new workers. But he has been disturbingly unfocused in his response to the current financial situation, rushing to "suspend" his campaign and take action (although just what action never became clear). Having little to contribute, he instead chose to exploit the crisis.

We may one day look back on this presidential campaign in wonder. We may marvel that Obama's critics called him an elitist, as if an Ivy League education were a source of embarrassment, and belittled his eloquence, as if a gift with words were suddenly a defect. In fact, Obama is educated and eloquent, sober and exciting, steady and mature. He represents the nation as it is, and as it aspires to be.

The Washington Post is a very conservative newspaper operating in the nation's capitol. But WaPo points to Obama's temperament and ability to make decisions in a deliberate manner as the reason why they are offering him their endorsement.

Washington Post editorial board's endorsement:

Barack Obama for President
Friday, October 17, 2008

THE NOMINATING process this year produced two unusually talented and qualified presidential candidates. There are few public figures we have respected more over the years than Sen. John McCain. Yet it is without ambivalence that we endorse Sen. Barack Obama for president.

The choice is made easy in part by Mr. McCain's disappointing campaign, above all his irresponsible selection of a running mate who is not ready to be president. It is made easy in larger part, though, because of our admiration for Mr. Obama and the impressive qualities he has shown during this long race. Yes, we have reservations and concerns, almost inevitably, given Mr. Obama's relatively brief experience in national politics. But we also have enormous hopes.

Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building. At home, we believe, he would respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets tempered by justified dismay over rising inequality and an understanding of the need for focused regulation. Abroad, the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain U.S. leadership and engagement, continue the fight against terrorists, and wage vigorous diplomacy on behalf of U.S. values and interests. Mr. Obama has the potential to become a great president. Given the enormous problems he would confront from his first day in office, and the damage wrought over the past eight years, we would settle for very good.

The first question, in fact, might be why either man wants the job. Start with two ongoing wars, both far from being won; an unstable, nuclear-armed Pakistan; a resurgent Russia menacing its neighbors; a terrorist-supporting Iran racing toward nuclear status; a roiling Middle East; a rising China seeking its place in the world. Stir in the threat of nuclear or biological terrorism, the burdens of global poverty and disease, and accelerating climate change. Domestically, wages have stagnated while public education is failing a generation of urban, mostly minority children. Now add the possibility of the deepest economic trough since the Great Depression.

Not even his fiercest critics would blame President Bush for all of these problems, and we are far from being his fiercest critic. But for the past eight years, his administration, while pursuing some worthy policies (accountability in education, homeland security, the promotion of freedom abroad), has also championed some stunningly wrongheaded ones (fiscal recklessness, torture, utter disregard for the planet's ecological health) and has acted too often with incompetence, arrogance or both. A McCain presidency would not equal four more years, but outside of his inner circle, Mr. McCain would draw on many of the same policymakers who have brought us to our current state. We believe they have richly earned, and might even benefit from, some years in the political wilderness.

OF COURSE, Mr. Obama offers a great deal more than being not a Republican. There are two sets of issues that matter most in judging these candidacies. The first has to do with restoring and promoting prosperity and sharing its fruits more evenly in a globalizing era that has suppressed wages and heightened inequality. Here the choice is not a close call. Mr. McCain has little interest in economics and no apparent feel for the topic. His principal proposal, doubling down on the Bush tax cuts, would exacerbate the fiscal wreckage and the inequality simultaneously. Mr. Obama's economic plan contains its share of unaffordable promises, but it pushes more in the direction of fairness and fiscal health. Both men have pledged to tackle climate change.

Mr. Obama also understands that the most important single counter to inequality, and the best way to maintain American competitiveness, is improved education, another subject of only modest interest to Mr. McCain. Mr. Obama would focus attention on early education and on helping families so that another generation of poor children doesn't lose out. His budgets would be less likely to squeeze out important programs such as Head Start and Pell grants. Though he has been less definitive than we would like, he supports accountability measures for public schools and providing parents choices by means of charter schools.

A better health-care system also is crucial to bolstering U.S. competitiveness and relieving worker insecurity. Mr. McCain is right to advocate an end to the tax favoritism showed to employer plans. This system works against lower-income people, and Mr. Obama has disparaged the McCain proposal in deceptive ways. But Mr. McCain's health plan doesn't do enough to protect those who cannot afford health insurance. Mr. Obama hopes to steer the country toward universal coverage by charting a course between government mandates and individual choice, though we question whether his plan is affordable or does enough to contain costs.

The next president is apt to have the chance to nominate one or more Supreme Court justices. Given the court's current precarious balance, we think Obama appointees could have a positive impact on issues from detention policy and executive power to privacy protections and civil rights.

Overshadowing all of these policy choices may be the financial crisis and the recession it is likely to spawn. It is almost impossible to predict what policies will be called for by January, but certainly the country will want in its president a combination of nimbleness and steadfastness -- precisely the qualities Mr. Obama has displayed during the past few weeks. When he might have been scoring political points against the incumbent, he instead responsibly urged fellow Democrats in Congress to back Mr. Bush's financial rescue plan. He has surrounded himself with top-notch, experienced, centrist economic advisers -- perhaps the best warranty that, unlike some past presidents of modest experience, Mr. Obama will not ride into town determined to reinvent every policy wheel. Some have disparaged Mr. Obama as too cool, but his unflappability over the past few weeks -- indeed, over two years of campaigning -- strikes us as exactly what Americans might want in their president at a time of great uncertainty.

ON THE SECOND set of issues, having to do with keeping America safe in a dangerous world, it is a closer call. Mr. McCain has deep knowledge and a longstanding commitment to promoting U.S. leadership and values.

