Monty's Toilet Reading » The Huffington Post | Raw Feed

The Huffington Post | Raw Feed (30 unread)

Bill Scher: Conservative Fiction: The New Deal Sucked!

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Bill Scher

Tags: [edit]

As we are facing the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression as a result of conservative deregulation, it's only logical that we would look to how we successfully dealt with the last major economic crisis -- the progressive principles that shaped President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's "New Deal."

The conservative response? Pretend that the New Deal sucked.

Last month Jonah Goldberg wrote on the National Review blog The Corner that the New Deal is to blame for making it a "Great" depression:

...we shouldn't let invocation of the Great Depression -- and our fear of it -- justify all of this New Deal talk. Say it with me: The New Deal prolonged the Great Depression. In fact, if anything it was the New Deal itself that made the Great Depression "Great." By 1938 one in six Americans were still without jobs. It wasn't until WWII, when FDR started describing himself as "Dr. Win the War" instead of "Dr. New Deal" that America finally started to lift itself out of its state-imposed economic stupor.

Today, the Heritage Foundation's Conn Carroll claims that the New Deal created a wholly separate Depression:

One of the great untold stories about the Depression is that there were really two of them. By the mid-1930's the U.S. economy was well along the road to recovery with the number of unemployed dropping from 13 million in 1933 to 7.6 million in 1936. The the Supreme Court, bowing to the court packing pressure of FDR, approved the Wagner Act and the economy tanked again.

The Wagner Act is that awful, awful law that gave workers the right to join unions, which in ConservativeWorld, ruined everything.

Carroll backs up his post with a Wall Street Journal opinion piece from Mark Mix of the anti-union National Right To Work Committee titled, "Labor Unions Prolonged the Depression."

By the mid-1930s, the U.S. economy appeared to be climbing out of the Great Depression. The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA), which had bottomed out at 41 in 1932, was advancing. It increased 73% from the beginning of 1935 through the end of 1936, when it hit 180. The number of unemployed, 13 million in 1933, dropped to 9.5 million in 1935 and 7.6 million in 1936.
Then, in 1937, the DJIA plunged 33% in what is often called "a depression within a depression." Joblessness skyrocketed.

A principal factor in the meltdown that year was the U.S. Supreme Court's surprise 5-4 decision in early April to uphold the constitutionality of the Wagner Act, which had passed two years earlier...

What do all three of these conservative attacks have in common?

They all base their claims on last year's book, "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," written by Amity Shlaes a former member of the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board, and found to have used misleading numbers.

UC-Davis history professor Eric Rauchway exposed the dubious underpinnings of the book in Slate last year. When the actual economic statistics didn't support her anti-New Deal claim, she used estimates that explicitly disregarded government jobs created by the New Deal. Rauchway writes (emphasis added):

The greatest knock on the New Deal is it did not end the Great Depression. The war did that. Open the authoritative reference work Historical Statistics of the United States and you will find that the unemployment rate did not return to its 1929 level until 1943.
But if the New Deal did not end the Great Depression, was it doing some good? Historical Statistics of the United States says yes: Except in the 1937-38 recession, unemployment fell every year of the New Deal. Also, real GDP grew at an annual rate of around 9 percent during Roosevelt's first term and, after the 1937-38 dip, around 11 percent.

So on the numbers, the U.S. economy improved briskly during the New Deal. Things that are moving quickly and in the right direction, but still haven't reached their destination after a while, are things that have a long way to go--which is true of the U.S. economy recovering from 1932. Historians disagree on which part of the New Deal most encouraged economic growth, but at the least the New Deal did not prevent this recovery.

Shlaes makes a different argument about numbers, because she uses different numbers. She starts each chapter with a rat-a-tat of just-the-facts, but instead of GDP, which represents the overall economy, she quotes the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which represents the maybe 10 percent of Americans who owned stock. And though she quotes an unemployment number, she doesn't quote the figures I've just mentioned. Instead she chooses different estimates of unemployment that (she acknowledges) show a much larger share of Americans out of work during the New Deal.

If you want to know how the New Deal treated ordinary Americans, this choice really matters. Let's look at a figure Shlaes gives twice in her book and again in her Wall Street Journal editorial: She has unemployment at 20 percent in the 1937-38 recession. That's appalling--almost as bad as 23 percent in 1932. Based on such a statistic, you could think the New Deal wasn't alleviating the Great Depression. But that number hides something: A third of the people Shlaes counts as unemployed had a job that the New Deal gave them through its relief programs.

Now, you may say, wait: Those people really shouldn't count as employed--we're not interested in government make-work, we're interested in the real economy. Fair enough--and if you look again at Historical Statistics of the United States, you'll see another measure of unemployment--private, nonfarm unemployment--measuring the real, industrial economy. And on that measure, unemployment again runs markedly lower under Roosevelt than under Hoover. John Maynard Keynes might have explained that the New Deal wasn't just offering make-work, it was stimulating the economy--and Shlaes in fact at one point says the same: "[I]t functioned as Keynes ... hoped it would." Yet of all the possible ways to measure unemployment, Shlaes chooses the only way that hides the effect of New Deal relief programs and makes it look as though the economy performed as poorly under Roosevelt as under Hoover.

Economic journalist David Warsh slammed the book in his economicprincipals.com weekly column, via Economist's View (emphasis added):

The result is a book just as fanciful, but much less convincing than Kenneth Roberts' account of Oliver Wiswell's long career as a critic of the first American Revolution. For Roberts never argued that the colonies' War for Independence was a mistake -- rather he showed that it was a very painful ordeal, with good arguments on both sides of the issues. Safely ensconced in Nova Scotia at the very end of the book, Wiswell allows, "Perhaps something great will come even to that rabble... that drove us from our homes."
Shlaes, on the other hand, seems to argue that we would be better off if John Maynard Keynes had never written what she describes as a "license for perpetual experimentation" with macroeconomic policies, if the extension of rights and responsibilities summarized by the phrase "the New Deal" had never occurred. But what about the enormous growth of the American economy since 1946? What about the seventy five years that have passed without another depression?

And New York Times economic journalist David Leonhardt also found Shlaes' argument wanting in his book review (emphasis added):

The great challenge for his critics has always been to come up with an alternate vision that might plausibly be said to have done more good with fewer downsides. Shlaes likes the model offered by Willkie, the Republicans' 1940 presidential nominee, in which the New Deal would have been scaled back and business would have filled the void. She builds her case mostly by implication, through a series of sketches of self-starters who embodied what the free market could have accomplished. There is Bill Wilson, for example, the stock trader who founded Alcoholics Anonymous and in the process "taught Americans that the solution to their troubles lay not with a federal program but within a new sort of entity -- the self-help community," as Shlaes puts it. Mellon shows the power of charity by donating his unrivaled art collection to the country, thereby creating the National Gallery. Even the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval has a role to play, as an example of how the private sector once took care of quality control. Roosevelt, however, preferred government institutions like the Food and Drug Administration.
In a way, Shlaes's book has come just a little after its time. In the early years of George W. Bush's presidency, conservative critiques of the New Deal served a larger political purpose, as a rationale for the administration's attempts to remake Social Security. Those plans failed, of course, mostly because they found little support among voters.

There is a historical parallel here. Roosevelt may be an icon now, but he faced enormous opposition when he was president. Americans at the time heard the arguments that he was insufficiently capitalist. They saw his missteps and, above all, they lived through the long Depression. Yet in four separate elections, when given a choice between his ideas and those of his critics, they overwhelmingly chose his. Based on what followed -- the great economic boom of the postwar years -- it is hard to doubt their decision now. They understood that the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval wasn't quite up to defeating the Great Depression.

On the verge of a resounding call for a New "New Deal" -- to right the derailed economy with robust public investment in clean energy, infrastructure and education; stronger worker protections; new rules of the road for corporations and a guarantee of health care coverage for all -- conservatives could choose to debate those ideas with their own new ideas that learn lessons from their failed ideas of the recent past.

Instead, they are stuck in their default position, preferring fictional history to actual history. Refusing to acknowledge what clearly has worked, and what clearly hasn't, in the past. Desperately trying to malign a president widely considered one of America's greatest presidents along with Washington and Lincoln.

If they want to stop a New New Deal, repeating the mistakes that led to one of the worst presidencies in American history is not the way to do it.

Originally posted at OurFuture.org

Robert Creamer: Two Thoughts Must Obsess Every Progressive for the Next Six Days To Assure Victory on Tuesday

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Robert Creamer

Tags: [edit]

With six days to go, the outcome of the election now rests far less with Obama, McCain or their campaign operatives - and much more with rank and file political activists.

Our success now depends entirely on our level of motivation and the skill of our execution. That in turn requires that we become obsessed by two thoughts every waking moment of the next six days:

1). The historic possibility that is almost within our grasp.

2). The personal anguish each of us will feel if we fail to hold the ring of victory tightly enough and is slips from our hands.

Last weekend I went to cast my ballot at an early vote location in my hometown of Evanston, Illinois. In my particular district no race is really hotly contested. Barack Obama will win Illinois by twenty points. My wife, Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, will easily win reelection in our overwhelmingly Democratic district. The races for US Senate and State House and Senate contests in my area are not close.

No matter. There was a half hour line of voters eager to cast their early vote. Each one wanted to be part of this historic campaign - to play their role in the national drama that has engaged the nation like no election campaign in my lifetime.

We see that same wave of voter engagement across America. If it continues - if we help make sure it continues - it could sweep out conservative politicians and also replace the conservative value frame that has defined the center of American politics for thirty five years.

Next year could mark the first time since the 1960's that progressives retake the offensive and begin once again to reshape the political and economic structures of our society to reflect the traditional progressive values that lie at the foundation of the story of America.

We can revive our economy with a "bottom up" economic agenda that allows all Americans to share in the growth that our exploding technological capacity can make possible.

We can launch a national crusade -- like Kennedy's program to land a man on the moon -- to convert our energy economy from dependence on increasingly scare hydro carbons to renewable, clean sources of power - and save our planet from global climate change.

We can finally make quality educational opportunity available to every child - and guarantee that everyone can get a higher education without being weighted down by a lifetime of debt.

We can reestablish America as a beacon of hope and progress and human rights in the world.

We can replace division with unity, fear with hope, cynicism with possibility. We can once again place America on the road to fulfill its historic mission of creating a truly democratic society that welcomes people of every religion, every ethnic group, every culture that wants to live in a country that celebrates diversity and is committed to proposition that we are all our brother's and sister's keepers.

