Because I don't have enough posts with the word "Palin" in them

Here's the most shocking thing I've read in a long time. Ready for this?
Sun-Times columnist Mary Mitchell doesn't like Sarah Palin.
Wow.
That surprised me.
Mary argues that a woman who became a mayor of a small town, who went on to become the most popular governor in the US, is a 'laughingstock to feminists.' I guess that if you really want to be a feminist, you have to be hated?

Frankly, Sarah Palin scares me.

Republicans always scare Democrats. Democrats are fearful of anyone who doesn't think like them, and of anyone who shows the regular use of a backbone.
But what's weird about Mary's column is that she is arguing that you can't be a governor of a big state if you have a family.

Even with a supportive husband, I doubt seriously that Palin has time to be a hockey mom unless she is making a personal appearance on a campaign trail.

What? Really? Is Mary making the argument against feminism?

After all, there's no such thing as a superwoman, and children of driven moms make their own sacrifices.

Now I know that I'm in a parallel universe. The left is telling me that its wrong for a woman to be both a mother and hold down a professional job.
What drove them in this direction? A strong Republican woman named Palin.

I now like Palin more then ever.

A photo that made me go "What???"

UPDATE:
Here is the wall, the one in the background of that photo (found on Flickr), that I was talking about.

Now please read the section below, and click on the link for the photo on Yahoo News.

If anyone is reading this, please tell me what your first reaction was when you saw this photo. (I won't copy it to my website because I don't want to violate the copyright)

Its from the headquarters of the Obama campaign.

The Newsweek article on Wasilla

Newsweek recently ran an article on Wasilla to get the rest of us up to speed. Just in case, well, you didn't know what a hick town it was:

You certainly can have a great time swigging beer in two bars that are allowed to stay open until 5 a.m. It was Mayor Palin who rejected attempts to make them close earlier. (If Palin had completely had her way, in fact, you could have sidled up to the bar with a gun.) At the Mug-Shot Saloon, you can memorize the expletives on the collection of bumper stickers next to the well of bottles. But once you leave, you might want to watch your back: in a state that is consistently in the top 10 of the nation's most violent per capita, Wasilla has among the highest per capita violent- and property-crime rates in Alaska.

The crime rate in Wasilla is pretty high. How high is it? Why, it's very similar to the city that Senator Obama comes from (and represents)... Chicago!

Here is the crime rate for Wasilla, and here is the crime rate for Chicago.

• 2005 rate of violent crime in Wasilla (extrapolated, of course) 1,199.7
• 2005 rate of violent crime in Chicago 1,195.7

Those numbers are, statistically speaking, the same.

Anyway, back to the article:

In 1999, when Wal-Mart was the place to shop in Wasilla, a couple who worked there decided to get married in the aisles of the store. Shoppers convened, and tour-bus passengers stopped and gawked. Palin, who was then mayor of the 5,000 or so residents of the town, officiated. Later, she told a reporter that she had to hold back tears. "It was so sweet," she said. "It was so Wasilla."

So I read stuff like that, and I conclude that the author
1) Doesn't like Palin
and
2) Really looks down on the residents of Wasilla

I got curious. As someone with a background in journalism, I smelled a whiff of bias. But I am a journalist, and I wasn't going to accuse Amanda Coyne of bias without reason.
At the end of the article, Newsweek tells us who Amanda is:

Coyne is a freelance journalist based in Anchorage. She’s the cofounder of alaskadispatch.com, an online magazine where commentators have been both supportive and critical of Palin.

Naturally, that made me even more curious. So I dropped by Alaskadispatch.com, where you can find the following headline:

"What Palin sees in Wasilla "

Over a photo of a 'gun loan' store.

Go to Alaska Dispatch and read the headlines yourself.
Of course, that just made me even more curious as to who Coyne is. I clicked on the "About" section of the website, and found this:

Amanda Coyne teaches writing at Alaska Pacific University, free-lances for magazines, and blogs for HuffingtonPost.com. She was a writer and editor at the Anchorage Press from 2001 to 2005. Her work has appeared in Harper’s, The Guardian, The New York Times Magazine, Bust, Alaska Magazine and other publications.

Huh. That's kind of curious.
She blogs for Huffington Post (not exactly a centrist pub) the Guardian (who opening loves Obama) the New York Times (who has already elected Obama president) and Bust. How'd she end up working for Newsweek?

Below that, came the answer that I was looking for.

Tony Hopfinger is a free-lance writer and correspondent for Bloomberg News and Newsweek. Between 1996 and 2005, he was a reporter and editor at newspapers in Idaho, California and Alaska, including the Anchorage Daily News and Anchorage Press. His work has appeared in Walrus Magazine, The Christian Science Monitor, Magazine, The Seattle Times and other publications

So Tony, her compatriot, is also a free lancer for Newsweek.

With that in mind, I wondered what Amanda normally writes about. Here are some of her articles from the Huffington Post:

• Alaska Chants for Oh, Oh, Oh, Obama,
• Life Is A Picnic For Democrats In Alaska,
• Another Alaska Republican Covered In Scandal

Starting to get a general picture of who wrote the article on Wasilla for Newsweek?
Here are some of the articles she wrote for the Alaska Dispatch:

• Sex allegations against Allen may come up in Stevens's trial (written with Tony)
• Alaska's Growing Pains (an article written for the Guardian)
• Taking the perp walk at Anchorage Baptist Temple (I can't describe this article. You have to read it yourself.)

To Amanda's credit, she did write this profile of Palin in 2006. She reprinted it on her website in August of 2008. What did she think of Palin at the time?

Palin has so far prevailed against all odds, and against her own party's mainstream, which not only is against her but at times lately has seemed to be trying to dismantle her campaign. Alaska's Republican Party has had its share of meltdowns, but no politician has stepped from its ashes like Palin, a small-town, angel-faced mother of four, an avid hunter and a fisher with a killer smile who wears designer glasses and heels, and hair like modern sculpture, who's taking it to the boys ever so softly. Whatever happens on Tuesday, her popularity has shown that good-old-boy politics, even in Alaska , in the GOP, may be yesterday's news.

Note the tone of Amanda's coverage on Sarah's "killer smile", heels, and hair.
(There are a lot of things that journalists don't like about Sarah. But part of it, for some reason, is the fact that she's stylish and pretty. I don't get that.)

Anyway, it answered my question of how Newsweek suddenly decided to do a story on Wasilla using a journalist from outside of their realm. They ended up using a writer who honestly doesn't seem to like Wasilla, nor Palin.
Go figure.

Jill Greenberg is a Cunt

That may be the second time I've ever called a woman a cunt.