But Mr. Obama, as anyone who reads his books can tell, also has a sophisticated understanding of the world and America's place in it. He, too, is committed to maintaining U.S. leadership and sticking up for democratic values, as his recent defense of tiny Georgia makes clear. We hope he would navigate between the amoral realism of some in his party and the counterproductive cocksureness of the current administration, especially in its first term. On most policies, such as the need to go after al-Qaeda, check Iran's nuclear ambitions and fight HIV/AIDS abroad, he differs little from Mr. Bush or Mr. McCain. But he promises defter diplomacy and greater commitment to allies. His team overstates the likelihood that either of those can produce dramatically better results, but both are certainly worth trying.

Mr. Obama's greatest deviation from current policy is also our biggest worry: his insistence on withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq on a fixed timeline. Thanks to the surge that Mr. Obama opposed, it may be feasible to withdraw many troops during his first two years in office. But if it isn't -- and U.S. generals have warned that the hard-won gains of the past 18 months could be lost by a precipitous withdrawal -- we can only hope and assume that Mr. Obama would recognize the strategic importance of success in Iraq and adjust his plans.

We also can only hope that the alarming anti-trade rhetoric we have heard from Mr. Obama during the campaign would give way to the understanding of the benefits of trade reflected in his writings. A silver lining of the financial crisis may be the flexibility it gives Mr. Obama to override some of the interest groups and members of Congress in his own party who oppose open trade, as well as to pursue the entitlement reform that he surely understands is needed.

IT GIVES US no pleasure to oppose Mr. McCain. Over the years, he has been a force for principle and bipartisanship. He fought to recognize Vietnam, though some of his fellow ex-POWs vilified him for it. He stood up for humane immigration reform, though he knew Republican primary voters would punish him for it. He opposed torture and promoted campaign finance reform, a cause that Mr. Obama injured when he broke his promise to accept public financing in the general election campaign. Mr. McCain staked his career on finding a strategy for success in Iraq when just about everyone else in Washington was ready to give up. We think that he, too, might make a pretty good president.

But the stress of a campaign can reveal some essential truths, and the picture of Mr. McCain that emerged this year is far from reassuring. To pass his party's tax-cut litmus test, he jettisoned his commitment to balanced budgets. He hasn't come up with a coherent agenda, and at times he has seemed rash and impulsive. And we find no way to square his professed passion for America's national security with his choice of a running mate who, no matter what her other strengths, is not prepared to be commander in chief.

ANY PRESIDENTIAL vote is a gamble, and Mr. Obama's résumé is undoubtedly thin. We had hoped, throughout this long campaign, to see more evidence that Mr. Obama might stand up to Democratic orthodoxy and end, as he said in his announcement speech, "our chronic avoidance of tough decisions."

But Mr. Obama's temperament is unlike anything we've seen on the national stage in many years. He is deliberate but not indecisive; eloquent but a master of substance and detail; preternaturally confident but eager to hear opposing points of view. He has inspired millions of voters of diverse ages and races, no small thing in our often divided and cynical country. We think he is the right man for a perilous moment.

The Salt Lake Tribune points to Sen. John McCain's choice of an unvetted Gov. Sarah Palin as proof positive of his inability to make sound decisions. On the other hand, Sen. Barack Obama has provided a clear vision to the 21st century for the country and thinks that his brand of leadership is much better for America during these trying economic times,

Salt Lake Tribune editorial board's endorsement:

A simple choice: The nation needs Barack Obama in the White House
Tribune Editorial
Article Last Updated: 10/18/2008 12:52:35 PM MDT

The next U.S. president will lead a nation that remains embroiled in two wars and is beset by an economic meltdown more severe than any since the Great Depression.

By necessity, the country's next commander in chief must also be its mender in chief, capable of inspiring his angry and divided constituents to join together in a recovery project to restore the peace, prosperity, and self-confidence we once knew.

We fear that a lesser effort may be insufficient to reverse America's slide toward economic, political and societal chaos. The times require dramatic and comprehensive change.

The presidential candidates know it, and have made it their mantra.

Most Americans know it, and, in growing numbers, are demanding it.

The countries that have long depended upon the United States for enlightened global leadership long for it.

For the sake of all, and for those who follow us, we must have it.

The editorial board of The Salt Lake Tribune believes that Barack Obama can deliver it.

Over the 22 months since announcing his improbable candidacy, Obama has transcended his image as a mere political and racial phenomenon. Though blessed with uncommon skills as a writer and orator, he was mistakenly thought to possess too little political experience, too little backbone, and too little evidence of the tangible, and intangible, qualities we ascribe to the best of our leaders. Democrats and Republicans alike thought Hillary Clinton would make short work of him.

Admittedly, we thought so too, and endorsed Clinton, not Obama, for the party's nomination.

Yet, Obama mounted an extraordinary grass-roots campaign, raised gobs of cash, and showed great fortitude and equanimity in the face of the Clinton juggernaut. He endured, and once the nomination was his, he set about uniting his divided party with an impressive display of magnanimity and diplomacy.

John McCain, meanwhile, crushed Mitt Romney to gain his party's nomination, but then blundered badly by not bringing the business-savvy Romney onto the ticket. Romney would have shored up McCain's poor grasp of economic policy.

Then, out of nowhere, and without proper vetting, the impetuous McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. She quickly proved grievously underequipped to step into the presidency should McCain, at 72 and with a history of health problems, die in office. More than any single factor, McCain's bad judgment in choosing the inarticulate, insular and ethically challenged Palin disqualifies him for the presidency.

Still, we have compelling reasons for endorsing Obama on his merits alone. Under the most intense scrutiny and attacks from both parties, Obama has shown the temperament, judgment, intellect and political acumen that are essential in a president that would lead the United States out of the crises created by President Bush, a complicit Congress and our own apathy.

The candidates' positions on issues are, in most cases, distinctly different, and no more so than in health care reform. McCain would make a bad system worse by deregulating an insurance industry that is the root of the problem. He would give every family a $5,000 refundable tax credit for purchasing the insurance of their choice, but would tax employer-provided health benefits. Obama's plan would require large employers to offer insurance, or contribute a percentage of payroll to offset the cost of taxpayer subsidies. People could buy into a private or a government-run plan, and the premiums would be subsidized by tax credits based on income.

