Obama’s Path to Victory is McCain Path to Defeat

With only five days left before election day, just about every national poll is indicating that Obama is going to win enough electoral votes to become the next president of the USA.

McCain is desperately trying to change this increasingly unchangeable scenario, campaigning in two “must win” states, Pennsylvania and Florida.  He will undoubtedly run himself and his cash-starved campaign ragged trying to convince voters in those states that he solely is the power and the glory for the American experience.  Unfortunately for McCain, he faces two daunting obstacles:

1.  He is unable to campaign for long before attacking Obama on everything from taxes to jobs to prosperity.

2.  He has less than five days to change the minds of at least 9% of Americans.

One area where McCain and his incompetent campaign cronies made a huge mistake was taking Obama’s comments about “spreading the wealth”, spoken to a reporter at the time of emergence of Joe (Sam) the not-very-articulate tax-liened plumber.  McCain morphed this simple concept into a “redistribution of wealth” issue, using something a bit heavier than nuance (i.e., lies) to define the latest thrust of his campaign.

Obama’s original idea of “spreading the wealth” is not such a bad concept.  It implies  that there is abundant wealth, and it should be spread so that all have wealth.  “Redistribution” means making wealthy folks poor so the poor can be wealthy.  The McCain campaign planners tried to pull a Karl Rove, but lacked the finesse of the Bush campaign engineer.  As a result, McCain, his not-so-cooperative talking head Palin, and his entire campaign staff has lost credibility.

With his credibility showing cracks, McCain’s ability to change the minds of 9% of Americans who are already decided, a third of which have already voted in early balloting, seems impossible.  For those who follow such things, the polls are not offering McCain any encouragement.  If you are interested, you can see all the national polls and their daily changes HERE.

In the meantime, there is reason to believe that Sarah Palin and her inner circle are seeing a probable McCain loss as an opportunity for future grandeur.  It’s actually amusing to watch this situation unfold, since both McCain and Palin describe themselves as mavericks.  So…are they mavericking against each other? 

It seems that Palin is.  The word on the street is that she is focusing on 2012, when Obama, presuming that he wins next Tuesday, will be running for re-election.  It appears that she sees herself as the future savior and supreme leader of the GOP, being a dynamic woman who could unseat the other minority guy occupying the White House in 2012.

There is no question that Palin is a good public speaker and that is, perhaps, her greatest non-physical asset.  In fact, she is too eloquent for the McCain campaign staffers, who wish she would stay on message, instead of venturing off the reservation during campaign stump speeches.  But Palin has her sights on her future.

Too bad she is such a divisive ditz.  If she had an original idea in her head besides personal ambition, she just might become the leader in the moribund GOP.  But she is too transparent for most people to take her seriously.  She lambasted Obama for “spreading the wealth”, while touting her own record in Alaska of making sure that Alaskans got a share of the oil pipeline profits, or, in other words, “spreading the wealth”.

Thus, in effect, McCain’s choice of vice-presidential candidate is another campaign mistake.  That’s makes three insurmountable obstacles.

In fairness to McCain, he should have won the 2000 republican primary season, because if a republican had to win that election, McCain would probably had been a much better president than George W. Bush.  But he couldn’t defeat the Karl Rove strategic plan.  So why would anyone believe that he could defeat the strategic plans of any of our enemies?

One last thing to ponder before November 4th.  Alaska republican Ted Stevens, convicted of eight felony charges involving accepting major gratuities, is barred as a convicted felon from voting. But he’s not barred by law from serving as a US senator.  The GOP sees nothing wrong with this scenario.  Is that bizarre or WHAT? 

And don’t forget Larry Craig, the republican senator from Idaho, who pleaded guilty to public misconduct for soliciting sex in an airport men’s room,  whom is also running for another term as Idaho’s senator.  The arrogance of these folks should be enough to warn American citizens against voting for these folks and the party they belong to that cannot and/or will not hold them back.

But there is no accounting for citizen stupidity.

Make sure you vote on or before (if able) next Tuesday, November 4th.  Demonstrate to all that you’re smarter than most.

We, the PEOPLE!! predicts Obama will win at least 320 electoral votes (270 needed to win).  Check it out next week!

Pro-American or Anti-American; That is INDEED the Question

With thirteen days left in this most urgent of US presidential campaigns, it seems we have re-entered what Barack Obama identified early in the primary campaign as “silly-season”.  That was, and  is, a time when candidates begin to grab at straws, as it were, attempting to get voters to fear the opposition candidate by using innuendo, outright lies, and ‘the Earth is flat” logic to make their slanderous and libelous case.

