7:46 Central Time: I can't believe this is the last of the '08 live-blogging, but it is. Settle in. Let's savor these precious moments together.
8:03: McCain begins with a tribute to Nancy Reagan's pelvis. Second: Americans are angry, angry I tell you.
8:05: The first question, on the financial crisis, gives them both a chance to give a speech that they could have prepared in advance. With a chance at a follow-up, McCain plugs in prepared material about Joe the plumber who is worried about taxes. He should have listened to Obama's answer and responded very precisely to that. Generally, Obama seems much more fluid and complex, and McCain is wooden and overprepared, unwilling to react on the spot. When he's not speaking, McCain sits with his hands folded on the table. Obama speaks again, then McCain hits him with the "spread the wealth around" comment that Obama made to Joe the plumber. He's coming alive a bit now [McCain]. But I don't know how many more times he can say "Joe the plumber." If we'd put "Joe the plumber" on the drinking game list, we'd be sprawling under the table already.
8:17: McCain is going to wield a hatchet and then a scalpel. He's after the pork. Especially that demonic overhead projector. Did you have "overhead projector" on your drinking list? Now, Obama is talking about "earmarks," an unfortunate term that make us notice how huge his ears look tonight.
8:22: McCain asks Obama to say when he's ever stood up to his party. And Obama has (what sounds like) some good examples: tort reform, charter schools....
8:31: McCain challenges Obama about John Lewis's charge that the McCain campaign has been racist. Obama ignores it for a while, then finally gets around to it. But what did he say? He didn't repudiate Lewis, which is what McCain demanded. McCain comes back at him, with a bit of a tirade about what fine Americans there are in the McCain/Palin crowds. On the split screen, Obama has that look that I saw him aim at Hillary Clinton months ago. I think McCain is getting to him. He got Obama to tip his head up and look down his nose at McCain. Now, McCain needles him about Ayers and ACORN. McCain is on the attack, and Obama is stuck in the defensive role.
8:43: Palin is a freath of bresh air.
8:47: Nuclear pants... uh... nuclear plants.
8:51: McCain mugs when it's not his turn. He lit up when Obama said he believes in free trade. He's all over Obama about free trade. Obama doesn't understand free trade... and he's never been south of the border. Obama comes back, seemingly unriled. But I'm distracted by the McCain side of the screen. McCain sparkles with the knowledge of his superiority on free trade... or so it seems.
8:56: My son Jac is live-blogging too, and he just wrote: "McCain is back to the 'he doesn't understand' line against Obama, this time about Colombia trade policy. Obama: 'Actually, I understand it pretty well ...' Oh, but how can that be? He's never traveled south of the border!" McCain is trying to get under Obama's skin, but Obama is standing his ground. He understands what McCain is up to.
8:59: McCain thinks you're fat.
8:59: Joe the plumber is back.
9:06: Something about health care. Who won? I don't know.
9:07: The Supreme Court. McCain notes his record of voting for judicial nominees based on their qualifications. This is a good point, because Obama has voted against highly qualified Supreme Court nominees, while McCain voted for Justice Ginsburg. They're both against "litmus tests" (of course).
9:13: McCain presses Obama on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act and partial birth abotion, very sensitive subjects. Obama wants to communicate to young people that sex is sacred and we don't want any "cavalier" activity.
9:19: Education. Gah. Am I paying attention? Are you paying attention? Education is important!
8:28: The closing statements at last. McCain sounds over-rehearsed and he stumbles over many things. He says "abased" for "based." I think he knows he hasn't done enough tonight. He hasn't rattled Obama, not enough anyway. Obama is doing his final statement now. It's not particularly interesting, but it's filling the space, and we're probably not listening, because we know, he's survived the final ordeal. He will be our President, I think, and I think they both know that. They shake hands, and we hear McCain vigorously congratulating the younger man -- our future President, in all likelihood -- "Good job! Good job!"
9:34: No more debates! Can it be? We've reached the end. Thanks to both men, John McCain and Barack Obama, for fighting so long and so hard and for stepping up to the awesome task of governing this great, unwieldy, beloved country of ours.
१५ ऑक्टोबर, २००८
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
७८७ टिप्पण्या:
«सर्वात जुने ‹थोडे जुने 787 पैकी 601 – 787Simon asks :What is everyone planning on doing on election night, by the way?
Well last night we had a lovely dinner and I read some Marc Bloch...oh wait you mean the US Election :)
Since my absentee ballot will have already been filled out, election night will hopefully be about seeing Americans come together and whichever candidate is elected will be given a chance.
That would be nice at least.
2 buck Chuck? At my Trader Joe's it's 3 buck Chuck. up to 2.99 a bottle.
kimsch said...
and of course the 77¢/dollar ratio doesn't take anything else into consideration.
If women actually worked the same jobs with the same quals, same experience, and same work flex as men, any employer would be an economic idiot, not to hire an entire female workforce.
The fact that even women employers don't make that irrational decision tells one that the workforce isn't perfectly equal and most of those men that make more that some of those women are working at tougher jobs, or longer hours or have more experience, etc.
What's really troublesome is that neither candidate offered a solution to the pending Ritchie/Ciccone divorce. Surely a nation that can spend trillions of dollars to bail out ne'er-do-well investment bankers can find the means to help those kids.
Oh, I think both Krauthammer and Brooks made accurate statements, it was just a bummer to see them being so blasé about the whole thing.
ron_st.amant, I don't know if it is possible at this point. There are hordes that have wanted blood for 8 years, and once a group starts clamoring for blood, unity is impossible. However, I do hope it happens.
Well, Jen Bradford, one thing Krauthammer is right on, McCain would throw some excellent punches, but wouldn't follow through. For example, I was glad that he bought the born alive act up, but didn't follow up.
I think this is what bothered me about McCain tonight, and why I would say he didn't do a good job, even if I agreed with him more. He does that thing where he starts to make a point and then he laughs as if the position of Obama is ridiculous, but he doesn't ever really finish him off. So if you don't already know what he's talking about, it just leaves you feeling like he's being arrogant and condescending rather than actually making a good point.
