It's Alive

Notice how a lot of conservative intellectuals have been jumping off the GOP bandwagon lately? Colbert takes 'em to task, and calls them out on the monster they spawned. Wickedly funny.

The Economist Chimes In

One more important nod for the Obamanator: The Economist puts forth its self-described "whole-hearted" endorsement of Obama. This piece is interesting particularly for the way in which it expresses both its hopes and concerns about what an Obama presidency might mean. For all those folks out there looking to make a 'closing argument' of their own, this endorsement may help clarify your thinking. Note: The Economist does not have a long history of endorsing politicians on the left side of the aisle!

82 Days Left

Courtesy of good friend and loyal reader JE, who draws a fantastic daily comic called "Motion Pictures" at http://www.MotionPicturesComics.com/, we are pleased to present our very first custom illustration for The Informed Voter!

Regardless of what happens on Tuesday, in a few months we won't have Dubya to kick around anymore!

Number Two Pencils

A short quiz to test your campaign trivia, courtesy of Gail Collins.

Also, are you (unconsciously) racist? Take the one quiz here or here (this second one offers more types of tests). Then read the related article here.

7 Counts

This photo topped the Times website this morning. Send us your best caption and receive an honorary mention on the blog!

Only in New York

Condo developers in Manhattan are offering a unique deal: contracts signed this week can be voided if Obama loses the election. In other words, if McCain wins, you don't actually have to buy the apartment.

Thanks to reader MA for this out-of-the-way find!

His Choice

An interesting ad out from the Obama campaign, highlighting McCain quotes saying he would rely on his VP for economic advice, and then showing Sarah Palin winking. I think it is the first ad using Palin to convince voters to vote for Obama. I don't think it will backfire--that was the conventional wisdom early on--but I am not sure it helps, either, since the media evaluation of her is not positive. The ad itself is quite good, using the Daily Show model of highlighting a politician contradicting himself. Enjoy!

Wicked Ways

In a fine piece for Slate, the always controversial Christopher Hitchens takes a swipe at the willfully ignorant zealotry of the Palin portion of the Republican party. Have a cackle and enjoy:

"This is what the Republican Party has done to us this year: It has placed within reach of the Oval Office a woman who is a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus. Those who despise science and learning are not anti-elitist. They are morally and intellectually slothful people who are secretly envious of the educated and the cultured. And those who prate of spiritual warfare and demons are not just "people of faith" but theocratic bullies. On Nov. 4, anyone who cares for the Constitution has a clear duty to repudiate this wickedness and stupidity."

Losing the Center

Anne Applebaum, a registered independent, explains in today's Washington Post why she liked McCain and why his campaign--and his party--have left her reluctantly supporting Obama.

The larger point, though, is that if I'm not voting for McCain -- and, after a long struggle, I've realized that I can't -- maybe it's worth explaining why, for I suspect there are other independent voters who feel the same. Particularly because it's not his campaign, disjointed though that has been, that finally repulses me: It's his rapidly deteriorating, increasingly anti-intellectual, no longer even recognizably conservative Republican Party. His problems are not technical; they do not have to do with ads, fundraising or tactics, as some have suggested. They are institutional; they have to do with his colleagues, advisers and supporters.

Thanks to reader WAM for sending us the article.

John the Spender

No surprise, neither candidate's plans are fiscally responsible. You can't fight two wars, bail out the economy, provide tax cuts, health care, etc. without consequence.

Based on what McCain has said and the GOP's reputation (no longer deserved) for being fiscally conservative, you'd think that Obama's plans would increase the deficit faster during his first term while Republicans would cut pork and dial back spending. But here's the interesting consensus from several non-partisan groups: Senator McCain’s tax and spending proposals would create larger annual budget deficits than those of Senator Obama. McCain just can't catch a break!

Barack-o-Lantern

Incredible: free, download-able jack-o-lantern carving templates featuring Obama, McCain, each of their campaign logos, and more.

Extra credit for anybody who send us photos of their (successfully) completed "political pumpkin."

Zeitgeist

As election day draws very near, things have grown a bit quiet and introspective in pundit-land. We think it is the calm in the eye of the storm, as things will no doubt get very noisy come next Monday. During this lull, a few well-written pieces have been written, but most add nothing new (though Alaska Senator Ted Stevens' conviction 8 days before the vote for his re-election does make for an interesting twist!).

One commentator, Greg Sargent of Talking Points Memo, thoughtfully places Obama's bid in a wider context, and paints him as a natural successor to Bill Clinton:

"Obama -- should he win -- has outworked McCain in ways very similar to Bill's outmaneuvering of Bush Sr. Like Bill, Obama has sensed that the electorate is looking for something larger than a set of policies or personal attributes. Unlike McCain, who has proven utterly incapable of grasping the public mood on many levels, Obama has sensed that the electorate wants to know how we will remake our politics -- domestic and international -- for the next century.

Bill famously envisioned his presidency as a "bridge" from the 20th to the 21st centuries in terms of keeping America at pace with globalization. Obama is presenting his presidency as Act II in that drama -- now that we've crossed Bill's "bridge," he is promising to transform our politics in kind. In essence, Obama is promising a true 21st Century politics."

One Week

The text of Barack Obama's "closing argument" speech. If you need any reason to re-ignite excitement about this election and what it can mean for our country, it's worth 10 minutes.

And for contrast, McCain's speech, also in Ohio, from yesterday.

FT Endorsement

That old lefty rag, the Financial Times, endorses Obama.

Assurance from the Chicago Tribune

The Chicago Tribune chimes in with a ringing endorsement of Barack Obama. And they really mean it:

"We have known Obama since he entered politics a dozen years ago. We have watched him, worked with him, argued with him as he rose from an effective state senator to an inspiring U.S. senator to the Democratic Party's nominee for president.

We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions. He is ready."

T-8 Days

A critical issue addressed by two prominent writers today: what can McCain do to press his case over the next week?