But Jill Greenberg - the photographer who shoots covers for Time, Wired, the Atlantic, and other trendy mags - is a true cunt.

I get to say this because I'm also a photographer.
But unlike Jill Greenberg, I don't betray the people who trust me to take their photo.
I don't lie to people and pretend like I want to make them look good, only to play a juvenile trick on them.

John McCain made the mistake of posing for Jill Greenberg. He trusted her, which is what you're supposed to do when a major magazine hires a professional photographer. Jill-the-cunt lit McCain from below for some 'special' shots.
Its a standard trick. You learn it in photo 101. Light someone from underneath, and it gives them a very unflattering look. It makes them look evil. The New York Post tells the story:

Asking McCain to "please come over here" for a final shot, Greenberg pretended to be using a standard modeling light.

The resulting photos depict McCain as devilish, with bulging brows and washed-out skin.

"He had no idea he was being lit from below," Greenberg said, adding that none of his entourage picked up on the light switch either. "I guess they're not very sophisticated," she said.

Bullshit, Jill.

I'm willing to bet that you told them that the light below was a 'fill light'.

Any photographer can set up a bunch of lights, and just have the one light pop during the shoot. There is no level of sophistication involved here. Unless someone is trained in photography, they won't notice that most of the light during that 1/250th of a second, when the flash pops, is coming from the light below them.

I would. But then I shoot headshots.

Unlike you, I treat all of my subjects with respect.

John McCain made the same mistake that Mylie Cyrus did, when she trusted Annie Lebowitz to take photos of her. Neither you nor Annie should be trusted to ever take someone's photo again. Annie because she somehow forgot that the girl she was taking provocative photos of, was a 16 year old girl. You, because you let your politics override your responsibility to treat every subject with respect.

Just in case you think that my politics are involved here, they are not.

This is what the New York Post said about Jill Greenberg's blog:

Her Web site now features a series of Photoshopped pics of McCain in some highly unflattering poses - including one that has a monkey squirting dung onto the Republican candidate's head.

Another one reads "I am a bloodthirsty warmongerer," with McCain retouched to have needle-sharp shark teeth and a vicious grin, while licking blood-smeared lips.

Greenberg was unapologetic about the assignment.

Great.

I think she should stick with that head-up-her-ass attitude. I think that any mag that hires her should be treated the same way as any mag who hires a pedophile.

Jill... you are a cunt.

You bespoil my profession. You are no better then the greasy fashion photographers who tell pre-pubescent women that they need to lose weight because they weigh 110 lbs, or the creepy guys who tell women that they only want to shoot their silouhette.

If it were up to me, every magazine would get a copy of the New York Post article with the headline "Jill Greenberg is a Cunt" pasted over it. With an unflattering photo of you with a beard. And devil horns. Because that's soooooo you. That's your style. Your 'sophistication'. Your grade level. Your idea of Art.

I hope that everyone sees your images so that they know how much of a cunt you are.

So much on Palin, that we need a summary

Luckily, ABC news gave a summary of what a lot of members of the press are saying about her. If you don't have a chance to read the hundreds of articles currently being written (I know. Pot. Kettle. Black. I'm guilty.) this is a fun article on how she's being received by the press.
The Note has the best quip about the Obama campaign responding to Palin:

The upside of insularity: There's no panic in Obamaland. The downside of insularity: There's no panic in Obamaland.

I think its time for them to panic.
The only likely voter poll that has Obama up (by one point) is Rassmussen.
The rest have the race tied, or McCain in the lead.

The Vogue cover story on Palin

In case you want to read it:

When term limits forced Palin out of the mayorship in 2002, she was appointed chairman of the Oil & Gas Conservation Commission by the Republican powers that be. The position seemed like a dream. With four children to raise and a husband whose blue-collar job pays an hourly wage, the six-figure salary was more than welcome, but it didn't take her long to become disillusioned by the unethical behavior she witnessed firsthand. "What I saw was so obviously wrong. I was so disappointed and shocked," she says. "Oil and gas revenue account for more than 80 percent of the state's budget, but Alaskans were never going to trust us if that was how we conducted business." When her complaints were ignored, Palin saw no choice but to resign in protest. The once golden girl was suddenly out of a job.

Its a good Palin primer, and might help people understand what McCain saw.

Factcheck clearing house on Palin

Newsweek has a good factcheck article on her.
Its a good place to start to address the rumors.

The little ACORN that could

I'd read before that Obama was connected to ACORN. But for whatever reason, I blew it off.

For those of you who don't know who ACORN is... they are an activist group that shows up at pretty much every rally. When they show up at anti-war rallies, they claim that the US is involved in "racist" wars.
But their random claims of racism are not the main reason why I find them to be threatening. I hate anyone... and I mean anyone, who resorts to violence to silence their critics.
ACORN uses brownshirt type tactics to silence their critics.

So let me start by telling you what their stated goal is: ACORN is a group that tries to get out the vote of low-income housing people.
(Here's a surprising fact: people who don't have jobs aren't always motivated to vote. Huh.)

Sometimes, when they do this, they tend to break the law. Just a little. As stated in this news report:

Investigators said questionable registration forms for new voters were collected by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a group that works to improve minority and low-income communities.The four indicted -- Kwaim A. Stenson, Dale D. Franklin, Stephanie L. Davis and Brian Gardner -- were employed by ACORN as registration recruiters. They were each charged with two counts.

Basically those guys were turning in false registrations of voters. Its a fancy way of saying that they were inventing voters who didn't exist.

Now here's something interesting that the same report noted:

ACORN and Project Vote recruit and assign workers to low-income and minority neighborhoods to register people to vote.

If you don't recognize the name "Project Vote", that's the group that Obama was working for... a long time ago, in a land called Chicago. Its not as radical as ACORN, but they can sometimes get pretty out there. Both groups insist that there are people trying to suppress their vote. (See my comment, above, in parenthesis.)

Back to ACORN:

• They've been accused / indicted in Florida for similiar vote fraud.
• Its a group that is anti-capitalist, and promotes 'welfare rights'.
• Quite naturally, ACORN supports Obama in the election.

So what does Obama have to do with ACORN?
National Review has a great overview that summerizes the connection.

At least a few news reports have briefly mentioned Obama’s role in training Acorn’s leaders, but none that I know of have said what Foulkes reports next: that Obama’s long service with Acorn led many members to serve as the volunteer shock troops of Obama’s early political campaigns — his initial 1996 State Senate campaign, and his failed bid for Congress in 2000 (Foulkes confuses the dates of these two campaigns.) With Obama having personally helped train a new cadre of Chicago Acorn leaders, by the time of Obama’s 2004 U.S. Senate campaign, Obama and Acorn were “old friends,” says Foulkes.