On tax policy, Obama would sensibly increase taxes for individuals making more than $250,000 a year, while cutting taxes for everyone else. He also would send money to the states for public works improvements that would generate jobs. His intent to increase the capital gains tax, however, is foolhardy while businesses struggle to weather the economic meltdown.

McCain would cut taxes for people in all income brackets, as well as mandate big reductions in corporate income taxes. It is a trickle-down plan that would do little to reduce the deficit.

McCain's foreign policy objectives virtually replicate Bush's disastrous course. His disdain for diplomacy is troubling, and his faith in eventual U.S. "victory" in Iraq is ill-defined. We simply cannot afford perpetual war. Obama knows this. And his nuanced approach would help America recover it's global prestige.

Indeed, we see too many of Bush's failed policies in McCain's recipe for recovery. The country desperately needs a new and well-defined road map for the 21st century and leadership that can unite the country behind it.

We believe that Barack Obama can give us both.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

plez sez: i usually put very little stock into the endorsements of the editorial boards of newspapers, as my concerns and views may not necessarily be those of the editorial board in question. but this national trend in major metropolitan newspapers not only shows how ready the united states is for the leadership of sen. barack obama, but it shows how out of touch sen. john mccain is with the needs of most americans. mccain's style of leadership is erratic and scary(cancelling his campaign, changing tactical approach on a weekly basis, etc.), his judgement has a basis in all of the wrong things (i.e., pandering to the lowest in his constiuency, picking an unvetted unknown running mate, etc.), and his temperment runs counter to what we need after eight years of george w. bush.

it is obvious that Sen. Barack Obama possesses the leadership and CHANGE that we can ALL believe in!

"The Obama Song (World of Friends)" by Garrison Davis & Friends

Bridges for Obama: American supporters of Sen. Barack Obama have been staging rallies abroad at world-famous bridges to show support for the Democratic presidential candidate and his pledge to span old political divisions.

The Obama Song (World of Friends): Japan-based American musical artists (Garrison Davis & Friends) created and performed this song to celebrate Sen. Obama's historic candidacy and to inspire us all to change the world.

"The Obama Song" with "Bridges for Obama"


Performed by Garrison Davis & Friends

15 Minutes Wasted on "Joe the (Unlicensed) Plumber"

Say it ain't so, Joe! Say you weren't lying about what you really stand for! You had 15 minutes of fame because of Wednesday's debate... say it ain't so, Joe!

Sen. John McCain was counting on you to be the face of his economic plan... say it ain't so, Joe!

"Joe the Plumber" was the cornerstone (or latest gimmick) of Sen. John McCain's argument for his economic plan during Wednesday night's debate. "Joe the Plumber" came up over 20 times during the 90 minute debate.

Apparently, "Joe the Plumber" - his real name is Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher of Holland, Ohio - engaged Sen. Barack Obama during a campaign stop in Ohio earlier in the week. Mr. Wurzelbacher had problems with Obama's approach because he had plans on buying the plumbing company where he worked and was afraid that Obama's tax plan would raise his taxes such that his purchase of the company would be cost prohibitive. Obama assured him that his tax plan would not raise the taxes on persons making less than $250,000 (about 95 percent of all Americans). "Joe the Plumber" was non-plussed since the business he was going to buy made $280,000 per year.

Well, it appears that "Joe the Plumber" isn't a plumber after all, since he doesn't hold a plumber's license and has NEVER had a plumber's license. As a matter of fact, Joe is nowhere near close to buying anything considering the fact that he owes the state of Ohio $1,182 in personal income taxes, according to tax records that show a lien for that amount filed against him in January 2007 and he only made $40,000 in the 2006.

Excerpts of the Toledo Blade article on "Joe the Plumber":

Since last night Mr. Wurzelbacher who lives alone with his 13-year-old son has been besieged with local and national news media, willingly granting interviews (Fox News, interviewed by CBS's Katie Couric, and ABC's "Good Morning America.").

Mr. Wurzelbacher told reporters Thursday morning that he worked for Newell Plumbing & Heating Co., a small local firm whose business addresses flow back to several residential homes, including one on Talmadge Road in Ottawa Hills.

According to Lucas County Building Inspection records, A. W. Newell Corp. does maintain a state plumbing license, and one with the City of Toledo, but would not be allowed to work in Lucas County outside of Toledo without a county license.

Mr. Wurzelbacher said he works under Al Newell’s license, but according to Ohio building regulations, he must maintain his own license to do plumbing work.

He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which means he’s not a plumber.

Mr. Wurzelbacher said he was hired by Mr. Newell six years ago and that the possibility of him eventually buying the company was discussed during his job interview. He said it’s his understanding he can work under Mr. Newell’s license as long as the licensed contractor works on the same site. Mr. Wurzelbacher said he is working on taking the Ohio plumbing contractors’ license test.

Mr. Wurzelbacher’s notoriety has raised the ire of Tom Joseph, business manager for Local 50 of the United Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters, and Service Mechanics, who claimed that Mr. Wurzelbacher didn’t undergo any apprenticeship training.

"When you have guys going out there with no training whatsoever, it’s a little disreputable to start with," Mr. Joseph said. "We’re the real Joe the Plumber."

Mr. Joseph said Mr. Wurzelbacher could only legally work in the townships, but not in any municipality in Lucas County or elsewhere in the country.

"This individual has got no schooling, no licenses, he’s never been to a training program, union or non-union, in the United States of America," Mr. Joseph said.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

He won’t say who he will vote for on Nov. 4, but did say he likes Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

He said he was born in the Toledo area, lived until he was 13 in the Florida Panhandle area, went to Springfield High School, and then entered the U.S. Air Force. He was stationed at an Air Force base in Alaska from 1992 until 1995. He said he was honorably discharged.

