Why Does McCain Seem To Want To Lose?

I've always half-kiddingly contended that McCain would be far happier running against a Republican than a Democrat, but as he draws closer to Election Day, his behavior is that of someone who'd rather lose in the hopes that the Treason Media return to loving him than win, be reviled, but save the nation (and the world) from the era of darkness that Obama would usher in.

On the NBC Nightly News, I caught a report full of clips of him telling supporters at rallies who were trying to snap him out of his torpor because they were afraid of what a Fuhrer Obama (well, they said President) and the chump mumbled that he thought Obama was a good man and "we have nothing to fear from a President Obama."

Pardon my French, but ARE YOU F*CKING KIDDING ME??!?!? HELLO?!?!? EARTH TO JOHN!!! ANYONE HOME?!?!?

Power Line also wonders WTF in "A Prophet Who'd Rather Not Mention It" concerning the letter McCain and 19 other Senators signed in May 2006 warning of the current calamity if Fannie and Freddy weren't brought to heel. Nothing happened and as the PL boys explain:

After May 2006, the Democrats continued to use Fannie and Freddy as their private slush funds until the inevitable collapse, which McCain had warned against so eloquently, occurred.

For some inexplicable reason, John McCain seems unable to claim the credit he deserves for being one of the few politicians in Washington who saw the present crisis coming and tried to do something about it. He is even more unable to vigorously and unambiguously put the blame where it belongs: on the Democratic Party. Which is one of the principal reasons why, as everyone expects, he will lose in November.

He won't be the only one losing. If he slips beneath the waves without attempting to warn America of the truly evil people they will be empowering, then he'd better plan on finding another country to live because the number of Americans coming after him with pitchforks and torches will be legion. I recommend France. They'll recognize a fellow surrender monkey when they see him.

ADD-ON: Mark Steyn on The Corner (in another context) opines:

As for the "old" vs the "new" McCain, I've had little use for either, as NR subscribers who read my cover story on him from eight-and-a-half years ago might dimly recall. I support him faute de mieux, and that's it. Clearly, he's found it difficult (to put it mildly) to make the transition from running against his party to running for it. There's a lesson there: "Maverick" is an attitude, not a coherent worldview, which is why McCain has been unable to make maverickiness (maverectomy?) into a viable electoral platform. Of course, "hope" and "change" are attitudes, too, but so fluffy as to float free of the constraints of reality.

But, if the combination of gazillions of dollars in illegal foreign donations, Acorn's Dig-Up-The-Vote operation, a doting media that would embarrass Kim Jong-Il and the Republican nominee's inability even to speak up on issues where he was right all along (like Fannie Mae), if all that is now unstoppable, I will be proud to have lost with Sarah Palin, who (unlike Brooks and Buckley) runs a state bigger than most European Union nations, has fought an honorable campaign, and has been responsible for such energy and enthusiasm as the ticket can muster.

==========

NOW, WITH VIDEO! Here's Greg Gutfeld and Michelle Malkin on "Fox & Friends" discussing McCain's "Hello Kitty Mittens":

The Coming Obama Thugocracy

One of the most frequent lies the Left has repeatedly hurled at Dubya is that he has been a "fascist" who has "chilled free speech". The irony that you can't pick up a paper or listen to the TV without some celebutard or rabble-rouser assaulting your sensibilities with these unfounded charges goes unremarked upon. (i.e. If there is no freedom to protest, why am I hearing about your protests?) Dubya's feeble "If you can't say something nice..." admonishments to encourage the American traitor class to tone it down a bit on the self-loathing are what's behind this hysterical malarkey; it's specious and disingenuous.

However, there is a chill wind of genuine speech suppression sweeping across the land, but it's coming from Mr. CHANGE! HOPE! Himself. As Michael Barone details, the steps taken by Fuhrer Obama's Brownshirts now that he is just a candidate are just a hint of what a fully-empowered-by-office dictator like He will do.

Actually, Obama supporters are doing a lot more than getting into people's faces. They seem determined to shut people up.

That's what Obama supporters, alerted by campaign emails, did when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg's WGN radio program in Chicago. Kurtz had been researching Obama's relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers in Chicago Annenberg Challenge papers in the Richard J. Daley Library in Chicago -- papers that were closed off to him for some days, apparently at the behest of Obama supporters.

Obama fans jammed WGN's phone lines and sent in hundreds of protest emails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Rosenberg's example. We will make trouble for you if you let anyone make the case against The One.

Other Obama supporters have threatened critics with criminal prosecution. In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Obama that were "false." I had been under the impression that the Alien and Sedition Acts had gone out of existence in 1801-02. Not so, apparently, in metropolitan St. Louis. Similarly, the Obama campaign called for a criminal investigation of the American Issues Project when it ran ads highlighting Obama's ties to Ayers.

These attempts to shut down political speech have become routine for liberals. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view. The motive was plain: to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. Liberal talk-show hosts have mostly failed to draw audiences, and many liberals can't abide having citizens hear contrary views.

To their credit, some liberal old-timers -- like House Appropriations Chairman David Obey -- voted against the "fairness doctrine," in line with their longstanding support of free speech. But you can expect the "fairness doctrine" to get another vote if Barack Obama wins and Democrats increase their congressional majorities.

Corporate liberals have done their share in shutting down anti-liberal speech, too. "Saturday Night Live" ran a spoof of the financial crisis that skewered Democrats like House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank and liberal contributors Herbert and Marion Sandler, who sold toxic-waste-filled Golden West to Wachovia Bank for $24 billion. Kind of surprising, but not for long. The tape of the broadcast disappeared from NBC's Website and was replaced with another that omitted the references to Frank and the Sandlers. Evidently NBC and its parent, General Electric, don't want people to hear speech that attacks liberals.

Then there's the Democrats' "card check" legislation, which would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions. The unions' strategy is obvious: Send a few thugs over to employees' homes -- we know where you live -- and get them to sign cards that will trigger a union victory without giving employers a chance to be heard.

Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Union organizers in the 1930s and 1940s made the case that they should have access to employees to speak freely to them, and union leaders like George Meany and Walter Reuther were ardent defenders of the First Amendment.

Today's liberals seem to be taking their marching orders from other quarters. Specifically, from the college and university campuses where administrators, armed with speech codes, have for years been disciplining and subjecting to sensitivity training any students who dare to utter thoughts that liberals find offensive. The campuses that used to pride themselves as zones of free expression are now the least free part of our society.

Obama supporters who found the campuses congenial and Obama himself, who has chosen to live all his adult life in university communities, seem to find it entirely natural to suppress speech that they don't like and seem utterly oblivious to claims that this violates the letter and spirit of the First Amendment. In this campaign, we have seen the coming of the Obama thugocracy, suppressing free speech, and we may see its flourishing in the four or eight years ahead.

The hypocrisy of the liberals who have been shrieking about Dubya's non-existent "chilling" is galling. I've always called them on it, too - they aren't opposed to Obama's genuine fascism because they just want free speech for themselves, not for anyone who may have another opinion or viewpoint. That they wrap themselves in the mantle of supporting "tolerance" and "diversity" is a joke. They don't. They've just projected their intolerance upon non-liberals and labeled them as such.

Catching Michelle Malkin's Eye

Wow. Just...wow. Mere hours after blasting the posters there for having kittens about SNL, a comment of mine got promoted to the body of Michelle's main post about McCain's daft proposal to federalize the mortgage business.

I guess I should put some pants on or something...

McCain vs. Obama - Round Two....FIGHT!!!

Round Two of the Presidential debates is being hyped as do-or-die for McCain because, well, because the Treason Media wants their Anointed Fuhrer in and fascism imposed upon the country. Any questions?

Regardless, this IS a big deal because after Moose-Slayer pounded Joe Biden so badly that the TM had to spin extra hard and ignore his nearly two dozen lies, fibs, and hallucinations, McCain is set to lay some hurting on the Obamessiah. In the past few days, Obama's terrorist pals have started to get some coverage and people who were blithely guzzling the CHANGE! HOPE! Kool-Aid now have had to reconcile their boredom and disgust with Dubya and the Stupid Party with the inconvenient truth that Obama may be too radical for their tastes. They want the "good" parts of socialism (i.e. "free" health care, "free" whatever), but not the bad parts (i.e. gulags, oppression).

NBC's coverage is already setting things up as McCain being a big meaniehead and the world's problems being all his faults. Tom Brokaw has picked the questions and since he's sanitized Obama's terrorist mentor, Bill Ayer, as an "educator", look for a fair and balanced batch of questions to be asked. (*COUGH*BULLSH*T*COUGH*)

Obama ducked McCain's offer to do ten of these over the summer, so let's see if McCain can use his skill edge to win. Will he be able to attack a fellow liberal? Live-blogging and updating as needed...

• Opening question is about the economy. (Duh.) Obama says this is the final verdict for the past eight years and says that Marxism is the answer. (Well, not in those exact words.) McCain totally forgets to mention that the Dems blocked Fannie/Freddie oversight that he wanted. Oy vey!!! It's gonna be a loooooooooooooong night. Gawd, how frigging hard is it to remember that you tried to stop this?!? Follow-up: Who would you name as Secretary of the Treasury? McCain had nothing much and Obama spewed more class warfare.

• OK, now that's better. On the 2nd question McCain finally mentions Freddiemac and Obama's money haul from them. Obama has a bemused smile - what's he got for a retort? A: A lot of blather and blame for free enterprise. McCain better punch back cuz it's not as if Barry's gonna be his pal in the Senate if it loses. Obama says that McCain jumped onto the bill after a year. Does McCain retort, "At least I got onto it while you were taking payola."? Nope. Gah!

