I agree that its a tough call. Obama has gotten this far, in part, by campaigning against "politics as usual". If he starts going all negative and 'hitting back', he could lose the idealistic voters who jumped on his campaign because he was going to stop all this. Obama has to be VERY careful, as some of his youthful idealistic supporters are starting to get disillusioned with his move to the center for the general.

I had the same question about abortion and was surprised with the answer - but if Griswold was overturned tomorrow, how many states are actually banning birth control? Even in the most conservative states (and maybe especially), I don't think the people want more poor kids running around to support.

Morning-after pill may be a different story, but I can't imagine getting the popular support for that either.

I'm one of the few people I know (as far as I know) that is super-pro abortion (I think everyone should have abortions), super-pro birth control, but don't think either are a fundamental constitutional right. If the people in a state don't want 'em, they deserve their fate. But we're getting closer to a national consenus where relevant constitutional ammendments are possible, which is the proper way to go, IMO (as opposed to appointed judges making shit up based on their own personal beliefs - which nobody seems to have a problem with as long as they agree with the practical effects of the decision)

This just seems like a poorly-formed argument that Jesse Jackson would make. The Republicans were laughing at the term 'community organizer' because the Obama camp had implied, right or wrong, that it increased his resume regarding leadership. It had nothing to do with his race. If the attacks by either side come down to finding ways to make segments of the voters pissed off at one candidate or the other, the Republicans are going to easily win. There are far more women out there that would switch their vote to McCain's ticket based on perceived sexism than their are black people that would switch to vote for Obama based on perceived racism.

http://wcbstv.com/politics/paterson.....2.813646.html

McCain's folks should just cut to the chase and say that any discussions about race are sexist and demeaning to women.

"But what disturbed him was what seemed like derisive laughter on the part of the Republicans at Obama's choice of helping his community rather than getting rich on Wall Street."

I'll make a bold prediction that by the time Obama is McCain's age, he'll have more houses and a higher net worth than McCain does now. (adjusted for inflation of course).

When McCain was Obama's age, he was only two years out of the Navy (where he was involved in some type of public service too, maybe not as cool as community organizing)

YouTube - Lipstick

McCain has a new ad out about the lipstick comment running in battleground states. Between this and the sex education ad, I think this is getting a little ridiculous.

I think you're looking at it too rationally. The people who want to revisit Griswold are doing so largely because of religious beliefs. God says... trumps all practical arguments about poor kids. I don't think it will happen, but it's just a fact that there are a lot of people that see the pill as part of the abortion debate and will stop at nothing to overturn Griswold.

Stupid yet sincere question: how is saying "there's no putting lipstick on that pig" a sexist attack? Because only women use lipstick?

SI

I'd would depend on how you define net worth. If Cindy's money is in the mix I'd be very surprised if Obama would match that total.

McCain's explicit attacks on tranny-Americans are reprehensible.

re:
I'd say worthless crap like Paterson's is definitely flailing & desperate ... but I don't think it's accurate to ascribe that entirely to the campaign as a whole. This seems more like a supporter doing some freelancing (at least at this point).

Fair point.

But Obama's going to be a bagillionare, with books and speaking engagements (and I don't fault him for that in anyway, except when he mocks McCain's wealth, or lack of knowledge of it)

That's just another video press release. Without McCain saying he approves it can't run. Will the cable outlets continue to provide free ad time for McCain by running this over and over?

I'm positive that it's freelancing. With that said, I've got to think that Obama would have asked him to not go down that path if Obama would have known what he was going to say.

Dear JPhillips,

Yes, they will and they should.

Sincerely,
Al-Jazzera and Al-Qaeda

?

Terrorist kill people -> Make video of killing or speech -> Post it to internet -> Get free air time

Obama makes comment -> McCain makes unofficial ad -> Post it to internet -> Get free air time

All sorts of organizations do the same thing. If you make a video and create enough waves, the cable media will play it every 15 minutes, 24 hours a day.

I really hate the "Even though what he said was right, he should still be punished because he should have know that lots of dumb people would not be able to understand him" argument.

This is just like the guy who got fired for saying "niggardly." People had to acknowlege that he was right, but he still got fired because he, apparently, didn't cater to the dumbness of his audience. That's fucked up.

So Obama's metaphors and big words confuse you*. OK. Fine. I know that I am niave, but I want to live in a world where your lack of education and vocabulary is your problem and not his.