And during the next six days, we should remember that it is no small thing that on January 20th, a man of African American descent could raise his hand to take the oath of office at the same Capitol where Abraham Lincoln called for the end of slavery just 7 generations ago.

He would take that oath just down the mall from the Lincoln Memorial where forty five years ago Martin Luther King called for an end to racial segregation and at the same time affirmed his belief in the dream "that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character".

The election of Barack Obama would say an enormous amount about America. It would provide a signal to the world that America believes in the kind of open, tolerant society that the world as whole must become if we are to survive the ethnic and religious conflicts that have brought the misery and hopelessness that spawn hatred and terrorism.

It would make us all very proud.

But in the next six days we also must also visualize the anguish we would feel if we are not successful - if we let this possibility slip through our fingers. It is entirely possible. Undecided voters may very well break for John McCain and Sarah Palin. The other side will not go quietly. They will continue to smear. They will attempt to suppress the vote. They will use every tool at their disposal.

Let's remember that we actually won the election in 2000. Yet because of their resourcefulness and tenacity, the right has held the White House for the last eight years.

Fundamentally we have to bring out such a wave of voters that this election will not be close enough to steal. And we have to remember that in any given swing state, just a few votes in each precinct could decide what direction our society - and the entire world - takes in the generation to come.

In 2000 my political consulting firm managed an excellent field program for a great candidate for Congress in South Florida. Our people did a great job. But in the end of the day, we lost by around 500 voters. They were the same 500 votes that cost Gore the Presidency.

Had each of our Election Day volunteers simply recruited one more vote per precinct, the world would have been spared the nightmare of the Bush Presidency.

Next Tuesday, when your watch shows that the polls are due to close in 15 minutes -- and you are satisfied that you have worked your heart out all day - don't stop. Go get one more voter. That voter - multiplied by all of the precincts in that state - could easily be the difference between a new progressive era and four more years of Bush-McCain-Conservative government.

And that is the attitude we all must have every waking minute of the next six days.

Remember the deep depression - the emptiness you felt after the loss in 2004. It would be much worse this time.

Think how you would feel watching John McCain and Sarah Palin taking the oath of office on January 20.

The same year Martin Luther King made his "I Have a Dream Speech", John Kennedy gathered in the White House Situation Room with his closest advisers to confront the Cuban Missile Crisis. The decisions they made in that room could easily have lead to the nightmare of nuclear war.

I have often been glad that George Bush, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld were not in that room. God knows what the outcome might have been.

For each of the next six days, think about John McCain and Sarah Palin in that room. Worse yet, think of Sarah Palin as commander in chief in that room.

We can almost taste the sweetness of the historic progressive victory that is possible next Tuesday. Now it is up to each and every one of us to take personal responsibility to grab that ring of victory and hold it firmly in our grasp - to refuse to let this historic opportunity slip away.

Time to empty the stands - get onto the playing field. Stop just checking the poll results and go change them. For the next six days drop whatever else you are doing. Whatever it is, it's simply not as important. Put off the errands, the home projects, the project and work. Take vacation days.

Volunteer to knock on doors, make phone calls, protect the vote. Go talk to your neighbors, put up signs. Drag your friends and neighbors to the polls. Don't take no for an answer. This time friends don't let friends not vote.

Obsess about what it will feel like to win - and how horrible it would be to lose. And let that obsession motivate you to make history - to make this the six days that change the world.

Robert Creamer is a long-time organizer and political strategist, and the author of the recent book "Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win," available at www.amazon.com

More on Barack Obama

Alex Remington: Young Knives' Superabundance: A Modern Classic of Post-Punk Enthusiasm

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Alex Remington

Tags: [edit]

Young Knives are one of what seems like a million British punk/post-punk bands, a nouvelle vague of guitar-slingers whose similar sound has caused rock critics to regard the word "angular" as if it were a four-letter word. But the problem isn't that the bands were unoriginal -- the problem was, they were boring. Angular guitars, driving beats, and funky basslines sound fantastic in the right hands, with a twinkle and a smile. Young Knives do it the right way, and their 2008 album Superabundance is compulsively listenable, with nary a musical innovation to be seen nor a note out of place.

Being derivative isn't a bad thing, provided you can come up with a good enough hook: The Offspring have been writing Bad Religion songs for two decades; the Rutles and XTC (as the Dukes of Stratosphear) parodied the '60s while writing better songs than most bands in the '60s; and, ultimately, there's nothing you can do in rock that Little Richard, John Lennon, and Jimi Hendrix didn't do first. So the key is knowing who to cop from, and remembering that the whole point of rock and roll is the sexual catharsis that comes from singing about lust over insistent, throbbing power chords.

Young Knives know all about lust and longing. "Up All Night" is about a London party, full of vapid beautiful empty dancing insomniacs, and the impossibility of dressing up to look good enough for them:

I got dressed up, up to the nines I took a look in the mirror, I wish I was thinner, then everything would be fine At least I smell nice So come on and breathe me in Whats the point?

Awkwardness is a big part of their shtick, as Wikipedia classifies them as a geek rock band. They are what Brits would call "public school boys," and they uphold it with their song "Here Comes the Rumour Mill," on a previous album. The pudgy guitarist and lead singer, Henry Dartnall, sings in an arch-British accent that would seem precious if it weren't so sincere. His range is somewhere around David Byrne's, often slightly higher than his register. Dartnall's bespectacled brother is the bassist, and goes by the charmingly upper-class name House of Lords. They started out "playing bad funk and Ned's Atomic Dustbin covers," and the jaunty synergy between House of Lords and bespectacled drummer Oliver Askew recalls those earlier days. So does their tendency to stretch songs into vamps, settling into repetitive lyrics and grooves, then breaking into an energetic, higher-pitched bridge, as in the album-closer "Current of the River."

Their lyrics are often fairly bleak, if sometimes a bit nonsensical: "We're all slaves on this ship/We're all slaves on this ship/This ship's sinking" in "Turn Tail," "Oh, the things we've done, the things we've done, the path has gone/Things we never said, the past is done, the past is dead" in "Rue the Days," "It looks like Mother Nature's got herself a whore/With a disregard for health and safety" in "Terra Firma." But they play with infectious enthusiasm: whether it's the residue of Ned's Atomic Dustbin, or the comforting British accents, the depressing imagery is always tempered by the tempo, and the vamps always give way to a satisfying, nervy crunch.

I don't know what it is about this album, but ever since I got it I can't stop spinning it. Sometimes a band just gets it right. Well done, lads.

Jerry and Joe Long: McCain's "Real Americans" Ad

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Jerry and Joe Long

Tags: [edit]

"Real Americans" from "Real America" give their carefully reasoned and meticulously constructed arguments against an Obama presidency.Â Behold the GOP base in all its glory.

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

Georgia Early Voting Has Some Waiting For Eight Hours At The Polls

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

ATLANTA — Georgia residents packed polling places as early voting started in earnest this week, braving lines as long as eight hours to cast ballots and forcing some voting sites to stay open deep into the night.

Polls have been open in Georgia since Sept. 22, but dozens more opened this week as part of a statewide strategy to ease the crunch on Election Day. The advance voting sites will be open every day through Friday.

The new system has been popular: About 200,000 voters cast their ballots on Monday alone. They're among 1.2 million people, more than 20 percent of the state's 5.6 million registered voters, who have voted early so far. The votes won't be counted until Election Day.

In Florida, a crucial battleground state where early voting lines have also been long, Gov. Charlie Crist signed an executive order Tuesday keeping polling places open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., four hours longer than specified in state law. He cited record turnout in signing the order, which also requires polling places to be open a total of 12 hours this weekend instead of eight. Many counties in Tennessee have also extended their polling hours.

Nationwide, about a third of voters in more than 30 states are expected to cast their ballots early.

In Georgia, lines were down to under four hours in most places by Tuesday, but the long waits prompted the Democratic Party to urge Secretary of State Karen Handel to keep the polls open longer during the week and over the weekend.

"No one wants to see Georgia's failed processes become a national news story," wrote Jane Kidd, the party's chair. "But today, it is clear that we are in a crisis, and it is unclear even if there is enough time for the remaining four million-plus Georgia voters to cast their votes in an efficient and timely manner."

Handel, a Republican who oversees Georgia elections, said state law doesn't provide for weekend voting and prohibits voting on the Monday before Election Day. Besides, she said, county officials will be working through the weekend to prepare for the crush of voters.

"There's a lot that happens Saturday, Sunday and Monday to prepare for Tuesday _ they've got to get ready for the three million people that are coming."

She said her office has dispatched 100 monitors around the state, and is sending teams to polling places with waits over two hours. The average wait time on Tuesday, she said, was around an hour.

"We had one day in four counties where there was an issue of longer-than-acceptable lines _ that's a pretty good performance," she said. "I think all in all it's gone pretty smoothly."

The lines were longest in metro Atlanta, where Democrat Barack Obama's candidacy was expected to increase black voter turnout. Republican John McCain is favored to win the state, although recent polls show he has a modest lead.

About 35 percent of the early voters were black, a disproportionate hunk of the state's population. Figures from Oct. 1 show blacks make up 29 percent of Georgia's electorate.

At a library north of Atlanta, wait times topped more than eight hours Monday night when the computer system crashed several times. Workers who didn't leave until 11 p.m. returned Tuesday morning to find voters had begun lining up at 4 a.m.

Lines were also long at a senior center in Clayton County, a suburban county south of Atlanta where some voters who showed up Monday had to wait until after midnight to cast their ballots. The lengthy lines continued Tuesday, but they averaged three to four hours instead of six to eight.

Dianne Meeks waited about three and a half hours _ and likely had another hour or two to go _ but seemed unfazed.

"It's worth it to wait because we have the freedom to vote and pick our officials, so that's what we need to do," said Meeks, a 58-year-old retired administrative assistant. "It's a civic duty if you want to call it that, but it's a privilege."

Denise Burgess of Decatur, an Atlanta suburb, waited 90 minutes outside a senior center, warding off chilly temperatures in her husband's parka.

"That was reasonable," said the Decatur resident. "I got in line last Friday and it was a three hour wait, so this was very reasonable."

Outside the Atlanta area, waits at many polling places were under 45 minutes.

Clare Morriss, a 50-year-old from Monroe, a rural area about 45 miles east of Atlanta, said she heard horror stories about long lines in Atlanta, but decided to give early voting a shot when she saw a short line outside her polling place.

"I was in and out in 30 minutes, no problems at all," Morriss said.