• I'm gonna abbreviate their names to Mc and O if you don't mind. You know who's on the field. Work with me here.

• O says something true: Dubya has been a spendthrift. Will Mc mention that O wants to spend more? Again, NOPE! He talks about reaching across the aisle and cuddling with the Dems to get stuff done. Whoops! Spoke too soon as he mentions O's spending and earmarks. Nice, but it should've been the FIRST HALF of the answer, not the ass end.

• Drinking game for alcoholics only: Take a drink whenever Mc mentions "earmarks", "reformer", any sort of palling with Dems crap. If he says "Maverick" or "straight talk", finish the bottle and start planning to move out of the country before Fuhrer O fires up the gulags.

• The Corner is getting pounded again by traffic and so far they're thinking like I am: McCain is blowing it. These letters show the disgust of the people Mc will desperately need to show up for him. He's trying to out-liberal the most liberal member of the Senate. Rush was saying today that he doesn't understand why McCain is trying to get the mushy moderates and independents who would likely break left if left alone and here Mc is chasing them and letting O get away with murder.

• I'm tired and didn't get a nap before this thing started and I'm having a hard time focusing. Barack is spinning honeyed lies and John is babbling. Pffft.

• Brokaw didn't allow O to get a free follow-on like Gwen Ifill gave him. Boohoo. He used his next response to speak his piece, but ignored Brokaw's question to do it. Will anyone in the TM call him on it like they did to Moose-Slayer? Ooooh, McCain gets a jab in that he'll answer the question. Then he takes it back be reminding us he stabs his party in the back. Shows a little fire but doesn't go nuclear.

• Ugh. A young woman asks about ManBearPig which allows Mc to get his Gore on. Ugh again. Mentions nuke power as good and that O is against it. This is manure, but he sounds enthused for it and that may help with the voters. O really believes in ManBearPig, too, so Moose-Slayer is the ONLY one of these four who isn't certifiably infreakingsane!

• On health care, O is peddling the distortion about about Mc's tax credits for insurance vs. taxing benefits being one hand taking what the other has received. I've seen the numbers run on this and the math works out that you DO save money under the Mc plan, but it doesn't sound like it works unless you run the numbers. What have I said about well-told lies vs. badly-told truths? Exactly. Mc didn't make his own case which means O's lie wins the point.

• So far, Mc has not pinned the tail on the donkey that O is promising tax cuts for everyone, but also that he's gonna increase spending like crazy? Who's gonna pay for all this govt. largesse? Huh? After you take Bill Gates' piggy bank, how do you finance another trillion bucks in spending?!? YOU CAN'T DO IT!!!! WTF DOESN'T McCAIN ASK THIS?!?!?!?!?

• Malkin's disgusted by all this. "I feel like watching the Palin/Biden debate again. How about you?"

• Now to foreign policy, O is whining about war cutting into his socialism piggy bank. More recycled lies about the money spent, blah-blah-woof-woof. Hooooooo!!!! HUGE LIE when O says that he agrees that America is the greatest nation on Earth, but catches himself and reminds his base that he thinks America is bad. Bleah.

• Brokaw asks for what the "Obama Doctrine" would be? He's mentioning Darfur and Rwanda, but those tragedies are the fault of the UN, the corrupt outfit that O would outsource our foreign policy to. If McCain doesn't smash this out of the park, I'm voting for Barr. He doesn't. Gah.

• Michael Graham at The Corner:

I don't think pit bulls, with or without lipstick, can save this slow-moving chat show. When the most passion is over the clock and warning lights, you've got a real flopperoo on your hands.

I think the typical voter sees two politicians who seem reasonably competent. 90% of those voters think we're on the wrong track. So why not vote to kick Bush in the shins and elect the Democrat? What's the difference?

And, based on their performance tonight thus far, I'd have to agree.

That's where I think voters are at: Obama doesn't seem like a naive, radical, racist and terrorist-coddling, Marxist with a cult leader Messianic streak; Dubya sucks and McCain is old; why not give the new guy a shot. HOW MUCH WORSE COULD IT BE?

A: Jimmy Carter on steroids. And crack. And meth. Unfortunately, people younger than their mid-30s don't remember how terrible that gang was.

John Hood concurs:

Or you can put things very simply: every minute he failed to clearly and convincingly separate himself from President Bush, he was losing. During the past two weeks, the bottom has fallen out of the Republicans' ability to woo swing voters. It's about the economy, and the assumption that Bush is responsible for it. Having missed the best opportunity to staunch the bleeding — returning to Washington to lead the congressional opposition to the bailout plan, proposing a better alternative and demanding that an unpopular president embrace it — McCain must now seek every rhetorical opportunity to distance himself from Bush.

Sure, the campaign should also try to link Obama to unpopular congressional leaders and radical figures and ideas, but that's not the fundamental problem. Swing voters are mad and they want to vote against Bush. McCain will do.

For his part, all Obama had to do was avoid making a mistake — you know, by letting his mind wander away from the question onto matters such as who'll be the deputy Commerce secretary for widget promotion and such.

• Obama is a big honking crybaby and Brokaw had to let him have a bonus rant period to tell his garbage about "taking the ball of Afghanistan" and blah-blah-woof-woof. McCain had a decent response, but will his tepid tone connect? It's funny that the Treason Media has painted Mc has this angry, crazed, warmongering maniac because he's a total wuss when he could legitimately lay the smack down.

• Ten minutes from the end - I don't think we're going to be hearing any questions about Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright, Tony Rezko, etc. (Duh.)

• McCain has a clear advantage on foreign policy, but does it matter to most voters? They're freaking out over the Dem-caused financial meltdown and worried about how to pay the bills. Obama offers Pollyanna "Don't Worry. Be Happy." platitudes and the eyewash that if only we were nicer to the mean people, they'd like us and stop being mean to us. This Kumbayah BS is exactly what got us 9/11 in the first place. People have forgotten, haven't they? Such is the power of Treason Media brainwashing. [sigh]

• Yaaaaaaawwwwwwwnnnnn!!! This was a big snoozefest with neither guy making any mistakes or land any devastating blows. The spin will surely differ, but Obama lied, McCain let him get away with economic BS while trying to match up in pandering.

• HA!!! I was right cuz NBC's Chuck Todd immediately brought up the tanking markets and how this hurts Republicans. Gee, when the Treason Media goosesteps the party line that ignores that the Dems are to blame for this debacle, I guess it would play out that way. Andrea "Mrs. Greenspan" Mitchell invoked the "headwinds" for the McCain. Someone on the Corner predicted that McCain saying "that one" would be a talking point and Brian Williams delivered. Bah.

• Flipping over to PBS, a former Clinton speechwriter said that the public was the winner because there was a substantitive debate (?), didn't get into character assassination "like Sarah Palin has been doing" (?!?), and felt that the people would "vote in their interests". meaning for fascism under the O banner. Bleah. Michael Gerson calls out McCain for all the missed opportunities to point out O's terribly naive views. The Clinton guy (a black man) is subtly dealing the race card, too. What a surprise. Gerson doesn't see it that way, but he's a White Devil, so he's obviously in denial!!!

• Back to NBC, the Truth Squad was pretty noneventful, but they're working the meme about "that one" to get that racial grievance whipped up. Chuck Todd is on and he repeats it again and says that Obama's Brownshirts are already firing around the web. He also mentions how bad the Dow is declining and reminds us that McCain must suffer for the Dems sins. Andrea Mitchell is a-flutter over the Big O's closing statement for "change". Do you know what "CHANGE! HOPE!" translates to in the original German? "SEIG HEIL!!!"

• Four weeks until the Election and the only one speaking the Truth about Obama is Sarah Palin. McCain isn't getting his message out thru the Treason Media's filters and when he has the spotlight like this, he isn't stepping up to bring the noise. Obama is spending THREE TIMES as much and his ACORN cronies are rounding up homeless people to commit voter fraud in Ohio already and with conservatives already leery of McCain and only staying interested because of patriotism and Palin, the longer he shuffles along, the more likely this "humble servant's" last public act will be to deliver the United States into the hands of the fascists and communists that he once fought against and suffered under. He's got the albatross of Dubya and his worthless party around his neck, but he'll have to do a hella lot more and better to spare this nation a horrible fate.

• Bottom Line: It was a draw, but since everyone is predisposed to give the "skinny kid with a funny name" a chance, it means Obama is one step closer to becoming Fuhrer.

• I've got a busy day tomorrow and I'm not getting paid to waste time listening to the spin, so this will probably be it for the evening; I'm passing on Nightline and Charlie Rose. G'nite!

• In case you think I'm being harsh on McCain, here's what Andy McCarthy had to say:

You Guys Are Nuts

We have a disaster here — which is what you should expect when you delegate a non-conservative to make the conservative (nay, the American) case. We can parse it eight ways to Sunday, but I think the commentary is missing the big picture.

Here's what Obama needed to do tonight: Convince the country that he was an utterly safe, conventional, centrist politician who may have leftward leanings but will do the right thing when the crunch comes.

Now, as the night went along, did you get the impression that Obama comes from the radical Left? Did you sense that he funded Leftist causes to the tune of tens of millions of dollars? Would you have guessed that he's pals with a guy who brags about bombing the Pentagon? Would you have guessed that he helped underwrite raging anti-Semites? Would you come away thinking, "Gee, he's proposing to transfer nearly a trillion dollars of wealth to third-world dictators through the UN"?

Nope. McCain didn't want to go there. So Obama comes off as just your average Center-Left politician. Gonna raise your taxes a little, gonna negotiate reasonably with America's enemies; gonna rely on our very talented federal courts to fight terrorists and solve most of America's problems; gonna legalize millions of hard-working illegal immigrants.

