and watch this video of Barney Frank's appearance on Bill O'Reilly's show:
Friday, October 3, 2008
McCain on the issue of his support for Bush
This is not quite as effective as the piece the Daily Show did on Republican hypocrisy, (Rove on mayoral experience, Limbaugh on unwed mothers, etc.) but it's good.
OpEd at the NYTimes - always a treat
Let's start with David Brooks. David Brooks, conservative columnist, whose wife and kids are Obama supporters. David Brooks who has written in the last week or so highlighting Sarah Palin's incompetence. Today, in his post-debate piece called "The Palin Rebound," Brooks writes: "During the vice-presidential debate, Gov. Sarah Palin took her inexperience and made a mansion out of it. Where was this woman during her interview with Katie Couric?" My first reaction is reading the essay was - how much did they pay Brooks to write that? But then I started reading the comments. I didn't read every one, just skimmed, but I did not find ONE comment that didn't blast Brooks. Many started with the question "David, were you watching the same debate I was?"
So, my take on this is that Brooks needs to defend his creds as a conservative columnist. He writes a column favorable to Palin, to make up for straying in the past. He KNOWS the comments will blow his piece out of the water. Way to take one for the country, David!
So, let's move on to Judith Warner, whose piece is called "Waiting for Schadenfreude." [schaden=damage, freude=joy; therefore, taking pleasure in the misfortune of others.] The contrast between the mental resources required to read and think about these two essays is analagous to the contrast between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden. (As some have noted, there is almost a gender reversal for Biden and Palin - read this piece on HuffPo about what Biden has done for the image of fathers.)
Warner's premise is basically that while we by rights should feel angry at Wall Street and joyful that they've gotten their comeuppance, how we really feel is a lot more complicated than that. There is hope that the bursting of the Wall Street bubble will level the playing field in terms of housing costs and salaries. For those who have accepted that there is more to life than money, the demise of Wall Street should be seen as a form of vindication and validation. But the fear that we all feel that the collapse of Wall Street is a prelude to the collapse of the American economy overshadows any pleasure at the fall of the "masters of the universe." (Tom Wolfe, I hate that term.)
As with the Brooks piece, the comments on the Warner essay are as good as the article they're written about. A couple of excerpts:
Focusing on N.Y. and Wall st. diminishes the most important point “Wealth Worship”. Wall st. isn’t just N.Y. anymore, I’ve personally witnessed whole families being destroyed in places like Minnesota too. Grown children in fabulous carrers depreesed and even committing suicide because they can’t measure up to or even understand their stockbroker fathers obsession with money. . . Were are our values?The cure is to teach our children the key to happiness ; a career you would do even if you didn’t get paid to do it..— Mark Yurkiw
Finance is an essential component of modern capitalism, but it doesn’t produce any real goods and services, itself. Henry Ford said something to the effect that if you’re only in the business of making money, it’s not a very useful business . . . — fred schumacher
On to Paul Krugman. If you weren't afraid after reading Judith Warner, you will be after reading "Edge of the Abyss." About the state of the US economy, Krugman writes:
"How bad is it? Normally sober people are sounding apocalyptic. On Thursday, the bond trader and blogger John Jansen declared that current conditions are “the financial equivalent of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution,” while Joel Prakken of Macroeconomic Advisers says that the economy seems to be on “the edge of the abyss.”
And the people who should be steering us away from that abyss are out to lunch . . .
Krugman doesn't offer much hope for stabilization of the economy anytime soon:
"For the fact is that the plan on offer is a stinker — and inexcusably so. The financial system has been under severe stress for more than a year, and there should have been carefully thought-out contingency plans ready to roll out in case the markets melted down. Obviously, there weren’t: the Paulson plan was clearly drawn up in haste and confusion. And Treasury officials have yet to offer any clear explanation of how the plan is supposed to work, probably because they themselves have no idea what they’re doing.
Despite this, as I said, I hope the plan passes, because otherwise we’ll probably see even worse panic in the markets. But at best, the plan will buy some time to seek a real solution to the crisis."