The latest is the practice of conservative politicians labeling of opposition politicians as “anti-American”.

Take the case of Sarah Palin alleging that Obama “pals around with terrorists”, simply because Obama served years ago on the same board of a charity in Chicago that 60’s “Weather Underground” ex-member Ayers did.

This statement by Palin attempted to do two things:  make folks think that maybe Obama has a terrorism connection (guilt by association), and make folks think that Obama is somehow anti-American.

She went even further.  She claimed that there are “pro-America” and “anti-America” parts of America.  She  confessed that she enjoys the “pro-America” parts more. You can read about it HERE.

Presumably, the “Anti-America” parts of America are the ones not supporting the “pro-America” Palin and her geriatric running mate.

The truth is that there is nothing more anti-American than to convict and sentence someone, as Palin and her supporters have, without the benefit of due process as mandated throughout over two hundred years of American jurisprudence.  So who is the anti-American in this case?

Every high-level federal government official takes an oath of office swearing to protect and preserve the Constitution of the United States, which, arguably, is the most American document in existence.  Yet, over the past eight years we have seen time and again the Bush administration circumvent and violate the constitution in the interest, in their words, of national security.  It is difficult to view a violation of that most American of documents as anything but “anti-American”, isn’t it?

It certainly seems that the more extremely conservative folks are, the more they believe that anyone that doesn’t agree with them is “anti-American”.  They see themselves as the super-duper patroits of America, advocating the “cleansing” of anti-American influences (such as anyone not like them).  They are simply being “pro-American” by using any and all means available, fair or unfair, legal or otherwise, to fight those “disagreeing anti-American” savage hordes.

This seems clearly the case when one considers the new sweetheart of the McCain/Palin campaign, “Joe the plumber”.  Joe disagrees with Obama’s tax plan because Joe claims to want to buy the plumbing company he works for.  By the way, Joe’s real name is Sam.

Joe (Sam) claims that if Obama’s plan becomes law, he won’t be able to buy the business.  But Joe  Sam) doesn’t explain how being taxed on a profit of $250,000 or more prevents him from buying the company.  He has also failed to explain up front that he is a two-year tax delinquent right now. Is it pro-American or anti-American to not pay taxes that you are legally liable for?

Even more significant is whether it is pro-American or anti-American for an entire presidential campaign to glorify a two-year tax delinquent as its darling mascot.  At least if their mascot was an Alaskan Malamute,  or even a polar bear, one could at least understand the thought process.  It’s understood that ihe mascot could never be a moose or a wolf, because those are fun to shoot in the presumably pro-America state of Alaska.  In America, it’s pro-American to shoot wolves and moose, but anti-American to shoot mascots, isn’t it?

And finally, the bizarre tale of a republican congresswoman from Minnesota who, until she opened her self-proclaimed pro-American mouth, was a shoe-in for re-election in her home district.  Michelle Bachmann is another of those holier-than-thou super-duper patriots who believes that there is a subversive under every rock, and we all must be “cleansed”.

Bachmann was on her way to easy re-election when she accepted an invitation to appear on Chris Matthew’s “Hardball” program, during which she said, “I’m very concerned that he [Obama] may have anti-American views”.   You can read more about this HERE.

Matthews then asked her, “How many in the Congress of the United States do you think are anti-American? You already suspect Barack Obama — is he alone or do you think there are others?”

Bringing back images of Joe McCarthy, the republican senator from Wisconsin who headed a witch-hunting search for communists in the US government in the early 1950’s (he never found even one), Bachmann responded, ““The news media should do a penetrating expose … on the views of the people in Congress and find out if they’re pro-America or anti-America”.

The result of all of this was that Bachmann’s democratic challenger raised an unprecedented million dollars in campaign contributions within a few days after this became public.  People evidently had finally had enough of this “cleansing” proposal by the super-duper patriot protectors of America (SDPPAs).

Bachmann later claimed first that she never made these statements, and then when faced with the recordings, claimed that she was taken out of context.  Evidently, lying is not anti-American, as evidenced by Bachmann and those like her.

And by the way, this super-duper patriotism and its call for the “cleansing” of America  are both absolutely the same processes that the fascists implemented in Germany in the 1930’s and 1940’s.  In the USA, it’s becoming more and more difficult not to imagine an SS armband on the arm of anyone who claims to be more patriotic and more “pro-American” than the rest of us who disagree with the self-proclaimed super-duper patriot.