Be it Obama, McCain, Bush, or the niggardly guy, I don't see why we want our public servants to strive to be pedestrian. We can and should expect more from them and ourselves.

(I will now go back to my imaginary world filled with bright rainbows and free beer and an American public that actually holds itself and its leaders accountable for anything. Mmmmm. Free Beer.)

*Not "you" personally, the reader of this comment. You, generically, the person who will change your vote based on the lipstick metaphor or who demanded that the niggardly guy get fired.

I think we're talking about two different things. To me, "the pill" refers to the daily hormone a woman takes to prevent conception. Your pill is the after-sex pill, and therefore after conception. Therefore, yes, I can see fundamentalists saying that they would want to outlaw this pill.

I don't think there's any question if you've watched the video how quickly the partisan crowd took it as such and the smile on Obama's face indicated he knew exactly what they were cheering about. I don't think there's a need for an apology like the McCain campaign requested. I think it was a small, relatively innocent barb that took on major spin implications. Anybody who has a wife or a mother knows the danger of associating the word 'pig' with any female, implied or otherwise. It usually involves an overnight visit to the couch.

No, unfortunately, JP was talking about "The Pill." The one a woman takes everyday. There is a movement that believes it should be banned.

I don't think it will ever happen, but that was the pill he was talking about.

Claps.

I agree with everything you said there. Especially the part about Free Beer.

I'm dumbfounded and never heard of this. I know the Catholic church for years was against any kind of birth control, but I've NEVER heard of this from fundamentalist Christians. That's ridiculous to me. Why the Pill? What's the difference between that and a condom?

Lipstick?

It depends on the intention of the speaker.

If the guy saying "niggardly" just meant "niggardly", as opposed to wanting to insult blacks, than ya, it's ridiculous that he got fired. But if he really wants to project hatred and just throws around that word as a means to do it, that's just as bad as the other word. (No idea what the case was there).

If Obama was intentionally trying to appeal to the lowest base of his supporters, than he's as guilty as making an overtly sexist comment. The video sure makes it look like it was intentional, but we can't know for sure.

Did anyone else happen to see this? Biden was in Columbia, Missouri yesterday and wanted to recognize Chuck Graham, who is a state senator in Missouri. He asked Chuck to stand up and be recognized. Only one problem......he's confined to a wheelchair. No political ramifications, but it made for a pretty funny moment when he realized his error.

Newsmax.com – Biden Gaffe: Tells Cripple to &#39Stand Up&#39

North Carolina State Board of Elections

33% seems like a reasonable estimate according to the NC State Board of Elections.

Well if we're going to start hyperventilating over language, Newsmax called Chuck Graham a "cripple". Criminy... ever hear of the word "disabled"?

BTW, I thought Biden handled himself very well there once he realized the situation.

Agreed. He did pretty well. It was reported that he went over to Chuck Graham afterwards and apologized by saying, "Can you tell I'm new at this?"

FWIW.....I think Biden is a pretty good guy, politics aside.

RCP has listed two National polls today...

Rasmussen: Obama 48, McCain 47
NBC/WSJ: Obama 46, McCain 45

The issue is fertilization. Generally the pill prevents ovulation, but not always. Some pro-lifers believe that since fertilization can occur without implantation in the uterus that the pill is a form of chemical abortion. This is from prolife.com:

McCain may not want to go down the sexism road, because there's alot of chatter lately about comments he made in the past:


He said this at a GOP fundraiser in 1998. There are also some other sexist jokes he possibly made that are being discussed, but at the moment I don't see any good sources for them, so I won't mention them yet. This joke was reported by the AP and the Arizona Republic.

Let's not forget the Gallup Tracking: McCain 48, Obama 43

Hotline Tracking (came out yesterday with the NBC/WSJ): McCain 45, Obama 44

Yeah the Gallup tracking was posted there after my post. As for dates, I'm going by RCP's listing, which puts the NBC/WSJ as the 10th and Hotline as the 9th. They could be wrong, though.

Ah, the reason I said that was because the NBC/WSJ measures the same amount of time as Hotline (9/6 - 9/8)

RealClearPolitics - Election 2008 - General Election: McCain vs. Obama

Crazy that, unless I'm wrong, we've not had a "non-close" election since what, 1996?

I'm sure McCain himself won't make a big deal about, but again, it's all about expectations.