Mr. Wurzelbacher also said he lived in Arizona from 1997 until 2000.

He voted in the Republican Primary in March 2008.

Excerpts of the New York Times article "Joe in the Spotlight":

Unlike some other states, Ohio does not have a formal statewide licensing system for plumbers. But the city of Toledo and other municipalities do, Mr. Joseph said, and Mr. Wurzelbacher has not met those requirements.

“All contractors are licensed, and he does not have a license, either as a contractor or a plumber,” the union official said, citing a search of government records. “I can’t find that he’s ever even applied for any kind of apprenticeship, and he has never belonged to local 189 in Columbus, which is what he claims on his Facebook page.”

According to public records, Mr. Wurzelbacher has been subject to two liens, each over $1,000, one of which — a personal tax lien — is still outstanding.

And his question to Mr. Obama about paying taxes? According to some tax analysts, if Mr. Wurzelbacher’s gross receipts from his business is $250,000 — and not his taxable income — then he would not have to pay higher taxes under Mr. Obama’s plan, and probably would be eligible for a tax cut.

Mr. Wurzelbacher is registered to vote in Lucas County under the name Samuel Joseph Worzelbacher.

“We have his named spelled W-O, instead of W-U,” Linda Howe, executive director of the Lucas County Board of Elections, said in a telephone interview. “Handwriting is sometimes hard to read. He has never corrected it in his registration card.”

The records, she said, showed he voted Republican in the March primary.

Mr. Wurzelbacher told Ms. Couric that his encounter with Mr. Obama was a matter of impulse. “Neighbors were outside asking him questions, and I didn’t think they were asking him tough enough questions,” he said.

He went on, “You know, I’ve always wanted to ask one of these guys a question and really corner them and get them to answer a question,” he said, “for once instead of tap dancing around it, and unfortunately I asked the question, but I still got a tap dance.”

He added, “Almost as good as Sammy Davis Jr.”

Read the entire Toledo Blade article on "Joe the (Unlicensed) Plumber" here

Read the entire Washington Post article on "Joe the (Unlicensed) Plumber" here

Read the entire New York Times article "Joe in the Spotlight" here

Read the entire CNN.com article on "Joe the Plumber" here


plez sez: damn... the press has vetted "joe the plumber" more thoroughly than mccain did palin!

i know there's only 18 days before the election, but one of these days, the mccain campaign will LEARN to do a little research before throwing names out in the public domain... they've been burnt every time: first with the governor of alaska and now with this deadbeat who is behind on his taxes!

dude ain't even a plumber!

all the news bureaus were camped outside "joe the plumber's" house this morning. i saw joe's little bungalow, the rusted out pickup truck, and the "working class" neighborhood this morning on the news. this dude is a lot closer to collecting food stamps than topping $100,000 per year! he lied to Obama when he said he was planning to buy the company he works at... but more importantly, he (and millions like him) continue to lie to themselves by voting for a republican against their own self interests... he doesn't make enough money to be a republican! Obama's tax plan would save him MORE MONEY than mccain's plan!

he is a rube and an uneducated redneck who wasted his life thinking someone like john mccain thought anymore of him than the shit that john mccain shat out of his old ass this morning. if not for millions of delusional and miserable souls like "joe the (unlicensed) plumber," the republicans would have a hard time getting five percent of the vote come election day.

well, it looks like mccain is going to have to keep searching for another gimmick for his erratic and unfocused campaign.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

plezWorld ain't even gonna touch the Sammy Davis, Jr. tap dancing reference!

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

the mccain camp has shown the inability to properly vet people associated with the campaign. what kind of job will they do in vetting possible supreme court justices, federal judges, cabinet members, ambassadors, etc.?

once again, the prospect of a mccain presidency is scary!

Hempstead, New York Debate: Obama vs. McCain

The last debate. Finally. Close to 50 debates over the past 12 months. This had to be the most superfluous of debates, once again, very little new ground came up, except an over-reliance on the part of Sen. John McCain on the story of "Joe the Plumber." Good story, but he went to the well too many times.

Most will say that this was McCain's best debate, since he he started out strong and on the attack. From the first question into the 30 minute mark, McCain attempted to pound Sen. Barack Obama as possessing unrealistic policies and even played the "spread the wealth" (i.e. socialist) card on Obama more than once.

Obama was cool, as usual. Spent a better part of the debate on the defensive having to explain a number of policy positions: healthcare plan, economic plan, plan on taxes, relationship with Bill Ayers, and ACORN. He seemingly came into the debate ahead on points and took the tactic of not engaging in toe-to-toe battle with McCain.

The talking heads on television chalked this one up as a McCain win because he was obviously the aggressor, but he didn't sustain the attack and couldn't deliver any game changing information. I agree with most independent voters: Barack Obama was the clear winner by showing calm and steady demeanor to McCain's oft-erratic and desperate views.


Read the entire CNN.com wrapup of the debate: Debate Overview and Debate Transcript and Debate Analysis.

Read the debate wrapup in the New York Times here.

Read post-debate thoughts at FiveThirtyEight.com here and here and here.

plez sez: i lied! i tried not to watch the debate, but i couldn't help myself!

this was mccain's best debate, but Obama's cool whipped mccain's "you know what." mccain came off as a desperate man. he was angry. at times his seething anger and contempt with Barack Obama showed. mccain came out on the attack and it appeared that he needed to win this debate or he know his campaign was over.

the mccain campaign - as we know it - is over!

mccain never acknowledged the negative tone of his campaign. he never acknowledged that his running mate (sarah palin) was out of line at the rallies.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

mccain had the best line of the night, though, "i am not president bush, if you wanted to debate george bush, you should've run four years ago."