So next time you hear someone talk about how “pro-America” they are, and how “anti-America” someone else is, remember this quote from the American novelist Sinclair Lewis:

When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.

Then check to see what they’re wearing and holding in their hands.

And The Winner Is….??

Folks that watched last night’s presidential debate probably woke up the morning after feeling grateful that the long debate season is finally over.  The debate itself was as inspiring as a bowl of corn flakes at dinnertime.  But certain moments are meritorious of note, if for no other reason than they were very telling in their insight.

It must be mentioned that John McCain came out swinging.  While one can appreciate the position of the underdog attempting to achieve some kind of game-changer, McCain took it well past the line.  McSame was most nasty when Obama attempted to once again tie him to the Bush fiasco.  McBush told Obama that he is not Bush, and that if Obama wanted to run against Bush, he should have done so four years ago.  That flash of anger by the republican was a glimpse into the famed McCain temper.

Additionally, several times McCain would throw a barb out at Obama and then smile that smile of a child proud of having built a mud-castle while his mother is screaming inside herself, wondering with a touch of panic how she’s going to get all the mud out of her kid’s hair and clothes.

It was an obvious turn-off to many Americans who watched the debate.  According to a CNN/Opinion Research poll taken right after the debate, Obama’s favorability rating rose from 63% before the debate to 66% afterwards, but McCain’s dropped from 51% to 49%.  That’s significant when you consider that many people vote for someone they like, period.

This same poll indicated that Obama handily won the debate by 58% to 31% for McCain.  Coupled with the favorability ratings, this is incredibly important  because in both cases, Obama has exceeded the 50% point by a considerable margin.

The news gets worse for the republican.  Even though McCain kept pounding Obama on taxes, 56% said they liked Obama’s tax plan better, as compared to only 41% for McCain.  And on the overall economy, which is clearly the most significant single issue of our time, 62% believe Obama is the better choice to handle the economy, as opposed to only 31% for McCain.  That’s a two-to-one margin, and it says in no uncertain terms that Americans do not trust the republicans to fix the economy after eight failed years of the Bush Administration, six of which had a rubber-stamp republican-controlled congress.

This very issue leads into McCain’s best, last strategy to turn this presidential election around:  Use fear of a democratic white house and democratic-controlled congress to get people to vote for him as the republican who will provide a check and balance to those nasty democrats in congress.

McCain and his strategists know that the democrats are poised to pick up additional seats in both houses of congress, and may even crack the sixty-seat mark in the senate, which would provide them with a filibuster-proof “super-majority”.  That would render the republicans essentially impotent in the senate, as they whine and complain about those nasty democratic policies such as universally-available health care and assistance to college students being passed and sent to president Obama for his signature.

But don’t expect the strategy to be honest.  Don’t expect McCain to condemn the six years that the republicans controlled congress and rubber-stamped Bush and Cheney.  Don’t expect him to remind you that he himself voted with the Bush-Cheney Syndicate 90% of the time during those six years.

Nope.  In typical GOP fashion, McCain will promote the “Do as I say, not as I do” that the Bush-Cheney Syndicate has made famous.  He will tout the evils of a lack of balance in government.  He will state that without the republican party and its operatives to hold back the tide of unbridled government spending, the democrats will grow the budget deficit and the national debt, probably doubling it during their tenure.

But wait just one minute, there, McBush!

When your pal W took office, he inherited four years of budget surpluses, and the USA was paying down the (at the time) $5 trillion dollar national debt.  In eight years of Bush with the support of six years of your  so-called “watch-dog” republicans controlling the congress, the economy has failed, the USA has experienced eight years in a row of record budget deficits, and the national debt more than doubled to over $11 trillion, with more to be added before this year is out.

So it really comes down to whether or not the American electorate takes the time to get informed about the facts.  and based upon the polling taken last night after the last debate, it appears that many of them finally are doing the research before believing all the tripe that’s being feed to them.  If true, that’s a good thing.

In the meantime, while we’re all enduring the final nineteen days of this extremely significant presidential campaign, try to imagine what it would be like if Sarah Palin was somehow catapulted into the presidency of the United States.

Can’t you just see her and her family at a weekend gathering at Camp David, enjoying the roar of flames in the fireplace and the fine food and scenery, with Sarah shooting at wolves from a Marine helicopter over the Maryland hills, while her hubby Todd chases them down in his snowmobile?

Warms your heart, doesn’t it?