Drill Sgt.:
Yep. If that mysterious 77¢/dollar ratio existed exclusive on any other consideration, why do any men have jobs at all, at all?
"Senator McCain is like the town crier -- first Kennedy now Nancy."
Is this an affection of the septuagenarian set? Trolling the obits and having to send get well messages to all your fellow peeps laid up?
I mean I appreciate the sentiment, but does anyone really think poor Mrs. Reagan is in the hospital with a busted hip and is watching this debate? For god sake's she's already injured don't make her sick as well.
lorelei leigh said...
Well, Jen Bradford, one thing Krauthammer is right on, McCain would throw some excellent punches, but wouldn't follow through. For example, I was glad that he bought the born alive act up, but didn't follow up.
I think this is what bothered me about McCain tonight, and why I would say he didn't do a good job, even if I agreed with him more. He does that thing where he starts to make a point and then he laughs as if the position of Obama is ridiculous, but he doesn't ever really finish him off. So if you don't already know what he's talking about, it just leaves you feeling like he's being arrogant and condescending rather than actually making a good point.
10:09 PM
Maybe he thinks that people see his point, and that that's all he needs to say?
Had to let other people in my household use the computer. Drat.
Education policy is one area where I know my stuff. I like vouchers, and I want to see them adequately funded. The best private schools, however, will be unlikely to take vouchers.
Off topic question for gun owners - What kind of handguns to you recommend for home defense use? I have long guns and would like to decrease the response rate a bit.
I can't help ut notice how...now that the debate is over...and every poll says McCain ate shit...again...the local wingnuts disappear into the night.
Gutless.
Re: 8:22 post--
I thought that was actually an interesting admission/punt from Obama (it's only an admission if you want to get really snarky). McCain asked him when he'd gone against the LEADERS of his party, and off he went rattling off special interests. Either he couldn't think of a time he had crossed Harry Reid and punted, or... the special interests really DO control politics!
*excuse the excessive capitalization. I have yet to figure out using HTML tags in comments properly.
And if there any Mormons in the commentariat tonight, how do you store wheat in your basement without having it turn all rancid and beetle-ish?
Just askin'.
Maybe he thinks that people see his point, and that that's all he needs to say?
Right, I think he does. Only, at this point, he's trying to win over voters who, for the most part, aren't that engaged with the issues, yet he talks to them like they are. Without a bit more explanation, he's not going to break through and get those voters who are waiting for him to give them a reason to vote for him.
Then again, it's probably too late at this point anyway, so it hardly matters much.
Peter,
Even if the best private schools won't be likely to take vouchers, the public schools will be forced to earn their keep, thereby increasing the quality of education on all levels.
ElcubanitoKC said...
"Simon I actually like Shields, he doesn't hide what he feels."
I agree. I really value people who know what they think, who aren't afraid to say what they think, and can articulate that thought well, who can communicate effectively. That's one reason why I love Fey, even though she's kryptonite. And in a totally different way, it's one reason why I love people like Gingrich and Scalia. Of course, there are some differences between those three!
McCain = Toast.
How much food should I have on hand to feed my wife and me for, say, two months? In case something happens.
Not MREs - real food.
elcubanitokc,
Congratulations on tomorrow.
They have MRE's at the commissary. I may pick some up on Friday...
Simon, agreed. I like str8 talkers.
lorelei, *sigh*, agreed.
Thank you, Beth!
Aha, on cue, the talking points have been issued, here comes the horde!
Do those stoves that use solar energy to heat food really work? And the ceramic filter devices to purify water - do they really get all the bugs out of the water? I don't want any cryptosporidium when I'm hunkered in.
Wish I caught the bit about autism at the end. What was that all about?
McCain thinks you're fat.
No no, he thinks your kid is fat.
palladian said...
Aha, on cue, the talking points have been issued, here comes the horde!
10:18 PM
Tada!!
Folks, do NOT engage you-know-who. He was recently asked to leave by Althouse and won't be staying. Ignore him.
Education policy is one area where I know my stuff. I like vouchers, and I want to see them adequately funded. The best private schools, however, will be unlikely to take vouchers.
I would think that they would take the vouchers, just not for entire payment of tuition. The schools I am most knowledgeable about are costing nearly $20k a year.
Solar ovens work, slowly, but they work.
Dryer lint under a coffee can with a "mouse hole" cut into it will make a hot enough fire to grill a cheese sandwich or fry up some eggs.
"No no, he thinks your kid is fat."
Well, his kid is fat.
McCain looks younger
He really did. How did they do that? Botox? Did they dig up JFK's Dr. Feelgood with the "vitamin B" shots, that were really methamphetamine or something?
Or just a good night's sleep and some caffeine?
michael_h said...
Do those stoves that use solar energy to heat food really work? And the ceramic filter devices to purify water - do they really get all the bugs out of the water? I don't want any cryptosporidium when I'm hunkered in.
10:19 PM
A couple of drops of bleach per gallon will do the trick.
You know that neighbor who lives across the street from me? The guy who gave each of his kids a car when they turned 16?
I'm sure he's been watching me with his night vision glasses. I know he is.
I put foil on my window so the bastard can't see anything. I know he hears me, though.
His wife is from Germany. East, I think, so that explains it.
"Folks, do NOT engage you-know-who. He was recently asked to leave by Althouse and won't be staying. Ignore him."
What Simon said.
I missed where he was asked to leave though?
McCain has plenty of time. It comes down to these last few weeks and the pendulum, as it has all season long will swing back just in time.
This ACORN thing is overblown. There isn't any evidence of VOTER FRAUD!!!, as the some would like us to believe. There are a lot of bad voter registrations, and ACORN is the source of identifying that fact. I'm not particularly worried about Donald Duck trying to cast a ballot.
Congratulations elcubanitokc!
You could still register in NC! (?)
(ACORN could help you even though you don't live here.)
dave said...
This ACORN thing is overblown. There isn't any evidence of VOTER FRAUD!!!, as the some would like us to believe. There are a lot of bad voter registrations, and ACORN is the source of identifying that fact. I'm not particularly worried about Donald Duck trying to cast a ballot.