___

Associated Press writers Shannon McCaffrey in Monroe, Ga., Dionne Walker in Decatur, Ga., Kate Brumback in Riverdale, Ga., and Bill Kaczor in Tallahassee, Fla., contributed to this report.

Tom Cosgrove: A Year From Now

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Tom Cosgrove

Tags: [edit]

In this election season finale Coco the star of [mypresidentpalin.com] predicts the future.

See it to believe it:

More on Sarah Palin

Permalink for 'The_Huffington_Post___Raw_Feed/2008/10/29/Out_Of_This_World__Joseph_Arthur__amp__The_Lonely_Astronauts_At_Schubas'

Out Of This World: Joseph Arthur & The Lonely Astronauts At Schubas

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

It's a good time to be a Joseph Arthur fan. Though the Ohio-born singer-songwriter has never been a layabout--he and his band, the Lonely Astronauts, recorded 80 songs in late 2006, only a fraction of which he's managed to release--lately his pace has been downright frenetic. This year he's released four EPs and the full-length Temporary People, all on his own label, and till his eviction last month he was running a gallery and show space in Brooklyn called the Museum of Modern Arthur. Temporary People is a grab bag of classic-rock-radio anthems, pastichey R & B, and po-faced attempts at country gospel--when you get right down to it, you could say the same about Exile on Main Street--which sometimes fails to connect and sometimes succeeds, ineffably and powerfully.

Lisa Derrick: Pray for Sarah Palin Dot Com

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Lisa Derrick

Tags: [edit]

The website prayforsarahpalin.com asks Christians to pray for Palin but heck, what about the rest of us?

I PLEDGE: to pray for peace, protection

and wisdom for Sarah Palin and her family.

Please add my zip code to the prayer coverage map.

Well, gosh, the heathens, pagans, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and less mainstream faiths may have some prayers of their own.

I bet there are some witches who are praying Sarah won't hunt them down and cast them out, and plenty of people praying she won't start the beginning of The End. Let's pray she gets a talk show, not the VP position...

More on Sarah Palin

Jeanie Pyun: The Eco-Sins of John McCain

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Jeanie Pyun

Tags: [edit]

Of all the candidates, Arizona's Senator John McCain talks a good green game, but in effect, has one of the least environmentally friendly records. The non-partisan League of Conservation Voters releases annual score cards for every member of Congress, and for the past two years, John McCain has scored a big, fat zero, due to not showing up for any of the votes that LCV considered environmentally significant - including those having to do with the future of clean energy in the U.S. and saving Americans money at the gas pump. McCain, like his opponent Barack Obama, acknowledges the link between human activity and global warming, and supports reducing emissions by cap and trade - whereby companies have a certain number of permits (like credits) for their annual output of greenhouse gas emissions, and can buy and sell extra permits from each other. McCain wants to use the cap and trade system to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and further reduce by 60 percent emissions levels by 2050 (Obama wants to further reduce by 80 percent). As with any other candidate, we like to look at how they live, or put their money where their mouth is. In the Senator's case, the money is substantial, but unlike, say, billionnaire Warren Buffet, who lives in the same house he bought for $31,000 in Omaha, Nebraska (albeit he owns a private jet), it appears that there is nary a house or car that John McCain has mouthed "no" to.

Bling-Master Flash: The McCain real estate portfolio includes eight properties that cost over $13 million in total and add up to 21,800 square feet of interior living space:
1. A 15-acre, $1 million 2,500 square foot ranch getaway along a desert creek in Sedona, Arizona, with a 900 square foot guesthouse and a caretaker's house
2. A $5 million-plus, 7,000 square foot main residence in downtown Phoenix with a waterfall, concierge service and biometric finger readers for security
3. On a lower floor in the same building, 2,000 square foot unit
4. Yet another Phoenix three-bedroom 1,904 square feet apartment that cost $700,000
5. Three beachfront apartments in California, one $963,00, two-bed, two-bath, two-car 1,429 square footer in La Jolla and ...
6. Two in Coronado, a $2.6 million, three-bedroom, eight-floor 1,750 square feet ocean-viewer that's six floors above a ...
7. $2.1 million, 2,250 square foot, three-bedroom bay-viewer
8. An $847,000 three-bedroom, 2,100 square feet apartment in Arlington, Virginia that has climate-controlled access to the Metro.

Since the average American home is 1,700 square feet, McCain's 21,800 square feet of residences account for about 12 times the emissions of the average person, per Carbonfund.org. At about 14 pounds per square foot per year, McCain is responsible for about 138 metric tons of carbon dioxide a year - no small beans. (That number could be way higher when accounting for their high-end amenities that could bump up energy usage, like HD TVs, Sub Zero freezers and other top-line appliances.) "He has eight houses spewing CO2 when the average American is struggling to hold on to one," says Eric Carlson, executive director of Carbonfund.org. On the minor plus side, the dÃ©cor in the McCain's Sedona retreat is folksy Americana, a look best achieved by reusing family-owned or purchased antique and vintage pieces.

Driven to Tears: Senator McCain sure has a lot of cars! Twelve, to be specific, that range from gas-guzzling to electric, vintage to recently purchased. Says Carbonfund.org's Carlson: "MPG factor doesn't seem to be behind a lot of his purchases."
1. McCain's car of choice, the only one listed under his name as opposed to wife Cindy's, is a 2004 Cadillac CTS sports wagon, has been called "boring," and its mileage isn't that exciting either: 18 MPG in the city and 26 MPG on the highway.
2. 2005 Volkswagen convertible (25 MPG city/30 MPG highway)
3. 2001 Honda sedan (20/28)
4. 2007 Ford half-ton pickup truck (avg 19/24)
5. 2001 GMC SUV, a Lexus owned by Cindy's family's beer distributorship
6. 2008 Jeep Wrangler (17/19)
7. 2000 Lincoln (avg 14/21)
8. A vintage 1960 Willys Jeep (10/17).
9. A Toyota Prius Hybrid
10., 11., 12. Three 2000 bubble-shaped golf-cart-like cars, or neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs) by Global Electric Motorcars, that run on batteries.

While gas consumption is of high concern for many Americans right now, this doesn't seem to be a personal worry for McCain. There is no way of knowing how far the vehicles are driven each year, but as a rule of thumb, gasoline emits about 19.5 pounds of CO2 per gallon. In aggregate, the footprint of such an astonishing number of vehicles - each of which has a manufacturing and carbon-emissions impact on the environment - is without question higher than the average American, if not unrivalled by anyone except perhaps Jay Leno. Plus, McCain has a fondness for riding ATVs, an environmentally harmful recreational vehicle that leads to land erosion, laying open trails that can encourage the proliferation of invasive plant species, and driving away indigenous animals because of noise pollution. Finally, flying from Phoenix Washington, D.C. is responsible for 1.93 tons of carbon dioxide round-trip.

Food for Thought: Seafood and barbequed beef are high on the Senator McCain's menu, especially at Pusser's Caribbean Grille, which he frequents when in Annapolis, MD visiting his son Jack at the US Naval Academy (McCain himself is a fourth-generation graduate). Favorite foods include shrimp, which "if Senator McCain is eating the kind of shrimp that most people eat, he's probably contributing to the decimation of coastal mangroves in Asia, the estuaries, or marine nurseries, for thousands of species," says author of The Ethical Gourmet, Jay Weinstein. "He - and we all - should be choosing domestic Florida pink shrimp or West Coast Spot prawns. Those are the sustainable ones." McCain's penchant for pepperoni and baby back ribs is "supporting some swine-like practices of the American pork industry. Unlike pork from a small humane farm or cooperative like Niman Ranch, U.S. hogs are raised so cruelly confined that they can't turn around, and are surrounded by toxic waste lagoons that foul waterways and cause coastal fish kills," says Weinstein. Enchiladas are another McCain go-to-food, and if they are "cheese-laden, and not organic," says Weinstein, "he's eating dairy laced with recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone to increase milk production, requiring mega-dosing with antibiotics that end up in the milk, too." The truth about food can be hard to stomach, but perhaps McCain knows more about such industrial toxic byproducts than we think. Note his barbequing strategies for chicken, tenderloin, burgers and ribs, as shared with HGTV: "The slower they're cooked, the better they're going to be and the more impurities you get out of them."

Bottom Line: Senator John McCain and his wealthy wife have a footprint many times larger than the average American, and the largest among the presidential and vice-presidential candidates by far. To paraphrase from a popular book often referred to during campaign season: It is unfortunately easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter (eco) heaven. Translation: Mo' money means mo' carbon footprint (sorry). Some folks may retort that being environmentally friendly should not have to mean discouraging the American way of life, of property and wealth acquisition, and that being pro-environment should not be equated with anti-capitalism. True, that, but there is an antipathy for both parties toward excess, if only because it widens the gulf of relatability between candidates and constituents. Unfortunately, conspicuous consumption may be particularly ill-timed right now (lifestyle image being of concern to politicians, after all): Before last month, would we have been able to link global credit-crisis-triggered recession (too much stuff bought with borrowed money) with global warming (too much carbon dioxide - from producing too much stuff - reflecting heat back to Earth)? Maybe not. Stuff we don't need - in Senator McCain's case, square footage and wheels - leads to an end stage that we can't get rid of without poisoning or choking our air, water, wildlife and earth. Mo' bummer.

Green Party Presidential Hopeful Rallies Downtown

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

The Green Party's US Presidential hopeful continues to make the rounds in the Chicago area Wednesday. Last night, the Illinois Green Party hosted an event for Cynthia McKinney in downtown Chicago.

About 40 people mingled over food and drinks while waiting for McKinney to make her appearance. Stephen Zarlenga was sipping on some pink wine. He says he likes the Greens because they're forward-thinking, even if they don't necessarily have the political clout.

Read the entire article and listen to McKinney's speech here.

Obama Accepting Untraceable Credit Card Donations

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor's identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.

More on Barack Obama

Democrats Plan Legislative Agenda With No Veto Or Filibuster

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

A landslide victory next Tuesday would give Barack Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reshape government policy dramatically.

By controlling the White House and expanding their Senate majority, Democrats would remove the most reliable weapons used by the GOP to block their agenda: the filibuster and the veto.

Those tools have thwarted Pelosi (Calif.) and Democrats since they won the majority in both chambers, leaving bills affecting labor law, healthcare and other issues to die in the Senate or on the president's desk.

More on Barack Obama

US' Syrian Embassy May Close To Public

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

DAMASCUS, Syria — The U.S. Embassy in Syria warned Americans in the country to remain alert and said it could close to the public after the deadly U.S. raid near the country's border with Iraq over the weekend.