US$85 Billion Bailout Included $440,000 Junket!

Yes.  You read it correctly.

AIG (American International Group, the largest insurance company in the world) received an eighty-five


dollar bailout from the US taxpayers on September 16, 2008.  You can read about it HERE.

A week later, AIG’s top executives enjoyed a luxurious stay at the extremely expensive resort of St. Regis in the California hills overlooking the Pacific Ocean.  This “business trip” came complete with wining, fine dining and more than $23,000 in spa treatments.

Surely, those spa treatments (whether or not capped with a happy ending is unknown) were required for the AIG executives to serve their insurance customers, so as to return to profitability as soon as possible to be able to pay back that bailout debt to the taxpayers, right?

Meanwhile, back at the political campaign for president, Barack Obama and John McCain met for the second time in debate last night (10-7-08), this time in a “town meeting” format that is supposed to be to McCain’s advantage.  You would not know that though, by simply watching the debate.

During the 90 minute event, both candidates answered questions from the audience, including inquiries regarding the rotting economy.  And what was striking was what each of them said and did not say.

To his credit, Obama made an emphatic point of letting everyone know about the AIG bailout junket, and he stated, quite appropriately, that the company executives involved should be fired.  Considering that Americans are losing their jobs and homes at a historic rate, it certainly is fair that these company big-wigs should have been terminated for their exceedingly poor judgment in allowing this junket to occur, particularly in light of the fact that AIG required an $85,000,000,000 taxpayer-funded bailout in order to remain in existence.

There is absolutely no excuse for such an event.  It was standard everyday corporate abuse.  If the executives had to meet and confer, that could have been done in the corporate office conference rooms.

McSame, for his part, mentioned


about this.  He just kept telling the audience that he knows how to fix the economy and everything else that’s broken.  He knows, according to himself, because he’s done it all before.  If you missed it, you can watch the debate in three parts HERE, HERE, and HERE.

What’s is most troubling about all of this is that the GOP manta for years and years has been “hands off” the economy and Wall Street financial complex.  Capitalism and free enterprise, they lecture us as their drums roll, should be totally free.  There should be no government regulation, oversight, accountability enforcement, or partial ownership.

To that end, the republicans, including McSame, have advocated for decades a near-total lack of regulation for the shakers and movers on Wall Street.  “The economy is self-correcting”, they yelled at anyone with the audacity to suggest that maybe the financial industry should be regulated to prevent greed and corruption from having a negative impact.

Yet, as if to reinforce this philosophy of non-regulation, the Bush administration encouraged the “free” market to do as it pleased for eight long years.  The result was the mortgage crisis, which led to the collapse of mortgage-based securities, which led to bank failures and a credit freeze, which led to more unemployment, which led to financial institutional bankruptcy.  You can read more about these events HERE.  During all of this, no government agency was really watching.  Even if they had been, no one had the power of the law to stop any of this.

Recent history clearly demonstrates yet again that the economy is not self-correcting as outlined in the GOP doctrine.

Nonetheless, the original Bush bailout proposal was only three pages long.  Since oversight of big business was not a Bush priority, or even desired by the Bush folks, the proposed $700 billion bailout, administered solely and entirely by Bush’s Treasury secretary Henry Paulson, would have been sufficient for Bush and the GOP.  It was the democrats in congress that insisted upon accountability, oversight, and accountability enforcement of the bailout process.

Of course, McSame, touting himself as a deregulator all of his career except the last two weeks, didn’t see an issue with the $440,000 AIG junket funded by Mr. and Ms. Taxpayer.  Just give AIG the money, and trust the free enterprise capitalist system to “self-correct”.

One has to wonder what the 10 year-old 16 hours-a-day sweatshop workers of the early 1900’s thought about the unregulated capitalist system that paid them a dollar a week for their toil, while the company fat cats bought their fourth and fifth vacation homes.

Or perhaps we should ask John and Cindy McCain, who are purported to have eight (or is it thirteen?….John can’t remember) homes what they think of the economic situation we all find ourselves in and its similarities to the economic conditions those sweatshop worker found themselves in around a hundred years ago.

And while you’re at it, ask them about its likeness to the Great Stock Market Crash of 1929, which occurred exactly seventy-nine years ago this month.  That event, by the way, was born during another republican administration, that of Herbert Hoover.  It led to the Great Depression of the early 1930’s, during which 25% of the work force worldwide was unemployed.

And like in 2008, it took a democrat who recognized and fought against corporate abuse to fix it.