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

thankfully, it is over... no more debates.

plezWorld

McCain vs. Obama - Economic Plans

Over the past 24 hours, Sen. John McCain finally released his plan, called "the pension and family security plan," which builds on the senator's "American home ownership resurgence plan," which he introduced during last week's debate. His announcement comes on the heels of an Obama announcement on Monday and speculation by his campaign surrogates that something was in the offing.

McCain's "Pension and Family Security Plan":

That home owner proposal that McCain released last week called for using $300 billion of the $700 billion financial bailout package to keep Americans in their homes, stop declining housing values, and stabilize the financial markets. The proposal has the federal government buying all of the mortgages of houses whose property values have declined and then refinance them for the homeowner... projected cost: $300 million.

McCain's new plan includes specific proposals to help seniors, those saving money and homeowners.

The plan will help seniors by lowering taxes on withdrawals from their retirement accounts and suspending tax rules that force them to sell their stocks during the financial crisis, the campaign said.

The plan will help those saving money by accelerating the tax write-offs for those forced to sell stocks at a loss in the current market and reducing capital gains taxes for 2009 and 2010 to raise the incentive to save and invest, according to the campaign.

To provide relief for homeowners, the plan includes a proposal to purchase mortgages directly from the homeowners and mortgage servicers and replace them with manageable, fixed-rate mortgages.

To assist workers, the plan would eliminate taxes on unemployment benefits, according to the campaign.

Sen. Barack Obama has called McCain's plan "a day late and 101 million middle-class families short."

On Monday, Obama released his four-part "economic rescue plan" for the middle class.

Obama's "Economic Rescue Plan":

Obama's plan proposes a temporary tax credit of $3,000 for firms that create new jobs in the United States over the next two years, and penalty-free withdrawals from IRAs and 401(k)s in 2008 and 2009.

The Democratic candidate called for new legislation that would give families the option of withdrawing as much as 15 percent of their retirement savings --- up to a maximum of $10,000 --- without facing a tax penalty this year or next. He also called for a temporary lifting of taxes on unemployment insurance benefits.

The Illinois senator also proposed a 90-day foreclosure moratorium for homeowners acting in good faith, and a new effort to address the growing credit crisis at the state and local level.

Under the Obama plan, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury would provide much the same kind of backing to state and municipal governments as the recent federal bailout did to the commercial credit market.

"We can't wait to help workers and families and communities who are struggling right now -- who don't know if their job or their retirement will be there tomorrow; who don't know if next week's paycheck will cover this month's bills," Obama said. "We need to pass an economic rescue plan for the middle-class ... and we need to do it right now."

Calculate your household savings with the Obama Plan vs. the McCain Plan:

Read the CNN.com article about McCain's economic plan here.

Read the CNN.com article about Obama's economic plan here.

Read the New York Times article that compares the two plans here.

Read and download the Obama campaign PDF that does a side-by-side comparison of the two plans here.


plez sez: using Obama's calculator, my family will save about $1300 in taxes under the Obama plan and around $220 in taxes under the McCain plan.

later tonight, both candidates will get the opportunity to speak to their plans in more detail in the final presidential debate... where mccain promised to beat Obama's "you-know-what"!

i'm debated out! i doubt i'll be tuning in...

"Yes We Can" ...again!

The Emmy Winning video "Yes We Can" is a collage style music video inspired by a speech delivered by Sen. Barack Obama following the 2008 New Hampshire primary. The song was released on February 2, 2008 by the Black Eyed Peas member will.i.am on Dipdive.com and also on YouTube.

"Yes We Can" received an Emmy for Outstanding New Approaches - Entertainment at the 35th Annual Daytime Creative Arts and Entertainment Emmy Awards Ceremony on June 13th 2008 at the Frederick P. Rose Hall at Lincoln Center in New York City.

"Yes We Can" by Barack Obama & will.i.am

plez sez: YES WE CAN... but only if you V-O-T-E!



remember, the new hampshire primary came on the heels of a stunning win in the iowa caucuses. and then Barack Obama lost a close race to hillary clinton in new hampshire. many felt that it was inevitable that the race would swing toward clinton after new hampshire and she would be the eventual democratic nominee. a lot of air came out of the Obama balloon as he set his sights on south carolina... which he went on to win (and win BIG). and as they say, the rest is history.

now we sit only 22 days from the general election... at the cusp of watching the most remarkable story in united states politics unfold before our very eyes. in what seemed like a dream buoyed by a catchy slogan back in early february has crystallized into a movement and a budding reality.

John Lewis on McCain-Palin

Civil rights icon and Georgia congressman John Lewis is accusing John McCain and Sarah Palin of inciting hate, by invoking the name of George Wallace, the segregationist former governor of Alabama and presidential candidate, when referring to the atmosphere at their Republican campaign events.

If you recall, John Lewis was on the front lines on the hard fought battles for the civil rights of Black Americans during the late 1950's and early 1960's. Many don't realize that he was one of the speakers on the dais when Martin Luther King delivered his "I Have a Dream" speech in 1963. But more importantly, Lewis was a recipient of seeds of hate the were sown by Gov. George Wallace when he was beaten bloody by a white mob in Montgomery, Alabama as a Freedom Rider in the spring of 1961. He still carries the scar on his head from that beating. He has the moral authority to speak of the hatred that was so pervasive in the country and how one could get that feeling from listening to the rhetoric that has been evident at McCain-Palin rallies of late.

Rep. John Lewis' statement (in part):

"What I am seeing reminds me too much of another destructive period in American history. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse.

"George Wallace never threw a bomb. He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise their constitutional rights. Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on [a] Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama.

“As public figures with the power to influence and persuade, Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are playing with fire, and if they are not careful, that fire will consume us all. They are playing a very dangerous game that disregards the value of the political process and cheapens our entire democracy. We can do better. The American people deserve better.”