The attack, in which U.S. troops landing in helicopters raided a compound and killed eight people, drew an angry response from Syria. The government on Tuesday ordered an American school and cultural center in the capital to shut down. Both, however, remained open on Wednesday.

The warning on the U.S. Embassy's Web site advised Americans to avoid demonstrations and review their personal security and said events could cause it to close to the public.

"The American community in Syria should be aware that unforeseen events or circumstances may occur that could cause the U.S. Embassy in Damascus to close to the public for an unspecified period of time," said the message, which was dated Monday but was not widely available until Wednesday.

Meanwhile, students and teachers attended classes as usual at the Damascus Community School in the capital's upscale Maliki neighborhood despite the government's closure order. An employee at the American cultural center, which is linked to the embassy, said it was also open.

"We have not received official notification from the Syrian government (about the closure order) and it would be premature to speculate about the embassy's reaction," an embassy information official said, declining to be named because he was not authorized to give official comment.

Syria's Cabinet said the ministers of education and culture were instructed to implement the closures of the school and the cultural center, but there was no sign Wednesday that they have.

The Damascus Community School, better known in Syria as the "American School," caters to the small American community and other foreign residents in the Syrian capital but most of its students are Syrian.

The cultural center is about 50 yards (meters) from the embassy and has a media and press section, a cultural section and a library.

U.S. officials said Sunday's raid killed a top operative of al-Qaida in Iraq who intelligence suggested was about to conduct an attack in Iraq, but Syria and the Iraqi government criticized the raid.

Syria's state-run newspapers, meanwhile, kept up their criticism of the United States for the attack, which they said will not make Syria change its regional policies.

"The U.S. administration could not be serious if it thinks that such terrorist behavior would make Syria accept occupation," Al-Thawra newspaper said in an editorial in an apparent reference to U.S. troops in Iraq and Israel's occupation of Arab territories.

It said Sunday's attack near the Iraqi border was carried out because of Syria's stance against the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

Gretchen Rubin: 4 Tips For Dealing With Pre-Election Jitters

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Gretchen Rubin

Tags: [edit]

The presidential election has everyone nervous. No one is confident about the outcome, and it could potentially be a very, very long night next Tuesday. Emotions are running high.

So how can you deal with pre-election jitters?

1. Don't stay plugged in every minute. With all the news and opinion outlets out there, you can make yourself crazy by trying to keep up. That's fine if you have nothing else to do, but if you fall behind at work or neglect the people in your life, you're going to see some unhappy consequences. Also, you might find your mood jerked up and down as you follow the good and bad news. Remind yourself that unless you're actually employed by a campaign, you don't have to process every scrap of information. Set aside certain times during the day to check in, and don't let it take over your life. At the same time, when you do engage in the political conversation...

2. Keep the level of your conversation high. One of the most fascinating insights from my happiness-project research is that although we often think we act because of the way we feel, we often feel because of the way we act. So if you're spewing vitriol anonymously on the internet, if you're screaming at the TV, if you're insulting your relatives for their political views, that ugly behavior is going to blow back on you, and make you feel more mean and angry. If you speak respectfully, you'll feel more respect for yourself, and you'll contribute to a more thoughtful level of political discourse. What's more...

3. Do more than pontificate. You may feel like you're participating very actively by doing a lot of reading and a lot of talking. Fact is, although every citizen has a duty to be well-informed, there's a lot more to civic participation than just talking about it. You can volunteer to help a campaign, or contribute, or be a poll watcher, or be a poll volunteer. Especially if you're feeling frustrated, taking an active role will give you a reassuring sense of having done your best to help. And, zoikes, at the very least...

4. VOTE! In 2004, I was absolutely flabbergasted when a good friend, a political nut, told me casually that he didn't vote, because it wasn't worth his time to deal with going to the polls. "My vote doesn't make a difference in New York," he explained. This is a guy who is consumed with politics. I was so shocked, I couldn't think of a thing to say - and that doesn't happen to me very often. Call me sentimental, but I think if you can vote, you should! I love to vote.

Voting will make you happier, too. The subject of self-esteem has generated a fair amount of controversy, but one thing seems clear: you don't get healthy self-esteem from constantly telling yourself how great you are, or even from other people telling you how great you are. You get healthy self-esteem from behaving in ways that you find estimable. In other words, the best way to feel better about yourself is to do something worthy of your own respect. By making the effort to do something worthwhile, like voting, even if it's inconvenient, you will raise yourself in your own estimation.

How about you? Have you found any good strategies for staying calm as we enter the last week before the election?

***

Are you suffering from Election Anxiety? How has the election impacted your life? Tell HuffPost, and we may just quote you! Tell us your stories using this Survey Monkey form.

Larry David: Waiting For Nov. 4th
Presidential Depression: Dealing With Post-Election Blues
Election Anxiety: The One Thing Republicans and Democrats Can Agree On

For more posts on Election Anxiety, click here.

If you'd like to read more about happiness, check out Gretchen's daily blog, The Happiness Project, or sign up for her monthly newsletter.

Alex Pattakos: Life, Liberty, And The Pursuit Of Meaning

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Alex Pattakos

Tags: [edit]

The introduction to the Declaration of Independence contains the following words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Indeed, these are powerful words for they help to establish a platform upon which all democratic societies may be built; not only that found in the United States of America.

In no way, then, do I intend to marginalize the inherent value and practical significance of these words by suggesting that they should be modified. Let me propose, however, that "true freedom" in a democracy cannot be found in, nor can it rest solidly upon, a foundation comprised only of "unalienable Rights," no matter how well intended. I even would go so far as to say that, at least within the USA in the 21st Century, the expectation of "Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as unalienable Rights has overshadowed, if not totally ignored, an important corollary of true freedom and participatory democracy--Responsibility. Let me explain.

The notion that responsibility is necessary for participatory democracy has deep roots and can be traced to Ancient Greece where the rights and responsibilities of citizenship were not taken lightly. The fundamental relationship between responsibility and true freedom also has a history that, among other things, should remind us that freedom is not something that should be taken for granted or about which we should ever become complacent. On this point, the world-renown Viennese psychiatrist and philosopher, Viktor Frankl, warns us that "freedom threatens to degenerate into mere license and arbitrariness unless it is lived in terms of responsibleness."

And even though Dr. Frankl enjoyed his time spent in America and admired a great deal about it, he was not shy about criticizing the popular understanding of some cherished American values, such as our notion of freedom. He took exception, for instance, to what appeared to be a commonly-accepted view of equating freedom with a license to do virtually anything that one wants. On the contrary, to Dr. Frankl, freedom without responsibility is an oxymoron. That is why he liked to say that "the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast should be supplemented by a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast."

True freedom, in other words, is not "just another word for nothing left to lose," as the late singer Janis Joplin once tried to have us believe. On the contrary, the word implies that we have everything to lose, especially if we don't take our role in a democratic society seriously. It is a fundamental value that must be cherished and protected by each and every one of us. And this necessary pre-condition of democracy can only--and will only--exist if we hold ourselves, and our fellow human beings, responsible. Like the lessons learned from Dr. Frankl, let us all benefit from the wisdom and experience of Nelson Mandela, who ends his autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, with the following words: "But I can rest only for a moment, for with freedom come responsibilities, and I dare not linger, for my long walk is not yet ended."

Dr. Frankl, I should point out, was also critical of the popular understanding of the phrase "the pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration of Independence. For one, he felt that it is wrong to be concerned only with pleasing oneself to the exclusion of others. Moreover, he views the pursuit of happiness as being misdirected and offered what I would call the pursuit of meaning as an alternative:

"Don't aim at success--the more you aim at it and make it a target, the more you are going to miss it. For success, like happiness, cannot be pursued; it must ensue and it only does so as the unintended side-effect of one's dedication to a cause greater than oneself or as the by-product of one's surrender to a person other than oneself. Happiness must happen, and the same holds for success: you have to let it happen by not caring about it." [Emphasis Added]

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Meaning. To be sure, these words suggest more than "unalienable Rights." It's now time, especially in light of next week's elections, to listen to freedom's cry and assume the responsibilities, both individually and collectively, that come with it.

***

You can find out more about Dr. Alex Pattakos, author of the international bestselling book, Prisoners of Our Thoughts: Viktor Frankl's Principles for Discovering Meaning in Life and Work, in his HuffPost Bio and at [prisonersofourthoughts.com]. Contact Alex at: alex@prisonersofourthoughts.com.

James Love: PhRMA giving more to democrats these days

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by James Love

Tags: [edit]

According to the WSJ today PhRMA is spending $13.2 million in an "ad buy to prop up 28 Congressional candidates, many of them vulnerable and all but three of them Democrats." The Journal points out:

"Money follows power, and obviously the drug makers believe they need to reposition themselves politically with the prospect of a Democratic Congress and Barack Obama in the White House. Industry campaign donations skewed about 3-to-1 in favor of the GOP over the last six election cycles. Now they're running about even, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Some of the beneficiaries will play key roles in shaping legislation next year, such as Max Baucus, Chairman of Senate Finance, and Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden, a dominant voice on health policy."

Pharma Sells the Rope, Begging Democrats for mercy, WSJ, October 29, 2008

Don Tapscott: Obama's Ace in the Hole

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Don Tapscott

Tags: [edit]

By Don Tapscott

For months I've been on record saying, that all things being equal, Obama will handily win the election because of a new group of voters - young Americans under 30 who have grown up digital and are flexing their political muscles for the first time. http://blogs.ft.com/management/2008/09/26/obama-will-win-don-tapscott/

These are the children of the baby boom, the Net Generation as I call them. In the last election, just under half of Americans under 30 voted. They made up 17 per cent of the total vote. But there's strong evidence that far more Net Geners will turn out this year, and most of their votes will go to Sen. Barack Obama. Fifteen million Net Geners may well be Obama's ace in the hole.

Youth turnout has been rising steadily since the 2000 presidential election, but this year it has soared. In many state primaries, turnout of young people doubled or even tripled compared with 2004. Young people, who overwhelmingly oppose both the Iraq war and the policies of President George W. Bush, have done more than just vote. They've jumped into politics - their style of politics. They've used Facebook to share information at a phenomenal pace, raise money, and set up rallies - mostly for Obama. They've used YouTube, in its infancy during the 2004 campaign, to reach millions of potential voters through music. Their Twitters have transformed the old-style news cycle.

