Palin, Seriously.

Aside from the fact that Palin is a dangerous woman, she could not even speak with intelligence. If she did not want to answer a question she just went back to "Well, you know, in energy producing Alaska" to differ the fact that she has no idea what shes talking about. When she called Americans "six pack Joe" i wanted to puke. How could people want this woman to be the second most powerful person in our country.

I do love that she highlighted the fact that she has only been in politics for five weeks though, and that shes new to Washington.

I found a flow chart of her debate that is interesting, and surprisingly true.

Bailout Law Seen as Politically Risky Measure

Regretfully, even as the Bailout plan is slowly being carried out, the voters are more than ready to punish their elected officials at the polls. Yesterday saw many representatives make the risky vote of their entire political careers. In a meeting between officials, Treasury Secretary Paulson and President Bush; they all knew one thing: the plan had to pass – there was and is no Plan B. Even as President Bush was signing the plan into law last night, there was big news: the sale of Wachovia Bank to Wells Fargo.

"There is no joy," said Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.), a rock-ribbed conservative who switched her "no" vote to a "yes" yesterday, even though a Democratic surge in North Carolina is making her once-easy district look increasingly dicey. "I don't like the bill. I'm not going to defend the bill . . . I had to do the right thing, even though, politically, it might kill me." ~From an Interview by the Washington Post (10/4/08)

Even faced with resistance by voters, it brought out political selflessness and courage, bipartisan cooperation and ultimately a triumph of sorts. Representative Myrick wasn’t the only one who changed their votes, below is a few others from that same Washington Post article:

• But in the end, none of these people proved decisive. Instead, for Myrick, it was the Charlotte banker who told her the night before the vote about how the credit market in North Carolina was heading toward rigor mortis.
• It was the woman in Cleveland, Tenn., infant son in arms, who looked into Tennessee Republican Rep. Zach Wamp's eyes and said, "I appreciate you voting no, but please don't come home and leave things the way they are."
• And it was Drew Greenblatt, president of Marlin Steel Wire Products in Maryland, who walked into Rep. Elijah E. Cummings's office Thursday to tell the Maryland Democrat's staff that his company had just landed a major contract for wire baskets, but when he went to the bank to get cash to meet the demands, he learned his credit line had been frozen. "I decided late last night," Cummings said yesterday, just after he switched his vote. "I prayed on it, because this is a difficult situation. I needed to allow this moment in history to sink in."

Now all we can do is wait and see if the bailout will make any difference or if the economy will continue to spiral further and further into a possible depression.

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/03/AR2008100303849.html?hpid=topnews&sub=new&sid=ST2008100303976&s_pos=

Obama Gaining Ground

Over the last three weeks Senator Obama has been gaining considerable ground in many swing states including: Florida, Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina, New Mexico and Colorado. The state that has gained the most attention is that of the Sunshine State, Florida. Ever since the economic crisis began, the state has been experiencing a significant swing, between three and six points in favor of Obama because people there believe he has a better ability of rebuilding the economy and has a better understanding of the world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04florida.html?hp explains that even in this critical state, people are aware of the choice they need to make a month from today. As of August, the Democrats have gained significant voter registration with an increase of 498,000 more voters than 2004; which had 373,000. Obviously this is an advantage Obama will not ignore and he will do whatever it takes to get them to the polls.

Meanwhile McCain has given up on campaigning in Michigan by pulling all his ads, closing his offices and relocating his staff - effectively surrendering the state to Obama. This is a dramatic turn of events which is slowly allowing Obama have many more ways of obtaining the number of electoral votes needed to win while McCain's ways to victory are getting narrower and narrower. With only a month to go - the time for both campaigns to roll out negative ads has arrived and below are two examples:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHvJPGnkQxE

Breaking Down the Bailout Bill

Well, the infamous Bailout Bill has finally passed, approved by the Senate, House, and, of course, President Bush. But for those of us who aren't familiar with the intricacies of this piece of legislation, this CNN article broke down the key components of the bill. I summarized them here:

• Attacking the credit crisis by (the Treasury Dept) buying the troubled assets of financial institutions.
• Protecting taxpayers by reimbursing them after 5 years for the losses of these institutions.
• Curbing executive pay by eliminating executive bonuses if they have made false profit statements.
  