Of course, Sen. John McCain was "saddened that John Lewis" would make such a "brazen and baseless" attack on his character. Not to be outdone, McCain had to draw Sen. Obama into the discussion:

"I call on Senator Obama to immediately and personally repudiate these outrageous and divisive comments that are so clearly designed to shut down debate 24 days before the election. Our country must return to the important debate about the path forward for America.”

The Obama campaign had a response:

“Senator Obama does not believe that John McCain or his policy criticism is in any way comparable to George Wallace or his segregationist policies. But John Lewis was right to condemn some of the hateful rhetoric that John McCain himself personally rebuked just last night, as well as the baseless and profoundly irresponsible charges from his own running mate that the Democratic nominee for President of the United States ‘pals around with terrorists.’

"As Barack Obama has said himself, the last thing we need from either party is the kind of angry, divisive rhetoric that tears us apart at a time of crisis when we desperately need to come together. That is the kind of campaign Senator Obama will continue to run in the weeks ahead.”

On Saturday night, John Lewis released another statement, further clarifying his initial statement:

"A careful review of my earlier statement would reveal that I did not compare Sen. John McCain or Gov. Sarah Palin to George Wallace. It was not my intention or desire to do so.

"My statement was a reminder to all Americans that toxic language can lead to destructive behavior. I am glad that Sen. McCain has taken some steps to correct divisive speech at his rallies. I believe we need to return to civil discourse in this election about the pressing economic issues that are affecting our nation."

[Hat Tip: Politico.com]

Read Pandagon's sarcasm-laced take on the John Lewis comment.

Read the New York Times op-ed piece about the racist-tinged rhetoric that comes from the McCain campaign here

Read the CNN.com article about McCain's reaction to Lewis's comment here and here.


plez sez: hmmmm, for the better part of the last two weeks, mccain and palin have been flying around the country saying that Obama is dangerous and that he supports domestic terrorism, and that isn’t character assassination; but calling mccain and palin out for running a campaign that very obviously incites hate (including threatening comments) is character assassination? {scratching my head}

Rep. John Lewis has a big scar on his head as a daily reminder of the "toxic language" of gov. george wallace. and i'm sure the chill that ran up his spine at listening to a mccain-palin rally is similar to that which he used to feel when listening to george wallace.

as they say down in this part of the country: "a hit dog will holler, and a stuck pig will squeal!"

palin's brand of populist rhetoric ("them vs. us", "liberal elites vs. true americans", "bad people like them vs. good people like us", "Obama is not a man who sees America the way you and I see America", etc.) is cut from the same cloth that was draped over the very words that dripped from gov. george wallace's racist lips! i guess palin forgets that she's pallin' around with an adulterer and an infidel! i guess she forgets the moral failings of her running mate while decrying the character flaws of her opponent.

as evidenced by mccain's reaction at rallies over the past couple of days, he sees that his words are getting out of hand; his campaign is already a lost cause, his entire career would be loss if the end product of this campaign is Obama's blood on his hands and race riots in the streets.

blog post artwork: Barry Blitt - New York Times - 10-12-2008

Tech Squeaks By Inferior Gardner-Webb 10-7

Well, so much for breaking into the Top 25 College Football rankings!

On Saturday afternoon, the JV Squad of Division I-AA Gardner-Webb Bulldogs took to Bobby Dodd Stadium at Historic Grant Field (the oldest and winningest active stadium in Div-1 football) with hopes of deflating the Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets (4-1)... and deflate they did! Tech stunk up the joint!

Tech's high energy triple option offense was engineered by third string senior quarterback Calvin Booker - he was not up to the task (now we know why he is behind a sophomore and a freshman on the depth chart). The seemingly porous o-line allowed the quick and nimble GW linemen and linebackers to join Booker in the backfield at will. Booker is a straight drop back passer who doesn't have a scrambling bone in his body... he was slow, inaccurate, and was sacked for losses too many times to recount. The offense spent 80 percent of the game south of the 50 yard line.

The only thing that kept Tech in the game was the play of the defense which kept the smaller GW squad at bay for most of the game. A second half turnover led to GW's one score... but it was scary!

This is how scary it was: GW had the ball inside the Tech 30 yard line late in the fourth quarter. With 9 seconds on the clock, DE Derrick Morgan saved the day when he partially deflected a 43 yard field goal that would've tied the game. It was sooooo scary, that I had to stay at the game until the end to see the final outcome (a first for the entire season)!

The entire Tech squad obviously was overlooking this game to next week's foe: Clemson at Death Valley. BUt they almost dropped a game that they should've won by 20 to 30 points. And I'm sure the polls will take note of this lackluster performance, we'll have to wait another week before Tech will appear in the Top 25 rankings.

Read the AJC.com account of the game.

Troopergate Investigation: Palin Abused Power

Girl meets boy. Girl marries boy (by the way, this is old boy's second or third marriage). They have a kid together. Things go south and girl leaves boy. There's a divorce and a nasty custody battle over the kid. Girl sic's her big sister (who happens to be governor of the state) on boy. The governor pressures the boy's boss to fire the boy. The boy's boss refuses to cooperate. The governor fires the boy's boss... and if you're wondering, that's how they do things in Alaska!

Well, the girl in question is Molly McCann, the sister of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska. The boy is Alaska State Trooper Mike Wooten. And the boy's boss is Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The New York Times recounts the sordid details of how the Palins (mainly at the behest of Todd Palin, the governor's husband) put extreme pressure on the public safety commissioner prior to him being fired. His successor also was harassed by the Palins before he quit the job.

Excerpts from New York Times story about Palin pressure:

ANCHORAGE — The 2007 state fair was days away when Alaska’s public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, took another call about one of his troopers, Michael Wooten. This time, the director of Gov. Sarah Palin’s Anchorage office was on the line.

As Mr. Monegan recalls it, the aide said the governor had heard that Trooper Wooten was assigned to work the kickoff to the fair in late August. If so, Mr. Monegan should do something about it, because Ms. Palin was also planning to attend and did not want him nearby.