McCain? He comes off as Center-Right .. or maybe Center-Left ... but, either way, deeply respectful of Obama despite their policy quibbles.

Great. Memo to McCain Campaign: Someone is either a terrorist sympathizer or he isn't; someone is either disqualified as a terrorist sympathizer or he's qualified for public office. You helped portray Obama as a clealy qualified presidential candidate who would fight terrorists.

If that's what the public thinks, good luck trying to win this thing.

With due respect, I think tonight was a disaster for our side. I'm dumbfounded that no one else seems to think so. Obama did everything he needed to do, McCain did nothing he needed to do. What am I missing?

Nothing, Andy. Nothing at all. Last week, conservative chatterboxes were demanding that Palin drop off the ticket to save McCain. After she whacked Biden, that noise ended. When are we going to hear calls for McCain to GTFO?

• Ended up watching Nightline and Snuffleuphagous declared Obama the winner - not unreasonable - and pointed out that Obama's calm demeanor is helping him convince voters that he'll be the stable one in a crisis.

Wasn't it only a few weeks ago when the choice of Moose-Slayer had him filling his diapers and his Brownshirts whipped into hysterical jihad against her? Then what happpened? Team McCain put her under wraps, sent her out in a straightjacket to be ambushed by Chuck and Katie, and turned her into a convenient meme for the Left. After she broke free and laid the smack down on Biden, she re-energized the race, but now that it fell to McCain to make his case, he's blown it.

It's kinda sad that the former Clinton hack (Dondi) is actually one of the straighter-shooters on this show. Matthew Dowd foisted the lie that Palin lost in top of all of McCain's failures. What else could we expect? They're bringing up Palin's sounding the alarm on Bill Ayers and Dowd spins it as desperate fear-mongering and "40 year old news when people are worried about the economy". Donna Brazile (another Dem apparatchik - where are the token non-libs?) denounced all these tactics and declared the public will punish them for daring besmirch the Obamessiah. To hear them tell it, it's going to be a landslide for fascism. [sigh]

•

CFE: Hysterical SNL Haters Need To STFU!!!

THE BACKGROUND: A very funny sketch ran on SNL last weekend blistering the Dems for their culpability in the financial mess we're in and had a parade of unsympathetic characters who were supposed victims. It was very sharp and funny. The sketch disappeared from Hulu and Michelle Malkin has been all over why it was yanked, most likely that it offended the rich liberals lampooned in it.

NBC finally came out with a reason for it being yanked and promises to post it after a change is made to a graphic which labeled a real couple as "People who should be shot." In her commentary about it, Malkin added this:

Commenter madmonk: “Standard[s]? What standards? They ‘joked’ about incest in the Palin family. So again… what standards?”

This set me off HARD and I blasted up this rant which is long overdue to be heard by these dolts!

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, PEOPLE!!!! DO YOU KNOW WHY CONSERVATIVES ARE CONSIDERED A JOKE?!?!? BECAUSE THEY FLY OFF THE HANDLE AND CRY OVER NOTHING!!!!

Whether it was having a cow over the “lipstick on a pig” nonsense or acting as if SNL was implying incest in the Palin family, when conservatives get their knickers in a twist WRONGLY, it makes their LEGITIMATE complaints fall on deaf ears. You can only falsely cry “BIAS!” a few times before you are ignored.

Let me explain it to you ninnies: The NY Times sketch was - now pay attention - MAKING FUN OF THE STUPID NY TIMES REPORTERS!!!! Not, I repeat NOT!!!! implying there was incest!!!! To the cloistered elites of the Treason Media, anything outside the island of Manhattan is Indian Territory and/or where sea dragons swim. The reporter whose nickname was “Queens” because he’d fallen asleep on the subway and went to Queens was one gag; the other who only asked about polar bears was another. ALL the reporters were being lampooned for their ignorance of the real world, like being unable to identify a shotgun.

Instead of appreciating the irony of a presumed-liberal TV skit show like SNL righteously thumping the Left for its biases - dating back to the Clinton-Obama debate where the CNN reporters were fawning over Barry - what are too many conservatives doing? Catching the vapors and shrilly fluttering about like LIBERALS and shrieking for their version of political correctness. GET A FREAKING GRIP!!!

I’m hypersensitive to liberal biases that are ruining entertainment (e.g. The awful Body Snatchers update, “The Invasion”, in which the deadly alien organism came from the space shuttle Patriot. Get it? Death comes from patriots. Har har. Ahem.), but there is absolutely no there there with these complaints about SNL. SNL has done a better job calling out the Dems culpability about Fannie/Freddie and media biases and hysterical twits are shrieking about incest, totally missing the point and living up to the liberal stereotypes of clueless moral scolds. KNOCK IT OFF!!!

As for the “People who should be shot” Chyron - that was a little harsh. If they leave the essence of the sketch unchanged (and we’ve got the original to compare it to) and change it to something like “High-rent scam artists”, there’s no harm done. Move the heck on, mmmkay?

I believe we need more morality in our lives, but there's a huge difference between wanting that and being a priggish scold who torches one's credibility because they're too outraged to see what's actually happening. Idiots!

Cross "Heroes" Off the Schedule.

Just a few days ago, I was grousing about all the TV shows I've been watching, but tonight I'm crossing Heroes off my too-watch list. As I explained in a couple of places (no links):

That's it, I'm done. I've crossed the FTS threshold and I'm reclaiming this hour of my week. I almost bailed 20 minutes in when they had the one-two thud of Brundlehinder and Tony Randall Sylar, but decided to gut it out. However, I noticed I was surfing the web while the show was on and even a big nuclear explosion didn't grab me.

The plotting is more random than intriguing; the performances are getting worse, if that's possible, with Clair Bear about as threatening that name would indicate and Stallone Jr's screwface "acting" is laughable; I don't give a sh*t about Hiro and Porkman or the other 15,000 characters. Unlike Lost, which had to dig out of a sophomore slump that ran into its 3rd season, I don't see Heroes pulling out of its death spiral.

The first season was really good; the second a near-total disaster; and now they've blown it for good. Creator Tim Kring thought he'd be able to fix his creation, but in the end, he just broke it in different ways and now all the King's horses can't...you know.

The Christian Slater show that fuses "The Long Kiss Goodnight" with "True Lies", "My Own Worst Enemy", starts next Monday in the 10 pm slot after Heroes, so I may catch next week's episode, but I'm more likely to do something else. My overall time spent watching may not be going down, but hopefully the quality average will go up.

"Take On Me": The Literal Video Version

Cute.

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

Debunking Obama's Keating Five Smear.

For a guy who supposedly has his coronation locked up, Obama is sure acting frightened. Now that Team McCain seems to be finally mentioning The One's ties to felons, racists and terrorists, he is launching a campaign ad blitz to try and hang the albatross of the Keating Five around McCain's neck.

Since the Treason Media will merely repeat the smears instead of explaining just why McCain was lumped in with the genuinely corrupt Dems on the take, we'll just have to spread the Truth ourselves. In this case, McCain's best defender is an unlikely source: Dem lawyer Bob Bennett (brother of Bill) who defended Bill Clinton during his impeachment trial. From his book, "In The Ring, The Trials Of A Washington Lawyer," comes this quote:

After reviewing my report, the committee voted on October 23, 1990, to hold a public adjudicatory fact-finding hearing in the matter as to all five senators. This was perhaps the first time the recommendation of a special counsel not to charge a senator was rejected. This was pure politics as the Democrats on the committee did not want to cut McCain loose so that only Democrats would remain in the proceedings. If Senator McCain was not going to be cut loose, in retaliation the Republicans were going to keep Senator Glenn in the proceedings. McCain was the victim of politics, and poor Glenn was held captive to the decision on McCain. So much for nonpartisanship.

Got that? McCain didn't do anything wrong but got (and is getting) smeared because the Dems needed a patsy to mitigate their actual criminality.

What I don't understand is that after getting raked over the coals by the Dems, McCain has spent the rest of his career tonguing their sacks and snarling at conservatives. Stockholm Syndrome, perhaps?

MORE! I'd just posted the above when I saw this showing that Obama has no problem with Keating Five members...when it helps Him!

John Glenn? Senator John Glenn got caught in the same Keating 5 scandal that Obama now wants to use as an attack on McCain. The Keating 5 — Senators Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, Donald Riegle, Glenn, and McCain — stood accused of intervening with federal regulators on behalf of Lincoln Savings & Loan, which later went bankrupt and cost taxpayers $2 billion. Glenn and McCain got cleared by the Senate of any wrongdoing, but were scolded for “poor judgment” in their contacts with Charles Keating. Cranston, DeConcini, and Riegle all were found by the Senate Ethics Committee of having “substantially and improperly” interfered with the regulator (FHLBB) when it attempted to investigate Lincoln. Cranston received a formal reprimand, and only Glenn and McCain won re-election after the scandal.

Is the Keating 5 scandal a legitimate political issue in this campaign? Yes. It involves McCain’s judgment and political record, and Obama can certainly raise it as a point for voters to consider. However, McCain has never denied using poor judgment in this case and has repeatedly apologized for it.

Obama, on the other hand, has never fought anyone for reform, and the use of John Glenn as a surrogate makes Team Obama especially hypocritical in raising the Keating scandal. If Glenn is clean, then so is McCain. If McCain is tarnished, then so is Glenn. Obviously, Glenn helps Obama in Ohio, so Obama has no real complaint over the Keating 5 scandal that outweighs his desire to win the election. Like so much of Obama’s reform rhetoric, his faux outrage over the Keating 5 scandal shows him as nothing more than a poseur.

Will the media point out......ah, who am I kidding?

New Sig Line Time!

Changing these like crazy lately.

Treason Media Math: 13 Is Overwhelmingly Bigger than 11.

Take a look at these two screen shots:





The top one shows 13 people in a CNN focus group who thought the lying Botoxed Joe Biden won the veep debate last week. The bottom shows that 11 thought Moose-Slayer won. 13-11 is just one vote away from being a 50-50 split, right? Now, watch this:



Yep, that's right - to Soledad O'Brien it looks like a slam dunk. (For Biden, natch.) As Creative Minority Report puts it:

I'd say about half the hands go up. O'Brien then inexplicably says, "So, looks overwhelming." Then she asks who thought Palin won. Again, about half the hands go up and she describes it as "small hands." Then she quickly declares Biden the winner and calls it a day.

Hey, how about a roll call, Soledad? Now to my eye, it looks pretty evenly split. I counted 12 for Biden and 11 for Palin. But take a look for yourself. Call me naive, but this kind of blatant bias still has the power to surprise me a little still. And for some reason when it comes to Sarah Palin, the media has just lost any connection with reality, decency, fairness...etc...

Now, does she forget that we can see her? Or does she think we can't count? Does she not know about TiVo? Or perhaps she can't imagine a universe that would allow the thought of Sarah Palin whooping up on her candidate?

This is how the Treason Media is going to spin it until their Anointed Fuhrer is placed on the throne - tell us, "Who are you going to believe: us or your lying eyes?

Starbuck's Wastes Water (and I Don't Mean Just Making Overpriced Coffee!)

Why isn't Al Gore making a fuss about this?

The giant coffee chain has a policy of keeping a tap running non-stop at all its 10,000 outlets worldwide, wasting 23.4 MILLION litres a day.

That would provide enough daily water for the entire two million-strong population of drought-hit Namibia in Africa or fill an Olympic pool every 83 minutes.

Every Starbucks branch has a cold tap behind the counter providing water for a sink called a “dipper well”, used for washing spoons and utensils.

Maybe if they weren't running up the water bill so high they could charge less than $5 for a coffee.

CFE: Hugh Hewitt's Clueless Optimism

THE BACKGROUND: Hugh Hewitt has a piece about Obama's connections to various shady characters which closed:

Is the country really going to roll the dice on Ayers' friend and neighbor and Rezko's partner, so that he can team with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to redesign the American economy in the middle of a global financial crisis and a war?

To which I replied:

YES, THEY WILL!!!

Yes, they probably will. With the cheerful assistance of the Goebbels-channeling Treason Media who will cover-up all of Obama's sins and smear anyone who dares mention them as "RACIST!!!", the American public will blindly decide that "it can't get any worse than the current bozo" and punch the ticket for the Big O.

Dubya and the Stupid Party will (and should) go down in history as the feckless dolts who ended the American Experiment and handed the world over to fascism - Islamic and liberal flavors. Between the unprincipled expansion of government to his inability to clearly articulate what the heck was going on in the world, the war, and the economy, Dubya has allowed the Treason Media to set the narrative and like a stupid turn-cheek punk, allowed the lies to become the truth to most people.

The Stupid Party has been a failure and their only redeeming selling point is that they're less socialist and willing to sell out to the world than the downright treasonous Democrats. Unfortunately, that makes for a poor campaign ad: "Vote for us because we're not as Stalinish as them!" Gah!!! Toss in McCain's lack of stones to be the slightest bit unpleasant to his liberal pals in the Senate - even as they stab him in the face - it's a recipe for defeat politically and death nationally.

Laura Ingraham has been boiling with anger this morning, raging at McCain's simpering comity and desire to lose like a gentleman. Moose-Slayer is out there bringing up Obama's treacherous BFFs, but I think it's only a matter of time before McCain condemns his running mate for being too harsh to the Senator from Illinois for whom he has the utmost respect. Pfffft.

WAKE UP, JOHN!!! The Treason Media is Goebbels to Obama's Fuehrer!!!

On a sunny Sunday afternoon, I see that Tom Brokaw has white-washed Obama's terrorist mentor, Bill Ayers, into a mere "school reformer"; Gwen Ifill was "powerless to call Palin on her lies" while everyone else fellates the genuinely lying and/or insane Joe Biden despite his nearly two dozen whoppers; the AP is labeling Moose-Slayer's mentioning of Obama's close ties to Ayers is racist; it's been a busy morning for the Treason Media in their effort to foist Obama and the dreams of this fascism on America.

Tuesday night is the next McCain-Obama debate and poor John is going in with both hands tied behind his back and no signs of wanting the Truth to will out. Thoroughly cowed by his former constituents in the TM, Malkin reveals:

McCain continues to forbid his campaign from going after Obama for his longtime friendship and ideological partnership with Rev. Jeremiah Wright — and refuses to attack Obama on the Fannie/Freddie/CRA debacles because he fears being perceived as a racist.

Earth to McCain: They will see RAAAACISM in whatever you and Palin will say and do from now until Election Day.

Fight or get rolled.

Wake. Up.

I've been wondering why the Stupid Party and its standard bearers have continuously bumbled about allowing the TM's Big Lie tactics to cow and muzzle them. This commentary at American Thinker may hold the answer as to why: The think the Treason Media is wrongly sympathetic to the fascist Left and can be shown the errors of their biases when the TM is actually a goose-stepping, INSEPERABLE part of the Left's political machine.

I have just about had it with the conservative punditry and their plaintive wailings about the unfairness of the self-proclaimed "mainstream media" (I think the designation "Big Media" would be more appropriate as applied to the information service of the leftist elites, which is anything but mainstream).

"Where is the outrage?" "Why does the mainstream media concentrate exclusively on the failings of the right while completely ignoring the failings of the left?" "Why does the mainstream media worship at the temple of Barack Obama while brutally savaging Sarah Palin?" pitifully lament conservatives.

Will they ever learn? What makes them think that the Big Media would or, for that matter, should behave otherwise? Would any of the conservative journalists perplexed by the "unfair" attitude of the Big Media wax indignant about the German Propaganda Ministry of the 1930's spreading outrageous lies about the opponents of the Nazi regime and extolling the virtues of their beloved Fuehrer. Of course, not. They know that Dr. Goebbels' outfit was part and parcel of Hitler's government and its mission consisted in meeting the propaganda needs of the regime. Naturally, it couldn't behave in any other way; that's what it did.

Why then are they so dumbfounded by the position of the US Big Media? Don't they realize that it is every bit as partisan as the Nazi Propaganda Ministry was in its heyday? Dr. Johnson described a second marriage as the triumph of hope over experience. So too conservatives, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, desperately cling to a belief that deep in the bosom of the Big Media there lives an honest broker yearning to break free...just one more fact laid out, just one more liberal smear blown out of the water and the scales will fall off the liberal journalists' eyes. They will see the light and embark upon the path of righteousness and objectivity. This hope is as baseless as it is stupid.

Wishful thinking and willful blindness disarm, disorient and debilitate the fighter who needs to marshal all his resources for the coming battle. If he is to climb into the ring in peak form, clear-eyed appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the opponent is paramount. Instead, he lulls himself to sleep with false hope.

Conservatives have to realize one simple truth: the Big Media is not the enemy's ally who can be won over; it is the enemy itself. The U.S. Big Media is every bit the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party's left wing as Dr. Goebbels' organization was the propaganda arm of the Nazi regime.

The Big Media's vitriolic campaign to vilify and destroy Sarah Palin, unprecedented in its sheer viciousness, is not primarily driven by the elite's perception of her as an alien life form (although there is that, too), but by the plain fact that she endangers the prospects of their idol, Obama, and hence has to be removed by any means necessary.

The sooner the conservatives abandon their delusional belief in the innate goodness of the liberal heart and realize that the Big Media is their bitter enemy that has to be fought tooth and nail, the better their chances will be. Enough is enough. It's time for the conservatives to wake up and smell the coffee.

Conservatives have been awake all along; it's John McCain who's asleep because he isn't a conservative and has spent too much time giving reach-arounds to his "good friends" in the Senate while they stab him in the face.

Moose-Slayer is itching for the fight, but first has to get the feckless Team McCain idiots off her back. We're seeing this with McCain's noisy, stupid and clueless announcement of his surrendering Michigan to Obama's orc legions. Why announce you're giving up so loudly when it overshadowed Moose-Slayer's overwhelming smackdown of Dr. Teeth since it allowed the TM to change the subject from her win to McCain's loss. Morons.

Sarah Palin Sex Tape!!

Why does this look and sound like "Fargo" as directed by David Lynch or Fellini?

Why Is McCain Letting the Dems Slide on Their Freddiemae Culpability?

The day after Moose-Slayer hauled his worthless ass back into the race comes some explanations as to why McCain hasn't been placing the blame for this mess squarely where it belongs: On the corrupt Dems who protected their greedy paymasters. It seems he doesn't want to be mean to his fellow liberals or some such rot.

SNIP #1: The McCain campaign is underestimating how absolutely furious conservatives are that free markets, and by extension Reaganomics and the last 25 years of American economic policy, are getting the blame for the housing and credit crisis. A real morale killer, they tell me. Over and over. Every day.
============
SNIP #2 I understand that he didn't want to get overly partisan while a delicate measure he thought was necessary was just barely making it through both houses of Congress. But there's no excuse for letting a false narrative lie, and letting Obama and Biden continue to lie about the roots of this crisis.

If not for Palin, McCain would be 15 points down in the polls and totalitarian fascism under the Obama Reich a done deal. Now that she has saved his bacon a second time, what does he do? He reverts to form and kicks conservatives in the teeth and puts the lie to all his "I'm a maverick! I'm a Reagan conservative." blah-woof.

Before the debate, some pious conservative dipwads were demanding that Palin drop off the ticket. Hey, here's an idea: HOW ABOUT JOHN McCAIN GET OFF THE TICKET SO THAT AMERICAN VOTERS WILL HAVE A CLEAR CHOICE BETWEEN A CONSERVATIVE AND THE FASCIST?!?!?

Idiot!

The 19 Most Ridiculous Moments From the VP Debate

Several writers from Cracked.com chatted up the Moose-Slayer vs. Dr. Liar Teeth debate and selected passages are here:

# 8:52 PM Dan O’Brien -What’s the difference between a pitbull and a hockey mom?
# 8:53 PM Dan O’Brien -I don’t want to have sex with a pitbull in the parking lot behind a Dennys.
=============
# 9:23 PM Ross Wolinsky -Who’s Moose? Is that one of her kids?
# 9:23 PM Dan O’Brien -No, her kids are Bagel, Trat and Sauron.
# 9:23 PM Michael Swaim -I thought it was Odin, Brussels and Camembert.
# 9:24 PM Dan O’Brien -Pooter, Stank and Obermeyer.

Some good clean raunchy rude fun at the link.

Star Trek as The A-Team!

Mashup madness continues!

The Biden Error/Lie/Hallucination List

There are so many places parsing the whoppers that Biden spewed forth - at least 22(!) in his part of a 90-minute debate - that I don't have time to collate them into a post while doing my work, but Jim Geraghty had the time and I implore you to take a peek at all the flat out lies and/or hallucinations Biden spoke. Keep them in mind when you watch the Treason Media apply their Goebbels-fu and portray Biden as the victor because of his "grasp of the facts". Oh, Biden had a grasp on something alright; it just wasn't facts.

UPDATE: Another front of Biden's lies has been noted regarding health care:

The rule of thumb for fact checkers of Thursday night’s vice-presidential debate was that every time Joe Biden sounded especially confident, he was saying something that wasn’t true.

For the most part, these were gross exaggerations or convenient fictions aimed to allow him to make a point he couldn’t otherwise support. How to answer the charge that he and Obama voted for a budget resolution that called for taxing Americans making $42,000? Assert that John McCain voted for it too, although he didn’t. How to argue that we’re paying no attention to Afghanistan? Claim repeatedly that we spend more in Iraq in three weeks than we have spent in Afghanistan in seven years, although that’s very far from true. How to explain his vote for the Iraq war in light of his subsequent views? Say it wasn’t a war resolution, though it was. And on and on Joe went.

One set of distortions in particular, however, seemed like more than extemporaneous exaggeration. Biden offered several criticisms of John McCain’s health-care plan which tracked precisely with the line of attack the Obama campaign has taken up against the plan in recent days, and which are flatly untrue and deceptive.

Will McCain be prepared to fight back with some TRUTH (f*ck the "Straight Talk" blah-woof, John) or will he just yank his Chatty Cathy string and burp up "I'll cut earmarks! I'll cut earmarks! Earmarks...marks...marks...marks...bzzzzzzzzzzzzt...."? Pfft.

Friday Fiver Triple-Play!

Wow. I can't even remember the last time I did one of these. Let's bust a few:

1. Last party you went to?

My drummer's birthday gig. It was already over and everyone was gone when I finally got there.

2. Do you pee in the shower?

No. (I'm not Madonna, yo!)

3. Have you ever fired a gun?

Yes.

4. Where do you call home?

Um...home.

5. What's your favorite board game?

I guess Monopoly.

=============

1. What's your weather?

Huh?

2. Where are you on your way to?

Bed.

3. Are you good with directions?

Yes.

4. Do you know your neighbors?

Not very well.

5. What do you smell?

Too much coke and too much smoke.

==============

1. Last laugh?

The crack Palin made about no one getting Biden's lame joke.

2. What do you love?

The bad love of a good woman. Wait, what? Do I have that backwards?

3. Gold or silver?

Silver.

4. Who do you hold hands with?

The nice police occifer.

5. Friday fill-in: There's no time to ____.

Kid around with the madness of electing Barack Obama. (Chthulu/Satan 2008: Quit settling for the lesser of evils!)

CFE: Calling Out Politco's Lunacy.

THE BACKGROUND: As I noted in the debate coverage, Politco's John Harris was leading the charge of Palin bashing immediately after her evisceration of woeful Joe Biden. He has since vomited those shibboleths onto his laptop - that means a portable computer in this case - and this waste of bandwidth is the work product. Note the sneering tone he uses to slap the woman while he then lovingly gorfs the shaft of Biden:

By that standard, she got out alive, though there were white-knuckle moments along the way: questions that were answered with painfully obvious talking points that betrayed scant knowledge of the issue at hand, and sometimes little relevance to the question that had been asked.

To the contrary, it is hard to count any objective measures by which Biden did not clearly win the encounter. She looked like she trying to get people to take her seriously. He looked like he was running for vice president. His answers were more responsive to the questions, far more detailed and less rhetorical.

On at least ten occasions, Palin gave answers that were nonspecific, completely generic, pivoted away from the question at hand, or simply ignored it: on global warming, an Iraq exit strategy, Iran and Pakistan, Iranian diplomacy, Israel-Palestine (and a follow-up), the nuclear trigger, interventionism, Cheney's vice presidency and her own greatest weakness.

If this joker hasn't seen a politician answer whatever way they want, despite what the question was, he's obviously just fallen off the turnip truck. Or is a liar. Now to his fellation of Biden:

Biden relentlessly and clearly delivered a specific message he had been assigned to hammer home: McCain-Palin would be four more years of Bush-Cheney. Biden mentioned President Bush more than a dozen times.

"Look, past is prologue, Gwen," he said at one point. "The issue is, how different is John McCain's policy going to be than George Bush's? I haven't heard anything yet."

"And his hot man-spunk fills my mouth with sunshine and rainbows!", Harris enthused. (I'm guessing.)

Now check how he hates on the person without a penis:

By contrast, Palin was in much more of a survival mode, barely delivering on her advisers' hopes that she would be aggressive with Biden, throwing gaffes and policies back at him. For the Alaska governor, it was policy as a second language — adequate, but not enlightening.

She twice referred to the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, as "McClellan." Biden did not correct her.

I'm surprised that Harris didn't scold that fecund breeder for mispronouncing "nuclear", too.

That prompted this comment from moi (#262 on pg. 9):

The Obama Compulsive Disorder that has consumed much of the Treason Media continues to ravage the formerly-objective Politico, causing them to rave like lunatics in an Orwellian frenzy of declaring up down, left right, and Biden victorious when he was clearly shot, gutted, skinned and his Botoxed head mounted to hang on Sarah Palin's rec room wall.

As Biden yelled and acted as if he was about to turn green and burst out of his clothes, Palin smiled sweetly and slipped the blade between his ribs unchecked, making him even more angry. The now un-credible Gwen Ifill had to keep throwing Biden lifelines in the form of allowing him the last word and moving on before Palin could rebut his constant lies.

Jonah Goldberg posted on The Corner:

What struck me the most about the debate - and it probably helped having quintessential Obamaphiles in the room - was how Biden's "gravitas" is derived almost entirely from the fact that he can lie with absolute passion and conviction. He just plain made stuff up tonight. I read a long list tonight in my debate with Beinart here at Wash U, we can visit the details tomorrow.

Just a few: Flatly asserting that Obama never said he'd meet with Achmenijad; that absolute nonsense about spending more in a month in Iraq than we've spent in Afghanistan ("let me say it again," he said as if he was hammering home a real fact); the bit about McCain voting with Obama on raising taxes; his vote in favor of the war etc.

It's amazing how the impulse to see Biden as the more qualified and serious guy stems almost entirely from his ability to be a convincing b.s. artist. I'm not saying Palin was always honest or unrehearsed, but when she offers up a catchphrase or a talking point, you can tell. When Biden spews up a warm fog of deceitful gassbaggery the response seems to be "what a great grasp of the issues he has!"

His ability, nay his eagerness, to fake not only the "facts" but his sincerity is so shameless many pundits seem either mesmerized by it or scared to call him on it. I'd call his fakery passive aggressive except it's actually just aggressive aggressive. Beyond being a tool of trial lawyers, I never saw much similarity between Biden and John Edwards, but tonight I was really struck by how alike the two are. Edwards fakes being an everyman, and Biden does too. But his real fraud is intellectual seriousness. He talks like an intellectually mature person, but that's all it is - talk.

I saw John Harris in the vanguard of his water-carrying for Biden (and by extension, his Sith Lord Master Obama) on PBS and wondered if he fancied himself the next Joe Klein; destined to have a column in TIME where he can make up whatever lovely fantasies he wants to about non-liberals.

Politico obviously wishes to position itself as a loyal organ for Fuhrer Obama to issue his edicts to his subjects via. When you have no higher ambition than to be a stenographer to the ruling class, you really shouldn't masquerade as a "journalist".

Well and truly said. Here's another: F*ck Politico!

Gwen Ifill Should Be Glad She Doesn't Work In Detroit!

Because unlike PBS, being an obvious advocate for a candidate will get you FIRED!

Longtime Metro Detroit radio reporter Karen Dinkins has been fired after wearing a pro-Barack Obama T-shirt while covering a rally for the presidential candidate Sunday at the Detroit Public Library.

Dinkins, who has worked at WWJ (950 AM) for 13 years, acknowledged that the radio station fired her Monday, but she did not elaborate.

"I don't want to comment at this time," she said.

Georgeann Herbert, WWJ's director of programming, said in a statement that Dinkins compromised the station's objectivity by wearing the T-shirt.

"(The station) believes that our credibility with our listeners rests on the independence of our newsroom staff," the statement said. "WWJ does not favor any candidate, party or issue.

"While we encourage employees to exercise their rights as citizens, we expect them to be on guard against any actual or perceived conflict of interest when covering news stories," the statement said.

Good for them! I listen to the top-of-hour CBS news and get my traffic/weather reports "on the 8s" from WWJ and have heard plenty of Dinkins' reports. While it's too bad she didn't have the sense to realize that while the audience can't see your shirt on the radio, the people watching you work can and that's a no-no for news outfits that still care about trying to be objective.

Palin vs. Biden - Round Only......FIGHT!!!

Well, for some reason, the prospects for the election are riding on this debate. How screwed up is that? Live-blogging and updating as needed...

• Gwen Ifill makes no mention of her giant conflict of interest. Nothing to see here. Move along.

• Crap. Had to reboot. Scrambling to catch up. Moose-Slayer is wearing a slick black outfit with heels. Biden isn't. She asked if she could call him Joe. Real small town polite.

• Right off the bat, Biden is throwing out incomprehensible streams of dates and numbers that don't make a point. Palin is really folksy and hitting the points. They're both talking a little fast with nervous energy. Palin has been talking to the camera like Obama did. Biden's been talking to Ifill, but has switched to the camera.

• 20 minutes in, she hasn't slipped up yet and has been popping off her spiel AND getting this folksy charm - it's VERY Reaganesque. Biden is coming off blustery and a little angry in his replies as he hurls out numbers. People can't follow numbers they hear - they need to see them - so he may be coming off yappy. OTOH, Palin is starting to sound a little canned. Then again, this isn't Lincoln-Douglas throwdown of Titans; these are smaller times we live in.

• Palin just regurgitated the "$700 billion to countries who don't like this" talking point about oil. Missed an opportunity to tie that number with the pork-slathered bailout bill. Ugh, her response to climate change got a little like "talking point refrigerator magnet" bingo. Biden has clearly indicated he worships at Al Gore's Church of the Almighty ManBearPig and blames climate change on mankind. This should earn him a ticket to a padded room, not the Veep House.

• Here goes the dynamite: Ifill asks about gay rights. Biden throws down 110% for gay everything. At least he's being honest, though he backs off from calling it "marriage". Palin is a little rough because she knows she's gonna get lit up unless she announces she's she's gay and all her children are Bristol's, including Bristol! XD They end up both saying they don't support gay marriage. Wanna bet that tomorrow's spin will be that she wants to kill gays? (j/k - you know it's gonna be that way.)

• Yikes, The Corner is down and Red State keeps dropping and their chat room is full.

• Iraq War: Biden thumps his lectern and promises to surrender in 16 months. Palin calls him out and calls it a "white flag of surrender". She's throwing his prior support for the troops and bashing of Obama before he became the veep pick back in his face and sticking the shiv in with a smile.

• I've noticed two times where Biden got off a slam that should've had a brief response from Palin, but Ifill quickly changed the subject to prevent anything getting in the way of her big book payday. What media bias?

• Palin pronounces it "NEW-cue-ler", so that's all it's gonna take for the Left to disqualify. Her folksy twang drives the coastal elites crazy. Too bad for them there are more unwashed heathens in the Flyover who talk like her then them.

• Biden is getting angry and yelling. I wonder if anyone is gonna call out his temper or whether only McCain is on temper watch? (j/k We know there's a double standard.) Ifill just allowed him another free shot. The way the questions and responses and rebuttals are stacked, Biden's getting the last word and thus the last impression. Oh jeez, while I was writing this, she gave Biden another one! She called him out for their backward-looking finger-pointing with a smile, but then wandering into canned slogans.

• Biden is getting madder. He's yelling more then McCain ever did. I wonder how this is playing with those dial groups. Whoops. Biden just talked himself into three corners and now is sighing like Al Gore. Uh-oh. Doesn't he remember what sighing did to the Goreacle. Now he's backing off on his yelled portion after she slapped him down.

• We're an hour in and Moose-Slayer is beating his ass and has only had a couple of talk-speaky moments. He's starting to come unglued and losing the ability to put together coherent answers. The gaffe machine Biden is starting to come to the fore. She's inside his head.

• Asked what they'd do if they became President, Biden says he'd follow Obama's plan to "reinstitute the middle class"? Que? How would you do that exactly? Wave your Emperor Wizard wand? Jeez. Palin says that she's gonna keep working on McCain about ANWR. "He didn't ask me to check my opinions at the door." KAPOW!!!

• 10:10 already? Wow! This is just sailing by like a rocket.

• Biden is playing the "I'm middle class card". Yeah, right! Palin threw down Reagan's "there you go again" and it sounded awesome! Unless she self-destructs in the next 20 minutes, no one is going to remember the bad interviews.

• OMG!!! She just SICK BURNED Biden by saying, "I guess that was a lame attempt at a joke because no one got it." After crapping himself, he came back with a smile, but man, he did not see that punch coming. The audience laughed. Wow.

• The knock on Palin coming in was that she was only good with a scripted bit and that the interviews showed she couldn't think on her feet. She must be a faster study than anyone could've believed because she's assembling on target replies on the fly. Biden's not doing badly from a mechanical viewpoint - he's not bumbling around - but he's lacking in charm in general and he's being KILLED by Palin's Dolly Parton vibe. (Her charm, not her rack!)

• BTW, I'm watching this on NBC because I heard that they (among others) have put up split-screens with both candidates up. PBS, which I've watched all prior political stuff on, doesn't.

• WTF?!? I think Biden just got to have an extra reply to spiel off a spittle-flecked rant about McCain. I need to see if that's what happened for sure, but if so, that's a pretty big favor Ifill granted her side. The Red State chat room has some comments about the time disparity.

• Closing comments - Palin takes a shot at the Treason Media by saying she appreciates speaking to the people without the filter of the media. ZING!!! A lot of little digs in the language she used, but it was a positive sunny outlook. Biden's closer was more of the dark, "Grapes of Wrath", misery where stray dogs are eating our elderly that is the stock and trade of the Democrats.

• The Winner? MOOSE-SLAYER!!!! Not even close, but Chuck Todd, the NBC News Political Director, has declared it meaningless. Yesterday, he said that the election was, for all intents and purposes, over because the Obamessiah had it in the bag, so we know how objective he is. Brokaw is positive toward Palin, but naturally tempered any praise.

• Flipping over to PBS, Mark Shields was bitching about how Dubya's tax cuts cause job losses - sane people say, "HUH?!?!?" - which means Palin killed and he's not happy. Wah. Presidential historian Richard Norton Smith said that the conservative pointy-heads who have be calling for Palin to GTFO - read: Kathleen Parker - will probably STFU. A woman (I'm missing the Chyrons) is annoyed by her folksiness - what did I say above? - so that's another sign the Left is back to crapping their pants.

A NY Times reporter (Kate Zernike) who's covering Palin said that the McCain people are pleased, but tempered it with the damn-with-faint-praise "She won by not losing" crack. John Harris from Politico declared Biden the winner, but that site has veered hard left in the past few weeks. He brings up the Couric interview as examples have how she sucked and ludicrously claimed that "she was hanging on for dear life" on her answers. I'm gonna have to take Politico off my RSS reader because they're no longer the balanced outfit they used to be. Too bad. Palin Derangement Syndrome and Obama Compulsive Disorder are ugly diseases.

Beschloss trots out the hoary trope about Lloyd Bentsen slapping down Dan Quayle with the "You're no Jack Kennedy" line but conveniently omits that Quayle got to be Veep and Bentsen didn't. The way they tell the story over and over, you'd think that Quayle turned into a pillar of salt after that crack.

• Flipped back to NBC and caught the end of a Truth Squad segment that was calling out Biden on misrepresenting a McCain position. Wish I could've seen more of this than the PBS blather of bitter partisans being sad. Brokaw just said that Biden's crew are glad that there was only one debate. Sounds like he saw the reality of Sarah Palin's killing, gutting and mounting of Biden's head on her rec room wall.

• Up next: John and Barry dance next Tuesday with Brokaw moderating. No word as to whether he has a book coming out.

• Nightline's panel of liberals all called it for Biden (No? Yes!) and pissed all over Palin. Matthew Dowd said that poor McCain has had two losses in a row (he said Obama won the last debate - I'm so suprised) and has little hope and should just go off on the ice floe to die. (Paraphrasing.) The divorce from reality of these guys is astonishing. My girlfriend called me up and I was surprised to hear she'd watched the debate and she thought Palin buried Biden and she's not anywhere near as politically, um, "engaged" as I am.

The Treason Media has ascended to propagandistic levels that would make Goebbels blush. The trope, "Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?", is writ large in Times Square-sized letters for all to see. If these guys were sports reporters, they'd be declaring the pro-in-name-only Detroit Lions undefeated and ready to repeat as Super Bowl champs.

Obama Compulsive Disorder has them going beyond just covering up Obama's close ties to terrorists, racists, and criminals to outright Orwellian DoubleSpeak where they tell you the exact opposite of what has happened. In a downpour, they'll tell you to have a barbecue because it's so nice. Will McCain speak the inconvenient truths about Obama that the Treason Media isn't covering? (I doubt it.)

• About The Corner being down:

I'm Deeply Sorry [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

We have at least five times the traffic we had last Friday night and our server couldn’t handle it. Most of us couldn’t access the NRO because of it. I am sorry. Cnn.com has more money so it doesn’t happen to them. We will do our darnedest with our resources that it never happens again.

A lot of the Cornerites are whining that she didn't break from McCain's unwillingness to defend free enterprise. How exactly would that work, kids? Yeesh. Babies.

• Charlie Rose's panel is in typical form, poo-pooing Moose-Slayer's performance and slobbering over Biden. Then they shifted to bashing McCain and just slamming everything he's done or tried to do as "failure". McCain's attempt to do something about the bailout was derided as rash while Obama's hanging back and doing nothing was hailed as stability. WTF?!?!? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills listening to these jokers! Now they're saying he's angry and annoyed - Mark Halperin said he's "a big mess...angry guy", while Obama is "cool". Shameless. Orwellian. Disgusting.

Gwen Ifill, Republican Wimps, and the Veep Debate

With the big debate between Moose-Slayer and Dr. Teeth a mere eight hours away, the coverage of the Treason Media is getting revved up with hopes that Palin will faceplant like she did in the gotcha ambush interviews with Charles Gibson and Katie Couric. Only this week has she been appearing on friendly conservative talk radio shows like Hugh Hewitt's and Sean Hannity's, marking an end of a period of typically inept work on the part of Team McCain. In the Hewitt interview I heard - I can't stand Hannity, so I skipped that one - she sounded sharp and quite personable. Unless you're a totally unhinged moonbat who hates conservatives and judges women by the number of abortions they've had, I don't see who could dislike her.

However for her poise in stump speeches and friendly interviews, I've gotta say that the fawning "WE LUV SARAH!" reactions I've been hearing from callers to these shows is too reminiscent of the blind adoration of the racist-Marxist-terrorist loving Obamessiah to go unmentioned here. As mean and nasty as her interrogators have been, it seems as if Team McCain sent her to the wolves without reminding her that they were out to DESTROY her and thus if she didn't know the name of the Deputy Minister of Goat Breeding in Kreplochistan, she'd better have some witty parries ready. You know how you can see "Jeopardy" contestants look like they're seething and wanting to yell, "Don't get snotty with me, Trebeck! You only know it because it's on the card!!!", when Alex snarks, "Ooooooh, sorry. The answer was Strontium. Strontium."? That's what Palin needs to have said - "I don't know that off the top of my head, but did you know that before your producer handed you that card, Katie? Do you know who the Deputy Minister of Goat Breeding in Kreplochistan is, Charlie? ANSWER ME, BITCHES!!!"

But she didn't say that and this is a continuing problem for the Stupid Party: They are terminally incapable of speaking the clear truth of the liberal Dems' fascist agenda. McCain is just too mushy inside for his liberal pals to make the case and incapable of expressing an economic policy other than "Earmarks BAD!!!" (unless they're slathered on top of a Wall Street bailout bill) and Palin has been over-programmed and held down by her Team McCain handlers.

Combined with the Treason Media's diligent propaganda efforts for Obama, the largest factor in a McCain loss will be his inability (or unwillingness) to take the fight to those who would destroy this nation if elected. As I've repeatedly mentioned, I didn't vote for Dubya in '04 because of his poor performance in his first term (including signing McCain's unconstitutional campaign speech restriction law) and, more importantly, his utter inability to properly articulate to the public the stakes at risk from Islamofascism. In a dangerous world, his tepid reactions and pronouncements have allowed the Left to frame the debate to their purposes.

NRO's Peter Kirsanow has also noticed this and wrote about it this morning:

The refrain from most of the GOP talking heads over the last twenty four hours concerning Gwen Ifill's role during the VP debate is that she's a fine journalist, who, now that the fact of her book is public knowledge, shouldn't be precluded from moderating the event. Heck, it may even work to Palin's advantage because Ifill will be under intense scrutiny to be fair and balanced.

This rationale points to the GOP's ( and, to some extent, conservatives') nearly wholesale capitulation to liberal media dominance and is one of the reasons the GOP base find themselves so frequently dispirited: no objection, no fight, no pushback to a howling conflict of interest.

We're instructed that it's perfectly understandable when all of the Democratic presidential candidates refuse to debate on Fox. But Republicans are supposed to quietly take their medicine from a moderator with a direct financial interest in an Obama/ Biden victory.

I concur that Ifill's a professional. That's not the point. Republicans will find themselves losing more and more often if they do not vigorously challenge these media travesties. And it's the right thing to do for the country. A partisan, cheerleading press is not a hallmark of a free and democratic society.

So many times we see Republicans act "gentlemanly" and turn the other cheek — to what end? It simply emboldens the media toward even greater bias. How does that serve the interests of the country? Democrat fingerprints are all over the current financial mess; Dodd and Frank were integral to the debacle, yet the GOP does nothing to counter the prevailing narrative that this is a McCain—House Republican problem—and McCain's poll numbers plummet.

HELL YEAH!!! F*CK YEAH!!! WHAT HAVE I BEEN SAYING?!?!?

The conclusion of McCain's convention speech exhorting us to "fight, fight, fight" has been quickly forgotten. There's no honor in failing to challenge brazen media bias and distortion. It does the nation no good when voters cast ballots based upon false or misleading information. Right now it looks as if the same politicians who engineered the Fannie Mae/ Freddie Mac train wreck are going to win in November. The most liberal candidate with the most radical associations of any presidential aspirant in history is poised to win because the media, with virtual GOP acquiescence, has portrayed that candidate as mainstream.

The GOP seems to depend on Rush Limbaugh to correct the record, and query where we'd be without him? But the GOP better start doing it's job and forthrightly, aggressively challenge blatant media transgressions each and every time they occur. The economy's at stake. Success in the war on terrorism is at stake. The Supreme Court is at stake. Do your duty. And part of that duty is not meekly surrendering to rank media bias.

YOU HEAR THAT JOHN AND SARAH?!?!?!? Calling out the Treason Media isn't whining (unless you whine while doing it) and telling the truth about Obama's terrifying radical ties and hidden agendas is a f*cking public service! If you lose after explaining what fresh hell will be visited upon the world, then thems the breaks, but if you sit silently by because you want to be a nice guy (and gal), then you'll learn first-hand what happens to nice guys. Rush has been on fire in the first hour of his show today, laying out the Obama menace; what are you two gonna do for yourselves? Hmmmm?

My Favorite Joke

This is my favorite joke ever. If I'm in a situation where I need to tell a joke, this is my go-to bit. Enjoy.

An American, a Jew, and a Canadian are in an auto accident and die. They appear at the Pearly Gates before St. Peter, but when he checks his book, he discovers there's been an error.

"It appears that there was a mixup and your souls were pulled from your bodies prematurely," he says, "kinda like in 'Heaven Can Wait'. Ever see that? With Warren Beatty? Nevermind."

Lowering his voice, he says, "I tell you what: Give me $200 and I'll have your souls restored to your bodies. You'll be totally unharmed and you will live your full lives. I'll toss in a little time on the end as a bonus, too. Sound like a plan?"

The American immediately whips out his credit card and badaboom badabing, he's back at the scene, good as new. However, the other two bodies remain motionless. After a while, getting worried, he calls up to the sky, "Hey! Where are my friends?"

A voice booms in reply, "We're having a snag up here. It seems the Jew is trying to talk down the price and the Canadian wants the government to pay for it.

Try the veal! I'm here forever!

Too Much TV!

(NOTE: Updated 10/28 with changes)

I haven't been much of a TV watcher in recent years. I hate the passive "Sit there. Watch this." aspect of it compared to interactive entertainments like video/PC games or teh Intarwebz and frankly there have been fewer than a small handful of decent shows to watch. Now, I'm watching 8 hours and it's kinda cramping my style with regards to other stuff I need/want to do. For those who want to live la vida Dirk®, set your Tivos to this grid:

SUNDAY: Desperate Housewives, True Blood (though I may bail on this for it's - no pun - suckiness)

MONDAY: Hottie Terminator (aka Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles), Heroes (I gave up on this a few days after this post when I realized it had become irredeemably stupid), My Own Worst Enemy (has potential for fun, but could get real stupid fast)

TUESDAY: Fringe

WEDNESDAY: Pushing Daisies (love this show!), South Park

THURSDAY: My Name Is Earl, Supernatural

I catch Saturday Night Live if I'm around a TV and watch it until it gets annoying. Not listed are shows that start mid-season like Lost, 24, and the new Joss Whedon joint, Dollhouse. I could potentially be on the hook for 10-1/2 hours of TV per week. Ugh. Here's to hoping some of these shows fall off enough in quality to allow a drop from the viewing schedule. I watched the first episode of The Cleaner and as hawt as Grace Park is, the show didn't grab me hard enough to make it worth chasing.

Hey, an excuse to post a picture of Grace! Yay!!!

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

Another day, another sickening sign of the fascism that awaits America if Obama is elected. This time it's Andy McCarthy, a former Federal prosecutor who convicted the "blind sheik" behind the 1993 WTC bombing, warning that "stifling political debate with threats of prosecution is not the “rule of law” — it’s tyranny."

In London last week, a frightful warning was sounded about encroaching tyranny. At an important conference, speaker after impassioned speaker warned of the peril to Western values posed by freedom-devouring sharia — the Islamic legal code. Like all tyrannies, sharia’s first target is speech: Suppress all examination of Muslim radicalism by threats of prosecution and libel actions, and smugly call it “the rule of law.”

But we may already be further gone than the London conferees feared. And without resort to the Islamicization that so startled them. For that, we can thank the campaign of Barack Obama.