A comment posted to the Krugman essay that echoes what most of us are probably feeling:
October 03, 2008 7:37 am
I thought 9/11 would be the most cataclysmic, disruptive history I would live through as a US citizen... but now I am heartbroken to say I may witness the actual destruction of our nation.
— tim, Athens, GA
Last - AND least - is a snarky little piece by Bethany McLean called "The Borrowers." I am compelled up front to say she is NOT talking about me or even about most of the people I know when she writes:
"But who made the decision to take on that mortgage she couldn’t really afford? Who lied about her income or assets in order to qualify for a mortgage? Who used the proceeds of a home equity line to pay for an elaborate vacation? Who used credit cards to live a lifestyle that was well beyond her means? Well, you and I did. (Or at least, our neighbors did.)"
Not quite. The only loans we have are to pay college tuition (total of $412,000- how many people do you know could pay that without borrowing, even after saving for 35 years). I know people who have big credit card debt, but it wasn't aquired financing much of a lifestyle. Ms. McLean should show a little more of the responsibility she talks about when she ascribes her lifestyle choices to those of her "neighbors." (No comment section on this one.)
So, my take on this is that Brooks needs to defend his creds as a conservative columnist. He writes a column favorable to Palin, to make up for straying in the past. He KNOWS the comments will blow his piece out of the water. Way to take one for the country, David!
So, let's move on to Judith Warner, whose piece is called "Waiting for Schadenfreude." [schaden=damage, freude=joy; therefore, taking pleasure in the misfortune of others.] The contrast between the mental resources required to read and think about these two essays is analagous to the contrast between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden. (As some have noted, there is almost a gender reversal for Biden and Palin - read this piece on HuffPo about what Biden has done for the image of fathers.)
Warner's premise is basically that while we by rights should feel angry at Wall Street and joyful that they've gotten their comeuppance, how we really feel is a lot more complicated than that. There is hope that the bursting of the Wall Street bubble will level the playing field in terms of housing costs and salaries. For those who have accepted that there is more to life than money, the demise of Wall Street should be seen as a form of vindication and validation. But the fear that we all feel that the collapse of Wall Street is a prelude to the collapse of the American economy overshadows any pleasure at the fall of the "masters of the universe." (Tom Wolfe, I hate that term.)
As with the Brooks piece, the comments on the Warner essay are as good as the article they're written about. A couple of excerpts:
Focusing on N.Y. and Wall st. diminishes the most important point “Wealth Worship”. Wall st. isn’t just N.Y. anymore, I’ve personally witnessed whole families being destroyed in places like Minnesota too. Grown children in fabulous carrers depreesed and even committing suicide because they can’t measure up to or even understand their stockbroker fathers obsession with money. . . Were are our values?The cure is to teach our children the key to happiness ; a career you would do even if you didn’t get paid to do it..— Mark Yurkiw
Finance is an essential component of modern capitalism, but it doesn’t produce any real goods and services, itself. Henry Ford said something to the effect that if you’re only in the business of making money, it’s not a very useful business . . . — fred schumacher
On to Paul Krugman. If you weren't afraid after reading Judith Warner, you will be after reading "Edge of the Abyss." About the state of the US economy, Krugman writes:
"How bad is it? Normally sober people are sounding apocalyptic. On Thursday, the bond trader and blogger John Jansen declared that current conditions are “the financial equivalent of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution,” while Joel Prakken of Macroeconomic Advisers says that the economy seems to be on “the edge of the abyss.”
And the people who should be steering us away from that abyss are out to lunch . . .
Krugman doesn't offer much hope for stabilization of the economy anytime soon:
"For the fact is that the plan on offer is a stinker — and inexcusably so. The financial system has been under severe stress for more than a year, and there should have been carefully thought-out contingency plans ready to roll out in case the markets melted down. Obviously, there weren’t: the Paulson plan was clearly drawn up in haste and confusion. And Treasury officials have yet to offer any clear explanation of how the plan is supposed to work, probably because they themselves have no idea what they’re doing.
Despite this, as I said, I hope the plan passes, because otherwise we’ll probably see even worse panic in the markets. But at best, the plan will buy some time to seek a real solution to the crisis."