If you're from Chicago, you know what this means. That's how Obama ends up going through the ranks of popularity. He starts out with the more radical organizations, and then works his way into the state senate, and eventually the US senate.

You can also read a great article by Michelle Malkin that explains ACORN better then I can.

You can also read the SunTimes article which brings up his ACORN connection.

In 1995, former Republican Gov. Jim Edgar refused to implement the federal "Motor Voter" law, which Republicans argued could invite fraud and which some Republicans feared could swell the ranks of Democratic voters.

The law mandated people be allowed to register to vote in government offices such as driver's license renewal centers.

Obama sued on behalf of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. The League of Women Voters and other public-interest groups joined in.

For those of you who aren't from Chicago, Motor Voter was a drive to get more democratic votes. The professionally unemployed may not want to leave the house... but they have to in order to get their driver's license.

He also fought against 'red-lining'.

Obama represented Calvin Roberson in a 1994 lawsuit against Citibank, charging the bank systematically denied mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods.

That's when banks denied home loans based on where people lived.

Let me reword that, for those of you who don't understand economics: banks were denying people home loans based on the 'radical' idea that some areas were too high of a risk to expect people to repay a loan.

-And just in case you still don't understand that concept: Look at the lending crisis in America right now. It was caused because banks were encouraged to give loans to people who might not be able to afford to pay them off.

But I'm getting waaaaay off track.
Back to ACORN. Obviously, this group has been connected with voter fraud more often then, say, Mayor Daley. So as Atlas Shrugs points out... why are they still allowed to do voter registration drives?

More importantly, why hasn't the national media followed the connections of Obama to this organization, and tried to find out more?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not seeing a conspiracy. I'm noticing the disinterest in finding out anything that might make him look.... messy.

How to get people to come to your speeches

Hire governor Palin.

According to this article on ABC news, McCain is suddenly having no problem getting people to come to his rallies.
Heck.. even the press is covering them now.
:)

Saturday in Colorado Springs, about 10,000 people waved American flags at McCain's rally in an airport hangar there, and Friday in the town of Cedarburg, Wis., there were more people crowding the main street and the surrounding blocks than the population of the tiny town.

Palin is now the biggest threat to the Democratic establishment.
If you don't think this is worrying them, read this article in the Wall Street Journal. Every lawyer, lobbyist, and slimeball operative that the Democrats have is currently trying to find some dirt in her closet.

Which poll has Obama ahead?

Why... NBC news does.
The rest have the race at tied, or McCain ahead.
Go figure.

"Lipstick On A Pig"

Obama's getting all coy, and pretending like he didn't mean to make any comparison between Palin, and... pigs.
So let's start with Palin's comments about Hockey moms, just a week earlier.
Watch the video.

Now let's look at Obama's comments.
Watch where he pauses... right after the word 'pig'.

If he simply made a mistake, and forgot the lipstick comment the week before.... he's stupid.
If he did this on purpose... then he's desperate and calling his opponents pigs.

More balance at MSNBC. "Up next: Why is Obama so darned cute?"

To make their network seem more fair and balanced, MSNBC took Keith Olbermann off of their anchor desk. And then they hired an uber-liberal to follow Countdown.

I can't even make this kind of stuff up.
This is a video of the first part of her show:


It's weird. They hired on Rachel Meadow, who is something like Obama's bestest friend ever. Watch the video, and tell me what you think.
Particularly about how both of these supposed journalists don't think that Obama wants to "attack" his opponents... and how Palin is Liza Manelli.

Obama is sending out surrogates to attack Palin

According to the International Herald Tribune, advisors to Obama are going to have surrogates argue the case against Palin. Apparently, they're worried about Obama attacking her personally. So the Obama camp is getting democratic females to attack her personally.

Way to go, Dems. That's "classy".

Howard Finemen warns Democrats: Beware of the Barracuda

No, we're not talking about the members of Heart.
We're talking about the most evil women on the planet. Someone more evil then Bush!
[cue evil music]

Sarah Palin!

Howard Fineman, of Newsweek, warns Democrat of the peril of going against Palin.
He starts out with a fairly balanced article, but then gives Democrats this advice:

The first—and for Democrats, the most obvious—way to do so is on abortion. Palin doesn't believe in abortion even in cases of rape or incest. Pro-choice advocates concede her sincerity (she gave birth to a baby she knew was a Down-syndrome child), but are planning an extensive independent ad campaign aimed at women in swing states.

I know what you're thinking: Howard Fineman would do the same thing for Republicans. He's just a couple of articles away from telling Republicans how to beat Obama. It'll happen.

I was wondering what the media was going to do once Bush was out of office. They needed a Republican that was more evil then the most evil of all Republicans.
I guess they found their (wo)man.

US Magazine Follows Other Sheep

Earlier, I commented on the latest Time magazine cover that asked if Evangelicals were really supporting Palin.

Now we have US magazine, with the headline:

Babies, Lies, and Scandal

Note the title of the link; "sarah-palin-very-difficult-to-work-with"
At least the people at US magazine are all in agreement.
Baaaaah. Baaaaaaaah.

Anyway, I expect this to just be the first wave of magazine covers asking us, the dumb electorate, what we were thinking when we approved of her so much! We obviously don't understand how dangerous she is.

I just came back from the grocery store. Newsweek, btw, had both McCain and Palin on the cover. Naturally, I bent down to see what headline they used for the cover.
Would you be surprised to find out that they didn't use one?
I guess its the golden rule: When you can't think of anything nice to say....

Huffington Post sets up comment pages for each Palin family member

Photos of the Palin family members are printed on the Huffington Post, as reported by Moonbattery.

Naturally, the Moonbats can't keep their dumbass comments to themselves on the family members.
Do you suppose that any of the family members would be immune to comments from the left? Your answer would be 'no'. They even pick on Piper. Here's a quote from the comments, on Piper licking her hand and smoothing down her baby brother's hair:

That was nasty. What kind of backwoods, hillbilly crap was that?

Does Olbermann like Conspiracy theorists?

If you don't know who Alan Jones is... all you need to know is that he believes that 9/11 was a conspiracy.
Cool? You got the picture?
If not, you can go to his web page, and you'll get an idea of how out there he is.

For that matter, as you can see in this YouTube on this page, he actually ranted/attacked Michelle Malkin after she dared try to ask him some questions.