William Kristol, who is usually happy to carry water for the GOP--perhaps you've seen him argue that Bush will be considered a good president in hindsight--has been aggressively criticizing the McCain-Palin campaign strategy. Last week he urged McCain to dump his entire campaign team, and this week he offers a few good ideas to salvage some votes. Too bad (for McCain) they don't sync with the Rove playbook, which will undoubtedly keep digging the campaign into a deeper hole.

And from The New Yorker, Hendrik Hertzberg also talks about McCain's strategy.

Sometimes, when a political campaign has run out of ideas and senses that the prize is slipping through its fingers, it rolls up a sleeve and plunges an arm, shoulder deep, right down to the bottom of the barrel. The problem for John McCain, Sarah Palin, and the Republican Party is that the bottom was scraped clean long before it dropped out.

Hertzberg also offers the best rebuttal I have seen to the socialism charge.

Editor's Note: If you do not yet subscribe to The New Yorker, please click here. It is simply the best magazine on the market.

In Defense of White Americans

Frank Rich, in an excellent column talking about the role of race in this election--a nuanced analysis of where we are, highlighting how the the media and the GOP are out of touch.

Editor's Note: All of the NY Times columnists had columns in this Sunday's paper. They are all quite good, and the rest can be found here.

Progessive Conservativism

David Brooks laments what might have been if McCain had reformed the GOP and led a new wave of progressive conservatives. The op-ed is a good discussion of what liberal and conservative mean, and how the ideas, blended, create a strong appeal for centrists and independents.

Snooty Elitism

Maureen Dowd lays shame to the claim that the Obamas are high-falutin' while the GOP is the party for Joe thePlumber. As she puts it:

The Republicans’ attempt to make the case that Barack Obama is hoity-toity and they’re hoi polloi has fallen under the sheer weight of the stunning numbers:

The McCains own 13 cars, eight homes and access to a corporate jet, and Cindy had her Marie Antoinette moment at the convention. Vanity Fair calculated that her outfit cost $300,000, with three-carat diamond earrings worth $280,000, an Oscar de la Renta dress valued at $3,000, a Chanel white ceramic watch clocking in at $4,500 and a four-strand pearl necklace worth between $11,000 and $25,000. While presenting herself as an I’m-just-like-you hockey mom frugal enough to put the Alaska state plane up for sale on eBay, Palin made her big speech at the convention wearing a $2,500 cream silk Valentino jacket that the McCain staff had gotten her at Saks.

And for good measure: the campaign spent $32,800 in the first half of October on Palin's hair and make-up.

If I Had a Million Dollars...

Flush with cash, Obama is running this two minute advertisement explaining his priorities as President. Hand it to his chief strategist, David Axelrod: Obama has defined his goals, defined his opponent, and framed the importance of the election extraordinarily well.

Shocking, Positively Shocking

As expected, The New York Times endorses Obama. We still think the New Yorker endorsement was the best, but this is still a good argument for the Senator from Illinois.

Turd Blossom Leaves Mess, Blames Others

We reflexively have to post anything the Boy Genius (aka Turd Blossom) writes in the WSJ. Rove suggests some strategy (the usual "create doubts about Obama") and coins a brilliant term--the Four Amigos--to describe Obama, Ayers, Rezko and Wright, but even he concludes that if McCain's campaign doesn't turn this around "he and other Republican candidates are about to be dealt a punishing electoral blow."

AS Talking Points Memo noted today, remember when Rove was credited with creating the Permanent Republican Majority?

Black Sheep of the Party

You may have already heard about Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN), who quickly became known nationally last week for her truly frightening turn on Hardball with Chris Matthews (MSNBC). If you still haven't seen the clip, click here. First off, Bachmann should absolutely be condemned for overusing the word "absolutely." Second, she sounds a bit too much like one of McCain's robocalls, stating over and over that she is very concerned that Obama is anti-American. What exactly does that mean in practice? Finally, and most shockingly, she demands that the media open a wide-ranging investigation into which members of Congress are secretly "anti-American."

Clearly, Bachmann possesses a clairvoyant link to Sen. Joe McCarthy. In fact, her performance was so over the top that, as Gail Collins reported in her column in today's New York Times: "So far, the only person who’s felt the impact of her call to reinvent McCarthyism for a post-Communist planet has been her opponent, a hitherto totally ignored Democrat named Elwyn Tinklenberg, who was stunned to discover in the following days that he had received close to $1 million in donations."

Actually, its $1.3 million and counting, almost all of it coming from online donors. In a fit of decency, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) has responded by pulling its financial support of Bachmann's re-election campaign. While Bachmann could still win her race (her district voted 57% to 42% for Bush in 2004), it is clear that a message has been sent: in this heated election season, you can push the envelope pretty far, but you'd better not step on Sarah Palin's brand-new Manolo Blahniks. Neo-McCarthyism is her territory!

The Making (and Remaking and Remaking) of McCain

Who is John McCain?

The New York Times Sunday Magazine takes a few pages to walk through the inner workings of the McCain campaign. A truly fascinating portal into campaign strategy, and a great case study in the misadventures of throwing the kitchen sink in place of disciplined branding. Here, the author highlights the six key narratives from the last six months, from pitching the candidate as a heroic fighter, then as someone who puts country first, as a leader, a maverick, as John McCain 2000, and finally, as a fighter again.

McCain Finally Gets Big Endorsement

Not sure he wants this one, though...

Sarah the Spender

A big Politico scoop: the Republican National Committee has spent $150,000--yes, you read that right--on clothes and make-up for Sarah Palin. This is not an allegation: the figures are from FEC reports. Where does she shop? The same stores as "real" Americans: Saks, Neiman Marcus, Bloomingdale's, etc.

And, courtesy of reader MW, a CNN story about Palin's using state funds to cover family travel.

We Are All Americans

Maureen Dowd, in an unusually thoughtful--none of her regular sass--column on Powell's endorsement.

The same theme, from the Daily Show's Monday night episode. The New York-based show was clearly offended by comments about red states being the "real" America.


And, per Palin's recommendation, a little common sense from Main Street Wasilla. If you only have time to watch one clip, this is the one.