Somewhat bewildered, Mr. Monegan soon determined that Trooper Wooten had indeed volunteered for duty at the fairgrounds — in full costume as “Safety Bear,” the troopers’ child-friendly mascot.

Two years earlier, the trooper and the governor’s sister had been embroiled in a nasty divorce and child-custody battle that had hardened the Palin family against him. To Mr. Monegan and several top aides, the state fair episode was yet another example of a fixation that the governor and her husband, Todd, had with Trooper Wooten and the most granular details of his life.

“I thought to myself, ‘Man, do they have a heavy-duty network and focus on this guy,’ ” Mr. Monegan said. “You’d call that an obsession.”

On July 11, Ms. Palin fired Mr. Monegan, setting off a politically charged scandal that has become vastly more so since Ms. Palin became the Republican vice-presidential nominee.

By now, the outlines of the matter have been widely reported. Mr. Monegan believes he was ousted because he would not bow to pressure to dismiss Trooper Wooten. The Alaska Legislature is investigating the firing and whether the governor abused the powers of her office to pursue a personal vendetta.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Ms. Palin has denied that anyone told Mr. Monegan to dismiss Trooper Wooten, or that the commissioner’s ouster had anything to do with him. But an examination of the case, based on interviews with Mr. Monegan and several top aides, indicates that, to a far greater degree than was previously known, the governor, her husband and her administration pressed the commissioner and his staff to get Trooper Wooten off the force, though without directly ordering it.

In all, the commissioner and his aides were contacted about Trooper Wooten three dozen times over 19 months by the governor, her husband and seven administration officials, interviews and documents show.

“To all of us, it was a campaign to get rid of him as a trooper and, at the very least, to smear the guy and give him a desk job somewhere,” said Kim Peterson, Mr. Monegan’s special assistant, who like several other aides spoke publicly about the matter for the first time.

Ms. Peterson, a 31-year veteran of state government who retired 10 days before Mr. Monegan’s firing, said she received about a dozen calls herself. “It was very clear that someone from the governor’s office wanted him watched,” she said.

Nor did that interest end with Mr. Monegan, the examination shows. His successor, Chuck Kopp, recalled that in an exploratory phone call and then a job interview, Ms. Palin’s aides mentioned the governor’s concerns about Trooper Wooten. None of the 280 other troopers were discussed, Mr. Kopp said.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Palin family’s dispute with Trooper Wooten surfaced long before Ms. Palin became governor.

On April 11, 2005, the day Ms. Palin’s sister, Molly McCann, filed for divorce, her father, Chuck Heath, informed the state police that a domestic-violence restraining order had been served on his son-in-law. Mr. Heath later told the state police that, although Trooper Wooten had not physically harmed Ms. McCann, he had intimidated her. Ms. McCann told the authorities that Trooper Wooten said to her that he would shoot Mr. Heath if he hired her a divorce lawyer and would “take down” Ms. Palin if she got involved.

The family also reported that Trooper Wooten, who was assigned to the wildlife investigations unit, shot a cow, or female, moose without a permit, used a Taser on his 10-year-old stepson and drank a beer at a friend’s barbecue before taking a second one for the drive home in his patrol car.

In March 2006, after an internal inquiry, Trooper Wooten received a 10-day suspension, which was eventually halved. The suspension letter mentions nothing about threats. At the time, Trooper Wooten and Ms. McCann had been divorced for about two months. But their relationship remained tumultuous, primarily over child custody disputes, said Ms. McCann’s divorce lawyer, Roberta Erwin.

Ms. McCann “wanted to know what relief was available to her” without spending the money to return to court, the lawyer said, adding, “As a close family, the Palins did their best to help her by reaching out further to the trooper hierarchy, with Todd taking the lead.”

On Jan. 4, 2007, a month into the Palin administration and his tenure as public safety commissioner, Mr. Monegan went to the governor’s Anchorage office to talk with Todd Palin, who had requested the meeting. Mr. Palin was seated at a conference table with three stacks of personnel files. That, Mr. Monegan recalled, was the first time he heard the name Mike Wooten.

“He conveyed to me,” Mr. Monegan said, “that he and Sarah did not think the investigation into Wooten had been done well enough and that they were not happy with the punishment. Todd was clearly frustrated.”

Mr. Palin noted Trooper Wooten’s divorce case but dwelt on the moose kill, even showing photographs of the dead animal, Mr. Monegan recalled. The commissioner said he would have his staff evaluate the evidence.

A few days later, Mr. Monegan informed Mr. Palin that the issues raised at the meeting had been addressed in the suspension. The case was closed.

Mr. Palin sounded vexed and said repeatedly Trooper Wooten was getting away with a crime, Mr. Monegan said. “I hung up wondering how long I could keep my job if I tick off my boss’s husband.”

Several evenings later, Mr. Monegan’s cellphone rang. “Walt, it’s Sarah,” the governor said before echoing much of what her husband had said. Trooper Wooten, he recalls being told, was “not the kind of person we should want as a trooper.” He told the governor, too, that there was no new evidence to pursue.

Soon after that, Mr. Palin and several aides began pressing the public safety agency to investigate another matter: whether Trooper Wooten was fraudulently collecting workers’ compensation for a back injury he said he had suffered while helping carry a body bag.

Mr. Palin’s evidence: He told Ms. Peterson, the commissioner’s assistant, that he had seen the trooper riding a snowmobile while on medical leave and that he had photographs to prove it.

When Mr. Palin called back two weeks later, Ms. Peterson said she had met with the trooper but was not authorized to discuss the conversation because it was an official state personnel matter. The issue was eventually resolved in Trooper Wooten’s favor, after his chiropractor sent a letter saying he had approved of the trooper’s riding a snowmobile, as long as he was careful.