McCain is a crusty old man. Isn't there well-confirmed story out there about him calling his wife a C***? (Maybe even a video?). Obama is young and hip and enlightened. More is expected of him. I know Obama fans don't like to hear that, but they should get used to the dissapointment they'll experience after the debates when Obama dominates but the public sees it as a "tie".

Free Beer! (oh, and cheers on the rest of what you said ;) )

This also goes back to the "elitist" thing from earlier in the election. I *WANT* my politicians to be smarter than me. I wish everyone who votes on the premise of "someone I'd rather have a beer with" wasn't allowed to decide something so important as the fate of our country.

(Now, I realize that's too simplistic for politics and it ignores the nuances of populism and the concept of a candidate being able to understand their constituents' situation. )

SI

yy

McCain has played the expectations card wonderfully here. The guy has been in the Senate for a long time and run for president twice. And he loves town halls. You could sit him down right now, ask any geopolitical question within reason, and he would be able to give you an impressive and presidential sounding answer.

But people seem to think that these debates are going to be like Grandpa Simpson v. Denzel Washington on a good day.

I think that the candidates will probably debate to something close to a draw and that it will be seen as a huge win for McCain.

A couple of surrogates for Obama need to start running this message out there. Hell, that exact quote :D

SI

Old, Grizzled Third-Party Candidate May Steal Support From McCain

I remain steadfast in my belief that nothing could sink Obama's ship quicker than loose lips in Hollywood. Matt Damon has decided to give it a try..........

Breitbart.tv » ‘Like A Really Bad Disney Movie’: Actor Matt Damon Condemns Sarah Palin

I'm not sure why Matt Damon believes that he deserves more credit for his opinion than Sarah Palin in regards to politics. His comments regarding her being an inexperienced hockey mom and it being 'like a bad Disney movie' are the kind of comments that the Republicans are begging the Dems to make. For the most part, Matt Damon is achieving just the opposite effect that he intends to create with his comments and I don't think he even realizes it.

That's pretty funny. I like the Obama elitist though.

Right, but Obama isn't saying anything. I think he could really score with a line like, "I agree that it is wrong when the media goes after Sarah Palin's children, just like it was wrong when John McCain called Chelsea Clinton ugly. We have serious issues in this country, blah blah change blah blah"

You're right that the McCain campaign has managed the debate expectations well, but so did Dole in 1996 and people still thought Clinton won the debates. The expectations game will help McCain, but it isn't a surefire win for him.

Clinton is a far better debater than Obama, though. Obama lost or tied plenty against Hillary.

I don't think there was anything wrong with that Damon interview. He is questioning her credentials just like millions of other voters are. Is he not supposed to answer the question?

I refer back to my post from this morning regarding the minefield laid before the Democrats. The Republicans have a great strategic setup right now with Palin. It's one thing to question her credentials. It's a whole different situation to use some of the comments that he used which could easily be seen as someone speaking down to women. Right or wrong, there are a lot of women who toss issue or party affiliation out the window now that a woman is in the mix. Any comments like the ones Damon makes could be easily construed as sexist and really turn off independent, female voters. Note that I'm not saying whether the perception is right or wrong, but it's definitely there.

The effect that these comments and Palin's presence are having is very evident in the poll numbers of white women and independent voters. McCain's number are drastically improved over the last 2-3 weeks in those two critical voting segments, thanks to the selection of Palin and the perceived sexist remarks/talking down to women from Obama and his supporters.

Anybody know if any studies have been done to show the effectiveness of Hollywood Star endorsement of a candidate? My feeling has always been that celebrity endorsements have always been a major turn-off. I don't listen to celebrities for political views, I just like to see them perform in whatever venue made them famous. Seems like the ratio of worthwhile political knowledge versus people they can get to listen to them is pretty low.

The problem with Obama in debates or unscripted interviews is that he pauses and stammers fairly frequently as he is parsing his words. When he is reading a prepared speech from a teleprompter, his delivery is flawless.

McCain has just the opposite problem. He stammers when he gives a prepared speech from a teleprompter, but he does much better in interviews and debates, especially the town hall format.

Since the game apparently has become "what would be embarrassing if the candidate meant some else"


Sure she didn't write the speech and sure she didn't say anything about Jews, but even so it creates the impression that Palin hates Jews. When will Republicans learn that not hating Jews doesn't matter if your opponent can lie about it?