They're pumped about this election, and they may decide the outcome of the race. That may come as a surprise to some pollsters, but consider what happened at the start of the primary season. In Iowa last January, Obama lost decisively to both Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in the 30 and over vote. Yet Obama won over young people - by a 5 to 1 margin - which was enough to propel him to victory.

They're still for Obama. Two-thirds of young people say they are democrats. The youngest voters (age 18 to 24) favor Obama over McCain by a margin of more than 20 percentage points, according to John Della Volpe, director of polling for the Harvard Institute of Politics. It's unlikely that the choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican vice-presidential nominee will change that, given that young people are considerably less socially conservative than she is.

Yet Obama's huge lead in the youth demographic may have been partially obscured by polling techniques. Although most pollsters do call people on cell phones, they still rely too heavily on land lines to get an accurate picture of young people's political leanings, according to Della Volpe. Half of young people age 18-24 do not have land line phones, he said, and they have sharply different political views than those with land lines about the big issues -- the war, the economy, and who should run the country.

After this new generation brings Obama to power this fall, they will certainly transform politics in the future. The new generation is turning into a political juggernaut that will dominate and change politics in America. They have the numbers to do so. By 2015, once they are all old enough to vote, they will be one-third of the voting public. They have at their fingertips the most powerful tool ever for informing, organizing and mobilizing. What's more they know how to use it effectively, by communicating directly with each other, instead of waiting for orders from campaign headquarters.

And they won't settle for politics as usual. Having grown up digital, they will want to be involved in the act of governing -- by contributing ideas before decisions are made. What's more, they'll insist on integrity from politicians; if politicians say one thing and do another, young Americans will use their digital tools to find out, and spread the news.

They may be a decisive factor on election day. And afterwards, they'll shake up the business of government. The new president will have a tiger by the tail.

Don Tapscott recently led a survey of 11,000 young people around the world. He has written 12 widely read books on the impact of the Internet on society. His 1996 book Growing Up Digital defined the Net Generation and the sequel, Grown Up Digital, will be published by McGraw Hill October 29.

More on Barack Obama

The New Radar Online Is Titanically Awful

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Over the weekend, one of the things that Ana Marie Cox and I spent time vlogging about was the demise of Radar Magazine, and their excellent "Fresh Intelligence" blog, which mined the meat of unique, writerly voices without becoming irksome, quirksome, or shallow. We both thought it was a big loss for the interwebs, but, hey, we were a bit biased.

Happily, the new anonymous crew at Radar has started up their own Fresh Intelligence operation, which has proved definitively that Ana Marie and I were right to lament the original's demise, because in two day's time, the site's new proprietors have put forth a product that truly fails to improve upon a blank laptop screen, thickly coated in whale turds.

Consider the insipid writing of their two-days-late Amy Poehler item:

Where in tarnation was Amy Poehler on SNL this weekend update?!
Why, she was off popping a babe!

Baby Mama Amy is a real baby mama!

Riffing on the child's name, Archie, the dimwit who wrote this piece concludes, "Can Jughead be far behind?" Oh, yes, HAHAHAHA, gotta love that effortless display of cultural currency.

But look, the new goal at RadarOnline is to become some sort of competitor of TMZ, stocked with empty-calorie celebrity fluff. There's a market for that, I guess, but you have to wonder how far they're going to get when they flub basic geography and they cannot even get their subjects' names spelled correctly:

For the record, guys? Hawaii is IN the United States, and it's spelled H-U-D-G-E-N-S.

But, look. If I had to sum up the first two days of New Radar, I need only present the following image:

That's just an atrocity. Indeed, Jughead, was not far behind.

RELATED:
Didn't He Ramble? [Alex Balk]

PREVIOUSLY, on the HUFFINGTON POST:
Hard to Kill, But Not Impossible: Finally, the End of Radar

Robert Scheer: Just How Dumb Are White Males?

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Robert Scheer

Tags: [edit]

Let me now defend white males. We can't possibly be as dumb as the polls showing we are John McCain's most reliable voting base would indicate. Do we white men believe for an instant that a vote for McCain would not represent more of President Bush's failed economic policies at home and costly military adventures abroad? If we don't hold such a belief, why are a majority of us expected to vote against the positive change that Barack Obama so clearly represents?

Most of us know how to read, and can even Google, so why would we think that GOP candidate McCain, who has supported Bush on every one of his economic initiatives, is now the anti-Bush? What exactly did McCain mean when he said, referring to his Democratic opponent during a campaign speech in Ohio on Monday, "We both disagree with President Bush on economic policy"?

Is McCain unaware that he consistently voted for the red ink run up by the Bush administration, or was he having a senior moment when he said that same day, "We cannot spend the next four years as we spent much of the last eight: spending ourselves into a ditch, and hoping that the consequences don't come"?

The only time McCain took issue with Bush's economic policy was in his short-lived criticism of the tax cut for the rich--a strategy he now defends. But if McCain doesn't increase taxes for someone, just how does he plan to pay for the enormous Iraq war debt, now vastly compounded by the banking bailout? On Monday McCain gave his answer: "I will freeze government spending on all but the most important programs, like defense, veterans' care, Social Security and health care, until we scrub every single government program and get rid of the ones that aren't working for the American people."

Is he kidding? If he doesn't curtail those programs, which make up almost the entire federal budget, then he's talking about chump change in possible cuts. There just isn't enough money in those earmarks that McCain goes on about to make a dent in the massive national debt.

President Bush's treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, left our collective credit card on Wall Street, where the bankers are once again to be trusted to regulate themselves. Are there any white males out there still so in the dark that they don't know that the radical banking deregulation legislation that McCain pushed so aggressively is what legally enabled those he condemned on Monday as "the Wall Street bankers and brokers who got us into this mess"? Have they never heard of Phil Gramm, the man McCain picked to co-chair his presidential campaign, who sponsored the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act--both of which made legal, for the first time since the Great Depression, the credit swaps and hybrid instruments at the heart of the Wall Street scams?

Call me naive, but I think white males, startled by job cuts and the devastation wreaked upon their retirement savings, are finally getting the point: Someone's got to pay for this mess, and better those who got rich off the stock market theft than the rest of us.

Can you imagine the uproar now if the McCain-Bush plan to privatize Social Security by linking it to stock purchases had become law? And have you noticed that the Wall Street crooks are not using the bailout money to ease credit but rather to line their golden parachutes? They know how to take care of their retirement.

I don't think McCain gets that the rest of us could use a bit more lift from the government safety net. That's the same federal support that GM CEO Rick Wagoner asked about when he went, hat in hand, to Washington on Monday to lobby for a $10-billion gift to keep his company out of bankruptcy. Or is the CEO of GM just another tax-and-spend socialist?

Robert Scheer is author of a new book, "The Pornography of Power: How Defense Hawks Hijacked 9/11 and Weakened America."

Adele Stan: Palin's Pal: A Feminist of Her Own

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Adele Stan

Tags: [edit]

Can you be a supporter of Sarah Palin and still be a feminist? Well, I guess you could call yourself a feminist -- that is, if you think that, as a woman, you still have rights equal to those of a man when:

* You do not have the right of self-determination over your own body
* Even if impregnated through rape or incest you are forced to bear a child
* You're told you're entitled to equal pay, but forbidden to sue for it under most circumstances
* Information on how to prevent your own pregnancy is withheld from you in sex education classes
* If you're a spiritually powerful or otherwise unusual woman, your harassment can justified as protection from "witchcraft"

In that case, I guess it could be said that Elaine Lafferty, a former Ms. magazine editor proudly stumping for Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, is a feminist. Otherwise, it just doesn't add up.

In an apparent diversion from answering the question of how a femiminst could possibly support an anti-choice ticket that also opposes legislation that would lengthen the statute of limitations in pay discrimination suits, Elaine Lafferty, in an essay appearing on The Daily Beast, admonished as sexist other feminists who challenged Palin's intelligence. This she conflated with actual sexism directed at Palin by male commentators. Nice try. But just because men (including right-wing men) have made sexist comments about Palin, and a few feminists, for good reason (given the media record), have mistaken Palin for being less intelligent than she is doesn't mean that Palin's a feminist. It just means she's a woman (a.k.a, sexism target) who can't name her least favorite Supreme Court cases, or tell us what magazines she reads.

The two feminists Lafferty insults are pioneers -- one was Ms.'s first and longest-serving editor; the other created and produces the first all-women political talk show.

I don't take lightly this challenging of Lafferty's feminist credentials; I've been on the receiving end of such criticism myself, from time to time, and I know the sting. But I've never supported an opponent of women't rights, and as a former Ms. staffer myself (before Lafferty's time), I feel betrayed by her support of a candidate who, taking advantage of an opening won by the efforts of feminists, would set back the cause of women's rights by decades.

I can't imagine how, as a feminist, one can support a candidate who couldn't bring herself to describe, in her interview by NBC's Brian Williams, an abortion clinic bomber as a "terrorist." Bill Ayers, she said, was a terrorist, but "others who would want to engage in harming innocent Americans or facilities that uh, it would be unacceptable. I don't know if you're going to use the word terrorist there."

Does Palin doubt that Claudia Gilmore, paralyzed from the chest down by the shotgun of an anti-choice fanatic, is a victim of terrorism? Perhaps during the long plane rides she describes in her Daily Beast essay, Lafferty could put that question to Palin, since she's the only feminist writer with any access to the candidate. (Would that Kathy G. or Ann Friedman could put a few questions to her.)

With no real refutation, Lafferty dismisses as hogwash any association of Palin with the far right. So, we are to make nothing of Palin's recent video shout-out to the annual convention of the Alaska Independence Party -- itself a secessionist movement and the state affiliate of the Constitution Party, whose platform calls for a return to the biblical law of the Old Testament. "The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations..." reads the platform preamble, which also claims the United States as a nation founded by Christians. First Dude Todd Palin belonged to the Alaska Independence Party for seven years -- until around the time his wife embarked on an unsuccessful run for the office of lieutenant governor in 2002.

I'm wondering if, on those long plane rides, Lafferty has asked Palin about the Wasilla City Council photo of her with a copy of the John Birch Society's magazine, The New American, sitting on the desk before her. The Birch Society, an anti-communist organization, also stands in opposition to most equal-rights movements, including the women's movement, according to the Web site of Political Research Associates, which researches right-wing organizations.