Cheaper Gas, Yes, But at What Cost?

In yesterday's "Axis of Oil" post we queried the geo-political impact of lower oil prices. Today, Thomas Friedman picks up the thread, discussing the environmental impact of cheaper fuel. He argues that a shift to "green" technology is not only a matter of virtue, but the key to an economic recovery.

Pinko

McCain calls Obama's refundable tax credits "welfare," but calls his own "reform."

The straight story, from the non-partisan FactCheck.org.

The Right to Vote

Bob Herbert takes the Republicans to task for trying to disenfranchise lawful voters.

Remember, too, that the politicization of the U.S. Justice Department was centered on getting loyal GOP operatives into Justice to prosecute bogus voter fraud cases. And the U.S. Attorneys who were fired were let go precisely because they chose not to pursue alleged voter fraud cases (on the basis that the evidence thin or manufactured) and focus on other priorities.

The Axis of Oil

Over the last year we were deeply concerned that the high price of oil was fueling anti-American rhetoric from Venezuela, enabling regional hegemony from Russia, and allowing Iranian nuclear development even in the face of sanctions. Sure, most people were concerned about the price of gas, but since we don't have a car, we worried more about the fate of the world.

In the last few weeks, though, we've wondered the opposite: what happens as oil prices fall? We were struck by the risks of intra-country destabilization and/or the prospect of global military struggles precipitated by oil and gas countries rattling their sabers in the hopes of raising prices.

Today, the Times offers a detailed look at the impact reduced oil prices may have on Venezuela, Russia, and Iran. These countries have ramped up spending to strengthen their political support, extend subsidies and welfare systems, and influence neighbors and other allies.

All three of these countries are, more or less, held together by oil and gas revenues. In the October 10th Wall Street Journal, a story cited research from PFC energy, which evaluated the base price of oil required for political stability. The research found that to maintain macroeconomic stability--not profit, just stability--Venezuela requires oil at $95/barrel. This is due to Chavez's domestic commitments, costs from nationalizing industries, and other handouts. Saudia Arabia and Iran both need prices of about $55/barrel. Remember, of course that mere stability may not be enough, and that as prices come closer to those thresholds, there will need to be a re-allocation of priorities.

This could play out a few ways, some for the better, and many for the worse. Something to keep an eye on though as oil edges into the low $70's and is believed by some to be heading towards $50 a barrel.

BoJo Endorses Obama

Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, endorses Obama today in The Telegraph. Boris is a Conservative, which places him somewhere left of MoveOn.org in the U.S. political spectrum.

Comparing Obama to Bush: "Unlike the current occupant of the White House, he has no difficulty in orally extemporising a series of grammatical English sentences, each containing a main verb."

And he concludes with an interesting thought from a British politician: "If Obama wins, he will have established that being black is as relevant to your ability to do a hard job as being left-handed or ginger-haired, and he will have re-established America's claim to be the last, best hope of Earth."

The New (New, New, New) Stump Speech

In this clip from last week, Jon Stewart takes a look at John McCain's 4th iteration of the stump speech. Only, nothing has changed. A brilliant example of where the Daily Show does better news coverage than the Big Guys.

Domo Origat-o, Mr. Robot-o

Watch McCain try and defend the use of robo-calls (automated phone calls that deliver recorded messages, usually with smears and lies about an opponent), even though he disavowed the tactic when it was used against him in 2000.

Amy Poehler feat. Gov-P

Yesterday we posted the video clip of Sarah Palin opening SNL. Turns out the even funnier part came later, in an Amy Poehler rap about Palin.

Monday Morning Quarterback

Well, a big weekend all around.

The big news, of course: the Obama campaign snags an endorsement from Colin Powell and announces September fundraising of over $150,000,000.

From the op-ed pages:

Frank Rich challenges the conventional wisdom developing among Republicans to explain McCain's faltering campaign (they blame Bush and the economy). Rich does a very good job describing the fall of McCain from the days when he was a maverick to the candidate who embraces W's policies and political tactics.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman uses the data to show that GOP policies have not exactly helped middle-class Amercians (case in point: Ohio plumbers made less in real terms in 2007 than they did in 2000). The lede: "John McCain’s strategy, in this final stretch, is based on the belief that Republicans can still pursue plutocratic policies while claiming to be the party of regular guys."

And finally, if you are thinking about the types of Justices each candidate might appoint, Clarence Thomas explains that the only way to interpret the Constitution is to look to the framer's intent ("originalism"). Sounds good on paper, but don't be fooled: it is no more impartial an approach than any other interpretive framework. See Bush v. Gore where the Justices (including Thomas) bend their way around a professed deference to a State's Supreme Court decision on a state matter to give the election to Bush.

Dumb & Dumber

In case you missed it, Sarah Palin opens SNL:

Is Anybody Happy?

Gail Collins sums up the race, noting that we have reached the point in the race when both Democrats and Republicans think they are going to lose. And this little gem, worrying about the President's attempt to calm the markets on Friday:

Everybody knows that anything our president says is very likely wrong, and certainly won’t happen. If he announced: “I’m sending government agents to Spokane to arrest the looters,” we would expect that the officials would get lost, nobody would be arrested, and the looters probably never existed in the first place.

So hearts sunk throughout the nation when Bush appeared at a Chamber of Commerce gathering to say that the economy would recover.

WaPo Endorses Obama

The Washington Post endorses Obama on the merits, after an even-handed evaluation of both candidates. The Post's piece is not as eloquent or as well-argued as The New Yorker endorsement, but it may be more compelling to independents. Their conclusion:

ANY PRESIDENTIAL vote is a gamble, and Mr. Obama's résumé is undoubtedly thin. We had hoped, throughout this long campaign, to see more evidence that Mr. Obama might stand up to Democratic orthodoxy and end, as he said in his announcement speech, "our chronic avoidance of tough decisions."

But Mr. Obama's temperament is unlike anything we've seen on the national stage in many years. He is deliberate but not indecisive; eloquent but a master of substance and detail; preternaturally confident but eager to hear opposing points of view. He has inspired millions of voters of diverse ages and races, no small thing in our often divided and cynical country. We think he is the right man for a perilous moment.

