Strange Love: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and to Love Obama
I've asked myself a few times why it is I'm not on board with Hope and Change. At times I look at his Hollywood-esque production and wonder if at my core there is some kind of darkness that prohibits me from swooning to Obamamania. Near my work is one of those old New England mills with plenty of office space. Many of the tenants are artists and the collection of sensible cars outside (a sprinkling of Prius) all sport Obama bumper stickers. Hope and Change. There's some kind of cult like aspect to it. A real love-in. Some of it I think is related to the Left's yearning to resurrect JFK and the Camelot myth. A belief that this youthful president was ready to propel the country to vaulted Utopian heights, only to be cut down by dark forces. Today's leftist has anointed Obama as the Kennedy heir apparent (remember that stage show early on in the campaign where the Kennedy's all gathered around Obama?).

This enduring need for the Left to create such hagiography and wrap themselves up in it is at the heart of Obama's appeal. Specifics are secondary. The imagery, the passion, the mythologizing, and the style of Obama's political theatre work more directly to the heart of the Obama supporter and perhaps less to the brain. Reason would suggest that electing such an inexperienced and judgmentally dubious person may not be the wisest of decisions. But in these uncertain times, and faced with such an emotionally stirring candidate, reason may prove secondary to passion as being the ultimate and final arbiter over one's electoral decision.

A funny thing about our Presidents, each attains a mythology after their holding of office. In the case of Obama, his whole campaign is geared toward manufacturing his myth before his even winning the office in the first place. I think all other politicians must be jealous to the core of such audacity of spectacle. To have at one's disposal nearly a Billion dollars ready to spend on tv spots, infomercials, stadium sound and light shows, mailings, merchandising, souvenirs, artwork, etc. The expenditures spent on manufacturing the consent of the electorate are truly staggering. But not only is the public's consent demanded of, but to a much greater degree the public's love and worship.

Are we to worship out politicians? Do our mortgage payments get any easier if we are on the floor, knees bent, supplicating ourselves to Change We Can Believe In? Frankly, I am comfortable admitting that I am not smitten. Who knows what the future will bear and who knows whether my views will change. But perhaps in the distant future, gathered with people of my age all exchanging stories of where were you the day when Obama did .... I'll be fine then as I am now that I was not there for Him the day Obama demanded of me my vote and my devotion.

The Precipice
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C.S Lewis

The Book I Read: Paris 1919 by Margaret MacMillan
This tightly focused book examines the deliberations of the leaders of the UK, France, and the USA as they prepared the treaty terms for the vanquished powers of World War One. The book doesn't go into the details of the war, rather it walks the reader through the amazing process by which the map of the world was recreated from the crumbling remains of old empires. Whole nations were created from territories that had belonged to the German, Austro-Hungarian, and Ottoman Empires. Some nations gained territory, some nations lost territory. Pockets of various ethnic groups found the names of their countries change as borders shifted and moved on them.

How this happened is observed by the author from the perspective of how the victorious allied leaders pursued each of their specific agendas as they horse traded. Wilson of the USA was interested to pursue his 14 Points progressive idealism (except where it clashed with the interests of France or the UK). France, ever fearful of a strong Germany at its border wanted its neighbor severely handicapped. The UK, mindful of its global Empire, strove to ensure a balance of power in Europe and its naval supremacy intact. With the three leaders playing a central role, various side actors representing the aspirations of emerging countries (Czech, Yugoslavia, Greece, Romania, Poland) each lobbied the allied powers their case for supporting their territorial/national claims. Typically, the most charismatic leaders succeeded while the less politically gifted saw their claims go unheeded (some even saw their situations get worse as territories previously under their domain were gifted to neighbors). Indeed, the map of the world radically changed as borders within Europe, the Middle East, and Asia were redrawn and lands and people contended with new governing powers.