So I this with a grain of salt. But his web page insists that Olbermann is giving his group the thumbs-up.
I don't think that Olbermann is that out there.
I think.
Oh, and Olbermann was just fired from anchoring election night coverage. Sure took you guys a while to notice that he was hurting your ratings.
I should note that the main reason that I didn't set my DVR to NBC was because I didn't want to watch the convention while listening to Olbermann rant about how Republicans have ruined the world.
Thanks MSNBC. Took you long enough.

Where did Code Pink get their Republican Badge?

Code Pink crashed the Republican convention a couple of times. They claim that it was easy.
Here's a YouTube video interview with Medea Benjamin, who insists that she was given the press pass by a friendly Republican. Note that Medea also insists that they are equal opportunity disrupters.

She was inside of the convention hall with Jodie Evans. Jodie is a huge Obama supporter. According to Gateway pundit, Jodie Evans was wearing the badge of Annie Eckrich. Of course, Annie has no idea how Evans got hold of her badge.

Considering how dishonest the arguments are of Code Pink, I wouldn't be surprised if they were lying about this too. There is a strong suggestion that they had gotten hold of MSNBC press passes. Which I wouldn't believe, except that MSNBC hates Republicans so much, that it sounds plausible.
If you find out the conclusion of this mystery, please feel free to comment or e-mail me.

A Palin Rumor Clearing House

This is a brilliant idea, and one that I thought of a while back for George Bush.
This blogger has decided to start a rumor clearing house for Sarah Palin. Any rumor that you might have heard about her is either dismissed or confirmed here.

How many rumors can there be? She's only been in the running for something like two weeks.

But there's already Sixty, count 'em, Sixty rumors about Palin on the web (and worse yet) in major news stories.

The most disturbing ones to me? The people who take a serious amount of time out of their day to photoshop images. Sarah in a bikini. Sarah nude. Sarah (no kidding) as a teen.
As a photographer, the poor photoshopping skills annoy me.
As a Republican, the dishonesty of it all just makes me mad. And ready to vote.

The NY Times is trying to figure out Palin

It seems that the New York Times is all over the place trying to explain why Palin is so popular.

First, Frank Rich defines irony by attacking Palin, and talking about how smug and nasty she was when she made fun of Obama. (Frank goes on to attack Palin for defending her pregnant daughter's privacy while being pro-life. Go figure.)

The week before, the Times was telling us that Palin was sloppily vetted. Which was the original narrative that all of the press was going with, since they didn't know who Palin was. (If the press doesn't know who someone is, then how can anyone know???)

But then there is this article. What sets this one apart is that the Times (who at one point tried to characterize Palin's appointment as a desparate move) is not suggesting that it was a masterstroke of planning on an advisor's part.

In the three months since that night in June, the McCain organization has become a campaign transformed: an elbows-out, risk-taking, disciplined machine that was on display here last week at the Republican convention that nominated Mr. McCain. And the catalyst for the change has largely been Mr. Schmidt, 37, a veteran of the winning 2002 Congressional and 2004 presidential campaigns, where he worked closely with Karl Rove, then Mr. Bush’s senior strategist.

A few days from now, when the polls settle in (they are all up in a huge way for McCain) the NY Times will have to write a new story explaining how someone else... not McCain, Palin, or even Schmidt, is to be given credit for picking Palin.
Maybe they'll credit Obama for it.
That would kind of fit.

Obama is not a muslim. He just claims he is.

Yes, I understand it was a slip of the tongue, as this article in the Washington Post makes clear.
No, I don't think that Obama is a muslim.
He said "my Muslim faith" as a mistake, while talking about his Christianity. I'm cool with that. (You can watch the full You Tube video here.)

However, if George Bush made this slip, it would be 'proof positive' that he's retarded. Right?
Yet, when Obama does such gaffes, he's just...
....He's what?
Honestly, I want to know what the difference is. Why does Obama keep getting passes for these gaffes?
Is it because of.... what?

In response to a comment on the previous post

On my previous blog, someone left a comment implying that Sarah Palin needs all of the press 'she can muster.'

When you have a higher approval rating then the presidential candidates from either party, I don't know why. But let's see if she's receiving any press today.

Over at CNN?

Palin's swift rise is the talk of her Alaskan town

As I went around the news websites, I found a few overwhelming themes.

First, this kind from Time magazine:

Are Evangelicals Really Sold on Palin?

I expect to find a lot more of these types of articles... either questioning whether Palin's popularity is real, or blaming the people who like her for being so stupid.

Here's an MSNBC video asking if the country is ready for a First Dude (meaning, Palin's nickname for her husband.)
I expect to read a lot of those articles too. Are you ready for this? Honestly? Is this what you wanted? Really?

On the ABC webpage, I found the Sarah Palin Spotlight section.
Gee. Guess they aren't interested either.
Palin better get on a bunch of those Sunday shows, like my commenter suggested.
:)

Look... this is pretty simple. When you bust in with a higher approval rating then the two actual presidential candidates, the media is going to take notice. They still won't like you because you're a Republican, but they'll grit their teeth and ask you why you like Sarah.

McCain, on the other hand, will never get covered.
Even though his approval rating equals Obama, and the Republican convention beat out the Democratic convention for people actually watching it.
The media will continue to tell us that no one is interested.

All Palin, all the time

If you haven't guessed - like most conservatives - I'm thrilled with her.

We finally have a Republican who won't pull punches. Like Reagan, who famously made fun of Liberals (and made the word an insult that year), Palin has the gift of making a great point.
It was soooo good, that even the people doing commentary for CNN had to give her high scores. 4 out of 5 gave Sarah an "A" on her speech.

I had DVR'd her speech since I was working when she delivered it. I ended up watching it at 2am, punching my fist in the air throughout it, and marveling at the fact that she was calling the Dems out on their bullshit.

My favorite moments? Palin:

• Spoke about how she had been criticized by Obama for merely being a mayor of a small town, and 'conceding' that she had never been a community organizer.
• Young daughter Piper. A little girl who couldn't have been more perfectly cast to look like the ultimate little girl. She was holding the baby when the camera caught her licking her own palm, and then using it to straighten out the babies hair.
• Talking about Iraq, and how the Dems never use the word "Victory" when talking about Iraq.
• Calling out how the Dems avoided using the word "terrorist" for four days.
• Centering in on Obama's tax proposals, and how taxes aren't the fix for a bad economy.

Some things you might have missed about her speech.
From "Live Feed", a television summary blog:

Palin pulled in 37.2 million viewers across broadcast and cable networks, according to Nielsen Media Research.

That's 55% higher than Day 3 of the DNC, when her Democratic counterpart, Joe Biden, and President Clinton took the stage (24 million).