10:26 PM
Repeat with me: O-Hi-O
JAL, thanks! And, LOL, yeah, I am sure they would!
Dryer lint, that's the ticket.
ElcubanitoKC, congrats.
Michael_H, you can always use coal to filter the water. Don't tell Joe Biden though, he wants to send that to the Chinese.
On food at home...
I'm one of the Wall Street parasites and from the inside, it looks pretty bad. There have been news reports of grain piling up on docks because shippers won't take letters of credit (see this from the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/business/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12414753
If shipping collapses, it could very easily be the case that food doesn't show up in the markets.
A water filter / purifier (e.g. MIOX) might be handy.
Beans last a long time, have protein and fiber. Canned tuna (not the time to worry about long term exposure to trace heavy metals...). Beef jerky if you can find it w/o sugar, just dried. Canned vegetables are better than none at all.
Hope we make it through ok. I have 25 cases of wine in my cellar, so I'll get plenty of resveratrol...
The Phils, the team of my youth, are one out away. Yay!
peter_hoh, thank you!
This ACORN thing is overblown. There isn't any evidence of VOTER FRAUD!!!, as the some would like us to believe. There are a lot of bad voter registrations, and ACORN is the source of identifying that fact. I'm not particularly worried about Donald Duck trying to cast a ballot.
Sorry, that one jolted me out of my cheap wine induced fantasy of survivalism.
Here's an easy test: Pretend for a moment that ACORN's activities were being carried out for the benefit of John McCain. Still think they are a benign group of happy local folks doing the Lord's work? Of course you don't, and pleeeeease don't try to spread your bullshit around here.
Vic, has Palin spoken about autism in any of her speeches? Does she fall into the vaccines-cause-autism camp?
Palladian - he was told to leave and had a bunch of comments deleted, I don't recall where, though.
Dave, If food doesn't show up, you drive out and get it. If there is no gas, you use a bike. I grew up in Cuba, I was there in the early '90s, I know what to do. People will know what to do, they won't starve.
if fraudulent voter registrations don't lead to fraudulent votes on election day, then why even register? There won't be any illegal voting done...
Well, there's the judgment issue of paying people per voter registration and thinking that's a good plan.
There's getting paid by Obama to do that. (Or do something... we're not sure what.)
There's the issue of overloading the local and state governments who will have to do their jobs *and* figure out who can really vote or not.
This, BTW, takes your tax money directly to pay the people who have to do that.
Then there is the issue that "purging" voter rolls of bogus registrations is AUTOMATICALLY RACIST. Daff E. Duck may not get to vote, but he may serve to prove that Republicans are out to suppress voters and thus deliver some real votes to Obama.
And, in the end, all of this dangerously undermines confidence in the process.
I'm reading Autism's False Prophets. There is a great chapter on science and the media. Should be required reading.
why even register should be:
why even make people register?
Back to alternate reality.
Has anyone tried to cook up a batch of bio-diesel? My wife's car has a diesel engine and I'm pretty sure I could nab old grease from a few local fast food places, but don't know how difficult it is to refine the grease so it can fuel a car w/o damage to the expensive bits.
bleeper said...
Of the two, Dear Leader (PBUH) has consumed far more Columbian than most humans.
In fairness to Obama, he started buying fine, American product from Hawaii and might have even help ensure that local product ended up in more hands, creating more jobs.
Pound for pound, I have consumed far more Columbian product than Obama has. Must be in the tons - of coffee, bananas, guava, cut stem flowers.
Other Columbian stuff? Must be in the gram level, only...Obama beats me on those products for sure.
****************
My verdict, McCain won the debate.
But - on issues the voters don't really care about in how they will make their choice. Democrats know the feeling - they beat Republicans on issue after issue in 2002, and 2004 but lost on the only issue that was foremost with voters - who will keep you save from the few thousand Islamoids out to kill a few thousand more Americans.
2008 is about the economic catastrophy now.
With single issue matters like having no health care, who loves the troops more, abortion politics swaying a small minority of voters.
I did notice that McCain attacked the "health of the woman" exception to abortion unless death is likely....during the debate and no one seems to be mentioning it. That could rise up as a post debate issue in the next week or so and lose McCain 3-5% more woman voter support.
Can I add voter fraud to the list of things like caucus vs. primary that are best worked out before we are in a presidential election year?
There's nothing inherently wrong with the c-word — the problem lies entirely in how it's misused, as an epithet thrown at people — much as there's a big difference between calling a man a penis and talking with him about his penis, or referring to a woman as a vagina versus speaking of her vagina.
The c-word in a conversation between mates at the opportune moment is a perfectly fine word — as, for instance, when lovers murmur to each other “I want [my / your] cock deep in [your / my] cunt” — and many people like and enjoy it very much in that way.
I wrote about this in two pieces “In Praise of the C-word” and “C-word II” — starring the Wife of Bath! As that inimitable lady put it:
“What ails you that you grumble thus and groan?
Is it because you'd have my cunt alone?
Why take it all, lo, have it every bit;
Peter! Beshrew you but you're fond of it!
For if I would go peddle my belle chose,
I could walk out as fresh as is a rose;
But I will keep it for your own sweet tooth.
You are to blame, by God I tell the truth.”
Or as said in the original: “Ye be to blame, by god, I sey yow sooth!” I like that.
Notice what the c-word looks like (at least that variant of it) in the original Middle English.
Fox News texting poll has McCain 87, Obama 12
Moose is supposed to be pretty good eating, although I can't find the Alton Brown episode where he cooks moose. Maybe that was on Iron Chef Alaska, the episode where Mario Batali vs. Michael Symon. the surprise ingredient was moose. Batali's dishes had way too much parmigiano reggiano.
I live in an area that is moose-deprived, so I'll need to bag a few schnauzers, I guess. The new restaurant, Wok Your Dog, has messed up the balance of nature.
Wooooooohhoooooooo! Phils Win. Will beat the Sting Rays or the Devil Rays or You Can Call Me Rays in The Series. Can't recall their name. Let the riot begin!
I've nearly polished off my bottle of Chimay.
Usually, I can't stand the presentation of the trophy and the locker room interviews with the front office people. However, this time, I'm loving hearing the Philly accent.