And while the blessing Palin received from one Rev. Thomas Muthee (famously preserved on video) asking for protection from "all forms of witchcraft" may seem pretty comical, it's really not when one considers that Muthee has a record of harassing women as "witches," having even driven one woman out of her hometown for allegedly causing accidents. It's a misogynist ruse as old as the Inquisition, and not one to be taken lightly as a part of Palin's belief system.

As far as I can tell, the biggest difference between Sarah Palin and Phyllis Schlafly is that Palin has expressed support for Title IX, the law that opened up educational opportunities, especially in athletic competition, to women. But other than that, she's pretty dern Schlaflyesque.

Like Sarah Palin, Phyllis Schlafly has long been the target of sexism in her own party. One of the conservative movement's foremost intellects, Schlafly is rarely celebrated as such, and instead finds herself relegated to the G.O.P.'s ladies' auxiliary. So, if I, as a feminist, decided to support Phyllis Schlafly in a bid for a job that offers a direct line of ascendency to the presidency -- would I still be a feminist? After all, I'd just be defending a target of sexism from people -- feminists -- who say mean stuff about her. And isn't that what feminism's all about -- empowering a female opponent of women's empowerment because she's victim of sexism? And to think that, all these years, I've gotten it wrong.

Hat-tip to Frank Gilligan of Beltway Sewer for the Blue Hampshire link.

More on Sarah Palin

Shawn Amos: Bye-Bye, Bling: A Recessionary Note to Rappers Everywhere

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Shawn Amos

Tags: [edit]

Yo, my hip-hop brothers, some words of wisdom: these are hard times. Don't know if you heard, but we're in a recession. People are losing their homes. Folks' retirement funds are tanking. People are pawning their jewelry for gas money.

It's time to reel in the bling. The days of '90s excess are over and out. All the gold ropes and gold teeth have got to go. You need to trade them in for cash and then hold on to it. Stuff it in those high-tops until the banks are safe again. No more shopping sprees. No more Hummers. No more Cristal. Back to basics, folks. You are not immune. Your record label could go belly-up like Lehman Brothers did, and you may find yourself standing behind Joe the Plumber at the check-cashing joint.

Yes, you've all come a long way from the days of Mr. T-level bling, but you've got many more miles to go. Pull off the gold chains and bring on the humility. Get yourself a Prius. Carpool to the next VH1 Rap Honors show. Recycle those kicks instead of tossing them after the first scuff mark. Yes we can, my hip-hop brothers. Yes we can.

Here are five of the worst offenders. I'm calling these folks out so they can step up and lead the way for the rest of the hip-hop nation. Do the right thing.

SLICK RICK
Slick never got the memo that not only are the '90s over but so are the '80s. He's the embodiment of hip hop excess (and bad behavior; the dude spent five years in prison for attempted murder). He's become a reformed citizen since his jail time but Slick Rick is still Bling Offender Number One.

PHARRELL WILLIAMS
My man from the Neptunes likes to brag about his Ferrari Enzo and his Mercedes SLR McLaren. Sure, he's got a trucker cap to give him working-class cred, but he wears chains so big they threaten to knock him over.

T-PAIN
T-Pain's got a grill full of metal and a big ol' chain that could buy him 10 vocoder machines.

BIG BOI
He's got a closet full of big minks and bug chains that need to go to the consignment store. While he's at it, maybe he can persuade AndrÃ© to join him back in the studio.

LIL JON
His teeth alone could feed a middle-class family of five for a year. Jon, cash in the mouth metal and get some old-fashioned enamel caps. Do it quick while you still have your insurance plan. You can use the money to buy some clothes for the half-naked ladies in your videos.

FLAVOR FLAV
The granddaddy of bling. Yeah, the clock probably doesn't cost much, but think of the statement it would make if Flavor started wearing a Casio. Besides, the news is so bad lately, who wants to know what time it is anyway?

Click here for the History of Bling in pictures.

Mark Joseph: Sarah Barracuda

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Mark Joseph

Tags: [edit]

There's a fascinating piece in GQ today about strife within the McCain campaign over the handling of Sarah Palin. I knew next to nothing about Palin before I set out to write my book which was just released last week, Sarah Barracuda: The Rise of Sarah Palin.

It all started for me when I emailed my literary agent and asked him what he thought about a book on Palin. That was in early September. What I learned in the ensuing weeks of researching Palin is that she is no dummy, but a smart, tough, political operator who will turn on friends, patrons and relatives on a dime if she feels they're corrupt or disagrees with them. Fans might call that principled while enemies would likely call it opportunistic.

My favorite story along these lines was the time her mother-in-law, a Democrat, ran for Mayor of Wasilla to succeed Palin, only to find her daughter-in-law oppose her.

I think the book will be like a Rorschach Test: if you dislike Palin you'll probably find more reasons to dislike her. If you're a fan, you may grow to be more of one.

I wrote the bulk of it before the strange Couric interview which I admit to being baffled by. Although my attempts to interview her were unsuccessful, the Palin I encountered in my research seemed miles away from the woman who seemed unable to answer basic questions like which newspapers she read, or her seeming inability to answer certain questions at the debate with Biden. My only thought is that perhaps she's been overhandled and at least for a time, lost her confidence.

The GQ piece seems to confirm the overhandling part. When she was asked what publications she read my guess is, mindful of her handlers' advice, she played scenarios out in her mind: "If I say Glamour, they'll think I'm shallow. If I saw the Washington Times they'll think I'm right-wing. If I say Anchorage Daily News they'll think I'm a hick." etc. So she punted and looked foolish.

As I've written elsewhere, Palin is an unconventional politician and needs to be allowed to be herself, whatever that may be. I think she's right in dismissing the handlers and going native. She may make a fool of herself, but it can't be worse than the last two months and she owes voters the chance to see her sans the handlers.

More on Sarah Palin

Bill Folman: Maybe You Shouldn't Vote

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Bill Folman

Tags: [edit]

Voting is a skill. It's like basketball. Not everyone is good at it. Sure, everyone likes to think he or she is a good voter, just like everyone likes to think he or she is attractive and has a sense of humor. Sadly, the numbers do not support these claims. If everyone was a brilliant voter, we would never elect bad leaders, and the last eight years might have turned out quite differently. So this election year, before you step into a voting booth and possibly screw things up for the rest of us, I ask that you take a moment to answer the following questions and determine whether you have the skill and the know-how to vote responsibly for our next president.

1. Do you feel you made a mistake in 2004 when you voted for George W. Bush?
If your answer is yes, then maybe you're just not good at voting. Every single thing you probably hate about Bush's second term was either already in evidence during his first term or was a direct result of actions taken during those first four years. The arrogant foreign policy, the massive deficits, the deregulation, the cronyism, the wasteful spending, the endless war, the bad environmental policies--all this was on the table in 2004. In fact, Bush probably made more mistakes in his first term than in his second. But why didn't that sway your vote when it mattered? Perhaps you were uninformed or perhaps you were misinformed. Perhaps you were fully aware of Bush's faults but chose to cast your vote on the basis of personality rather than policy. We'll deal with all of these points in a moment. For now, you should ask yourself this: if I got it totally wrong in 2004, how do I know I won't get it wrong again in 2008?

2. Do you believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? Do you believe he "pals around with terrorists"? Do you believe John McCain wants us to be at war in Iraq for one hundred years?
If you answered yes to any of these questions, you need to ask yourself where you are getting your information. If you actually believe any of these voluminously debunked claims, your grasp on reality might be looser than you realize, and this could very well make you a bad voter (see next question).

3. Do you believe any of the following to be unbiased and even-handed sources for political news: The Drudge Report, The Huffington Post, Air America, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, or the Fox News Network?
Seriously? There's nothing wrong with getting your partisan fix, but you need to know the difference between news that attempts to be objective and "news" with an agenda. If you are relying on any of the above as your exclusive source of news, then you are watching the world through a skewed lens, you are hearing only one side of the story, and this doesn't make you a good voter. Spend a few months varying your media diet, and then maybe you'll be ready to step into a voting booth.

4. Are your political opinions easily swayed by forwarded e-mails, messages on your answering machine, or frightening campaign commercials?
If yes, you might be a bad voter.

5. Do you vote based on who you feel is the more "patriotic" candidate? Do you worry about having a president who is a member of the "elite?"
These are made up issues, meant to distract you from real things like the economy and foreign policy. If you fall for this stuff, it might be an indicator of poor voting skills. Every president in U.S. history--the good ones and the bad ones--have been both elite and intensely patriotic. McCain and Obama are no exceptions. To ask who loves their country more is akin to asking which candidate is a bigger fan of oxygen. Nobody would ever put him or herself through the public rectal exam that is a modern political campaign without a passionate love of country. As for being a member of the "elite," just remember that Franklin Roosevelt, who couldn't be more elite if he bathed in money, was also the president who probably did more for the working man than any in our history. The lesson: these labels don't matter. If they matter to you, you may not be a good voter.

6. Are you planning to vote a certain way because of Barack Obama's skin color or Sarah Palin's gender?
If yes, what century are you living in? Please do not vote.

7. Are you afraid of accidentally electing a socialist president to the White House?
Please reread the responses to questions 2 through 6.

8. Do you want your president to be just like you?
Are you the most brilliant person you know? Are you smart enough and experienced enough to be the sort of president whose face is put on currency? If you are not, then I, for one, do NOT want a president who is just like you. You shouldn't either. Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, and Roosevelt were not ordinary men. Good voters vote for extraordinary. Or at least they try.

9. Are you upset because you don't know where the candidates stand on the major issues? Do you feel there is no real difference between the two candidates?
If you answer yes to either question, you clearly have not been paying attention. Barack Obama and John McCain represent two very different philosophies of government, and if you don't understand that, please don't vote. These men have spent the last two years explaining where they plan to take the country. If you still don't know where they stand, then go online and do some research. If you're too lazy to figure out the differences between the two candidates, or if you plan on waiting until you are in the voting booth to listen to what your gut tells you, then please do not vote. This election is too important to be left to the mood swings and ignorant guesswork of bad voters like you.

You've reached the end of the quiz. Thank you for taking this time for self-examination. Now let's be honest: How did you do? Are you a good voter or a bad one? If you've just discovered that you are a bad voter, do not despair. Remember, not everyone can be good at everything. I, for example, am terrible at bowling. That's okay. There's no reason to feel ashamed. And there is an upside too. This year, you don't need to vote! You are officially absolved of your responsibility. Across the nation, millions of more skilled voters will happily pick up the slack, and we will shatter participation records even without you. So, on November 4th, I ask you to take it easy this time. Please, for the love of your country, stay at home.