That's huge, and its why the Dems are scared shitless.

They did not see this coming. They tried to portray this as a desperate move on the part of the Republicans. They seriously underestimated Palin, and McCain himself.

How badly?

According to Brietbart, the Republican convention...

...marked the end of an astonishing run where more than 40 million people watched political speeches on three nights by Obama, McCain and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. The Republican convention was the most-watched convention on television ever, beating a standard set by the Democrats a week earlier.

Read that again. The Republican convention was the most watched convention on television. Ever. In one fell swoop, Palin dropped a speech bomb on Obama.

She has a 58% approval rating, according to Rasmussen. How big is that?

Perhaps most stunning is the fact that Palin’s favorable ratings are now a point higher than either man at the top of the Presidential tickets this year. As of Friday morning, Obama and McCain are each viewed favorably by 57% of voters.

Its yet to be seen whether or not Palin has a positive effect on the McCain camp. (I can't imagine her not having some effect, but I'm horrible at these predictions.)

However, a poll by CBS has the two presidential candidates essentially, even:

The presidential race between Barack Obama and John McCain is now even at 42 percent, according to a new CBS News poll conducted Monday-Wednesday of this week.

Yowsa!

Its no wonder that every Democratic lawyer/investigator in the Obama camp is running to Alaska to try to dig up some dirt on Palin.

Of course, that could be a problem in itself. You see, Sarah Palin is horribly popular in her home state. Ya know, that might just be why she was picked, rather then the media concluding that she was picked because she's a girl.

According to the Anchorage Daily News, from an article written in May of 2007:

With the latest poll showing her approval rating at 89 percent, Gov. Sarah Palin may now be the most popular governor in the nation.

Okay... so lets suppose you are a presidential candidate. Your obvious 'go-to' for a vice president is a governor. Who do you go with?

Maybe the most popular governor in your party? Ya think? Particularly one who delivers speeches like Palin does, with that spirit that she captures?

What If A Republican was caught saying this?

In the next anti-terror bill passed by Democrats, they will ban video cameras from airplanes. At least, they will after this incident.

The ex-chair of the DNC, Don Fowler, was on an airplane flying away from Denver. Some enterprising person started a video recorder on his conversation. They caught him laughing up a storm (pun intended) when talking about how God is on the side of Democrats... because a hurricane was about to fall on the coast of New Orleans taking the thunder (pun intended) from the RNC.

Fowler apoligized for the remarks. He's tried to pass them off as just an obscure reference to Fallwell's rather absurd comments. But that's not the point. When you watch him, he's genuinely glad that Gustav is making landfall. He's not just making a joke, like I did with the puns above. He's just darned glad that the RNC has to compete with a hurricane.

Remember a while back when some jags from Enron were caught on tape joking about how they were going to rip off people? This tape has the same feel to it. You realize how this guy really thinks.
The difference is that when the Enron tape came out, no one was worried that someone had broken into the private conversation between two executives.
In the case of Fowler, Democrats are actually quietly arguing that it was creepy to tape Don.

Again, if it were a Republican who was caught saying the same thing...

Arnold, in the previous RNC convention

There's a fun website called "American Rhetoric." Its basically a bank of speeches and quotes that its keeps on hand, taken from movies and politics.

Just recently, I ran across the speech that Arnold Schwarzenegger made for the 2004 Republican convention. Its beautiful. I hope that every speaker who takes the stage for the RNC convention this year listens to it before writing theirs. It would give them a hint to what their audience wants to hear.

I know that many people think that Arnold is the punchline to a joke. The thing is, Arnold knows that. He also knows that he wouldn't be famous or wealthy without the opportunities that this country gave him. Which is why he's a Republican.

Politico, and McCain being 'desperate'

Politico got slammed this week by its readers for printing "6 things Palin pick says about McCain".
The number one thing they wrote?

He’s desperate.

Apparently, I'm not the only Republicans that took offense to that. Politico was surprised to find their inbox filled with e-mails of protest.

I'd like to think that the reporters took this to heart. But judging from the e-mails that they picked (which seem to be a collection of the poorest e-mails ever written) I don't think that they're thinking was swayed.

Its annoying that they insinuate that those who e-mailed them were activists. (I almost did, but had to run at the time.) But its more annoying that they don't seem to get why people were angry with their presumptions.

Since I didn't write it there, I'll write it here.
McCain was only trailing by a few points, in the polls, behind Obama when he picked Palin. That's hardly the time to be desperate. This was despite the fact that Obama's been getting the vast majority of the press coverage.

If anyone should be in a desperate situation, it should be Obama.
He's lost ground over the past month, and can't seem to seal the deal. Seldom has a lovefest between a candidate and his press existed like that between Obama and the MSM. Yet, the poor guy can't top 50% in the polls.

And this poll from Zogby suggests that its a dead heat. 47% for Obama, 45% for McCain. Moreover, according to that poll, 52% of the electorate feels that Palin will help McCain's chances.

CNN puts Obama at 49%, and McCain at 48%.

This poll by Rassmussen says:

Palin Makes Good First Impression: Is Viewed More Favorably than Biden

They break the numbers down further.

Palin earns positive reviews from 78% of Republicans, 26% of Democrats and 63% of unaffiliated voters.

The unaffiliated numbers are the really great ones. Those are the ones that McCain would love to tie down.

So if this move by McCain was 'desperate', it worked desperately well.

Daily Kos thinks Palin faked her baby

I don't run a website where people maintain public diaries.

I say this, because if I did, I'd moderate the living fuck out of it. I wouldn't let any jag dork write something stupid that would make me look like an asshole later on.

For instance, oh.. I dunno... let's say that I insinuated that Palin isn't really the mother of Trig, her child who has Down's Syndrome.
Let's say that I accused her 16 year old daughter of having her.
You know? Like this jerk at DailyKos did:

Well, Sarah, I'm calling you a liar. And not even a good one. Trig Paxson Van Palin is not your son. He is your grandson. The sooner you come forward with this revelation to the public, the better.

Keep in mind, there is no proof of this. Its just a bunch of photos that the blogger found, and who apparently can't keep the dates correct on when they were taken.
He / she uses these photos to suggest that Sarah couldn't be pregnant at the time, because she doesn't look it. In the meantime, he/she points to a photo of the daughter and suggests that she looks like she might be pregnant in the photo.