What? Maybe McCain didn't explain it well, but really, "health" of the woman means... "I might suffer some emotional trauma if I get stretch marks," or "giving birth will put me in the hospital for two days."
You know it does.
palladian said...
I've nearly polished off my bottle of Chimay.
10:46 PM
What have you been doing to it??
I do love Chimay, btw, and the fact that it's made by drunk monks in Belgium just makes me all giggly and fuzzy inside.
Michael_H, I've heard cat tastes pretty good as well, just like rabbit, mostly the neighbor's cat too.
Chaucer used the word 'quent'. Old English for cunt. The Wife of Bath had a quent she used to get what she needed from men.
Quentin Tarantino was probably teased a lot as a child, thus explaining his peculiar behavior as an adult.
Michael_H said...
Off topic question for gun owners - What kind of handguns to you recommend for home defense use? I have long guns and would like to decrease the response rate a bit.
Michael_H - You seem to be trying hard to derail Althouse's post on the debate by luring commentors into posting on a range of off-topic subjects you are trying to start a discussion on.
Guns, Madonna's divorce, where and how restaurant grease can run a car, food storage advice..
Why is that so?
"I do love Chimay, btw, and the fact that it's made by drunk monks in Belgium just makes me all giggly and fuzzy inside."
I'm also a lover of Chartreuse, stronger and also made by drunken monks. I recommend the V.E.P.
Synova said...
"Maybe McCain didn't explain it well, but really, 'health' of the woman means... 'I might suffer some emotional trauma if I get stretch marks," or "giving birth will put me in the hospital for two days.' You know it does."
It's something the pro-choice lobby has brought on itself. They've made "health of the mother" a euphemism for abortion on demand, which precludes the inclusion of that exception. A genuine good-faith health exception would be accepted as a compromise if it wasn't a loophole allowing abortion on demand, but the left have ensured that it will be so. Ordinary women get caught in the crossfire.
Joe the Plumber is on Nightline
"Michael_H - You seem to be trying hard to derail Althouse's post on the debate by luring commentors into posting on a range of off-topic subjects you are trying to start a discussion on...
Why is that so?"
It's an old Jewish trick. You wouldn't understand.
cedarford said...
Michael_H - You seem to be trying hard to derail Althouse's post on the debate by luring commentors into posting on a range of off-topic subjects you are trying to start a discussion on.
Guns, Madonna's divorce, where and how restaurant grease can run a car, food storage advice..
Why is that so?
10:53 PM
Dr Goebbels doesn't understand humor. It must be the "superior Aryan intellect" that can't process lowly and mundane things like a joke.
Eh. The joyful bliss of cheap wine, the Gucci bag of economic downturns, has begun to wear off.
Good night all. Best regards.
Joe will not commit to a candidate.
palladian said...
[...]
I'm also a lover of Chartreuse, stronger and also made by drunken monks. I recommend the V.E.P.
10:55 PM
Yay!
Michael_H, goodnight. It will be fun in the bunkers.
You wrote," McCain sparkles with the knowledge of his superiority on free trade... or so it seems."
Ah, the same Free Trade that has done such a great job of DESTROYING the global economy. Not sure if that's something about which I'd boast superiority; but that's just me.
Why is that so?
1. Because I have had three near-death experiences in my life. We fool ourselves when we believe our words will control our lives. Even words on a blog.
2. Because these long, often contentious political posts need moments of humor and diversion to break the tension, just as any well-written play.
3. Because I have watched every presidential debate since JFK vs RMN and have concluded that every politician makes the same promises, and then fails to keep those promises, regardless of party affiliation. Nothing ever changes, so it's not worth getting your skivvies in a knot.
Now, Obama talking about how we needed to educate young people not to act in a cavalier manner about sex... it seemed obvious he meant something like abstinence education, but he didn't actually say that, did he.
And about how he was all FOR banning late term abortions... but did he actually say that?
And he's against a litmus test for judges... but not really. He softened that one somehow.
McCain was right about the "look at" statement... it certainly wasn't a commitment to do anything but look at, which isn't a commitment at all.
Silverton, that is a complete fallacy, and you know it. But I am too tired to discuss that now, so, go read some Friedman in the meantime, and call me back in the morning.
Gosh, it looks like McCain's Debate Strategy was an utter failure, voters declaring Obama the winner by even larger margins than he is expected to win the election, almost 2:1. I suppose the upside for the wingnuts and lunatics of the Republican Party is that McCain says "Ayers" and "ACORN." I'm sure that sent shivers of delight down to the toes of the unhinged, foaming at the mouth set. But that will be little consolation once the foam has crusted up on the lips and McCain continues his plummet in the polls, God willing.
Maybe the wingnuts can go out and shout death threats to make themselves feel better.
Oh, I may have been mistaken about the shivers of delight. Just got an IM from a Republican co-worker who is outraged and says McCain is going to lose the debate because he didn't raise Rev. Wright.
LOL.
Palladian, you mentioned the hordes (the herd?) and they heard you.
Goodnight, all! I need to be ready to recite the Pledge of Allegiance promptly tomorrow.
Oh fuck off, Verso.
Seriously.
If your candidate wins, you mother fuckers will have to do a lot more than snipe from the sidelines. You'll be in charge, in a way that you haven't been for a decade at least. You better hope that you're fucking prepared for that, because "hope" and "change" expires as effective talking points on Inauguration Day.
And Obama can continue to pretend that HE is not encouraging accusations of racism.
verso,
one of Frank Luntz's guys said that even if Obama "won" the debate, the slicker talker isn't the one he'd want in the office so he'd vote for McCain anyway.
Ernie, if LuckyOldMichael and Recto-Verso are the best horde they can muster, we don't have much to worry about.
Though one does wonder... what *will* they do when they can no longer whine about everything not being their fault?
Or did someone already lay the grounds for the excuse of Republican obstructionism?
Synova, re abortion and litmus tests, McCain's answer was incoherent and Obama's mendacious. Of course Obama has a litmus test in Roe. The idea that he'd appoint an anti-Roe nominee is laughable.