Mr. Palin declined to be interviewed. But in a sworn affidavit this week for the legislative investigation, he wrote that he had hundreds of communications about the trooper “with my family, with friends, with colleagues and with just about everyone I could, including government officials.” He added, “In fact, I talked about Wooten so much over the years that my wife told me to stop talking about it with her.”

As for what he had told his wife, Mr. Palin said he often raised his concerns about “the unfairness of his remaining on the state troopers when he was obviously so unfit for the job.”

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In July, Ms. Palin’s acting chief of staff called Mr. Monegan to another meeting in that same room in the governor’s Anchorage office. The aide, Michael A. Nizich, said the governor wanted him to head the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, part of the public safety department. Put another way, he was no longer commissioner.

Saying the firing had come “out of the blue,” Mr. Monegan asked how he had upset the governor. Ms. Palin, the aide said, wanted to take the agency in a new direction.

“Was it Wooten?” Mr. Monegan recalled asking.

“A new direction,” was the reply.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Mr. Monegan’s successor, Mr. Kopp, said that when the trooper came up in his pre-employment conversations with Palin aides, “it was raised within the context of one of the things that I needed to be aware of, but there was no direction to take any job action.”
During his first week on the job, Mr. Kopp received a call from Mr. Nizich, an aide to Gov. Palin. Trooper Wooten, in uniform, had shown up at the governor’s picnic, which is open to the public. “Is there anything you can do?” Mr. Nizich asked, explaining that the Palins were concerned about his presence.

The trooper was told to leave the area.

About a week later, Mr. Kopp resigned amid [from his job].

Trooper Mike Wooten, who declined to be interviewed for this article, remains on the force as a patrol trooper.

It is reported by CNN.com that Todd Palin testified that he never pressured the public safety commissioner, the governor wanted to move the department in another direction.

What follows are excerpts of the different stories that Todd Palin told about WHY Walt Monegan was fired:

Palin's husband, Todd, said in a sworn affidavit released Wednesday night that he never pressured the state's public safety commissioner to fire Palin's former brother-in-law, a state trooper who had divorced the governor's sister.

Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan was not fired this summer because he wouldn't dismiss the trooper, Todd Palin said in his written response to questions from the state Legislature's investigation into Monegan's firing.

"My concerns ... were not why Monegan was reassigned," Palin said in the 52-page document.

Some of Todd's stories include:

• His wife - the governor - was unhappy with Monegan because of "budget issues and failure to fill trooper vacancies."
  
  
• [Walt Monegan] was offered a reassignment, and he resigned rather than accept the reassignment.
  
  
• Mike Wooten was a "rogue trooper" who had threatened the Palin family during his divorce.
  
  
• "As Monegan has stated, I never told him to fire Wooten," Palin said in his written response to questions in the state Legislature's investigation into Monegan's dismissal. "My understanding was that he was in charge of receiving any kind of complaint about a trooper. That was his job. At no time did Monegan tell me he felt 'pressure' to do anything he did not think was right."
  
  
• [Todd said that] his complaints with Monegan centered more on his wife's inability to sometimes use the Department of Public Safety's King Air Turbo Prop plane to reach far-flung constituents in the large state. "It seemed like whenever Sarah needed this plane, it was unavailable."
  
  
• He also contacted Monegan in the "summer of 2007 when a friend's husband drowned in Lake Louise and she was upset with the way the body recovery was being handled.
  
  
• Todd also claims that Trooper Wooten used a Taser stun-gun on his ten-year old stepson, had drunk beer both before and during the operation of his marked State Trooper patrol car, and had illegally shot a cow moose without a permit.

They may not have come right out and said it, but it is pretty obvious by the Palins' obsession with Mike Wooten that Monegan was punished by the governor for not firing her ex-brother-in-law.

Findings of the Legislative Council investigating the claims against Gov. Palin:

Finding Number One:
For the reasons explained below, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) provides

"The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

Finding Number Two:
I find that, although Walt Monegan's refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissionare Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.


Finding Number Three:
Harbor Adjustment Service of Anchorage, and its owner Ms. Murleen Wilkes, handled Trooper Michael Wooten's workers' compensation claim properly and in the normal course of business like any other claim processed by Harbor Adjustment Service and Ms. Wilkes. Further, that he received all the workers' compensation benefits to which he was entitled.


Finding Number Four:
The Attorney General's office failed to substantially comply with my August 6, 2008 written request to Governor Sarah Palin for information about hte case in the form of emails.

These findings carry no criminal actions against the governor. Although, Mr. Monegan may decide to look at some civil action to recoup the salary that he lost because of this harassment by the governor and her husband.

Read the New York Times article about how the Palin's pressured Walt Monegan here.

Read the CNN.com article and download the PDF about Todd Palin's response to the Judiciary Committee subpoena here.

Several media outlets are reporting on report from the Alaska Legislature claiming that Gov. Sarah Palin abused her powers, read them here & here & here.

Read and download the 263-page PDF of the Branchflower Report to the Legislative Council (the findings of the council concerning the Troopergate investigation).

plez sez: i delayed in posting about this story, because frankly, there were so many other juicy and salacious stories and rumors about the governor of alaska that this story got put on the back burner until it was resolved. well, now that an investigation by the Alaska Legislature has concluded that palin abused her powers in the firing of walt monegan, i feel it is time to spread the news!

this is just one more item in a long list of indescretions that should've caused john mccain to look elsewhere for his running mate. not only has the woman proven to be a drag on his campaign - remember, he was close to being tied with Obama in most polls when he picked her and now he is down by over 8 points in most national polls less than 2 months after picking her - but she was not adequately vetted, and her public misdeeds will undoubtedly play a role in mccain's defeat on election day.

we can now add "corrupt" to her long list of adjectives: uncurious, uneducated, bigoted, xenophobic, liar, charlatan, brown-noser, overly ambitious, etc.