• Oversight through two committees: a financial stability board comprised of current government economic leaders, and a congressional oversight panel appointed by the House and Senate. 
• Tax breaks: renewable energy tax breaks for businesses and individuals, research and development tax credits, credits that allows individuals to deduct state and local sales taxes from their federal returns, and a year-long relief of the Alternative Minimum Tax.  
• New Accounting Rules under which the Securities and Exchange Commission will have more power to change accounting rules on Wall Street.
• Shielding bank deposits by temporarily raising the FDIC insurance cap from $100,000 to $250,000 therefore allowing the FDIC to borrow more from the Treasury to cover any losses as a result of the higher insurance limit.
• Mitigating foreclosures by reducing interests rates and extending a provision that exempts from federal income tax any debt forgiven by a bank to a borrower in a foreclosure. 
• As for cost, the tax bill's tax provisions will come from tax breaks of other legislation. This will reduce the federal tax revenue by $110 billion, and overall the bill will increase the current budget deficit by a substantial margin.

I'm not well-versed enough to make a firm claim whether or not this bill was the right solution, but with the current state of the economy, I don't think America has room for much risk.   

House Passes Revised Bailout Bill

I'm watching C-SPAN as I write this. The House of Representatives is now voting on the Revised Bailout Bill. The revised bill passed through the Senate on Wednesday by a vote of 74-25. This CNN article highlights some of the important changes between the original, rejected bill and the new bill.

The final results of the bill:
Democrats -

• Yea: 172
  
• Nay: 63
  
• Present: 0
  
• Did not vote: 0
  

Republicans -

• Yea: 91
  
• Nay: 108
  
• Present: 0
  
• Did not vote: 0

Total -

• Yea: 263
  
• Nay: 171
  
• Present: 0
  
• Did not vote: 0

Now that the House has passed the revised bill, it's up to the President to approve or reject the bill.

Communications technology, the Millennials and the Vote

After reading Amanda's post I thought I'd add a few links to stories that have been circulating about the under-polling of younger voters. This tends to happen, so goes the conventional wisdom, because virtually all major polling firm polls rely solely on land lines. Because voters under 30 are far more likely to only have a cell phone, they are less likely to be polled.

While these articles agree about the under-sampling of younger voters, I also remember that this was a thread of the conversation during the Bush-Kerry election in 2004, and the issue seemed to have no demonstrable impact on the final results. That said, younger voters seem (a) more numerous; (b) more excited about a candidate; and (c) more likely to be exposed to political news via the Internet in 2008 than they were in 2004. So, who knows?

Anyway, here are the links:

"The Cell Phone Polling Gap: An Artificially 'Close' Race"

"Is Youth Being Served?" (news article version)

"Is Youth Being Served?" (blog version)

McCain's Road to 270 Getting Rougher and Narrower

Politico.com has two articles today about shifts the McCain campaign is making in order to focus their resources on a smaller playing field.

The first move involves giving up Michigan, where the campaign had been playing offense and expanding field operations in Virginia, bad news for the GOP considering the state hasn't voted Democrat since LBJ won it in 1964.

The second involves zeroing in on Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Minnesota, an offensive move designed to make Obama defend states Kerry won in 2004 by narrow margins.

Daily Kos weighs in with this breakdown of the difficult and shrinking strategic options McCain has left:

McCain is actually significantly more competitive in Michigan than he is in Wisconsin. Looking at Nate Silver's numbers (probably the best anywhere), he gives Obama a 91 percent chance of winning Wisconsin, projecting a 9-point Obama victory. Michigan is looking better for McCain, at 88 percent. Pennsylvania isn't much different, at 86 percent likely Obama.

With New Mexico and Iowa safely Obama, Obama gets to 266 EVs including the rest of the Kerry states. Throw in any other (competitive) Bush state and Obama gets to 270, and Obama has plenty of targets for those final EVs -- Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, etc. And while New Hampshire hasn't been locked down yet, its 4 EVs wouldn't buy McCain much breathing room.