That said, McCain's answer was wrong, too. Here's what McCain ought to have said:
"Bob, I'm not going to impose a litmus test that says 'if you don't want to overrule this specific case, I'm not nominating you.' I don't think that's appropriate, my friends. But I am going to impose a litmus test on whethe someone shares my basic philosophy of what law is and how judges should act. And I can't imagine a judge who took that view supporting Roe v. Wade."
This idea that all we want are "qualified" judges - that's silly. It's a smokescreen. It's not a question of "ideology" per se, but to pretend that judicial philosophy - a judge's conception of what law is, what the legal inquiry is, what a judge does - is sheer fantasy.
The Founding Fathers, in their inspired wisdom, created a political system that two centuries of lying shitweasel politicians couldn't fuck up.
Put different people in office, and their greed, deceit and arrogance will only assure that they will be sacked in favor of buffons who will only appear to be better.
The system was designed to accommodate, and be limited by, human malice and deception.
it's not Italy. (With apologies to any Basil-Americans in the audience).
Palladian said...
"[The left had] better hope that [they're]'re fucking prepared for [being in charge]."
Yep. Litigation is going to (or at least should) ensue on absolutely everything they do that can be sued on that isn't frivolous enough to merit sanctions.
Simon, I thought McCain did mention that Judges ought to strictly adhere to the constitution. Didn't he?
But yeah... he seemed mostly trying to say that what was right was to confirm the judges that the President wanted confirmed, because that's what the people had voted for.
It was a bit disjointed.
I'd still rather have the judges McCain is likely to appoint than Obama.
What did you think of Obama's insistence that privacy was in the Federal Constitution?
Re qualification not being enough - suppose you have two very qualified candidates. One is a textualist - they believe that the law is what the law says. The other is an intentionalist - they believe the law is what Congress intended. The case presents a straightforward question on the face of the text, but the legislative history indicates that whatever Congress did enact, they intended to enact something to the contrary. To pretend that judicial philosophy isn't relevant, and that sheer qualification is enough asks us to believe that both judges come out the same way in our hypothetical case - which isn't so.
Synova, I agree with you, although I wouldn't say that what I want is strict construction. No, I don't agree that there's a general right to privacy in the Constitution - I can't explain any better why not than Justice Black did in his Griswold v. Connecticut dissent. Both Obama and Palin have said that, and they're in very good company, but alas, not mine.
Simon, is determining the intention of Congress as opposed to the actual wording of the law they wrote anything like election judges in Florida determining the voter's "intention based on the hanginess of the chad?
As one of those 'marxist' liberals, I thought McCain won handily. Obama came expecting attacks on the ACORN and Ayers front and instead got slammed on the issues all night. McCain was great at attacking and counterattacking.
huh?
kimsch, no, I don't think so. In the Florida case, the reason "intent of the voter" mattered was because the statute said that the intent of the voter was the touchstone for determining which candidate (if any) the ballot should count for. The more general question over what the touchstone for interpreting legislation goes to what law is - I covered that briefly here.
What is is with about 99% of the people here?
Literally every poll that's been released has Obama winning by anywhere from 10 - 15% yet if you were to read the comments here you'd think McCain won. (As they have in each of the previous two debates.)
Are you people dropping acid right before the debates?
What is everyone planning on doing on election night, by the way?
Teaching a 3-hour sophomore literature class online. I expect it to be a little difficult to keep them on track, so I've scheduled only two short stories for that night. Perhaps I will be generous and cut it short at 2 hours.
For what it's worth - After a particularly bad troll attack on my blog - someone left the following comment - that actually put a stop to it - not my words, but good words -
Ah, "cunt". What a great word! Oh, I know it's supposed to be a shockingly vulgar & derogatory term but its ancient etymology says otherwise as does current modern feminist thinking. After all, the vagina (as it's known in polite company) is such a warm & wonderfully powerful & pleasurable thing that history is full of examples of men who have wrecked their lives, minds & careers just trying to get some. The vagina ranks right up there with money, power & status! It is usually the wrecked or rejected men who can't quite attain or achieve the goals they set for themselves who resort to such colorless descriptions of what is so highly prized & sought after by their gender. Some women might take offense at the word but smart women snicker to themselves because they know it speaks volumes more about the speaker than it does about them: she's hurt or scared him somehow....
Making up an "intention" is different, I think, than looking at the writing or speeches given in support of a law when it was passed.
Not that what is actually written down should be ignored either. Perhaps instead of just voting yes or no, justices should have the option of sending a law that seems to say the opposite of what the people voting for it said they wanted, back for a do-over.
elcubanitokc,
Your "ride my bike to the dock and get the food" plan is probably easier on a small island. Here, you'll need to go to one of our three coasts, and if you're in Missouri, well, that's quite a trip. If you can get a nice big boat and head down Old Man River, I'll meet you at the Napoleon Street wharf.
But good luck getting past Homeland Security -- our ports are high priority targets, you know.
Synova, a "do-over" sounds good. The higher courts do that with the lower courts all the time. The federal courts should be able to do that with the legislature as well.
Hey guys! Law X says Y, but all your speeches say Z. Go back and clarify. Rewrite if necessary!
What is is with about 99% of the people here?
Literally every poll that's been released has Obama winning by anywhere from 10 - 15% yet if you were to read the comments here you'd think McCain won. (As they have in each of the previous two debates.)
This is the only one I think McCain has won, and I really expect to see a noticeable change in the polls from here on out. Particularly in the 'leaning McCain' states like Georgia, North Carolina, W. Virginia and North Dakota.
My new years resolution was not to engage you, Michael, but what is "wrong" with people who don't care what the polls say, is that they/we really don't care what the polls say.
Your arguments constantly stink of a demand to defer to authority.
Some people value deference to authority. Some people don't.
CONTRARY TO THE DELUSION HERE:
The entire Frank Luntz focus group on Fox News, which was staged tonight in Miami, said that Barack Obama won the debate.
Luntz termed it a "clear majority."
The results over at CBS show Obama to have scored the biggest victory to date: "Fifty-three percent of the uncommitted voters surveyed identified Democratic nominee Barack Obama as the winner of tonight's debate. Twenty-two percent said Republican rival John McCain won.