I’ll be blunt: Sen. Obama and his supporters despise free expression, the bedrock of American self-determinism and hence American democracy. What’s more, like garden-variety despots, they see law not as a means of ensuring liberty but as a tool to intimidate and quell dissent.

We London conferees were fretting over speech codes, “hate speech” restrictions, “Islamophobia” provisions, and “libel tourism” — the use of less journalist-friendly defamation laws in foreign jurisdictions to eviscerate our First Amendment freedom to report, for example, on the nexus between ostensible Islamic charity and the funding of terrorist operations.

All the while, in St. Louis, local law-enforcement authorities, dominated by Democrat-party activists, were threatening libel prosecutions against Obama’s political opposition. County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, abetted by a local sheriff and encouraged by the Obama campaign, warned that members of the public who dared speak out against Obama during the campaign’s crucial final weeks would face criminal libel charges — if, in the judgment of these conflicted officials, such criticism of their champion was “false.”

The chill wind was bracing. The Taliban could not better rig matters. The Prophet of Change is only to be admired, not questioned. In the stretch run of an American election, there is to be no examination of a candidate for the world’s most powerful office — whether about his radical record, the fringe Leftism that lies beneath his thin, centrist veneer, his enabling of infanticide, his history of race-conscious politics, his proposals for unprecedented confiscation and distribution of private property (including a massive transfer of American wealth to third-world dictators through international bureaucrats), his ruinous economic policies that have helped leave Illinois a financial wreck, his place at the vortex of the credit market implosion that has put the U.S. economy on the brink of meltdown, his aggressive push for American withdrawal and defeat in Iraq, his easy gravitation to America-hating activists, be they preachers like Jeremiah Wright, terrorists like Bill Ayers, or Communists like Frank Marshall Davis. Comment on any of this and risk indictment or, at the very least, government harassment and exorbitant legal fees.

Nor was this an isolated incident.

[snipped several items - go read the article]

Obama may very well win the November election but he, like Sen. McCain, should be forced to win it fair and square: by persuading Americans that he is the superior candidate after our free society has had its customary free and open debate.

One understandably feels little sympathy for McCain here. His years-long assault on the First Amendment under the guise of campaign-finance “reform” has led inexorably to the brazenness of Obama’s Chicago-style strong-arming. But the victim here is not McCain. The victim is democratic self-determination. The victim is our right to informed participation in a political community’s most important decisions. The victim is freedom.

Regardless of the legal landscape, however, it is the political consequences that matter. Day after day, Obama demonstrates that the “change” he represents is a severing of our body politic from the moorings that make us America. If we idly stand by while he and his thugs kill free political debate, we die too.

We know the Treason Media won't report this - hell, they're fully on board as eager stenographers of whatever the Dear Fuhrer wishes done in His name - but the silence of supposed "free-speech advocates" is deafening? Could it be that they only want free speech that echoes their views? Will John McCain get over his man-crush on liberals and confront this false Messiah with this overwhelming bill of particulars in the last two debates or will he let Barry walk on water to the White House?

Duh.

Try to point out Obama's agenda and what do his Brownshirts shriek?



God help us, everyone.

21 Twist Ties

I just has one of those rare moments when I offended enough by the clutter around me to actually tidy up a bit and in the process of tossing a bunch of papers that long ago had lost their relevance, I noticed I had quite a cache of twist ties left over from my lunches. Hermione uses them to secure small baggies of cookies and whatnot and after I've opened them, I've tossed the twist in a corner of my desk.

I don't know why I don't just toss them out. I think I've given a couple to the woman who works next to me once when she needed some, but other than that odd intersection of need and supply, they've just taken up space and added to the cruft.

Did I toss them out after tallying them? Nope. I stuck them in a drawer next to an extraneous mouse and some RAM from an unknown laptop. Just in case they're needed. Someday.

How Can Gwen Ifill Possibly Be Fair?

As if we needed more proof that the media is totally in the tank for the Obamessiah, here's a Michelle Malkin column detailing the EXTREME conflicts of interest that the moderator of tomorrow's Veep debate between Moose-Slayer and Dr. Teeth, Gwen Ifill of PBS, has with regards to Obama.

First some background: Ifill hosts PBS's "Washington Week in Review" and I've enjoyed the show for quite a while even though it's just Beltway liberals from big Treason Media outlets spewing their liberal biases to each other. (I guess I view it as a comedy about people with either so little self-knowledge or such utter contempt for their viewers, they believe they're actually being objective journalists.) However, as I noted in "The Moose-Slayer Cometh!", after Palin's speech, "The PBS crew sounds depressed that she did so well." Don't just take my word for Ifill's sour demeanor, watch for yourself:



I figured she was just having typical liberal angst*, but as Malkin details, she has more invested than even I was aware of:

In an imaginary world where liberal journalists are held to the same standards as everyone else, Ifill would be required to make a full disclosure at the start of the debate. She would be required to turn to the cameras and tell the national audience that she has a book coming out on January 20, 2009 – a date that just happens to coincide with the inauguration of the next president of the United States.

The title of Ifill’s book? “Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.” Nonpartisan my foot.

Ifill’s publisher, Random House, is already busy hyping the book with YouTube clips of Ifill heaping praise on her subjects, including Obama and Obama-endorsing Mass. Governor Deval Patrick.

Ifill and her publisher are banking on an Obama/Biden win to buoy her book sales. The moderator expected to treat both sides fairly has grandiosely declared this the “Age of Obama.” Can you imagine a right-leaning journalist writing a book about the “stunning” McCain campaign and its “bold” path to reform timed for release on Inauguration Day – and then expecting a slot as a moderator for the nation’s sole vice presidential debate?

Despite the protestations of her colleagues that she will be fair, Ifill has appeared on numerous radio and TV talk shows over the past several months to cash in on her access to the Obama campaign. She recently penned a fawning cover story on the Obamas for Essence magazine that earned much buzz. The title? “The Obamas: Portrait of an American Family.”

During the Democratic National Convention, Ifill offered her neutral analysis before Michelle Obama’s speech on NBC News: “A lot of people have never seen anything that looks like a Michelle Obama before. She’s educated, she’s beautiful, she’s tall, she tells you what she thinks and they hope that she can tell a story about Barack Obama and about herself…”

Like Obama, Ifill, who is black, is quick to play the race card at the first sign of criticism. In an interview with the Washington Post a few weeks ago, she carped: “[N]o one’s ever assumed a white reporter can’t cover a white candidate.”

It’s not the color of your skin, sweetie. It’s the color of your politics. Perhaps Ifill will be able to conceal it this week. But if the “stunning” “Breakthrough” she’s rooting for comes to pass on January 20, 2009, nobody will be fooled.

Crikey! Is this for reals? Someone on the Debates Commission thought it would be OK for someone with a vested interest in one of the candidates success to oversee this cage match?!?

The stakes are already pretty high as the conventional wisdom is that Moose-Slayer will do a face plant against the slick plagiarist from Deleware - Palin's been weak in interviews and the idiots at Team McCain HQ have kept her so under wraps that a "Free Sarah!" movement has erupted in the conservative media - and a poor showing will be devastating to McCain's chances for any substantive gaffes will be conflated with the smear campaign they've been running for the past month-plus into a deafening cry of "UNQUALIFIED!!! UNWORTHY!!!"

I've got a post in the works for tomorrow which shows just how frightening Obama's network of terrorists is and that for all the media spin and audience projection, he is the most dangerous and radical person to get near the levers of power and horrible consequences for America are in store if he wins the Election. Given McCain's lack of fire to fight his liberal pals and Palin's wet-behind-the-earsness, the debate was seen as a pretty big deal and with the moderator clearly too invested in the outcome of the race (as in foot, not color), the fix seems ever more in.


* I also see that on the 2nd night of the RNC, I had these observations about Ifill:

• Gwen Ifill is giving Tucker Bounds, McCain's campaign spokesman, the third degree that she didn't give her friends at the DNC last week. How am I not surprised that suddenly their journalistic teeth will are now out? She's asking if Palin's nomination is about to be scrapped since they've slung all the mud Fuhrer Obamessiah demands of them and she's obviously not worthy according to them. Keep it up, Treason Mediaers - the backlash will be stunning if I know the decency of the general public.

• OK, I'm back, it's perhaps 20 minutes later and a dour Gwen Ifill is asking someone else if Sarah Palin is a drag and to be tossed overboard. What media bias?

I had no idea this was coming or I would've said something them. Yeesh...chalk up Gwen Ifill in the Obama Compulsive Disorder positive column.

ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS: The lineup of moderators was known long ago, so why is this just coming out two days before the debate? Why didn't Team McCain move to have Ifill removed for her obvious conflicts? Imagine it this way: If Brit Hume had a book slated to drop on Inauguration Day about John McCain, do you think he'd be allowed to moderate a debate? Exactly!

UPDATE: Power Line concurs:

Ifill's position is untenable. She will almost certainly be accused of (a) being unfair to Palin in order to sell her book, (b) being unfair to Biden in order to prevent accusation "a" or (c) both. Either the first of the second accusation will be quite plausible.

Ifill was selected by the Commission on Presidential Debates. In my view, her selection discredits this body. And Ifill's decision to accept the role of debate moderator during this cycle discredits her. In 2012, neither the Commission on Presidential Debates nor Ms. Ifill should play a role in presidential debates.

In case you think a respectable journalist would take pains to avoid sacrificing their all-important credibility, I've got two words for you: Dan. Rather. Four years ago, he threw away his career in order to smear Dubya with forged documents. The means justifies the ends to the Treason Media and perhaps Ifill anticipates becoming the Press Secretary to the Obamessiah after she's become radioactive as a journalist.

As I said above, the fix is in.