If it was up to me, I'd pull out of every Kerry state except one, probably Pennsylvania, not to win, but to draw a disproportionate amount of Obama's deep resources. Then I'd focus on defense. It'll be far easier to hold Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Indiana, Missouri and West Virginia, than win any single Kerry state. And McCain can win if he holds the line.

It will indeed be interesting to see if he's able to do this, but playing defense in eight states is no easy task, especially when you still have to pick off one of Obama's safe(r) states like PA, WI or MN.

age group demographics.

I found a website that placed states as for obama, against, too close and the same for mccain according to age groups. I think its a very interesting map, concerning it has a large audience. The site is part of myspace, which is a huge social site as we all know. Anways, take a look, its pretty self explanatory and worth looking at. 

go here!

ps. youll have to sign in as a myspace user. 

I'm moving to Canada...

...if McCain wins, has a heart attack and leaves Palin as President. I mean, I know Obama isn't the perfect candidate. But can we really risk having McCain and Palin run our country?

I feel sort of bad for her. I mean, she's been thrust into the public eye, put under all of this scrutiny, people are making fun of her, her daughter is knocked up, and she's forced to go around campaigning and debating and being interviewed by Katie Couric when probably all she wants to do is curl up on a couch in her pajamas and drink cocoa.

But really... I want my candidate to know where s/he stands. I want them to speak intelligently, to know that foreign policy is about more than being able to "keep an eye" on someone, to be able to answer simple questions about the economic crisis, know specifically what they want to change, and to at least be able to name one or two newspapers or magazines they read. Or at least lie and start throwing out names.

Here are a few videos. This first one is Palin failing to name a Supreme Court decision she disagrees with. None of these videos will embed, for some reason, so you can take action and follow the link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn9WduykYpA


Here she is, not being able to name a newspaper she reads. She claims to read "all of them." And then launches into a rant about how Alaska isn't a foreign country. Which would, admittedly, help her foreign policy stance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkWebP2Q0Y

Finally, here is a side-by-side comparison of the disasterous bailout question, and Tina Fey's portrayal. It's brilliant- it's almost word-for-word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqdfzi1Ega0&feature=related

America's Mood

While doing research, I stumbled across the results of the Reuters/Zogby Index (RZI), which attempts to use the results of 10 different monthly polls to measure the "mood" of America. The September 2008 results show an increase from August's results (91.9) to September's results (96.3). The RZI began at a level of 100 in June 2007. A level above 100 indicates America's mood has improved, while a value less than 100 indicates a decline.

A breakdown of the September Results as compared to the August Results:

• Congress's Approval Rate: Increased from 9% to 13%.
• President Bush's Approval Rate: Decreased from 29% to 28%.
• Approval Rating of President Bush's Economic Plan: Decreased from 15% to 13%.
• Approval Rating of United States Foreign Policy: Remained steady at 25%.
• People who considered themselves in good economic standing: Increased from 47% to 52%.
• People who felt they had good job security: Increased from 61% to 64%.
• People who feel the United States in "on the right track": Increased from 23% to 25%.
• People who are proud of the United States: Increased from 87% to 91%.
• People who felt safe from foreign threats to the United States: Increased from 84% to 86%.
• People confident that their children would have better lives than themselves: Increased from 64% to 68%.

The following two polls are not part of the RZI, but were reported anyways:

• People who will spend less money on holiday gifts this year than they did last year: 45%.
• People who will spend the same amount of money on holiday gifts this year as they did last year: 46%.

Although President Bush's ratings are for the most part deteriorating, faith in the country, the economy, and the future seem to be increasing. And isn't that what America is all about?

Bending the Rules

This year's vice presidential debate will embrace a "historic" new format. Both Palin and Biden will have a mere ninety seconds to respond as opposed to the more recent format that allowed for two minute responses. Despite the fact that this time restriction is not as harsh as the seventy-five second time limit of the 1992 VP debate, it still works out to the favor of the McCain campaign.

"McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose
format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a
disadvantage and largely on the defensive" (Healy).