[Do you have opinions about what makes a good voter? If you have questions you would add to this quiz, please let me know by leaving a comment here or on my blog at www.billfolman.com/blog. I'll post the best questions on my blog soon.]

Taylor Marsh: Mitch McConnell Stiffs League of Women Voters

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Taylor Marsh

Tags: [edit]

by Taylor Marsh

McCain only threatened to skip a debate.

Mitch McConnell took a page from McCain's playbook, then did him one better. He simply ducked out... more than once, in fact. Is this any way for the Senate Minority "Leader" to behave?

But dissing the League of Women Voters? Stiffing them in a year when the women's vote is so critical? It seems beyond tone deaf. In a year where the first woman ever to run on a Republican national ticket breaks through, McConnell turns up a cad.

It's as out of touch as when McConnell channeled McCain on the economy. When after the catastrophic Wall Street collapse Mitch said it was really only an "economic slowdown."

"There's no question we are having an economic slowdown right now," McConnell said. "It is simply not in debate, and how serious it gets remains to be seen." - [Northern Kentucky Enquirer, 9/16/08]

"McConnell admits the economy is in bad shape, but says Democrats lack the remedy and will in fact do more damage by carrying the unions' water on bashing and dismantling trade agreements. 'There's no question we are having an economic slowdown,' he said." [National Journal's CongressDaily, 9/26/08]

"RACHEL PLATT: Let me ask you first and foremost, number one issue everyone would agree, do you, the economy? MCCONNELL: Yeah I think the economy is a big issue; we're obviously having an economic slowdown. People are concerned about it." [WHAS, 10/15/08]

Stunning. Maybe Mitch is afraid he'll have to explain those remarks. Especially with the Wall Street Journal saying things like "Worst Crisis Since '30s, With No End Yet in Sight."

After McConnell decided to duck the debate with Bruce Lunsford, the LWV was told McConnell was basically too busy.

"Exposing voters to a rigorous debate of the critical issues facing this nation today is a cornerstone of the democratic election process in America. It is regrettable that Sen. McConnell has chosen to deny Kentuckians that opportunity by declining this statewide broadcast opportunity," said League president Teena Halbig, in announcing that the league's debate had been canceled.

So on Monday, at the KET venue, it was just Lunsford: Appearing alone in front of two question-wielding journalists and TV cameras, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Bruce Lunsford chastised Republican U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell for not debating in what he called "the big race" in the state.

Roll Call had a piece on it entitled "McConnell Ditches Debate." (Link no longer working.)

There's only one reason a veteran politician blows off a debate. McConnell is trying to hold on and he's chicken to face Lunsford for fear he'll further illustrate he's way out of touch. Anyone saying we're only in an "economic slowdown" has reason to worry. McConnell obviously can't prove to voters why he's earned the right to keep his job.

But stiffing the League of Women Voters?

Hey Mitch. What's got you so scared? Maybe it's the fact that Kentuckians have you figured out.

bwak... bwak... bwak.

GOPer Reportedly Launches Phony, Gay Baiting Robocall

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Chalk this up as one of, if not the, sleaziest robocall of this election cycle.

In a race for a South Carolina Senate seat, the Republican challenger, Mick Mulvaney, has reportedly launched an automated call effort that makes it seem as if a gay-rights group is effusively praising his opponent's extremely liberal agenda.

The calls claim to be sponsored by an organization called the Alliance for the Advancement of Gays and Lesbians -- except such a group doesn't actually exist. And "they" praise the Democratic candidate in that race, Mandy Powers Norrell, for absurdly framed positions, such as her support for "homosexual unions and abortion rights."

It is all an outrageous (if not sad) gay baiting effort designed to make Norrell seem way out of touch with traditional South Carolinian values. Not to mention the fact that it may also be fraudulent -- there are laws prohibiting robocalls in the state.

It also brings to mind two other instances of similarly devious campaigning. The first being, of course, the calls the undermined John McCain's 2000 primary run in the Palmetto State. The second occurred this past fall when calls were made in the Kentucky gubernatorial race claiming that "For the first time in 20 years, the homosexual lobby proudly endorses" Democrat Steve Beshear.

Hat tip: Shaun Dakin.

Arizona Poll: McCain Leads By Just 2 Points

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

A new poll from Arizona State University finds John McCain just two points ahead of Barack Obama in his home state.

The results would likely be dismissed if not for the reputation of Bruce Merrill, the poll director, whose work is considered a gold standard in Arizona polling.

Some details:

Republican John McCain leads Democrat Barack Obama by two points (46 percent to 44 percent) in Arizona, a margin that makes the race too close to call, according to a new Cronkite/Eight Poll. The poll of 1,019 registered voters in Arizona was conducted Oct. 23-26 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

According to poll director Dr. Bruce Merrill, "The race in Arizona is very close. Supporters of both candidates are highly committed to their candidates, with 94 percent of Obama's supporters and 93 percent of McCain's supporters indicating that they are firmly committed and won't change their mind before Election Day. In addition, the undecided vote is very low, which means that there are few people remaining to be persuaded during the last week of the campaign. Obama has been closing the gap by attracting independents and women to his campaign. McCain does well among conservative Democrats and evangelicals. Still, a week is a long time in a political campaign and anything can happen. Who wins will be determined by which candidate gets their supporters out to the polls on Election Day."

The previous Arizona State University, taken last month, had McCain leading 45 percent to 38 percent.

More on Barack Obama

Early Voting Information, Polls

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Updated 10/29 -- h/t to Brownsox for the initial round-up, we've supplemented it with other stories

NATIONAL

From the ABC/Washington Post tracking poll:

More than twelve million voters have already cast ballots in the presidential contest, according to one estimate, and new data from the Washington Post-ABC News tracking poll shows these voters breaking Democratic by a wide margin.

Among those who said they have already voted at an early voting location or sent in an absentee ballot, Barack Obama picked up 60 percent of the vote in the new poll to John McCain's 39 percent.

These voters make up 9 percent of "likely" voters in the track.

The senator from Illinois has a similar lead, 58 to 39 percent, among those who plan to vote early but have not yet. (Those who plan to vote on Election Day also go for Obama, but by a narrower, 51 to 45 percent.)

From Gallup:

The voter preferences of the group of 1,430 individuals who have already voted and who were interviewed by Gallup between Oct. 17 and Oct. 27 show a 53% to 43% Obama over McCain tilt.

Among the group of those who say they have not yet voted, but will before Election Day, the skew towards Obama is more pronounced, at 54% to 40%. By comparison, those who are going to wait to vote on Nov. 4 manifest a narrower 50% to 44% Obama over McCain candidate preference. (Across all registered voters over this time period, Obama leads McCain by a 51% to 43% margin).

Some analysis of early trends from Nate Silver:

According to Michael McDonald's terrific website, there are three states in which early voting has already exceeded its totals from 2004. These are Georgia, where early voting is already at 180 percent of its 2004 total, Louisiana (169 percent), and North Carolina (129 percent).

Hmm ... can anybody think of something that those three states have in common?

The African-American population share is the key determinant of early voting behavior. In states where there are a lot of black voters, early voting is way, way up. In states with fewer African-Americans, the rates of early voting are relatively normal.

This works at the county level too. In Cuyahoga County, Ohio (Cleveland), which about 30 percent black, twice as many people have already voted early as in all of 2004. In Franklin County (Columbus), which is about 18 percent black and also has tons of students, early voting is already about 3x its 2004 total.

COLORADO

Early voting is currently at over 75% of 2004 levels with one week to go.

Democrats currently outnumber Republicans in early voting, albeit by a slim margin - 38.6% of all early voters, to 37.9% Republicans

TEXAS

"Across Dallas County and into the outer suburbs, thousands of people continue to stream into polling places, dwarfing early-voting records and raising questions about what the preliminary tallies mean for candidates and political parties."

FLORIDA

In this critical swing state, early voters already make up 27% of total 2004 numbers (in 2004, early voters constituted 36% of total votes).

Dems outnumber Republicans so far, 44.7% to 40%.

GEORGIA

Early voting is already 33% higher than 2004 numbers, and is equivalent to 31% of all votes cast in Georgia in 2004.

Of early voters, 35% are African-American, compared to 25% of the total voting population in 2004.

Also, nearly 56% of early voters are women, another excellent sign for Democrats.

OHIO

"Among those in Ohio who told WHIO-TV/SurveyUSA that they have already voted, Barack Obama leads by 13 points. When the two populations are combined, the data is as here reported: Obama 49%, McCain 45%. Compared to an identical WHIO-TV/SurveyUSA poll released two weeks ago, Obama is down 1 point; McCain is flat."

ILLINOIS

60,000 votes have already been cast in the Tenth Congressional District.

Of those, 58% were cast by registered Democrats, compared to 25% for Republicans.

Obama should win the district and state in a landslide, but these numbers bode especially well for IL-10 Democratic candidate Dan Seals.

IOWA

Registered Democrats have a 20-point advantage in early voting over Republicans in Iowa.

LOUISIANA

Early voting is near double 2004 levels. Of early voters, registered Democrats have a huge edge, 57.9% to 29.4%.

34% of early voters are African-American.

NEVADA

Democrats lead 54.4% to 29.1% among early voters. Early voters constituted 59.4% of all voters in 2004; this year, early voting to this point is equivalent to 44% of all 2004 numbers.

NORTH CAROLINA

The proportion of black voters among all early voters has leveled off - they constitute 28% of all voters now - but still exceeds black registration in the state.

Early voting has far outstripped 2004 levels, and Democrats are turning out disproportionately.

Asian Stocks Extend Gains, Nikkei Jumps 7%

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

HONG KONG — Asian stock markets extended a global rally Wednesday after an overnight surge on Wall Street as investors awaited possible interest rate cuts from central banks in the U.S. and Japan.

Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index jumped 526.99, or 6.9 percent, to 8,148.91, building on a similar advance in the prior session.

In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng Index added 4.7 percent to its spectacular 14.4 percent rise the day before. South Korea's benchmark rose 2.5 percent, while Australia'sS&P/ASX200 trader 3.7 percent higher.

Investors were heartened by an overnight rally on Wall Street, where the Dow Jones industrial average soared nearly 900 points, or 10.88 percent, to 9,065.12 to its second-largest point gain following rises in Asian and European markets earlier in the day.

The U.S. Federal Reserve is expected to cut its target fed funds rate by half a point to 1 percent on Wednesday. Markets also were holding out hope the Bank of Japan would trim its interest rate _ already at a low 0.5 percent _ when it meets Friday.