The book is short on big picture analysis and editorial regarding the aftermath of what transpired in Paris 1919. Frankly, this is helpful as its factual examination of the events leaves the reader with a good basis to launch into further investigation of the aftereffects of the Great War's peace.

Resistance
The possibility has been discussed whether a portion of the population will pull a John Galt and decide to opt-out from being a productive member of society. Frankly, after hearing so much spread the wealth around coming from politicians or left-wingers ruminating about stupid Americans and their inability to earn, spend, save, and invest properly I've just about had it. Count me out from the coming bullshit bazaar that's coming our way. I'll do anything to gum up the works for this bunch coming into power. I'll work less productively, accept any dole I can get my hands on. Man, I'm a freakin' moron. I can't handle my own checkbook. Pay me off. Send me dole. Bail me out. Bail me out now. Send me money. Send me someone else's money. Send it to me now. I am a moron. I can't handle my checkbook. I can't handle it. Bail me out. I need your tax cut or whatever you're calling it these days. I need your government check. I need it. I need the welfare. Pay me. Pay me now. I am stupid. You know better than me Mr. One. You know what's best for me. Pay me. Pay me to think and do. Keep me drunk, happy, and stupid on hope and change because I can't handle reality. I can't handle this world. I am stupid. Pay me to be stupid. I'll accept. I'll accept your stupid subsidy. Pay me now.

Debate: Concluding Thoughts
I think the decision in the voting booth will come down to a choice between Gridlock with Partisanship (McCain stopping Pelosi/Reid and suffering attacks because of it) or further Big Government Expansion (Obama running wild with Pelosi/Reid).

McCain never makes it but I think a strong argument in these I am mad as hell times is how effective wielding a Veto Pen might be over the next few years. If there is anything that is true about Democrats incessant complaint about the eight years of Bush it has to do with the expansion of government size, power, and scope that he presided over. Obama's whole theme is not that government is too big, but that it is not effective and it needs to do more things. Is this what a majority wants? I just wonder, as the people cast the anti-Bush vote, will they want more of Washington DC? Or less? It is fair to believe that Obama will not be casting too many vetoes of Pelosi/Reid bills sent to him for signature. It is possible that McCain will veto away (it is also possible that McCain may actually sign away - doing so under Bipartisanship that he so values).

Debate 3-6
Obama's closing statement is about choosing to side with same failed politics and policies or choosing to side with a new direction. He says we must all come together but how will this happen should Obama be president? With him, Pelosi, Reid running the show there will be no opportunity for moderate sensible solutions.

Debate 3-5
Wind, tide, solar, clean coal technology....

Debate 3-4
It's not about what Ayers did 40 years ago. It's why Obama felt perfectly comfortable working with Ayers less than 10 years ago. Why is it that Obama finds himself at ease keeping company with radicals, liberation theologians, and identity-group mobilizers, et. al., of a far-left bent?

Perhaps it has something to do with his interest in redistributing the wealth?

Debate 3-3
Obama, Reid, Pelosi. Who thinks that bunch is going to show any kind of spending restraint?

Debate 3-2
McCain brings up the plumber Joe Wurzelbacher that Obama is going to tax. Here's an interview with the plumber who ended up walking away more scared about Obama after speaking with him.

PM: Still, in that vein, Obama says he doesn’t want to “punish” you, but he wants to – let me see if I can see what his exact quote was…

JW: Redistribute the wealth.

PM: …taxing small businesses making $250,000 and above is going to help the people “behind you.” And yes, “spreading the wealth around.” How did you feel about that?

JW: As soon as he said it, he contradicted himself. He doesn’t want to “punish” me, but – when you use the word “but,” you pretty much negate everything you just said prior to that. So he does want to punish me, he does want to punish me for working harder to – you know, my big thing is the American Dream. I work hard. You know, I was poor; my mom raised me and my brother by herself for a very long time until my dad came along. So I know what it’s like to suffer. It’s not like I was born with a silver spoon. Usually it was a wooden spoon and it was on my butt. It was just a contradiction of terms, what he said: he doesn’t want to punish me but he wants to redistribute my wealth. And what I mean when I say my wealth, I mean the collective. Eventually – I mean, just to sound a little silly here, but you need rich people. I mean, who are you going to work for?