That just goes to show the ridiculous political move made by the McCain campaign. If they were worried about how Palin would fare in a debate then perhaps they should have picked a more qualified running mate. In fact, this seems to be the most blantant attempt by the McCain campaign to pull the wool over the eyes of Americans regarding Palin. What is evenmore mystifying than McCain's made efforts to cover for Palin's lack of experience by changing the debate format, is how Obama and his campaign agreed to allow the changes. Obama and Biden clearly had the Republicans, in their own words, "on the defensive", so why back down now? I personally think that Andrew Sullivan, a writer for theAtlantic.com put it best when he said:

"We are now rigging the debate formats to compensate for a know-nothing, mendacious Manchurian candidate drilled in meaningless talking points? And the Obama team agreed to this? And so did the press?" (Sullivan)

Since the Obama camp may have let Palin avert potential disaster, they will now have to wait to see if McCain's rule bending backfires.

Ideally, people will see right through this cheap political move, which will possibly be a turn-off to swing voters or anyone who is unclear as to whether Palin is a legitimate VP pick or not. That is one potential point that could lead to a backfire in the McCain campaign's plan. The other potential falling point of McCain's move would be that the shorter time for responses leaves voters with the same feeling of uncertainty regarding Palin as before. Since she will have less time to respond, it will be difficult for voters to get a feel for Palin's politics, which would not benefit the Republicans. Whether McCain's plan works or not, it is completely a completely ridiculous move and I am astounded that Obama, the media and everyone else is just letting this happen right before our eyes.

Sources:

Sullivan, Adrew, The Atlantic.com, http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/, October 1, 2008

Healy, Patrick, New York Times, Pact on Debates Will Let McCain and Obama Spar, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us/politics/21debate.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1, September 20, 2008

Commision on Presidential Debates, http://www.debates.org/pages/his_2008.html

Personality Cult?

In what would seem more at home in totalitarian states of past and present, "Sing for Change" presents a medley of Obama songs sung by earnest uniformed youths. Until recently the videos were noted on the Senator's website, but it appears that they are on their way down the memory hole. Also, anyone who questions the pro Obama bias the mainstream media has should note the involvement of NBC president Jeff Zucker. The second video is a portion of a somewhat similar slightly creeper "Dear Leader" Birthday song.

Who Really Stands by What They Say?

My favorite part of the bailout rhetoric is as follows.  According to Barack Obama, McCain "votes" with Bush 90% of the time, and we cannot take a 10% chance with the future of America.  This assertion implies that George Bush is wrong 100% of the time.  When the bail out package came into realization President Bush supported it, I assume that this is what Senator Obama meant by votes.  Obama spoke with bush Tuesday morning about the necessity of the bill’s ability to pass congress, and McCain suspended his campaign to support the bill. Both Senators Obama and McCain voted for the bill, it failed anyway, and the DOW Jones industrial average fell 778 points.  With Wall Street in this much turmoil one doesn’t even need to know where Main Street is to guess what kind of condition it is in.  Intricate dances about avoiding and rescheduling debates and street maps aside there is a clear logic problem here.  President bush is always wrong and John McCain is wrong whenever he “votes” with bush, why should Obama voted for it. Further more Barack Obama cares about middle class Americans more than the big banks; but the bill will also help middle class American’s, McCain doesn’t support government meddling in the economy or big spending; but can’t afford to loose a single swing voter who supports the bill, so neither candidate should have voted for it. Congress struck the down, and the American people ran out of confidence in the economy as a result showing their support.  Who is right? It certainly seems that none of the candidates should have voted for the bill because it opposed both of their views in some way. 

Barack Obama’s main focus in his economic policy is the well being of the middle class American taxpayer.  A bill giving $700 billion to banks is not the kind of economic stimulus that senator Obama generally supports. McCain’s economic policy is in direct opposition to the ideals laid out in the bailout plan. McCain is so opposed to government spending, and regulation that he would like to suspend all government spending that isn’t absolutely necessary for the first year of his presidency, and because of this there is no reason, under McCain's plan that he should have supported the bailout either. Aside from this both candidates have attempted to distance them selves from President Bush and his approval ratings, but even senator Obama called the President in order to further plans to help the bill pass.  The tendency in America to associate candidates and their parties with ideals falls through in moments like this.  It is when America is in turmoil that it is revealed that both candidates have the interests of the American people at stake, have viable plans for the future of our country, and a great deal of insight and intelligence applicable to good policy making.  That and neither candidate wanted to be responsible for the recession that could result from not passing the bill and wanted more votes, which is much more likely.   