"The optimism is fueled by the prospect of rate cuts," said Singapore-based investment analyst Nicole Sze of Bank Julius Baer & Co., which manages about US$300 billion in assets. "Wall Street's rally brought some extra confidence to the market, reminding investors that selling might have been overdone and this might be a good time to pick some values."

"Having said that, this doesn't necessarily signify the absolute bottom and that things will be rosy from here," he said.

A weaker yen also prompted investors in Tokyo to buy exporters like Toyota Motor Corp., which was up 9.5 percent. Honda Motor Co. jumped 16 percent even though on Tuesday it reported a 41 percent drop in quarterly profit and lowered its forecast for the full year.

On Tuesday, the dollar leaped to 97.68 yen from 93.93 yen late Monday _ and as low as 91 yen on Friday. A strong yen erodes exporters' overseas earnings. In Asian trading Wednesday, the dollar was down a bit at 96.92 yen.

Japanese financials also rose, with megabank Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc. surging 11.7 percent.

In South Korea, Samsung Electronics Co. rose 6.7 percent.

Oil prices rose. Light, sweet crude for December delivery advanced $2.07 to $64.80 a barrel in Asian trade on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract slid 49 cents overnight to settle at $62.73, the lowest closing price since May 15, 2007.

In Europe Tuesday, Germany's DAX gained 11.3 percent and France's CAC-40 added 1.6 percent. The FTSE 100 index of leading British shares closed 73.79 points, or 1.9 percent.

___

AP Business Writer Kelly Olsen contributed to this report from Seoul.

HuffPollstrology: Candidates' Horoscopes, Polls And More For October 29

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Polls have come to dominate the media's horse race coverage of political campaigns. Pundits and reporters constantly use them to tell us who's hot and who's not -- but skip over the fact that plummeting response rates and variables like undecided voters and margins of error often render these polls useless as anything other than lightweight diversions on par with horoscopes and political betting lines. Below you'll find a slew of polling, astrological, and betting information that will hopefully help the polling junkies in the media keep polls in the proper perspective.

We've also updated HuffPollstrology to bring you regular takes from astrologers on the state of the presidential race. And we've included a section that digs deeper into how polls are conducted. And to make sure we're really investigating, we're going to add various blogs and articles that cast a skeptical eye on polling. Read on for lots of HuffPollstrology:

ASTROLOGER PHILIP SEDGWICK LOOKS AT THE CANDIDATES - **NEW POST 10/27**:

Value-oriented driven Venus, advancing through the mindful, philosophical, once a mind is made up it's hard to change Sagittarius, conspires with the dog with a bone tenaciousness of Mars and the ego-driven Sun in not so flexible, intensely passionate Scorpio, combine to make one non revokable point: Minds are mostly made up. The only variations might be if one candidate's choo-choo jumps the tracks and he (or she) spins out with a verbal meltdown and show those voters how make a last second impulse vote. Likely it's close to being completely carved in stone. The robo-call money could be better spent elsewhere - like more shoes. After all, do not shoes reveal the soul?

McCain

Venus approaching McCain's personal planet of philosophy, Jupiter, in tense relationship with the reality and non-ordinary reality planets, Saturn and Neptune, comes to a crisp focus. This focus asks, "Tell me again what the hell you were thinking?" This question plays in a number of permutations, for instance, "I think differently than Bush." As Mars and the Inuit goddess planet Sedna, assume opposite sides of the sky, the prevailing theme deals with the choice of Palin as running mate. Believe it or not, that scenario gets worse. Neptune implies closed door conversations discussing alternate realities that wonder if there's any means for replacement. Certainly there's justification for an October surprise, the likes of which have not been seen in a long time. Think of the delicious chaos that could be created with such a radical move this close to the election! The Scorpio planets caution that those who play with fire better know how to wear asbestos gloves.

Obama

Out of sight, out of mind. Leave the contiguous U. S. for two days and take a slight poll drop. Jeez, can the people of this country be more media-sensitive? No matter, Mars now well past the invisibility of Neptune, climbs to the top of Obama's chart. Given fire in the belly, passion for cause and purpose, and smack downs against all assaults, he gets stronger and stronger in the last days up to the election. Mars, making an angle to a relationship sensitive point in his chart, encourages cooperative campaigning. Keeping Michelle near his side, stumping with the Clintons and as the week develops, creating a sense of togetherness with Biden, all work to secure voter confidence. Well endorsed already, a few more statements of support thicken his electoral pudding.

RENOWNED COSMIC NAVIGATOR GAHL SASSON LOOKS AT THE SYMBOLIC ASPECTS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES **NEW POST 10/27**

My name is Gahl Eden Sasson and I teach and write about Astrology, Symbolism, Kabbalah, and Mythology. I am very happy to have this great platform to share my thoughts and ideas with you. As an Astrologer I have seen how the Zodiac can change people's lives. Again and again I have witnessed the connection between the Above and the Below. It's time to take Astrology out of its fortunetelling context and bring it back to its original form as a tool that helps us shape our own destiny. If you want to learn more about your own sign you can go to CosmicNavigator where you will find a great deal of free downloads including lectures on all 12 Zodiac signs and Part I of my new book Cosmic Navigator - Design Your Destiny with Astrology and Kabbalah. If you want to learn more about the connection between Astrology and the Financial Situation please go to my blog.

POLLING METHODOLOGY: New Polls Added 10/27

HuffPost is delving into the gray area of how polls are conducted. Below is an analysis of how pollsters come up with the numbers through response rates. The definition of a response rate is taken from Arianna's 1998 column "Investigating The Pollsters."

The key to polling's accuracy is the principle of "equal probability of selection." But if larger and larger numbers among those randomly selected refuse to participate, this principle no longer applies.

We asked polling companies to please give us the response and refusal rates for their polls listed below.

Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby Poll, Conducted October 24-October 26

Results: McCain 45%, Obama 50% Method: 1,203 likely voters polled over three days. "Can you please give us the response and refusal rates for your most recent national poll?": A Zogby representative said, "26% Response, 74% Refuse."

DailyKos/Research 2000 Poll, Conducted October 24-October 26

Results: McCain 42%, Obama 50% Method: 1,100 likely voters polled over three days. "Can you please give us the response and refusal rates for your most recent national poll?": A Research 2000 representative explained the methodology of the poll, saying that it was a rolling poll with a baseline of 1,100 likely voters, taking approximately 355 to 365 calls per night and throwing out the oldest numbers. "I would say that [we take] one in every eight calls on average," he said, attributing this rate to a combination of callers "telling us to go to hell" and callers not meeting their standard of a "likely voter" through a name recognition test.

Gallup Daily Poll Conducted October 23-October 25

Results: McCain 43%, Obama 52% Method: 2,331 likely voters polled over three days. "Can you please give us the response and refusal rates for your most recent national poll?": 14% response rate, 26% refusal rate. This is an average rate for this particular series of polls, technically defined as the CASRO rate which is similar to the AAPOR-III response rate (these definitions can be found here).

Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll Conducted October 24-October 26

Results: Obama 51%, McCain 46% Method: Sample of 3,000 likely voters over three days. "Can you please give us the response and refusal rates for your most recent national poll?": A representative for Rasmussen told us, "We don't give out that information".

George Washington University (Lake/Tarrance) Poll, Conducted October 20-October 26

Results: Obama 49%, McCain 46% Method: Sample of 1000 likely voters. "Will it be possible for us to get the response and refusal rates for your most recent national poll?": After a few calls, a representative for Tarrance told us, "It's not going to be. Write what you need to write, but it's not going to be. We're four weeks out from a campaign and quite frankly this is not anywhere near my priority list. Okay?"


Mccain vs obama in the General election
mccain	46% Rasmussen Daily	VIRGO August 29, 1936 Contact with lawyers or with those who appear to hold great power seems likely. You may feel you're taking part in a major drama though. Tension between two groups of people could be both mesmerizing and worrying. Concern as to how money is being spent and invested could cause you to make contact with someone who is considered to be an expert at budgeting and thrift.	12.5% chance of winning
obama	51% Rasmussen Daily	LEO August 4, 1961 You may have overreached yourself. You might also be having a fantastic time! The fact that others are talking about what you gave to a recent event, and your clear star quality, could leave you in the world of reminiscences for much of the day. On this theme, you might also be attracted to books that focus on the past and an area of the world to which you feel spiritually connected.	87.9% chance of winning

weather report
East		Pittsburgh, PA Variable clouds with snow showers that will mix with rain showers later. High near 40F. Winds W at 15 to 25 mph. Chance of precip 60%.
south		Charlotte, NC Sunny skies. High 58F. Winds W at 10 to 20 mph.
midwest		Cleveland, OH Rain and snow showers in the morning. A shower or two in the afternoon - otherwise, mostly cloudy. High 42F. Winds WNW at 20 to 30 mph. Chance of precip 60%.
west		Santa Barbara, CA Areas of patchy fog early. Some clouds in the morning will give way to mainly sunny skies for the afternoon. High 78F. Winds SSE at 5 to 10 mph.

Sources:

General Election Poll: Rasmussen Daily Tracking

Like all polling firms, Rasmussen Reports weights its data to reflect the population at large. Among other targets, Rasmussen Reports weights data by political party affiliation using a dynamic weighting process. Our baseline targets are established based upon survey interviews with a sample of adults nationwide completed during the preceding three months (a total of 45,000 interviews). For the month of August, the targets are 40.6% Democrat, 31.6% Republican, and 27.8% unaffiliated. For July, the targets were 41.4% Democrat, 31.5% Republican, and 27.1% unaffiliated (see party trends and analysis).

Horoscopes: horoscopes.co.uk

Weather: Weather.com

Betting Lines: Intrade Prediction Markets

Watch The New Episode Of "Republicrats" Now On MSN Video

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Watch The New Episode Of "Republicrats" Now On MSN Video

Monty's Toilet Reading » The Huffington Post | Raw Feed » October 29th, 2008

Feeds

The Huffington Post | Raw Feed (30 unread)

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Bill Scher

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Robert Creamer

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Alex Remington

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Jerry and Joe Long

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Tom Cosgrove

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Lisa Derrick

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Jeanie Pyun

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Gretchen Rubin

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 11:01am EDT by Alex Pattakos

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by James Love

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Don Tapscott

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Robert Scheer

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Adele Stan

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Shawn Amos

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Mark Joseph

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Bill Folman

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by Taylor Marsh

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]

Fetched: October 29th, 2008, 7:50am EDT by The Huffington Post News Editors

Tags: [edit]