The Last Supper

This was the scene Thursday night in New York: the two contenders separated by Cardinal Egan. The occasion: the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner in New York City.

For a very funny review of the candidates' joke-filled speeches, click here. And if you have time to actually watch the delivery, press play:

You Betcha

Roger Cohen gets at something that has been bothering us for weeks: the faux we-are-the-real-America claims advanced by McCain-Palin and the Republican party.

Cohen writes from Branson, MO, the heart of country music and "get 'er done" pragmatism, and is struck by the contrast between polite, practical, conservative midwesterners and Sarah Palin's political style:

And it dawned on me that Palin, with her vile near-accusations of treason against Barack Obama, her cloying doggone hymns to small-town U.S.A., her with-us-or-against-us refrain, is really an impostor.

She’s the representative of a kind of last-gasp Republicanism, of an exhausted party, whose proud fiscal conservatism and patriotism have given away to scurrilous fear-mongering and ideological confusion.

He concludes, beginning with a quote from Obama's 2004 convention speech:

“There is not a liberal America and a conservative America. There is the United States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America. There’s the United States of America.”

I found that spirit in Branson, the last place I expected. And it gave me hope, in these sobering days, for a nation aching to unite behind a new start and uplifting endeavor.

1,000 Words

Thanks to alert reader MA, who sent us this photo of McCain as he accidentally walked the wrong way off stage after the debate. Fearing it might be doctored we went back to the c-span tape and saw it happen (at 1:29:59). Priceless.

Save the Rock for Barack

First it was Heart complaining about Sarah Palin's use of their hit, Barracuda, on the campaign trail. And so it followed with The Foo Fighters, Boston, John Mellencamp, and Jackson Browne, who each requested that Republicans refrain from using their songs at campaign events.

Bon Jovi are the latest to complain that their songs are being wrongfully co-opted. And Jon Bon Jovi puts his money where his mouth is: he recently hosted a $30,000 per-plate fundraiser for Barack Obama.

90%

"90 %" is one of the better political ads this season because it uses McCain's own words and expressions and simultaneously deprives McCain from using his best line from the debate in his own spots.

Debate Commentary Highlights

We expect that by now the lines are fairly clearly drawn, and anyone who is a registered anything has already cast their lot with their candidate. So we'll dispense with trying to assess who won. Still, there has been some interesting commentary today. A smattering of quality thoughts:

Roger Simon in Politico: 'The biggest impact of the three presidential debates for Obama was not anything said or not said. It was impressionistic: Obama simply did not appear to be the scary “other” that McCain needs him to be. “When people suggest that I pal around with terrorists, then we are not talking about issues,” Obama said smoothly.

For McCain, the biggest impact of the debates was visual: In the first debate he refused to look at Obama, in the second debate McCain appeared to careen around the stage and in this last debate McCain would scribble furiously with his Sharpie as Obama was talking or else smirk in response to what Obama was saying.'

From Dan Balz in the Washington Post: 'This debate may have been McCain's strongest performance of the three, but it was also an example of how Obama has used the encounters to try to show that he has not only the knowledge of the issues but also the temperament and the judgment that voters are looking for in a successor to President Bush.'

Joan Vennochi in the Boston Globe about McCain: 'He has talking points. He is against taxes, earmarks, and pork. But he can't knit what he opposes into a coherent economic philosophy that would inspire voters to get behind him in the final days of this presidential campaign. He has an inspirational life story. But in this campaign, he never connected his biography to his presidential ambition, and he never told voters how it would shape a McCain administration and make him a better president than his opponent. McCain has long years of political experience, exactly what Democrat Barack Obama lacks. But McCain is unable to explain why his experience makes him better able to lead the country.'

And finally, from David Yepsen of the Des Moines Register: 'Conservatives will love McCain's dwelling on his pro-life, anti-abortion stance. Obama, who is pro-choice, tried to reach out to people opposed to abortion by calling for more adoption. That exchange was telling: McCain seemed more focused on firing up his base of conservative supporters, while Obama was trying to reach beyond his. At this point in a general-election campaign, a candidate should have his or her "base" locked up and should be going after undecided voters.'

All this is to say that Obama was cool and collected, and wasn't drawn out of his happy place by anything McCain said or did. For his part, McCain did his best to make this debate a game-changer, but it didn't work, and it now remains to be seen if he can turn this thing around. The clock is ticking.

Plan D

Our dear friend Karl "Turd Blossom" Rove weighs in again with advice for the McCain campaign. Since most of Rove's proteges are running the McCain campaign these columns are usually a good predictor of campaign direction over the next few weeks--and reflect plans already put into place.

The Good Old Days

Another blast from the past, this time in an advertisement for Eisenhower in 1952. Enjoy the debate tonight!

Nobel Peace Prize?

Maureen Dowd tries for her own Nobel (following fellow columnist Paul Krugman who won the Nobel in Economics this week) by brokering peace between the pro-Palin and anti-Palin conservatives on the NY Times op-ed page.

Horse Race

New York Times/CBS News poll shows 53% Obama to 39% McCain if the election was held today.

Many watchers think that Nate Silver, the guy who used baseball stats to develop sophisticated models, provides the best electoral forecasting. You can check his site out here.

And the Intrade Prediction Markets favor Obama with an 80.1% chance of victory. If you are feeling flush (is anybody feeling flush these days?) an interesting trade would be long McCain and/or short Obama; as the polls narrow in the next few weeks I'd bet you could make some money trading in and out of these contracts.

Lurching Incoherence

Eugene Robinson takes the GOP to task for abandoning principles in favor of a do-anything-to-stay-in-power strategy. Well-written, and spot-on.

...And You're Bound to Get Burned

In the October 10 issue of The New Yorker, George Packer writes about the dark under-current of anger in the GOP, and astutely assesses where the McCain camp is and where it should go from here:

"Palin is too shallow to understand the weapon she’s playing with; she’s just thrilled to be the birthday girl and the object of so much semi-erotic devotion. But McCain knows better. His manner in debates and at rallies tells me that he’s conflicted about the forces his campaign is unleashing. Win or lose, he’s already damaged his cherished reputation beyond repair. But there’s still time for him to show leadership and do what’s necessary."