Debate 3-1
McCain, like previous debates, addresses his answer to the moderator who asked the question. Obama speaks directly to the camera.

Debate 3
Obama and McCain at Hofstra. Will McCain bring up ACORN and Ayers? Will Obama detail his plan to redistribute wealth away from the hordes of greedy fat-cat plumbers, carpenters, and HVAC technicians? Who knows. Here we go!

We're Screwed (Part 1)
Ed Driscoll observes

If Obama wins, a large part of the country will feel angry and powerless against the will of the left leaning blue states, the news media, Hollywood and academia. (In fact, they already feel that way, I assure you.) They will believe that ACORN created enough false voter registrations to put Obama over the top. If McCain wins, the left will riot and claim, "The Diebold machines were hacked!" The blue states, the news media, Hollywood and academia will resent that the will of the "dumb hicks" in flyover country overruled that of their "betters". And we will hear the cries of, "Racism! Racism!" ad nauseam.

Yes, whatever the outcome we're screwed. Here's my take on what we can expect from either an Obama or McCain administration.

Obama as President: Expect the the convergence of this far left executive and far-left Pelosi/Reid legislature to send up for vote all manner of bills favorable to the environmental, labor, corporate farming and open-borders lobbies. Expect a mess of an energy bill with fig-leaf provisions for expanding domestic oil production and clean coal. The bill will be a grab bag of tax incentives for alternative energies long on hope but short on proven delivery. Expect no movement on the Pickens Plan approach due to opposition over expanding the electrical grid infrastructure needed for the Plan to be realized (environmental and NIMBY opposition).

Expect a cleanout of unsympathetic justice department officials and attorneys (a la Alberto Gonzalez) replaced by Obama loyalists. A muscular Obama justice department will pursue with vigor investigation, enforcement, prosecution of all manner of environmental, civil rights, and labor laws on all levels of business. Businesses with deep pockets will settle while small businesses will be driven out of business. Expect additional justice department action working in concert with local activist groups like La Raza and ACORN and organized labor against private companies and municipal governments.

Expect a renewed pursuit of faith-based initiatives under an Obama administration with an effort to forge an alliance between agenices under an Obama executive and churches of a progressive, urban, ethnic, or activist bent all animated by left-wing understandings of Social Justice and/or Liberation Theology theory. Overall, expect vervent attempts by progressive grassroots organizations to allign with an Obama executive for funding, leverage, and muscle toward deepening their influence within state and municipal government initiatives.

Expect no "middle class" tax cut.

....(Part 2 to follow)...

Suffer the Little Children
From Obama's website:

On Sunday, October 12, Washington State kids and families will parade around Seattle's Green Lake. "Kids for Obama Parade" will illustrate one of Barack Obama's core beliefs: Everyone's voice counts. Join us as Obama's youngest supporters rally their families and call for change, for a better America. At 2 pm, rain or shine, children and teens will express with words and drawings their hopes for the future of America on "wish flags" that will be mailed to Obama. The first 300 kids will be given a helium balloon, an expression of solidarity

Sure it sounds like a nice family event and maybe a good day for a picnic, but there's also something a tad creepy about this mixing of kids with the political desires of their adult guardians. As I linked to earlier a group of kids singing some paean to Obama, children are certainly a focus of the Community Organizer.