This offends me on so many levels I don't know where to start. But I'll try.
1) If you're going to accuse a 16 year old girl of hiding the fact that she had a kid, you better have damn good evidence. At least something more then a burning desire to slander her mother. I think that whoever wrote that blog forgot that she is a 16 year old girl. Jackass, you just accused a 16 year old girl of getting pregnant and hiding her pregnancy. Dick move on your part.
2) An even more dickish move? To point to the photo of a 16 year old girl (a year ago) and go: "hey, she looks pregnant." Honestly, if this were my daughter, the originator of the post would find himself/herself on the receiving end of the first fist that I've ever thrown in anger.
3) Accusing someone of lying with no evidence. None. Unless you consider looking at misdated photographs, and writing out loud that she's not fat enough to be pregnant 'evidence'.

If it turns out that Trig really is her grandson, I will publicly apologize to the absolute jagoff who wrote that, print this post, and eat it. And I'll post photos of me eating it online.

In the meantime, its good to see that at least 5% of the population of The Daily Kos recognizes that posts like that only make them all look like assholes. Particularly when there are so many on that board that are saying things like, "Yeah! I'll bet the kid is her grandson!"

Fun at MSNBC with Olbermann

This makes me happier then the Easter Bunny!
Yay!
There is infighting at MSNBC.
I reported, earlier, how Joe Scarborough got into a tiff with Olbermann. Apparently, that's just the tip of it.
In this article at Politico, they describe the tensions that have been building behind the scenes. I guess you can't attack your fellow anchors on air without a little bit of fur flying.

I know that MSNBC won't fire Olbermann. You have to demean a person of another race for that to happen. But I predict its only a matter of time before Olbermann gets his lunch handed to him on air.
Heck, Joe pretty much bitch slapped him earlier when Olbermann said "get a shovel". Joe's response was priceless.
I think that the next time that Olbermann falls over the edge, someone's going to go to town on his behind. Personally, I can't wait to see it. Particularly after Olbermann's horrible distortions of the truth.

Rome and the DNC

Trying to blunt criticism of Obama as being 'elitist' and 'arrogant', the DNC built a roman collesium for Obama's Thursday speech.

Wait. What?
This is so far out there, that Republicans weren't sure how to address it. According to ABC's Political Radar:

"Is this from the Onion?" quipped a McCain adviser.

That would make sense, wouldn't it?
But this is real.
A Greek / Roman stage has been built for Obama's Thursday night appearance. After he talks, fireworks will go off. Oh, and I mentioned earlier that CNN paid for a blimp to cover all of this.

I think its safe to say that in 2008, the Democratic Party is embracing the empty photo op as something that they can get behind.

Various outlets are predicting that Obama will give his best speech yet.
Of course, they say that about every Obama speech. Obama speeches are like ER episodes.

The most moving ER episode... ever. This one, you have to see. Don't miss it. Why aren't you in front of your TV already?

We've all seen those commercials.
That's what Obama speeches are like. Except with more stedicams.

"No, he's not a Messiah. We just worship him."

The New Republic gets stupid, again, in an article dismissing the idea that they think of Obama as a messiah. They write:

The hysteria about Obama's alleged messianism is, in part, a calculated response to his wild popularity with the Democratic base.

Uh, no its not.
There is nothing calculated about watching a bunch of people chanting "O. Bam. Ah." at a rally and thinking, "Huh. That might be unhealthy."
There is a population of people out there who literally think that if Obama gets elected, their lives will suddenly get better. That Obama will take care of them.

Just so that we're all clear on this, I understand what Democrats believe.
Democrats don't think of Obama as actually being the return of Jesus Christ to our earth.
There is a big difference for Democrats. To start with, Democrats don't believe in believing in Christ. At least as a party. That's soooo 1974. Yes, the Dems are co-opting the idea of believing in God for this convention. They are allowing prayer meetings and that kind of thing. But that's just a big photo op.

-And I think its pretty funny to watch Democrats try to toe the line between offending the bitter gun-toting-Jesus-freaks, and offending their own bitter Pagan-ritual-astrology-vegitarians-against-Christ. Nothing entertains me more then the guy wearing pyramid earings talking about Fein Shei who questions those who read a bible.

On the other hand, there has to be a word for it when someone looks at a potential leader and actually believes that this Democrat (as opposed to Bill, the last one-who-will-set-us-free) is the real deal. No, that word isn't a Messiah. And its not hope.

I believe the word for those type of believers is... Naive.

What if Global Warming Wasn't?

I know. I know. All these scientists agree that we're in a warming trend. Right? Not according to this article by weatherman Tom Skilling:

Decade has had fewest 90-degree days since 1930

How did that happen? How can Chicago have one of the coldest decades on record (since 1930) and the rest of the world is warming?
This is just part of the story. Keep watching.

Rap Song advocates killing O'Reilly, Michelle Malkin

I won't mention the name of the band, because the only reason that they're doing this is because of the publicity.
If I print their name, then they get the pub they wanted.
But I honestly hope that if/when someone takes retribution on them, these morons get the definition of irony.

Olbermann once again proves that he's an idiot

Olbermann, in covering the elections, had a reporter named Joe who was commenting on the McCain campaign. If I understand the background, Joe was telling Olbermann that McCain was gaining serious ground.

Olbermann - being the asshat he is - asked Joe if he needed a shovel.

Joe - being an actual reporter, rather then someone who fellates Democrats - smacked down Olbermann with facts.

Watch it until the end. Its a great example of how a blowhard can be left speechless when challenged.

Governor Rendell calls pro-Obama coverage embarassing

In a panel discussion that included Tom Brokaw and George Stephenopolous, Governor Rendell called out the MSM.
According to the Politico:

"Ladies and gentleman, the coverage of Barack Obama was embarrassing," said Rendell, in the ballroom at Denver's Brown Palace Hotel. "It was embarrassing."

Yes. Yes it was.
More embarrassing was the comments by Judy Woodruf at the event. She suggested that Rendell sit down.
So much for freedom to speak about the press.

Phil Spector votes against Capital Punishment

Guess who wants to vote Obama?
If you're a rock star accused of murder, you probably want to go with the guy who is lenient on crime.
According to Wired, Spector was recently wearing a "Barack Obama Rocks!" pin.
He's gotta be proud.

TV Networks are working overtime on Photo Op

McCain creates a photo op, and the networks complain that its a photo op.
Obama creates a photo op, and the networks try to make it a better photo op.

From the New York Times...

When Barack Obama accepts his party’s nomination on Thursday before a capacity audience of 70,000 at Invesco Field in Denver, an aerial camera will hover above the stadium turf, using a TV technique normally applied at football games.

The special camera angle — and CNN’s decision to spend close to $100,000 on it — shows the steps networks are willing to take to compete for viewers as the presidential campaigns move into the fall.

So CNN is spending $100,000 to get the best angle of Barack's big speech.
But I assure you... there is no liberal bias in the media.