Over at CNN, a separate poll of several hundred debate watchers again favored the Democrat by large margins: 58 percent for Obama to McCain's 31 percent.
Perhaps more importantly, McCain's favorable rating dropped 51 to 49 while his unfavorable rating increased from 45 percent to 49 percent.
Obama ended up with 66 percent favorable rating.
Asked who "expressed his views more clearly" 66 percent said Obama, 25 percent said McCain.
"Who spent their time attacking his opponent:" 80 percent said McCain, seven percent said Obama.
"Who seemed to be the stronger leader:" 56 percent for Obama, 39 percent for McCain.
And who was "more likeable:" 70 percent for Obama to McCain's 22 percent.
Before the debate:
McCain: 54 favorable / 34 unfavorable
Obama: 42 favorable / 42 unfavorable
After the debate:
McCain: 50 favorable / 48 unfavorable
Obama: 72 favorable / 22 unfavorable
(Sam Stein
stein@huffingtonpost.com | HuffPost Reporting From DC)
Are you people dropping acid right before the debates?
What a great idea! Better than those drinking games, for sure. Can you imagine McCain's grin and Obama's ears on acid? But now it's, like, too late, right? Where were you four hours ago, dude?
what, no hearing aids spotted this time?
Danny, I think that McCain did better this time than he has before, but I doubt many were convinced.
I think what happens these last few weeks will have a lot to do about just how angry McCain remains over being called a racist by Lewis. And it doesn't matter that Obama says he had nothing to do with it. He does. For setting the tone.
The idea that people have unlimited take-backs for things that were clearly not mistakes of speech... how far does that bird fly?
Synova - I realize you don't like the polling results, but that doesn't mean they aren't indicative of what Americans think.
PJ "Where were you four hours ago, dude?"
Getting ready to watch the debate.
Getting ready to watch the debate.
And people say the left has no sense of humor.
John McCain sealed his fate when he bypassed qualified candidates and selected Palin as his V.P. nominee.
Had he selected Ridge, Pawlenty, Romney or even Lieberman he would be right there with Obama.
As is, he's toast.
And yet... they do seem not to be indicative of what people will *do*.
And in the end, what will happen will happen.
So what ought I think is more important? My own opinion or someone else's?
Maybe we should have a poll, again, on whether Scott Peterson killed his wife? Our country is poll crazy and we poll on the most amazing things. We poll on matters of fact, as if opinions change fact.
It's not that I don't *like* the results of these polls. It's that I don't care.
PJ said..."And people say the left has no sense of humor."
Hey, I'm here...and it doesn't get any funnier than this.
And *that* Michael... that proves to me that you don't have a clue.
synova - Okay, hold to your "opinion."
The national polling is all wrong.
You're right.
McCain would still be McCain.
Obama would still be running against Bush. McCain would still be Republican. He would still have a stiff demeanor and a high pitched voice.
Choosing Palin was one thing he did absolutely right.
That YOU don't like her is irrelevant.
I guess the big concern now is the fact that the United States Secret Service is being forced to follow the McCain and Palin operations around the country, starting up a new investigation at each campaign stop in an attempt to identify the Republicans making death threats. At the current rate of Republican mob incitement, the Secret Service will have to hire so many new agents that they just might be able to save the Bush economy!
You know, it would be an interesting study to try to figure out why the Palin rallies attract more lunatics than the McCain rallies. I guess she just appeals more to the pure Base Republican, the classic type made infamous at various dark points in American history.
synova - I forgot to add: The fact that you don't "care" about the polling results doesn't make them any less correct or relevant.
I'm right about *my* opinion, twit.
I'm not going to change my opinion just because other people agree with me.
Totally OT, but this is funny.
Someone on a Townhall comment thread notes that Obama was seen standing in front of modified American flags. Modified with that special Obama seal, of all things.
A few comments later, someone explains it all.
Guess the O.D.S. conspiracy theorists are going to have to look elsewhere.
*sigh* Yes...
Obviously it's a "sign" when someone comes up with something silly and someone else corrects them a few comments later.
synova, I think Palin is unqualified.
And I'm not alone:
WSJ/NBC Poll: Voters Doubt Palin’s Qualifications to Be President
The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows nearly half of voters harbor doubts that Republican vice presidential hopeful Sarah Palin is qualified to be president.
Asked, “Do you feel that Sarah Palin is qualified to be president if the need arises, or is she not qualified to be president?” 49% of all respondents said the Alaska governor is not qualified while 40% said she is.
AND:
In a Newsweek poll in September, voters were asked whether Palin was qualified or unqualified to be president. The result was a near dead-heat.
In the same poll this month, those saying she was "unqualified" outnumbered those saying she was "qualified" by a massive 16 points.
We poll on matters of fact, as if opinions change fact.
We mostly poll to measure the effectiveness of propaganda, so polling on matters of fact is the best kind.
Did you notice that when McCain said that Obama had spent more money on negative advertising than any candidate, Obama didn't even bother to deny it? He went straight to a (NYT, I think) poll which found that people believe McCain to be the more negative campaigner. It doesn't matter whether they're right.
peter hoh said..."This is funny..."
What's "funny" is that there are no pictures of what you describe.
verso, Palin rallies attract more people than McCain rallies, or so I have heard.
Michael, you are not alone in your thinking that Governor Palin is unqualified to be VP.
That does not mean that Synova and I and many others who agree that Governor Palin IS qualified are wrong and therefore we must change and agree with you.
michael, try following the link.
So, to be clear: Pi, synova, etc...just don't believe in national polling?
You think it's all just made up. huh?
Means nothing?
*That's probably why both campaigns (and every campaign for decades on end) spend so much money on polling...because it's irrelevant.
Duh.
peter, I did.
are there photos?
kimsch - I never said anything about agreeing with me.
I merely said Palin is unqualified and was a major blunder on McCain's part.
I will say this: The evidence reflected in her falling popularity and criticism via even the right wing pundits would appear tp support my contention.
Believe what you want, but it's not going to help McCain dig himself out of the hole he's in.
The polls are oversampling democrats by large amounts.