The Chess Game Continues

In the heated race for the White House this election year, Obama may have just made a crucial step towards securing his presidency. His campaign, according to dailykos.com removed some of its staffers from North Dakota last week and moved them to Minnesota and Wisconsin.

The thinking behind this strategic move is impressive. North Dakota, which is worth three electoral votes, has been leaning increasingly towards McCain; in fact, at this very moment it appears that McCain has an approximate 11 point lead over Obama in North Dakota. This makes Obama's chances of winning the state seem bleak compared to his odds in the toss up states of Minnesota and Wisconsin.

In Minnesota Obama is nursing a 3 point lead over McCain. While this lead is meager, it is vastly important that Obama win this state. What makes this state so much more important in the eyes of the Obama campaign is that Minnesota has a value of 10 electoral votes as compared to North Dakota's 3.

Wisconsin, like Minnesota, is also worth 10 electoral votes. In Wisconsin, which is beginning to lean more and more towards the Democrats, Obama is fostering an approximate 5 point lead over McCain and the Republicans. A victory in this state would also be a huge boost for the campaign.

All in all, if the Obama campaign's strategy works out, than rather than just hoping to win the 3 electoral votes from North Dakota, it has put its self in a position to win 20 total electoral votes from Minnesota and Wisconsin.

House bails on Bailout

With the United States economy in a tailspin, the house of representatives voted today on a $700 billion dollar bailout that would allow the United States government to buy up all of the bad mortgages that have caused major companies such as AIG to collapse. The bill was just voted on and the result is the house shut it down; the bill did not pass. I have to wonder what this means for the not only the United States economy, as the DOW plummeted 600 points while waiting for the results of the vote, but also for the world economy. Several banks in Europe have already folded due to the economic crisis in America. It is unclear why the bill was not passed, however the majority of the "no" votes came from members of the republican party. It needed 218 votes to pass, but it came up 13 votes short. The final vote was 228 against, 205 for, and it has been stated that 60% of the democrats voted for the bill, while less than 1/3 of republicans voted for the bill to pass. The bill was seen as the only measure to prevent the economy from tanking any further, ranking republican on the house financial services, Spencer Bachus, was reported as saying "Our time has run out. We're going to make a decision. There are no other choices, no other alternatives." Yet even after urging from major party leaders, the bill still failed in the house. Latest reports are that supporters of the bill are attempting to put it up for another vote. At this point I don't think anyone really knows what the next step is, but it is clear that the effects of this bill not passing are going to be felt not only in the financial district, but in homes across America. 

Isidore, Chris. "Bailout Plan Rejected." Bailout moves toward congressional approval - Sep. 29, 2008. 29 Sept. 2008. 29 Sept. 2008 .

FauxNews pulls article expressing uncertainty about Palin

While visiting Google News a few minutes ago, I was surprised to see a link at the top section of the page to a FOX News article titled "Conservatives Begin Questioning Palin’s Heft". I was less surprised, however, to find that the page now reads "You've requested an America's Election HQ page that cannot be found. The page you are looking for may have moved or it may no longer be available. We apologize for the inconvenience." The link on the Google page has also since been removed.

Luckily though, despite Fox's efforts to protect their candidate, the article is still floating around. You can read it here.

snl rocks

this skit is so funny, yall should watch it.

snl is making fun of the debates. 

go here!

McCain and Special Interests

Everyone know how McCain always portrays himself as a maverick, unswayed by special interests.  Except, it turns out, by the gambling industry.  In an article yesterday by The New York Times, it was revealed that, actually, more than 40 of his fund-raisers and top advisors have significant ties to the gambling industry.  And throughout his years in Washington, he has always been there to help the industry out, with an estimated $326 million in tax breaks over a dozen years and an amendment in 1994 that let more Native American tribes open casinos.  Oh, and I'm sure you remember the Jack Abramoff scandal, when McCain was in the forefront of the investigation?  Well, turns out that one of the crimes Abramoff committed was to steal $66 million from several tribes.  No wonder McCain was so incensed - NO ONE messes with McCain's gambling industry!!!!  And McCain really profited from the take-down, too. One, he crushed a competitor.  Two, he collected inquiry fees from the tribes that had been bilked.  Three, he confronted political enemies from his 2000 presidential campaign while polishing up his maverick self-image.  Good job, Old Boy!

Of course, the McCain campaign was not at all happy when this article ran.  McCain's spokesman, Tucker Bounds, attacked The Times, saying, "Your paper has repeatedly attempted to insinuate impropriety on the part of Senator McCain where none exists - and it reveals that your publication is desperately willing to gamble away what little credibility it still has."  Sound familiar?  It should.  Last week, on Monday, The Times ran an article highlighting the relationship between McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis and Fannie and Freddie Mac.  The McCain campaign attacked The Times then, too, saying that it was no longer a fair reporting agency.  So, now, this is really not right.  Any time The Times comes out with news about some impropriety on McCain's part, it loses it's impartiality?  Uh-uh, I don't think so.  It is just so incredibly rude, and just so wrong, that McCain's advisors would resort to insults!  I'd say that maybe it makes McCain lose some of his credibility.

Mr. McCain Goes to Washington

Last Wednesday, John McCain threw the political and media establishments on their ear by announcing he was planning to suspend his presidential campaign and return to Washington, D.C. to help broker a deal that would stave off the seemingly imminent collapse of our financial infrastructure.

The next 24-72 hours of McCain's campaign may well turn out to be among the most disastrous of his political career. Consider:

• McCain cancelled his appearance on The Late Show with David Letterman. Letterman invited outspoken McCain critic Keith Olbermann on in his stead and then spent the vast majority of the program raking McCain over the coals. A YouTube clip that distills Letterman's assaults has been viewed over 2.3 million times.

• Rather than head straight back to D.C., McCain stayed in New York, gave an interview to Katie Couric, spent the night, then spoke at the Clinton Global Initiative on Thursday morning.

• The 24-hour delay between his announcement and his arrival in D.C. proved costly, as it allowed the Dems to get their ducks in a row and turn McCain's plan against him in the following ways:
  

• Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank (D-MA), seemed to ink a compromise deal with enough support before McCain showed up, leaving the Arizona Republican to look less like the cavalry riding in to save the day than a superfluous attention-seeker whose only way to remain relevant was to throw the deal off track.

  
  

• When it came time to meet with leaders from the two parties and President Bush at the White House, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) handed over role of lead negotiator to Barack Obama, who then pressed McCain to choose between siding with the conservative base in the House that had revolted against the original bailout on the one hand, or with the bipartisan agreement supported by Dems, Bush and Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. Reports indicate that McCain would not respond to Obama's repeated requests for him to say which plan he supported. Eventually, the notoroiously tempermental McCain left the meeting a few minutes early, erasing any chance for the big bi-partisan presidential photo-op with him, Obama, Bush and other congressional leaders.

• When McCain announced he was suspending his campaign, he also indicated he would not attend the debate if a deal had not been reached. Because he took so long getting to D.C., he wasn't part of brokering a deal but of breaking the deal. With no agreement in place, McCain had to find a way to justify attending the debate without losing face. The answer from his campaign: Senator McCain believes progress is being made and he will return to D.C. immediately after the debate and remain there until a deal emerges.
  

• McCain's running-mate Sarah Palin's disastrous interview with Katie Couric meant she continued to be hidden from the press, allowing Joe Biden to make the rounds in the hours after the debate while McCain's VP was conspicuously MIA.

• McCain's temper seemed to show in the debate, in which, despite maintaining that he likes to reach across the aisle, could not even look across the stage at Obama. This bit of body language has featured prominently in post-debate coverage and will likely result in an awkward bit of over-compensation in the second debate.

• With no deal in place, and McCain having sworn he'd return to D.C., the Maverick spent all day Saturday holed up in his Arlington, VA condo. This will have some repercussions, to be sure. With only five weekends left before the election, weekend events allow candidates opportunities to draw the largest possible crowds while also ensuring that they don't have to compete with other news. For instance, instead of trying to maintain the appearance of putting country first, Obama hit the trail in the battleground state of North Carolina, where he hammered McCain on the economy in front of 20,000 people in Greensboro.

All in all, not a great couple of days for the Straight Talk Express.