Former POW back's McCain's "cross in dirt" story

From the National Review; Orson Swindle, another POW, remembers McCain telling him this story back in 1971.

"I recall John telling that story when we first got together in 1971, when were talking about every conceivable thing that had ever happened to us when we were in prison" Swindle told me a few minutes ago.

Kinda kills the whole idea that McCain has been cribbing this idea from someone else.
When it comes to using original material, its McCain - 1, Obama - 0.

John McCain's POW story

There is a great story on John McCain from US News and World Report. It was originally written in May of 1973. In it, McCain describes some of the propaganda that was used against them from the people who were protesting the war.

If you ever had any doubts about what McCain went through, this is a good place to start.
A short passage of what happened when McCain complained that he was being treated like an animal:

When I said that, the guards, who were all in the room—about 10 of them—really laid into me. They bounced me from pillar to post, kicking and laughing and scratching. After a few hours of that, ropes were put on me and I sat that night bound with ropes. Then I was taken to a small room. For punishment they would almost always take you to another room where you didn't have a mosquito net or a bed or any clothes. For the next four days, I was beaten every two to three hours by different guards. My left arm was broken again and my ribs were cracked.

McCain is not my ideal candidate. But its important to note what he's been through.

Milorad Cavic ; Olympic class

You don't know his name, but you should.
You see, Milorad was racing Michael Phelps in the 100 meter butterfly. Cavic was ahead by a stroke when Michael - defying the physics of water resistance - took one last stroke to win by 1/100th of a second.

To put that into context, its the smallest amount you can win by. Everyone in the stadium, including Michael's own mom, thought that Cavic had won until they looked at the scoreboard. NBCs commentator went apeshit when he realized what had happened.

But that's not what this post is about.

You see, Milorad Cavic swims for Serbia. -And Serbia decided to challenge the race results. Serbia did, but not Milorad. According to his website:

Filing a Protest: Yes, as you all saw, I almost won the Gold, and if you ask me, the clock does not lie. I had nothing to do with this filing, and neither did my coach Mike Bottom. This is just another attack on my coach who has done never wronged anyone in swimming, except coach foreign athletes (non-Americans) to Olympic medals. You all have to understand that any coach would have done this for their swimmer if there were any possibility of error, but I’m sorry to disappoint, it was my Olympic committee and swimming staff who did the filing. We’re not “sour grapes” and we’re not “pissed”… If you ask me, it should be accepted and we should move on. I’ve accepted defeat, and there’s nothing wrong with losing to the greatest swimmer there has ever been.

Milorad, you are completely right... and one classy man. I honestly felt for you when Michael beat you, because you swam one hell of a race. Mike beat you by the smallest of margin's humanly possible while tearing apart pretty much every swimming record along the way.
If you have to lose a jump shot, lose it to Jordan. If you have to lose a putt, lose it to Tiger Woods.

You lost by 1/100th of a second to the greatest swimmer on the planet... someone that even Marc Spitz looks up to. You had an amazing day, and you handled it with class.

Thank you.

"Big Law" versus "Big Oil"

Its interesting to me how "Big Oil" - some dark conspiracy of unnamed oil executives - has become the latest bogeyman. Its even displaced "Big Insurance Companies."

The Democrats are using Big Oil to good effect with a MSM that's more then willing to oblige. Heck, we just had a film about evil oil men in the visage of "There Will Be Blood," and there's been a lot of drama made about the fact that John McCain has recieved more then a million dollars from the oil industry.
It made me wonder about the other industries that are contributing to the election campaigns.

What industry do you suppose is the number one contributor to Barack's campaign?
That's right; lawyers.
According to this page on Open Secrets, Obama has recieved over $20 million from lawyers and legal firms.
Now if I have to be worried about oil executives because they gave a million dollars to McCain... what should I think of the twenty million that lawyers have given Barack?

John Edwards, on 'personal lives'

In the past week, I've argued with a number of people over the relevance of a candidates personal life. Edwards made a great argument as to why its relevant.
He made these comments in an interview with 60 minutes. People were questioning his judgement about whether he should stay in the race while his wife had cancer. Edwards said that he didn't want people to vote for him just because his wife was sick. Then he said this:

But, I think every single candidate for president, Republican and Democratic have lives, personal lives, that indicate something about what kind of human being they are. And I think it is a fair evaluation for America to engage in to look at what kind of human beings each of us are, and what kind of president we'd make.

Let me expand on that.

If a man can't remain faithful to the one person in his life who he's claimed to love and cherish forever, then how should I trust him to have my best interests at heart, when he's never met me?

Let me go further.
People like to point out that 50% of men cheat on their wives. Yes, I understand that. That's the lower half of men. Why do I want to vote for the lower half of men? The one's who are clearly motivated by greed and desire, without any consideration for the feelings of the one person that they claim to love the most?

If you don't want to vote for a man who would take advantage of women and children that he's never met... why would you vote for a man who will take actions that will hurt those closest to him?

Anyway, thanks Mr. Edwards for making it clear that personal lives of the candidates are relevant. Now do yourself a favor and drop out of public life, and stand by your own words.

Vapid Edwards, Vapid Vanity Fair

Because of the National Enquirer report on John Edwards, I started to visit his website. I was curious about how much John Edwards talks about his family.
It turns out, he has a whole section of his "about me" for his wife and his daughter Cate.

You know what? If you want to run for president while cheating on your wife... great. I won't vote for you, but cool. Whatever. Its your life. You fuck it up.

Its her problem for getting involved with you. I know so many women who willingly block out such bullshit because they want to believe that they are different from the previous women that their husband has cheated on. They honestly think that they are the first woman that the man will faithful to.
They are naive, but its their problem.

But do me a fucking favor, and don't try to bullshit me into believing that I should vote for you because you are a family man.
Leave that shit off of your website.
If you don't have the integrity to divorce your wife before having an affair with a twenty-something, then don't even try to con me into believing you love her. -Or that you're faithful to her. -Or that you'll be more honest with me then you were to your wife.

John Edwards:
Assuming that you weren't at a hotel to provide emergency child care for a single mother... You are a dick. I hope she asks for the vice presidency as part of the divorce proceedings. If she does, I might actually vote Democratic just to see you whimper as she gets the title of VP.

One other thing I learned while dropping by the Edwards website, and its about John's daughter Cate:

Cate later lived in New York City, working as an editorial assistant for Vanity Fair magazine. She currently attends Harvard Law School.