Main Street Stimulus

The Times details Obama's "main street" economic proposals. In summary:

- An additional $25 billion dollar loan to automakers (an increase from the already-authorized $25 billion guarantee from a few weeks ago). Price: Depends. $25 billion is "at risk," but the actual cost to the government is about $4 billion.

- 90 day moratorium on home foreclosures. Price : zero (the idea is that lenders who get help from the government have to participate).

- Money for states to speed up infrastructure work (goal: create jobs). Price: $50 billion.

-Tax "stimulus" rebates. Price: $65 billion.

-$3,000 income tax credit for employers for each new full-time hire above their current workforce. Price: $40 billion.

- Eliminate income tax on unemployment benefits and extending duration of aid to 13 weeks. Price: $10 billion.

-Allow small businesses to borrow from the Small Business Administration disaster funds. Price: $5 billion-ish.

- Allow people to tap into retirement accounts, up to $10,000, without the usual 10% penalty that comes with an early withdrawal. Price. Zero. No outlay, just the lost income from the penalty.

All-in that's about $175 billion dollars--and hey, that's cheap compared to the financial bailout. But will all these approaches work?

I am skeptical about the wisdom of lending more money to GM and Ford--remember these are the clowns who have run a respectable set of brands into the ground. I don't see the reason for foreclosure moratoriums: if the bank felt that someone could pay on a revised program they would reach an agreement--banks do not want to own homes. The credit for hiring new employees might work, but seems like a nightmare to administer. And letting people tap into their long-term retirement money is ill-advised: savings rates are already too low.

In the balance, I can live with cutting taxes on unemployment income, the infrastructure spending, and the rebate checks--though the rebate checks seem fairly ineffective. What bothers me about all of this is that, from either side, the underlying assumption is that China will keep lending us the money. If they do, great. But responsible leadership would require paying for all of these goodies with higher taxes (or cutting spending elsewhere). That's not likely with a few weeks to an election.

WWMD (What will McCain Do) in response?

McCain first said he would have new economic proposals on Monday, and then recanted, as an adviser reported that they would only offer new plans as events warranted. Now, it seems, he will launch new proposals today, which will be interesting to compare. From our vantage point, McCain's $300 billion dollar government-buys-mortgages program was dead on arrival (conservatives don't like it), and since that costs nearly double what Obama has proposed, will be an even harder sell now. But with both candidates clamoring for the middle class, perhaps he will throw some pork at the problem, too.

Obama Under Fire For Playing T-Ball During Vietnam

From The Onion, courtesy of reader NY:

WASHINGTON—At a press conference on Monday, members of the Vietnam Veterans Alliance blasted Democratic nominee Barack Obama for his failure to serve in the Southeast Asian war that ended 33 years ago, alleging that during the conflict the candidate frequently engaged in games of T-ball. "While our boys were dying in Vietnam, Barack Obama was running around a little league field, laughing and having fun without a care in the world," VVA spokesman James Lowry said. "John McCain left his wife and three children behind and fought bravely, but I guess Sen. Obama decided that practicing cursive and learning how to ride a bike was just more important than defending his country in her hour of need. I bet he wasn't even able to point out Vietnam on a map." Lowry later speculated that if Obama had been sent over to fight in the conflict, he probably would have peed his pants and cried for his mommy as soon as he touched down in Saigon.

There They Go Again

The McCain campaign, in its best effort to make Bush look grown-up and the Dole campaign look really well-run, has gone too far.

First, John McCain said Sunday he is going to "whip" Obama in the debate. As much as we'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he did not really mean to dredge up whipping the black candidate, his campaign has used coded language (Obama is "not one of us") for some time and so no longer has the authority to just claim it was a poor word choice.

And Palin--whose incoherence is matched by her vitriol--implies that Obama supports and is sympathetic to terrorists. Remember, it was just last week that she said Obama thinks America is imperfect and that he pals around with terrorists--so don't believe it if/when she claims that she was misunderstood in the remarks below.

“Help me, Ohio, to help put John McCain in the White House,” she said. “He understands. He understands you. We understand how important it is that this team be elected. For one thing, we know who the bad guys are, OK?”

That statement elicited scattered shouts of “Obama!” throughout the crowd.

“We know that in the war, it’s terrorists, terrorists who hate America and her allies and would seek to destroy us, and the bad guys are those who would support and sympathize with the terrorists,” she said. “They do not like America because of what we stand for. Liberty. Freedom. Equal rights. Those who sympathize and support those terrorists who would seek to destroy all that it is that we value, those are the bad guys, OK?”

These are dark days for the GOP.

Off With Their Heads

Continuing with the last post on GOP unease with the campaign, William Kristol tells McCain to fire everyone and start over. The new thrust? Make the candidates accessible to the press (like the old days), assert that centrist leadership is critical to face the uncertain economic and security threats, remind voters that the next President will be appointing judges, and stress the importance of having a Republican president to balance the Democratic Congress.

Sunday Round-up

Welcome back for your Sunday fix.

Today, Frank Rich analyzes the ways McCain-Palin have crossed the line from legitimate political discourse to inciting vigilantism. In short, bringing up Ayers is ok as a (flawed) guilt-by-association tactic, but Palin in particular is going too far in suggesting to the crowds that Obama is a terrorist himself. Besides the risk that these words wil incite someone to try and kill Obama, there is another problem: does the GOP really want some active duty soldiers under the impression that their commander in chief is dangerous to them? They have just gone too far.

And it turns out the GOP agrees. In this article, read about the growing GOP concern that McCain's campaign has no central message, and that in whipping up anger they are only alienating women and persuadable undecideds.

Doggone Ethics Investigation

It's Saturday morning and there's all kinds of good stuff in the papers.