A comment posted to the Krugman essay that echoes what most of us are probably feeling:
October 03, 2008 7:37 am
I thought 9/11 would be the most cataclysmic, disruptive history I would live through as a US citizen... but now I am heartbroken to say I may witness the actual destruction of our nation.
— tim, Athens, GA
Last - AND least - is a snarky little piece by Bethany McLean called "The Borrowers." I am compelled up front to say she is NOT talking about me or even about most of the people I know when she writes:
"But who made the decision to take on that mortgage she couldn’t really afford? Who lied about her income or assets in order to qualify for a mortgage? Who used the proceeds of a home equity line to pay for an elaborate vacation? Who used credit cards to live a lifestyle that was well beyond her means? Well, you and I did. (Or at least, our neighbors did.)"
Not quite. The only loans we have are to pay college tuition (total of $412,000- how many people do you know could pay that without borrowing, even after saving for 35 years). I know people who have big credit card debt, but it wasn't aquired financing much of a lifestyle. Ms. McLean should show a little more of the responsibility she talks about when she ascribes her lifestyle choices to those of her "neighbors." (No comment section on this one.)
Thursday, October 2, 2008
A little more humor tonight
Check out this site: http://www.palinbingo.com/ What a great idea! Too late to play now, but it would have been fun to have during the debate. You print out a bingo card with Palinisms instead of numbers. Spaces with "hockey mom" - "pit bull" - "Russia" - you get the picture.
I love Joe - Who won the debate polls
Joe Biden did a great job tonight. I wish he had not said, "Look," so many times, but otherwise he was pretty good. He hammered on Cheney, who is even less popular than Bush. He hammered that John McCain is NOT a maverick. He was folksy, while Palin was almost a caricature of folksiness. Obviously, she has no clue what she said in confirming Dick Cheney's view about which branch the VP belongs in, nor does she have any concept of its implications. Her response to this question is much more alarming to me than the one the media is focusing on, which is her calling the general in Afghanistan McClellan instead of McKiernan, which to me is nothing more than a gaffe, not a major red flag like agreeing with Dick Cheney on the role of the vice presidency.
Everybody was exactly right about the expectations for Palin - she didn't sound nearly as dumb as she did in the Couric interviews, so for her the debate was a success. She was impressive in the amount of talking points she had memorized, and she did a pretty good job of matching talking points to the questions. She scored some good points in the rebuttals. But Sarah Palin is downright nasty, and it showed a little tonight. Though she wasn't nearly as nasty tonight as she was in some of her Alaska debates (which you can see on Huffington Post).
Anyway, the polls are showing the Biden won the night. In unscientific, online polls, Fox News was showing 56% for Biden and 43% for Palin, but now I can't get their results page to load. MSNBC shows Biden 53% to 37% Palin. In CBS News' scientific poll of 473 undecided voters, forty-six percent of the uncommitted voters surveyed say Democrat Joe Biden won the debate, compared to 21 percent for Republican Sarah Palin. Thirty-three percent said it was a tie. (not all the participants have responded yet)
Here are a couple of comment from the Fox News site that sums it all up for me: (note, if even these folks are seeing it, you know it's a problem)
by jmlam Colorado [Oct 2, 2008 11:27:07 PM]
So lemme get this straight: Sarah Palin needed to avoid looking to dumb. Joe Biden needed to keep from appearing too smart. What planet are we on? I'd love to have Sarah Palin on my bowling team, not in the White House. Wait, I'm pretty sure Joe probably carries a higher average. So why did McCain pick her again? As a conservative, I wish he would've made a better choice, seriously.
by tigerdahm Pennsylvania [Oct 2, 2008 11:26:32 PM]
She was "real?" Are you kidding me? She dodged direct questions and said the same things repeatedly. I don't blame Americans for seeing only the surface... she definitely had a nice outfit and great demeanor. But if you listened to what she said, you'd realize it was all fluff and a way to use the word "maverick" 20+ times. Wow, I'm amazed anyone could possibly take her seriously. We don't need a hockey mom running our government, we need a professional.
UPDATE: Here are the numbers from Fox News: Who won the debate?
Sarah Palin 40%
Joe Biden 60%
Total Voters:99589
UPDATE #2: I love the polls from these sites that could be thought sympathetic to McCain - here are the New York Daily News poll results:
Poll Results Who won the vice presidential debate?
Sarah Palin
38%
Joe Biden
56%
Neither
6%
Everybody was exactly right about the expectations for Palin - she didn't sound nearly as dumb as she did in the Couric interviews, so for her the debate was a success. She was impressive in the amount of talking points she had memorized, and she did a pretty good job of matching talking points to the questions. She scored some good points in the rebuttals. But Sarah Palin is downright nasty, and it showed a little tonight. Though she wasn't nearly as nasty tonight as she was in some of her Alaska debates (which you can see on Huffington Post).
Anyway, the polls are showing the Biden won the night. In unscientific, online polls, Fox News was showing 56% for Biden and 43% for Palin, but now I can't get their results page to load. MSNBC shows Biden 53% to 37% Palin. In CBS News' scientific poll of 473 undecided voters, forty-six percent of the uncommitted voters surveyed say Democrat Joe Biden won the debate, compared to 21 percent for Republican Sarah Palin. Thirty-three percent said it was a tie. (not all the participants have responded yet)
Here are a couple of comment from the Fox News site that sums it all up for me: (note, if even these folks are seeing it, you know it's a problem)
by jmlam Colorado [Oct 2, 2008 11:27:07 PM]
So lemme get this straight: Sarah Palin needed to avoid looking to dumb. Joe Biden needed to keep from appearing too smart. What planet are we on? I'd love to have Sarah Palin on my bowling team, not in the White House. Wait, I'm pretty sure Joe probably carries a higher average. So why did McCain pick her again? As a conservative, I wish he would've made a better choice, seriously.
by tigerdahm Pennsylvania [Oct 2, 2008 11:26:32 PM]
She was "real?" Are you kidding me? She dodged direct questions and said the same things repeatedly. I don't blame Americans for seeing only the surface... she definitely had a nice outfit and great demeanor. But if you listened to what she said, you'd realize it was all fluff and a way to use the word "maverick" 20+ times. Wow, I'm amazed anyone could possibly take her seriously. We don't need a hockey mom running our government, we need a professional.
UPDATE: Here are the numbers from Fox News: Who won the debate?
Sarah Palin 40%
Joe Biden 60%
Total Voters:99589
UPDATE #2: I love the polls from these sites that could be thought sympathetic to McCain - here are the New York Daily News poll results:
Poll Results Who won the vice presidential debate?
Sarah Palin
38%
Joe Biden
56%
Neither
6%
Rate the Debate
From an e-mail I received today:
Tonight is the only night vice presidential candidates Sarah Palin and Joe Biden will face off in a debate. As tens of millions of people watch, will the issues you care about be heard?
Last Friday, thousands of people logged on to www.RatetheDebates.org to score the media's performance in the first presidential debate.
Tonight, we need even more people to watchdog the press. Let the anchors and pundits know whether issues that matter the most are getting airtime in the political arena.
How to fill out the Citizens Media Scorecard:
Go to www.RatetheDebates.org. We'll post a link to the Citizens Media Scorecard shortly after the debate begins.
Click on the Scorecard link and send us your feedback as you watch the debate. (It's easy, short, and anonymous)
Check back at www.RatetheDebates.org afterwards to see results.
We can't let the media hijack this one-time debate with gotchas and partisan bickering.
The media play a central role in elections as Americans prepare to make a decision about the future leadership of our country. Tonight, you can cut through the media spin alongside thousands of others who are fed up with election news that puts gaffes and gossip ahead of the issues.
Make Your Voice Heard Tonight!
Want to be notified instantly when the Citizens Media Scorecard goes live? Join our Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. We'll post announcements the minute the Citizens Media Scorecard is posted.
Stay tuned,
Timothy Karr
Campaign Director
Free Press
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.ratethedebates.org/
Tonight is the only night vice presidential candidates Sarah Palin and Joe Biden will face off in a debate. As tens of millions of people watch, will the issues you care about be heard?
Last Friday, thousands of people logged on to www.RatetheDebates.org to score the media's performance in the first presidential debate.
Tonight, we need even more people to watchdog the press. Let the anchors and pundits know whether issues that matter the most are getting airtime in the political arena.
How to fill out the Citizens Media Scorecard:
Go to www.RatetheDebates.org. We'll post a link to the Citizens Media Scorecard shortly after the debate begins.
Click on the Scorecard link and send us your feedback as you watch the debate. (It's easy, short, and anonymous)
Check back at www.RatetheDebates.org afterwards to see results.
We can't let the media hijack this one-time debate with gotchas and partisan bickering.
The media play a central role in elections as Americans prepare to make a decision about the future leadership of our country. Tonight, you can cut through the media spin alongside thousands of others who are fed up with election news that puts gaffes and gossip ahead of the issues.
Make Your Voice Heard Tonight!
Want to be notified instantly when the Citizens Media Scorecard goes live? Join our Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. We'll post announcements the minute the Citizens Media Scorecard is posted.
Stay tuned,
Timothy Karr
Campaign Director
Free Press
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.ratethedebates.org/
Fox News: Keeping your sense of humor
The secret goal of Fox News must be to provide fodder for Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. The video below is so funny - A Fox News reporter asks for a show of hands in a diner, who is going to vote for McCain? One guy starts to raise his hand, but his wife drags it down. Then he asks who is going to vote for Obama, and everyone in the place raises their hand. The reporter calls it a "split"! Enjoy.
And in keeping with the humor theme of this post, here are David Letterman's Top Ten things overheard at Sarah Palin's debate camp:
And in keeping with the humor theme of this post, here are David Letterman's Top Ten things overheard at Sarah Palin's debate camp:
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Palin and Biden talk about the Supreme Court
Katie Couric has been asking the two VP candidates the same questions in a series of interviews. Here is CBS video of her asking both candidates about Roe v. Wade and other Supreme Court decisions. To make a long story short: one can't think of any decisions besides Roe v. Wade, the other is frustrated the Supreme Court didn't support the bill he WROTE and spent 1000 hours researching for presentation to the court.
Watch CBS Videos Online
Watch CBS Videos Online
McCain gets testy in Iowa
Here is the video of parts of McCain's conversation with the editorial board of the Des Moines Register. (the whole video is available here) The story originated with AP Iowa reporter Mike Glover. From the other reports I'd read about how testy McCain was, I thought it would be worse; he is a little cranky, but never really loses his temper. There has been a lot of coverage of this story, I guess for two reasons: 1. media looking out for each other, and 2. after the McCain campaign's attacks on the media, they aren't going to cut him any slack.
Eve of the debate
The Washington Post style section has a very insight-filled, detailed examination of Sarah Palin's speaking style and how it affects her listeners. The article is called "Shooting from the Hip, with a Smile to Boot." Author Libby Copeland seems to really understand both those who just looove Palin, as well as those who are revolted by her "nasal twang." Good reading in preparation for the debate.
A snippet for you:
Wait, did you see that? There! She did it again: wrinkled up her nose in a way that either looks like a sneer or is adorably reminiscent of Samantha from "Bewitched." Depending on whom you talk to ...
People love her so. People hate her so. At the heart of it is the delivery, a style of speaking we'll see again in tomorrow night's debate, a style that reaches past folksy and veers into the territory of -- to hell with it, cue the charges of sexism -- cute.
"She's perky, she's spunky," says Republican speechwriter Landon Parvin, who has written for both Presidents Bush. "She has this quality -- in a 1950s comedy, her father would call her 'Button.' "
And?
"This allows her to get away with murder," he says.
A snippet for you:
Wait, did you see that? There! She did it again: wrinkled up her nose in a way that either looks like a sneer or is adorably reminiscent of Samantha from "Bewitched." Depending on whom you talk to ...
People love her so. People hate her so. At the heart of it is the delivery, a style of speaking we'll see again in tomorrow night's debate, a style that reaches past folksy and veers into the territory of -- to hell with it, cue the charges of sexism -- cute.
"She's perky, she's spunky," says Republican speechwriter Landon Parvin, who has written for both Presidents Bush. "She has this quality -- in a 1950s comedy, her father would call her 'Button.' "
And?
"This allows her to get away with murder," he says.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)