Vanity Fair is a horrible mag. I'm not saying that because it leans so far left. (They actually have a "Bush Countdown" clock on their website.)
Its horrible because its one of the most vapid and shallow magazines I ever had the disdain to subscribe to. Yes, I actually subscribed to it... once. I thought it would be a good experiment to read something that I wouldn't ordinarily read, and the subscription was really cheap. Bad writing is usually very cheap.

So it made a lot of sense when I read that Cate Edwards, daughter of John Edwards, worked for Vanity Fair. This is the same magazine that trumpeted liar Joe Wilson (husband and wife of Valerie Plame/Wilson) as a whistleblower. Its the magazine that has a section on the "Sexiest Models" in this issue. It defends the NY Times.
Its so vapid that they actually have an article this month on The Unbearable Dullness Of Luxury Goods.
I'm not even going to touch their taste in music on their "Hot Tracks" page. Fuck... I gotta say something!
Apparently, you can't be a hot track unless you sound British.

I am a pacifist. I don't believe in violence. But if I could magically blink my eyes and improve the world with one nod of my head, I would use my mystical powers to make Vanity Fair disappear. It would improve the IQ of the US, and quite possibly make women love themselves again. It would definitely improve the political discourse of this country and there would be one less website with a George Bush Countdown Clock on its website, or a "Countdown to Obama" clock on their desktop workstation.
American music would start sounding less like Americans trying to sound British. And poor Cate, daughter of John Edwards, wouldn't have to sit on her hands as her boss at Vanity Fair explains away why her dad really isn't a dick... but just another wealthy Democratic presidential candidate who cheats on his wife.

Obama is losing traction after Berlin World Tour

He was covered live by the MSM while he gave his speech in Berlin.
He's been covered by so many magazines, news reports, and Olberman gushing that a poll suggests that half of Americans are tired of hearing about him.

How bad has it gotten?
He's dropping in the polls.

For the second day in a row Rasmussen shows John McCain and Barack Obama tied with 44 percent and with "leaners" added, McCain takes a 1 percentage point lead. Zogby also shows McCain with a 1 percent lead and Obama losing support with the young and women

A while back, I predicted to friends that - at some point - the Obama fascination would get old. After all, you think the prom king is cool when you're in high school. A couple years later, you see him working at his dad's office and he's not as cool anymore.

Obama is starting to work for his dad. (Note to Democrats: I mean that as a metaphor.)
It was bound to happen. After all, that Berlin thing was pretty over the top. To date, no one can explain to me why an American presidential candidate - in the middle of the election - has to campaign in Berlin.

The weird thing is that Obama hasn't had his Dean scream yet. I thought the Dean scream might have been the seat on his campaign airplane with the word "President" written on it.
I was wrong.
Apparently, no one thinks that's weird.
But people do seem to have a problem with him giving that speech in Berlin. And just for tonight, that will reenforce my belief in my fellow man.

Atlas Shrugs pwned Obama on donations

I've been looking into this myself, but I'm not as good as the staff of Atlas Shrugs. Their detailed articles on contributor Monir Edwan, an Obama contributor from the Gaza strip, is extraordinary.
A short summary, in case you haven't kept up on this:

Monir has two receipts. One dated 10/27/07 for $1,290.63 (primary - this is in the FEC file), the second dated 10/30/07 for $1,671.85 (primary - this is in the FEC file). The total on the receipt for Election Cycle is $9,598.54 (above allowed). NOTE THE TOTAL HE GAVE JUST ON 10/30/07 ACCORDING TO THE FEC FILE IS $7,435.81.

Atlas Shrugs would get a Pulitzer for their in-depth research if they were not a blog. -Or if they were reporting on contributions to a Republican.
If you don't understand how important this is, maybe I can help. A Palestinian has illegally contributed just under $10,000 to Barack Obama.
This leads me to two key questions:

• Why? Why would you donate $10,000 to Barack if you lived on the Gaza strip? As an American president, how would Obama affect your future that much if elected?
• Why wasn't this caught by the Obama campaign? Every campaign has some form of auditing to make sure they don't break election laws. This isn't because all campaigns want to be honest. Its because they know it looks bad if they get caught breaking FEC laws.

Congrats to Atlas Shrugs on their research! They earned a spot on my toolbar with their homework.

The small donors for Obama get bigger

Remember being told about how Obama was getting support mainly from small internet donations?

Uhm... it turns out that's not true. At least not now.
The always dubious International Herald Tribune has an article about Obama's big donors. Granted, I always have doubts about the International Tribune, however, this is their conclusion:

But records show that a third of his record-breaking haul has come from donations of $1,000 or more - a total of $112 million, more than the total of contributions in that category taken in by either Senator John McCain, his Republican rival, or Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, his opponent in the Democratic primaries.

Yes, the man of the little people. The little people who can give $1,000 or more to a presidential candidate.

Will anyone admit Obama's real problem?

I don't get it.
If you were to rank the criticisms on a scale of 1-10 of Obama, what would be in first place?

1) Arrogant / self-aggrandizing

Right? That's 'our' worry, those of us who have been trying to warn others of him?
Right?

So if you were the campaign chief of staff, and you KNEW that, wouldn't you take every step to blunt that criticism? To make everyone believe that the charges of "arrogance" weren't true?

I mean, you don't need to have Obama prostrating himself in front of the press. But after the "presidential seal" fiasco, and the "presidential Euro trip" thing, wouldn't you try to tone down the presumptuousness?

Or does his staff think that's his best trait?

They must, because of this:

His chair has his name and campaign logo embroidered on the back top -- “Obama ‘08” on one line and “President” underneath.

Not "for president".
President.

If you think I'm making this up, look at the photo (CBS/Allison Davis O'Keefe):




Again... presuming that you were the person running the campaign, wouldn't you try to AVOID this kind of presumptiveness?
I know what you're thinking: "we'll... maybe he's owned this for a while"
No.
From the same article:

Barack Obama’s new campaign plane is nothing short of grand. Well, for the candidate that is.

What am I missing?
What makes this guy so special that he can just be president without a vote?
Even more importantly, what makes his campaign people so incompetent that they keep on allowing this side of him to show? -Or is it that Barack is SO arrogant, that they can't even STOP it from happening?

Obama and 200,000 Berliners, flyered in

How do you get 200,000 Berliners to show up for a presidential press conference? I mean, when you're not actually president?
You have your staff flyer the city.
Patrick Ruffin had linked to the flyer before the speech. Later, I read a report (yeah, I can't find the damn thing now) about how staff distributed flyers around the city.

This is what I find interesting about that report:
I can't find any references to it today. Which either means that I imagined it, or that none of the press thinks that was important enough to mention.

You almost have to admire the ability of the MSM to go along with the photo op.