While it may be pertinent, we need not get into a historical review of activist political movements that have mobilized children in service of the ideology. However, it is vital to recognize the interest that Obama has shown in matters of education. Indeed, a key point about the Ayers-Obama relationship is not merely the fact that Obama chose to associate with the domestic terrorist and left wing hyper-radical Ayers, but that he and Ayers teamed up together to reform Chicago public schools, most notably with their administering of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge effort. Currently employed as a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago Ayers professional interest is primarily focused toward the teaching and shaping of young minds, as his degrees attest:

EDUCATION:
1987 - Ed.D, Columbia University, Curriculum & Instruction
1987 - M.Ed, Teachers College, Columbia University, Early Childhood Education
1984 - M.Ed, Bank Street College, Early Childhood Education
1968 - B.A., University of Michigan, American Studies

RESEARCH AND TEACHING INTERESTS:
Bill Ayers's interests include teaching for social justice, urban educational reform, narrative and interpretive research, children in trouble with the law, and related issues. See www.billayers.org

Indeed, as his CV reveals, Ayers is working within the realm of public education to achieve his vision for political and societal transformation through the creation of education curriculae designed to achieve such ends. While this isn't the post to get into the revolutionary Marxism espoused by Antonio Gramsci, it is key to highlight one of Gramsci's chief contributions to the development of Marxism as a revolutionary movement was his exhortation to fellow radicals to engage their long march through the institutions. Gramsci understood that in order to affect revolution, one had to first work within the existing system in order to influence incremental systematic change. Once undertaken, such change over time would radically transform the system to one in line with Marxist ideology. Seen in this light, one begins to understand why the revolutionary radical Ayers would devote his life towards shaping the minds of young children - the transformation of society marches on one young mind at a time. Thus, families are rallied, and a solidarity takes shape around a revolutionary push for societal Change.

Win the children and you win the world.

Debate 2 Conclusions
Dull and boring. Boring questions. Where the hell was this townhall located? It should be appropriated through eminent domain, razed, and replaced with a planetarium.

JackDied points out that a lot of the response was boilerplate cut & paste. McCain nervous. Obama arrogant. Now I see T.Boone Pickens on TV. Can I vote for him? Whoops! Spoke too soon. Now I see McGovern on TV. Man, we're doomed.

Debate 2-16
Obama whiffed on the final question. McCain ends with a stronger close.

Debate 2-15
No matter what McCain or Obama say about fixing Afghanistan the crux of the problem is the ridiculous NATO load-sharing arrangement where some member countries sit on their ass while others fight. The disjointed political military approach is due to the political / military disunity of the NATO forces operating there.

Debate 2-14
Mrs. Rants notes that anytime a price tag is tossed out by the candidates, its always $700 billion dollars. Does everything cost $700 billion now?

I want to see a $700 billion dollar planetarium projector. That would make for a stunningly sexy cosmos.

Debate 2-13
Obama says our troops have performed honorably - except for when he says they are air-raiding villages.

Debate 2-12
Obama just bashed Delaware and their fuzzy banking laws (hello Biden Jr and your ties to MBNA). So say again who your running mate is?

Arghhh. McCain had it teed up for him and he didn't take the shot!!!!!

Debate 2-11
Poor Obama's grandmother. After throwing her under the bus a few months ago for her racism, we're now to empathize with his empathy for her.

Debate 2-10
We need to engage in a Manhattan style project, on the same scale as sending a Man to the Moon, to create a 21st Century modernized bipartisan process of ensuring that greedy corporate CEOs are not able to deploy their golden parachutes over offshore drilling.

Debate 2-9
McCain recommends a commission to repair Medicare. Awesome. For each one of the attendees I recommend that they receive their own Medicare subsidized personal Rascal to use and cruise around the halls of Congress with. I'm sure taking them off their feet will be medically necessary.

Debate 2-8
Nice! Brokaw has mentioned the time bomb of entitlements. Obama mentions his tax cut for 95% of Americans. A large percentage of that 95% includes Americans that don't pay taxes. So how do they get a cut? Obama needs to be honest and mention that what he is offering is not a cut, but a transfer payment. Not sure what impact to the deficit that government expenditure will have.