Because of all those "new" democrats that are being registered.
And all of those 'disenheartened' republicans who switched their registration to democrat during the primaries...
So, no, I don't believe the polls and I haven't for years.
michael, if you followed the link, why would you want to see photos?
McCain Frowns, Rolls Eyes, Blinks More Than 3,000 Times
peter, i wanted to see the obama flag.
duh.
Synova, I found the story amusing. I'm not going as far as John Cole, who seems to think this gives him license to paint all McCain supporters with that broad brush.
Michael, Cole highlights two comments from the Townhall thread. There's a link in the second comment that shows what the first guy (Clendon) mistook for the Obama-nation flag.
kimsch: "So, no, I don't believe the polls and I haven't for years."
WHICH polls?
There are at least 10 reputable polling organizations that work for every major corporation and political campaign in America.
You just think they're ALL wrong...about EVERYTHING?
And by the way, I don't think Gallup has missed on an election for over 50 years.
Polls are too easy to manipulate, or they ask for opinions on things that are not matters of opinion.
Palin is not as qualified as many people would wish... a few more years as governor would be nice. Yet, on objective measures... she's more qualified than Obama.
How would one set up a poll to judge this in a way that wouldn't break down to "I like her" or "I don't like her" or "I want him to be President?" I defy anyone to do it.
peter...just joking, dude.
relax.
What I believe is that a poll is not valid proof of a fact (other than a fact about what people, perhaps erroneously, believe). Campaigns do not poll because they're interested in establishing actual, unchanging facts; they poll because they're interested in finding out people's malleable beliefs, with a view to changing them.
synova - so you think gallup, cnn, usa, cbs, wsj, abc, fox, nbc, pew, zogby...just haven't figured out how to create polling questions and result evaluation data and statistics to alleviate skewed results?
you think they just throw out random questions and hope for the best??
good lord...please tell me you don't really think that.
Michael,
The only poll that counts is on election day. Everything else is just leaves in the wind. Sometimes they blow this way and sometimes they blow that way.
Exit polling is included in the "doesn't count" side. The actual count of actual votes does count.
Now if only we could believe that those numbers are true...
pj: "Campaigns do not poll because they're interested in establishing actual, unchanging facts; they poll because they're interested in finding out people's malleable beliefs, with a view to changing them."
No kidding?
You mean...kind of like cereal makers test marketing a new brand? Or auto makers test marketing new designs?
BEFORE they actually spend the time and money to create the products?
Crazy stuff like that?
*Post-debate polling is conducted to examine and evaluate real human responses to what people have just seen.
kimsch - Elections aren't "polls."
What I believe is that a poll is not valid proof of a fact (other than a fact about what people, perhaps erroneously, believe).
For example... a majority *may* believe that Palin is a net loss for McCain.
But without an alternate universe to try the other choices we can't know if she is or not.
Since Obama was doing so well against "McSame" before the announcement, I assume that Michael thinks that a Pawlenty pick would mean that McCain would be ahead of Obama by now?
I'm certain that this world view of yours makes your political choices very comforting for you, Michael.
To think that the experts are right because they are experts. To not question the purpose or applicability of polls that are taken.
I'm sure you were really impressed with the "Do you think Scott Peterson is guilty?" polls they had on the news a while back.
Michael,
Yes they are. You go to the "polls".
Except that this is the only one that really counts.
It's the same thing, a snapshot in time. The questions are a bit easier because you generally just pick one from each. (some are more and say so) or you say yes or no to a referendum question.
No "on a scale from 1 to 5 with 1 being highly unlikely and 5 being highly likely do you feel about "A"" stuff.
But it's still a poll, but with a concrete result.
michael, your earnestness on the polling issue suggests that you don't have much of a sense humor. Therefore, when you are joking, you have to employ little smileys or some other signal to indicate that.
Actually the "polls" would better be called surveys. That's what they are after all.
Also, political polling has been consistently wrong and consistently wrong in Democrats favor. Some of that is taken into account by polling companies but at some point deciding how polling fails to reflect reality and saying what the true results are is an art and not a science.
I understand what polls do. But I understand what they don't do.
They don't, for example, say anything about the legitimacy of a question, and "who won the debate" is a pretty stupid question... right up there with Scott Peterson's guilt. Did I think McCain *won*?
All it really is, is something for the talking heads to talk about afterward. If they didn't have something other than themselves to talk about it would begin to seem to ego-centric and we'd catch on to them. So they talk about the polls... very much just like talking about the polls taken about Scott Peterson because, in the end, a talking head and only say the same things over and over so many times.
And yes... I think that polling organizations can create polls and *studies* that can ferret out people's true opinions on matters.
They are more than five questions long.
And they still can't control how the results are mischaracterized or misapplied... simplified... or presented as proving something they don't prove.
Agreed: the "who won the debate" instant polls are pointless.
What happens to wider polling in the days after a debate -- that's more significant.
What happens on election day is what matters.
Asked who "expressed his views more clearly" 66 percent said Obama, 25 percent said McCain.
Here is an excellent example...
If we were to determine who expressed himself more clearly the way to do so would be to ask the people polled to relate the views expressed by each candidate and see which candidate was more clear about what he thought.
It would require writing questions that were carefully crafted not to lead those answering in one direction or another.
It would require including information from the debate itself.
And it couldn't be done within the five minutes required to get the "poll results" on the air.
I certainly agree, Peter.
In the next few days we'll see if the debate has an effect on the basic "who will I vote for" percentages.
It will depend a lot on who actually watched it, who flipped back and forth to Law & Order, SVU, or just watched baseball, how it is reported in the next couple of days, and how badly everyone just wants it to be over.
Palladian wrote (10:24):
I missed where he was asked to leave though?
I think "Michaels" dénouement occurred here.
Fucking blogger!
Sorry, everyone, I didn't know the earlier warning concerned my interlocutor.
Synova - So what ought I think is more important? My own opinion or someone else's?
Someone else's opinion, combined with others is more important than your opinion. That establishes statistically useful polls and determines elections.