We'll start with what we have suspected for some time, now confirmed by the Alaskan Legislature's investigation and report: Governor Palin "unlawfully abused her authority" trying to fire Trooper Wooten. How maverick-y of her!

Gail Collins, our favorite op-ed columnist, with a pitch-perfect walk down memory lane to the good old days of this last August when the Dow was above 10,000, John McCain was still running a relatively honorable campaign, and we had never heard of Sarah Palin (who, amazingly, is leading the "Who is Barack Obama" charge--an interesting gambit for someone on the national political scene for 6 weeks and who doesn't do interviews).

Bob Herbert writes a good piece explaining how and why the GOP has lost its way (hint: they've been on the wrong side of social security, medicare, energy, and the environment).

Frank Schaeffer, in the Baltimore Sun, addresses some comments to McCain that will resonate for all concerned by the recent anti-Obama frenzy at campaign events:

John McCain: If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism and portraying Mr. Obama as "not one of us," I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence.

And finally, Christopher Buckley, son of the late conservative lion William Buckley, and writer for the National Review, does the unthinkable: endorses Obama. To summarize:

This campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget “by the end of my first term.” Who, really, believes that? Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis. His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?

Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for.

Class War

David Brooks expresses profound disappointment at the way McCain and Palin denigrate intellectualism. Noting that conservatism started as an intellectual movement, he writes:

...Ronald Reagan was no intellectual, but he had an earnest faith in ideas and he spent decades working through them.

...The Republicans have alienated whole professions. Lawyers now donate to the Democratic Party over the Republican Party at 4-to-1 rates. With doctors, it’s 2-to-1. With tech executives, it’s 5-to-1. With investment bankers, it’s 2-to-1. It took talent for Republicans to lose the banking community.

...Republicans developed their own leadership style. If Democratic leaders prized deliberation and self-examination, then Republicans would govern from the gut.

Brooks concludes:

And so, politically, the G.O.P. is squeezed at both ends. The party is losing the working class by sins of omission — because it has not developed policies to address economic anxiety. It has lost the educated class by sins of commission — by telling members of that class to go away.

Economist Consensus: Give $$$ to the Banks ASAP

Greg Mankiw offers a specific public-private partnership to re-capitalize the banks (i.e. get money to the banks so that they can start lending again).

Krugman and Mankiw even seem to agree--though Mankiw's proposal strikes us as potentially more effective (hard to believe Mankiw is a former adviser to George W. Bush).

Action Plan

What can you do to manage your finances during the downturn?

We really like http://www.mint.com/, a free service that connects online to all of your banks, credit cards, mortgages, investment accounts, and student loans, and compiles information into easily understandable groups. It's a great tool for managing your expenses. Here is a review of the site (which has been updated and improved in the interim) from The Wall Street Journal's "Mossberg Solution."

Another helpful site for getting the best rates on savings accounts, cd's, credit cards, etc. is http://www.bankrate.com/. For more specialized recommendations on higher-yielding cd's, try this site.

And for general market-watching, try http://www.finance.google.com/ and http://www.bloomberg.com/.

Hard Times

The S&P is down 25.7% in the last month alone.

Here's a stock that has dropped even faster than the overall market: John McCain contracts are down 50.6% in the last month.

In other words, you did better last month in the stock market than you did if you were betting that John McCain will be the next President.

Defense Against the Dark Arts

My friends, it is possible that in as few as four weeks from right now we will know the outcome of this election. As you have no doubt noticed, things have gotten down and dirty--even Obama has dredged up The Keating Five scandal and produced a 13-minute documentary explaining John McCain's role in one of our last economic crises, the Savings and Loan debacle. While not riveting, at least the video is relevant and makes a considered statement about McCain's character.

But the big story is that McCain has let the Hockey Mom off her leash, and we expect to her to begin frothing at the mouth any day now. Beyond conjuring up the ghosts of William Ayers and Reverend Wright, she has been busy questioning Barack Obama's character (what else is there to do when the economy is tanking and you don't know anything about economics?). Her new line: “This is not a man who sees America as you see it and how I see America.” This is actually a "true fact," as Palin might say. Obama still has some hope for America, whereas under that perky demeanor, Palin is deeply, deeply cynical.

According to the New York Times Editorial Board, which today issued a damning condemnation of Palin's tactics: "Her demagoguery has elicited some frightening, intolerable responses. A recent Washington Post report said at a rally in Florida this week a man yelled 'kill him!' as Ms. Palin delivered that line and others shouted epithets at an African-American member of a TV crew."

While Palin has not yet publicly cast the Aveda Kedavra curse on Obama, the whole country is now aware that she takes witches seriously. Momentarily bringing the discussion back to the realities of the muggle world, Tom Friedman also offers a fresh condemnation of Palin's kind of patriotism, noting that "at least the king of Saudi Arabia, in advocating 'drill baby drill,' is serving his country’s interests — by prolonging America’s dependence on oil. My problem with Palin is that she is also serving his country’s interests — by prolonging America’s dependence on oil. That’s not patriotic. Patriotic is offering a plan to build our economy — not by tax cuts or punching more holes in the ground, but by empowering more Americans to work in productive and innovative jobs. If Palin has that kind of a plan, I haven’t heard it."

Neither have we.

Debate Prep II

Today on Slate, John Dickerson discusses the wild-card nature of town-hall debates: "Questions from the crowd can easily be turned into 'moments' that journalists cling to for weeks. We're always looking for vignettes that allow us to tell a larger story. A 'moment' by a swing voter is particularly valuable. The questioner, after all, is representative of a worried nation...Voters see themselves in other voters—particularly those defined by television anchors as independent-minded—and tend to repeat these moments to their friends."

In the Wall Street Journal, Amy Chozick argues that town-hall debates tend to break either distinctly positively or negatively for McCain depending on where his 'straight talk' takes him.

"The spontaneous, unpredictable conversational style of the events and the informal interaction with voters seem to bring out the best in Sen. McCain, more than canned, oft-repeated stump speeches do. The group interaction brings out his quick wit and self-proclaimed bent for 'straight talk' -- he often will engage in extended debate with a voter who disagrees with him, even saying directly that the person is wrong. At a summer event in Denver, a woman in a wheelchair asked Sen. McCain whether he would consider supporting the Community Choice Act that would give disabled people greater freedom on where to live. 'I will not,' Sen. McCain responded. 'Because I don't think it's the right kind of legislation.' A trio of people in wheelchairs left the room after his response. In recent weeks, the McCain campaign has sharply curbed the number of such events."

While we can understand why McCain's advisers may not encourage such bluntness, on the other hand it can be disarmingly charming when channeled the right way. At the Saddleback forum in August, McCain openly cited his first marriage as his "greatest moral failure," a personal admission that did much to please the forum's evangelical crowd. Everybody loves a repentant sinner.

However, as Election Day draws near the mud is being slung with greater force and McCain's angry temperament is on full display. Just as McCain was unable to conceal a smile when, back during the primaries, a woman asked him "How do we beat the bitch?" regarding Hillary, now McCain seems unwilling or unable to control the, um, 'spirited' supporters who attend his rallies. Indeed, on Monday McCain revved up his crowd with a rant that concluded with the question "Who is Barack Obama?" The reply from the crowd? "A Terrorist!"

No correction was made.

What will tonight's debate bring? Stay tuned!

One Month to Go

Ever wonder what Karl Rove does on weekends? We suspect he hangs out with Dick Cheney in an undisclosed location, plotting fresh evils to unleash upon the world. But that is just us. This past weekend he drew up some notes for how McCain can get his mojo back and published them in Newsweek. Of course, #1 on the list is to assassinate Obama's character. Sarah Palin already got that message, and is building up her "Obama associates with terrorists" story.

But back to Turd Blossom: "Drawing on Obama's own record and statements, they need to paint him as a big spender, class warrior and cultural elitist; they need to say he's never worked across party lines or gotten his hands dirty solving big issues. But the duo must also give voters reasons to support them. They must crystallize a positive, forward-looking vision so people who see Obama as unqualified have something to hang on to. It can't be a laundry list of positions. McCain-Palin must offer a narrative about what they will do to help America see better days, especially on kitchen-table concerns."

We can't wait to see what our favorite "Mavericks" will come up with next. Also, please note that Rove's article is a response to Jon Meacham's Newsweek cover story, called The Palin Problem. In it, Meacham asks a very important question: "do we want leaders who are everyday folks, or do we want leaders who understand everyday folks?"

Endorsement Time

In its forthcoming October 13th issue, The New Yorker's editorial board will print a well-reasoned and ringing endorsement of Barack Obama for President. Though not brief, this endorsement should serve as the template for any Obama supporter wishing to convince the still Undecided on how to vote. It begins with a stunning account of America's many predicaments, and then moves into Obama's "convincing, rational, and fully-developed vision" for reform. It then deftly uses Obama's reaction to the current economic crisis as a case study to describe his measured and thoughtful approach to governance. Most forcefully, it draws an important distinction between Obama's temperament and McCain's temper. It rightly describes McCain as "impulsive, impatient, self-dramatizing, erratic, and a compulsive risk-taker," and Obama as "temperamentally, intellectually, and emotionally attuned to the complexities of our troubled globe."

No matter what your political views, please take a few moments to read this endorsement. It is one of the finest pieces of writing to come out in this extended election season.

Sunday Morning Round-up

Saturday Night Live delivers a great parody of the Biden-Palin debate.

And on Weekend Update, Bill Clinton stops by to clarify any confusion about who he supports for President...

The New York Times columnists offered up three solid columns this morning:

- From Frank Rich, questions about McCain's limited health disclosures, and Palin's unseemly eagerness to be President.

- Thomas Friedman writes that the next President will have his hands tied by economic circumstances, and will be forced to seek cooperation instead of acting unilaterally.

- And Maureen Dowd channels William Safire, pointing out the numerous follies of Palin's "Frontier Baroque" speakin' style.

And finally, from The Washington Post, a warning from the McCain camp that they are going to start getting really nasty. Warning: watch out for cornered animals.

Reader Response

From Reader JE, a great response to "October Curse" post below:

Wow, I was astonished to read on your blog that you felt that Biden got run over by Palin at the debate last night. Frankly I thought Biden was terrific -- firm, and forceful without ever crossing the line into being rude, and I thought he demonstrated an incredibly comprehensive understanding of all the issues discussed, without coming off as stiff and bookish like Kerry. Palin, on the other hand, was worse than I'd expected her to be. Her efforts at being folksy were transparent and her winking at the camera was rather disturbing. And her inability to actually ANSWER most of the questions she'd been asked was striking.

Was it a home run for the democrats? (To carry over your baseball analogy...) Certainly not. Palin didn't make any huge goofs, and she didn't scurry in tears off the stage. Frankly, I doubt any of these debates (presidential or vice-presidential) really change a lot of minds. If you loved Palin and buy into her "woman-of-the-people" vibe then you probably thought she did great. If you were a die-hard democrat, then you probably find her as ridiculous a figure as I do. I would imagine that there were few minds changed.

But I do feel that by any sort of standard of debating -- in terms of who spoke well, who answered their opponents' criticisms well, who demonstrated a grasp of the issues, and most of all who we could really imagine as stepping in to be the President of the United States, the event went to Biden, no contest.

Meanderings

Peggy Noonan's column for the Wall Street Journal, Declarations, should probably be called Meanderings, but Noonan offers an insightful and valuable perspective . About Mrs. Palin's debate performance: "There were moments when she seemed to be doing an infomercial pitch for charm in politics. But it was an effective infomercial."

About the financial crisis, and Still President Bush's ineptitude at doing a damn thing about it: "We witness here a great political lesson. When you are president, it matters—it really matters—that a majority of the people support and respect you. When you squander that affection, you lose more than mere popularity. You lose the ability to lead when your country is in crisis. This is a terrible loss, and a dangerous one, for the whole world is watching."

And finally, about the danger of divisiveness in electoral politics, and about the morphing of 2004's red-state-blue-state divide into 2008's more specific urban elite vs. the small town 'values' crowd: "'It's time that normal Joe Six-Pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency,' Mrs. Palin told talk-show host Hugh Hewitt. This left me trying to imagine Abe Lincoln saying he represents 'backwoods types,' or FDR announcing that the fading New York aristocracy deserves another moment in the sun. I'm not sure the McCain campaign is aware of it—it's possible they are—but this is subtly divisive. As for the dismissal of conservative critics of Mrs. Palin as 'Georgetown cocktail party types' (that was Mr. McCain), well, my goodness. That is the authentic sound of the aggression, and phony populism, of the Bush White House. Good move. That ended well."

October Curse

The Chicago Cubs, like the Democrats, are famous for folding in the post-season. Last night, as the Cubbies fell to the Dodgers (10-3), and Biden got run over by a folksy (lyin') hockey mom, we got to see both underdogs repeat a familiar routine.

As The New York Times noted this morning, "Ms. Palin never really got beyond her talking points in 90 minutes, mostly repeating clichés and tired attack lines and energetically refusing to answer far too many questions."

True. But she did what Republicans have always done better than Democrats: stick to a narrative about lower taxes, stronger defense, and values (true or not). Biden made good arguments, but Palin was the better salesperson. As the Times of London wrote, "last week, Senator McCain probably lost his first debate against Senator Obama by not winning it. On Thursday night Mrs Palin won her debate by not losing it."

At least in the snap poll following the debate only 42% said that Palin was qualified to be President. She gave a forceful (if sneering) convention speech and debate performance, but fundamentally lacks the domestic and foreign policy knowledge required to be VP or President.

And that's what counts.

D'oh! Homer Struggles to Vote

In this short 1:20 clip, Homer tries to vote for Obama, but the (Diebold) machine won't let him.



Register to vote here.

Alarm Bells

In the last two weeks we noted that the real story to watch is not the stock market but the credit markets. Here is a very compelling narrative of what happened during the first "big" week of the current crisis, charting the problems in the credit markets from prime brokerage to credit default swaps to money market funds. If you've felt a bit lost in all of the credit story this is a good explanation of what happened and how the pieces fit together.

Editor's note: why you should care about banks not lending to one another? The rate that banks charge one another for loans is called LIBOR. As banks do not trust one another, they charge more and more to compensate for the perceived risk of default, and LIBOR increases.

The "main street" problem is that many home, auto, and personal loans are benchmarked off the LIBOR rate. Assume that you have a $100,000 mortgage priced at LIBOR + 3.0%. If Bank A charges Bank B 3.0% to borrow money for 12 months, the consumer rate would thus be 3% (LIBOR)+ 3% (bank's profit)=6%, or $6,000 per year in interest. If LIBOR goes up to 5%, the total interest cost for the consumer also increases, in this case by $2,000 per year.

The scary part: LIBOR is used as a benchmark in $360 trillion dollars worth of loans and derivatives. So for the average consumer the increased cost of LIBOR may affect them directly through their own loans, or as a result of increased costs of goods since all businesses, from manufacturers to retailers, will have higher interests costs.

Would You Like Fries with Your Whopper?

FactCheck.org runs a non-partisan tally of the biggest lies and misrepresentations of 2008.

Mis-underestimated

Sarah Palin has not done herself any favors with the series of Couric interviews. But in these assembled debate clips from her run for governor, she is confident and poised--a reminder that Thursday may not be the blowout the left is expecting.

Two Legs Bad, Four Legs Good

Sarah Palin's readiness to assume the Vice Presidency and (God forbid!) the Presidency remains under fire this week as more of her disastrous interview with Katie Couric is aired on CBS (and replayed all over the internet). At the same time, more conservatives are publicly raising their concerns about her abilities. As CNN reports:

"Republicans say the complaints are coming from 'intellectual' conservatives -- not Main Street Republicans, who they insist love the 'hockey mom,' from Alaska, as Palin describes herself. 'These are the folks that really have responded to the candidacy of a McCain-Palin ticket. These are the folks that are showing up in huge numbers, tens of thousands, to the rallies,' Leslie Sanchez, a CNN political contributor, said."

Apparently the views of those secret arugula eaters--the Republican Intellectual Elite--don't count for much so long as Palin keeps rallying the 'Base.' Indeed, the Base is looking more base all the time.

Also on CNN, Anderson Cooper takes a moment to discuss Palin's inadequacies with James Carville and Bay Buchanan. For a good laugh, watch Bay Buchanan try to spin Palin's down-hominess as a positive, refreshing quality, even in the midst of the most dire economic crisis this country has faced in decades.

How Does This Affect Me?

As evidenced by Monday's vote, the majority of lawmakers and Americans were not convinced that the bailout was in their own best interest.

On this site we've argued that the bailout is lousy but necessary to get the wheels of capitalism moving again. This analysis from the Times David Leonhardt is the first straightforward explanation of how a failure to act will likely hurt us all.

In short: the banks are not lending to one another, and are dramatically increasing the cost of borrowing even for good borrowers because they are afraid they won't get their money back. If this persists, the effects will be severely damaging.

The knock-on effects of no money in the system will hit the manufacturer that can no longer get an equipment lease, the franchise-owner who can't get a loan to buy another franchise, the student who can't fund his or her education. Local banks with no exposure to sub-prime assets will find that their personal loans won't get paid back as borrowers lose their jobs, and secured loans will be in trouble when the underlying assets lose value in the deteriorating economy. People who manage to keep their jobs won't be able to get reasonably priced home or auto loans, which in turn will depress home prices further and put the nail in the auto industry's coffin. Summer camps will see a drop-off in attendance as families can no longer afford the cost for their children--and many will go out of business. Schools will suffer severe funding shortages as the local tax base contracts dramatically, and will be forced to layoff teachers and pack more students in the classroom.

The bailout is a blunt tool, but at least has the potential to soften the blow of what will be a difficult recovery at best.

Civics 101

The events of the last week offer a good refresher course in how Congress works (or doesn't work). But how will the bailout package go from bill to law?