Debate 2-7
The Planetarium Projector has thrown Obama off his game. He was a bit peeved for a second there. He even said (paraphrase) "George Bush did some good things" re: responding to 9/11. Did Obama just agree lockstep with Dubya??

The winner of this debate is the Adler Planetarium Projector

Debate 2-6
Here is what Obama's Senate website says about the poor tired planetarium projector:

One of its most popular attractions and teaching tools at the Adler Planetarium is the Sky Theater. The projection equipment in this theater is 40 years old, and is no longer supported with parts or service by the manufacturer. It has begun to fail, leaving the theater dark and groups of school students and other interested museum-goers without this very valuable and exciting learning experience.

Debate 2-5
$3,000,000 earmarked to replace a planetarium projector! Obama boasts about this sterling act of government service on his own Senate webpage!

Debate 2-4
Obama said we need to coordinate with other countries our bailout policies. I say we need to bailout Iceland.

Debate 2-3
McCain nervous. Obama said he wrote a note to Sec. Paulson. I wonder if his penmanship was poor. Too bad the note from Obama didn't fix the problem.

Debate 2-2
Both hit a grab bag of talking points with the first question. For Treasury Secretary I would nominate Dave Ramsey.

Debate 2-1
JackDied has some comments and may be liveblogging. I can't wait to enjoy a nice steaming plate of mangled Brokaw consonants.

Mobilizing and Organizing
An interesting panel discussion on Community Organizing and Obama. Some good detailed information here from the panelists regarding the role of community organizing in American society, its growing influence, the conflict between organizing and mobilizing, and what it may all mean should Obama become President.

Windy City Full of Ayers

A Typical Day in the US Congress

Send Lawyers, Guns, and Money
2008 election contributions data, as compiled by OpenSecrets.Org, shows that Obama leads over McCain in campaign contributions received from individuals and PACs associated with the Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate sector as well as the Lawyers/Lobbyists sector.

Hold him accountable.

Blatant Media Bias
It is so unbelievably obvious that the media is doing whatever it takes to orchestrate an Obama victory. Here Soledad O'Brien does her part to suggest Biden overwhelmingly won the debate by a show of hands of their studio focus group. However, as Megan McArdle of The Atlantic points out, the simple magic of TiVo shows a count of hands puts the response at an effective tie.

Can our democracy survive our Media?

Change is Coming

This is worse than Enron. This is worse than Ken Lay. Executive compensation:

Franklin Raines (Obama adviser and Fannie CEO 1999-2004): $90 million

Jim Johnson (Obama adviser and Fannie CEO 1991-1998): $21 million in 1998 alone

Jamie Gorelick (former Clinton administration Deputy AG & Fannie vice chair 1998-2003): $26 million.

Campaign Contributions

Barack Obama, though only in the Senate since 2004, took in $126,349 from Fannie & Freddie (second only to Sen. Chris Dodd, $165,400 — whose collections go back to 1989).

Taxpayer Liability Increase

Potentially $5 trillion.

Hold them accountable.

BP Debate: My Critique
Speaking for conservatives, we wanted to see the RNC convention speech Palin. Instead we got the McCain bipartisanship Palin and the attacks on Obama from Palin were few and far between. BIG MISTAKE. From a conservatives point of view, Palin failed on this.

However, Palin scored on some personality points and re-emerged her live persona out from the media contrived persona built up on edits and SNL skits. The live Palin is the x-factor juggernaut that so spooked the Dems the moment she showed up. The last few weeks have been spent attacking that persona and to an extent was successful. But the live Palin struck back and I expect to see some poll swings because of this.

People vote on issues and they vote on personas. Palin's performance strengthens her persona brand. I believe this brand will have play in the battleground states. But it must be maintained against the headwinds of a media intent on reigniting the joke Palin.

So on conservative message Palin was not 100%. But on non-conservative points she exceeded the mark. Conservatives will tell you that they HATE the image game. But so much of todays politics is scored on this ground. (Dictionary entry see Obama).

We'll see where it goes.

BP Debate: Even More Thoughts
The Palin debate performance now highlights a disconnect between Palin live (the RNC convention speech and now the VP debate) and Palin media-edited (Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric interviews). I expect that this issue will gain some traction in the next few days and should. The McCain people limited the live Palin and allowed time and momentum to be lost as the MSM created the media-edited Palin. Expect some kind of discussion to emerge on this point and what the media had attempted.

BP Debate: More Thoughts
Palin's outsider rural accent and manner of speech cuts against the usual Washington grain. This may be a plus in some areas and no doubt plays horribly with people on the coasts.

BP Debate Concluding Thoughts
A fair debate for both, but not necessarily strong for both. I'd play it even, and using the calculus of the last debate as Obama was the winner there Palin is the winner here. But not a strong win. Perhaps a win by a wink.

BP 1-34
Palin ends with a chunk of her available time spent toward reciting a quote from Ronald Reagan. Whimsical and poignant. But not a strong parting thought on why a vote for McCain is the choice to make. Biden ends stronger with his case for the Biden-Obama ticket.

BP 1-33
McCain has made the strategic decision to push Bipartisanship as his overriding theme rather than a more combatative "clean up Washington" message. Obama will never back down on his attacks on Bush. McCain is ceding the combatitive battlespace to Obama.

BP 1-32
Palin singing the McCain maverick themes. Only slightly hit at the Pelosi Congress. Missed a golden opportunity to link McCain maverick to hitting back at Washington. Biden senses the missed opportunity and hits at the McCain maverick brand. A strong attack loaded with some minutae which the fact checkers can review.

BP 1-31
Biden speaking from the heart about his family tragedy.

BP 1-30
Palin working the heartbeat of America theme. She's played this angle more than Biden. Will the heartbeat of America take to it? Or will they choose The One, he of upturned nose and stadium adulation?

BP 1-29
Joe basically admits the game plan. Obama wants Biden to help him govern. Has Biden admitted that Obama is not qualified, and would require hand-holding if elected President?

Biden says Cheney was dangerous. But if you Biden are going to have to help Obama govern, aren't you yourself taking on a Cheney-esque role?

BP 1-28
Palin wins another charm point. She's showing a bit more confidence here and even Joe-Gore likes it. But we're minutes away from the end. Will the charm offensive win hearts?

BP 1-27
Biden and Palin wandering. Biden gets a chance to tee up again and he gives some nice whimsical stroll through his Wilmington neighborhood. Palin wins the charm moment of the debate with her whimsical stroll through middle school. This will probably get the post-debate reply since this has been a debate short on style, short on much.

BP 1-26
This segment of the debate is on foreign policy, which has been billed as Biden's strong suit. But he hasn't appeared dominant here and Palin has stood ground on certain points.

If Obama won the first debate simply because he held ground and McCain didn't trounce him on foreign policy, can't the same be said of Palin as victor of this debate since Biden hasn't "knocked it out of the park".

BP 1-27
Palin STRONG on her response to Biden regarding a Surge strategy in Afghanistan with specifics. Biden responds with another SIGH and then some floundering.

Now say again Biden is the foreign policy expert?

BP 1-26
McCain is a nuke-monger!

BP 1-25
Not sure if Palin's comment on nukes will play well in the post debate analysis as some of the comment was worded strangely.

BP 1-24
Biden-Gore inhaled so loudly I think he did a whippit!

BP 1-23
Biden giving the "fact-checkers" some stuff to work with. "I said and Barack said"....in relation to certain foreign policy actions. Might be some historical truth stretching here.

BP 1-22
The Biden Gore SIGHS again!

BP 1-21
Palin STRONG on the issue of diplomacy and how Obama has shown weakness in this area. Biden knows this and he is trying to fight back on semantics.

BP 1-20
Palin attacking Obama. Finally! The centrality of this debate is not so much for Palin to prove her bona fides, but to call into question Obama's.

BP 1-19
Biden is doing the Al Gore sigh. I've heard it several times.

BP 1-18
Jackdied is liveblogging and notes that Palin is whipping through the points. I agree. Both Biden and Palin are running through points, but the need here is to tie it all to a theme which must center on Obama and McCain in the end. Biden has been more effective in linking issues back to Obama. Palin needs to do the same for McCain.

She's now doing a little bit of that with regards to the discussion about the Iraq war. But this is a secondary issue at this stage of the election. The key points need to be back on the economy. Palin needs to hit at Obama's lack of resume, lack of specificity on what he has done in his life, lack of experience, and association with elements of the far-left. Palin is not doing this.

BP 1-17
This format is making the debaters fly through their questions. Lots of talking points being whipped out. Ifil holding tight to the time limits. There's no back and forth here. The two are not engaging all that much.

BP 1-16
Biden covering up his YouTube comments about clean coal (not here!), but his answer was succinct in what it needed to be while Palin's answer wavered a bit.

BP 1-15
Climate change issue rocky for Palin. She's right about the cyclical nature of temperature changes associated with cyclical changes over time, but this is not the forum to get into the weeds on that. The media and conventional wisdom will beat you up on that.

BP 1-14
Palin going back to earlier issues. There's a strategy here to expand on certain issues and use the debate time to do that. Other issues get crowded out. A strategic error perhaps at this particular time since Biden was on a question about mortgages which is pertinent at this time.

BP 1-13
The debate so far is somewhat flat and boring. No fireworks.

BP 1-12
Ifil goes after Palin to answer the original question. Palin answers, but slightly. Biden countering but makes a gaffe. He says Palin enacted a "windfall profits tax". No the tax is not on profits, but on oil company operations. (I forget what the tax is called but it is levied on companies that extract natural resources that cannot be replaced. Since the state has lost a non-renewable resource, they consider it a loss and enact a tax to mitigate the loss).

BP 1-11
Will Obama's own campaign literature declare that he voted for tax breaks to oil companies?

BP 1-10
In his recitation of taxes, Biden did not mention how Obama's plan will pay for the transfer payments that his plan will pay to people who don't pay taxes.

BP 1-7
palin hints at small businesses getting hit. I wish more attention was put on this fact in the media. The way small businesses incorporate can have a dramatic effect on personal income taxes paid by the small business owners.

BP 1-7
Biden keeps smiling at Palin in split screen shots. I don't know how this will play. It may be seen as Biden charm, or it may be seen as Rick Lazio style condescension.

BP 1-7
Biden pushing back on deregulation. But Palin fighting back on taxes! Ran a little long and Ifil shuts her off. Didn't address the regulation issue in the question.

BP 1-6
Palin saying "darn right". No doubt this bugs certain people.

BP 1-5
Biden going on about deregulation. Former President Clinton said a few days ago on ABC News that deregulation didn't cause this problem. The deregulation was enacted into law by Clinton's pen!

BP 1-4
YES!!!!!!!!! Palin is talking about personal responsibility. This mortgage issue is about irresponsible borrowers as it is about irresponsible lenders.

BP 1-3
Palin uses the wink and more personality traits to accentuate her points. Biden was smiling during her presentation. He'll bring out the charm later on because this debate will be one or lost on charm points.

BP 1-2
Biden says he works bipartisanly. No that is not correct. Go back to any judicial hearing and he is very partisan.

BP 1-2
Palin calmer. But nerves are in her voice. Much slower than Biden. Both make their case why their running mate is the better choice.

BP 1-1
Biden whipping through the talking points about last 8 years economic policies. Talking very fast. Trying to get the talking points. Must talk really fast. Must get the points out. Talking points, talking points. Take a breath Joe!

B/P Debate
She flies a float plane. He takes the train. An eastern industrial accent versus a western rural one. Here we go.