Right now, your opinion is nice and a reflection of how you feel and all that - but not relevant outside yourself. But the polls point to McCain being a goner as a Presidential hopeful. It's all over but shoveling the dirt on his 2008 Presidential race grave.
Maybe we should have a poll, again, on whether Scott Peterson killed his wife? Our country is poll crazy and we poll on the most amazing things. We poll on matters of fact, as if opinions change fact.
Polls are done about people's beliefs and if a judgement call, be it policy, an evaluation of threat, or a quasi-fact like a "judicial finding of fact", was the right call or not.
Polls are for things where there are no right or wrong answers. Or where people's belief systems may contract the evidence others used to make a judgment call.
The "established judicial fact" of Petersons's guilt or OJ's innocence of murder may be questioned in polls.
The established fact of Laci Peterson and Simpson's likely victims being dead - not still alive - is an undisputable fact and a poll in that area WOULD be a waste of time.
Polls in political contests may be silly vanity things - like who you want for 2012. Or, they can be critical information items with great impact on the economy, on investment decisions, how tasxpayer funds get allocated and who gets employed...
The latter is why so much money and time are spent on certain polls.
Well I for one changed my mind a little about McCain's little $300Bn bailout out of homeowners.
Could AA please begin threads on mortgage delinquencies?
Once again I remain thankful that I do not own a TV--I I spent this evening cooking arroz con pollo with my partner and then watched three episodes of black adder on her DVD player--I suspect I had a much better night doing that than watching this tripe that passes for political discourse in this nation.
for elcubanito: felcidades and bienvenidos to los estados unidos.
I am honored thatt you chose this country as su patria.
and to most of the commenters thanks for providing me an entertaining recap of the debate.
@C-ford:
All over but the shouting I suppose- it's a waste of time.
Your embrace of the lesser is supposed to be an Ok??
Hey Peter again. Sorry, I went to unpack my suitcases, and am bushed. Just wanted to address your question:
Vic, has Palin spoken about autism in any of her speeches? Does she fall into the vaccines-cause-autism camp?
I do recall that she has mentioned autism at least once on the stump. I am trying to vigourously remember if she had expressed any opinion on that, but I don't think she has.
In this blog, The Age of Autism, they state that the course of vaccines Trig might be on, may bring on autism (which occurs one in ever 15 children with DS).
Please note that the blogpost linked to also mentions Heather Bruce, Palin's sister, as having a son with autism -- as I stated earlier.
It would be interesting to ask her that question at a town hall, seeing how she and John McCain tonight, have made such hay about her being a champion of the autistic.
Cheers,
Victoria
ERNIE CONGRATS!!! And welcome to the American fold.
It's funny to say that, since I'm sure you've been a member in good standing of said fold since your exile to America. :)
Cheers,
Victoria
Hey Roj! Missing you. :)
Hey guys, I had a surprise for the Sundries readership, but I thought you might want to know:
Guess where I will be this Friday at 11 AM?
I'm so excited! And he's not even the candidate I want to see, but I know Sarah will make it later. :)
Cheers,
Victoria
Wow, Michael is one post over the line, yes? Dude, what part of "stop posting" do you not understand?
Thanks for the kind thought, Ms Victoria. But I still suggest I had more fun last nite than most.
The Asian stock markets have opened and are reporting record index drops. The Nikkei index is down 1,000 points. The European stock markets are down 74 points.
The stock markets appear to have not responded to the capital injections by central banks, but in reality, a substantial part of the decline is the market response to a likely Obama presidency, with its nonsensical tax and investment policies.
Of course, the Obama response is to propose the elimination of 401(k) plans entirely, in favor of compulsory investment in government-run savings programs.
You know how well Social Security turned out, don't you?
The One (tm)(PBUH) is our better and knows what to do with our money, so we must give it to him. It's a sound plan.
When he is coronated markets will rise, the seas will lower, and our shackles will be - well, we will see, right?
It is a shame to see our country volunteer to submit itself to the kind of tyranny that rational people have fought for years to overthrow. Does not speak well for us as a people or give me much hope for the future. I think that people who are willing to vote for Him for the sake of "change" truly don't think our country is beloved.
Anyone else tired of the McCain smirk...the smile of "I know and you don't you rube"...the endless crap of "ou said he said she said she/he didn't say."
McCain is Bush incarnate...
Senator McCain, there is no R in Washington!
Is that a prediction or an observation? And shouldn't it be there are no (R)s in Washington?
"Ronald Reagan! Newt Gingrich! George Bush! Your boy took one hell of a beating!"
Actually I didnt see the debate so dont know who won, but couldnt resist that reference.
McCain is Bush incarnate…
Ah, yes — yet another of those New Agey “follow the crowd” leftist beliefs: Christianity is idiocy and its adherents deserve unmitigated scorn — while sensible, oh-so scientific-minded folk believe in reincarnation.
Beth wrote:
Your “ride my bike to the dock and get the food” plan is probably easier on a small island. Here, you'll need to go to one of our three coasts, and if you're in Missouri, well, that's quite a trip. If you can get a nice big boat and head down Old Man River, I'll meet you at the Napoleon Street wharf.
Just how is one to board that riverboat except via a dock? Folks forget that America's vast internal river system, the Missouri-Mississippi-Ohio — linked by canals way beyond that, to the Great Lakes system (what Alexis de Tocqueville called the “River of the North”) and the Atlantic beyond — also handles (a huge amount of) shipping. (Much like Serbia, via Belgrade on the Danube, is not “landlocked.”)
Just downstream from my home town at the Great Falls of the Missouri in Montana, Fort Benton during the development of the West was known as the “World's innermost port” — 3,484 miles (5,607 km) from Fort Benton to the Gulf.
Lots of steamboats cracked up making that dangerous journey — thus one can go searching for sunken treasure — in Montana. (I have an article in the works about the riverboats of Montana.)
Michael_H said...
Off topic question for gun owners - What kind of handguns to you recommend for home defense use? I have long guns and would like to decrease the response rate a bit.
H&K .45 ACP. I own it. I love it. Excellent stopping power. You won't regret it.
Glock .45 ACP, with extra magazines. Hollow points have good stopping power.
But a shotgun is the original point and click interface.
test
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा