McCain defends Obama as "decent, family man"

Allahpundit writes:

He did the right thing, needless to say, but I’m not sure how this squares with Palin telling people at fundraisers how many supporters are urging her to take the gloves off. It all goes back to this morning’s post: McCain wants to win the election but doesn’t seem to have the stomach to get truly nasty, so he compromises by bringing up Ayers but not pressing the issue too much. Gotta commit one way or another, champ. As it is, it’s a sad, strange situation to have one candidate forced to stick up for the other candidate in front of his own audience.

Now that he’s defended Obama, I think it gives The One cover to call him out on it at the debate on Wednesday in the guise of, “John, I appreciate you trying to set the record straight on my behalf, but this climate you’ve created…” etc etc. In the meantime, here’s the only video I’ve been able to find thus far. Shuster aired the footage where the woman in the audience calls Obama an Arab a few minutes ago, and McCain really did almost yank the mike out of her hand before she could get going and make it worse. It’s not up on MSNBC’s website yet, but if I see it somewhere, I’ll update. Click the image to watch.

He did do the right thing. I think McCain will lose, but going out honorably will ensure he's not remembered as the man who instilled hate in a campaign of such magnitude. Chris Buckley was right when he said McCain is the sort of man who should lead America, but that he's lost his way. Indeed, he has, but this moment proves that he is a man of substance, honor, and a true American patriot.

Now can he dump Sarah Palin so I can vote for him?

McCain's redemption?

Perhaps this is a sign of the old McCain, rearing his head after so long...

But then something weird happens: He acknowledges the "energy" people have been showing at rallies, and how glad he is that people are excited. But, he says, "I respect Sen. Obama and his accomplishments." People booed at the mention of his name. McCain, visibly angry, stopped them: "I want EVERYONE to be respectful, and lets make sure we are."

The very next questioner tried to push back on this request, noting that he needed to "tell the American the TRUTH about Barack Obama" -- a not very subtle way, I think, to ask John McCain to NOT tell the truth about Barack Obama. McCain told her there's a "difference between record and rhetoric, and I plan to talk about his record, respectfully... I don't mean that has to reduce your ferocity, I just mean it has to be respectful."

And then later, again, someone dangled a great big piece of low-hanging fruit in front of McCain: "I'm scared to bring up my child in a world where Barack Obama is president."

McCain replies, "Well, I don't want him to be president, either. I wouldn't be running if I did. But," and he pauses for emphasis, "you don't have to be scared to have him be President of the United States." A round of boos.

Good for McCain. There's more. Read it...

Sorry Dad, I'm voting Obama...

Son of William F Buckley, father of the Conservative movement, Christopher Buckley is voting Obama. A quote:

John McCain has changed. He said, famously, apropos the Republican debacle post-1994, “We came to Washington to change it, and Washington changed us.” 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?

All this is genuinely saddening, and for the country is perhaps even tragic, for America ought, really, to be governed by men like John McCain—who have spent their entire lives in its service, even willing to give the last full measure of their devotion to it. If he goes out losing ugly, it will be beyond tragic, graffiti on a marble bust.....

.....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.

So, I wish him all the best. We are all in this together. Necessity is the mother of bipartisanship. And so, for the first time in my life, I’ll be pulling the Democratic lever in November. As the saying goes, God save the United States of America.

Maverick?

McCain used to kind-of-sort-of ACT like a maverick without actually labeling himself as one.

Now he labels himself a maverick without actually acting like one.

Thoughts on the Republic

"A return to first principles in a republic is sometimes caused by the simple virtues of one man. His good example has such an influence that the good men strive to imitate him, and the wicked are ashamed to lead a life so contrary to his example. "

~Niccolo Machiavelli

Classical Libertarian Conservatism

I just have to say, these are very similar sentiments to my own. At this point, a McCain defeat will actually probably be a blessing in disguise for conservatives. Of course, for the social-cons and others, this will perhaps only spark greater belief in the notion that we need more hard-core social conservatives on the ticket, though perhaps the failure of Palin to deliver will water this down. Maybe that will be McCain's gift to secular conservatism--picking Palin and still losing may weaken the social-cons' claims, whereas a Lieberman or Ridge pick would have only strengthened them.

In any case, I look forward to a conservatism that is actually fiscally responsible, that can approach globalism with wisdom and care, protecting American jobs while still building wealth. I look forward to a conservatism that is strong on defense, but not reckless, invested in humanitarian concerns, but not at the cost of American security. I look forward to a conservatism that hearkens back to our Classical Liberal beliefs in equality and freedom and separation of Church and State. I look forward to an acceptance of smart regulation, tax reform, and less national debt (and increased domestic production of goods, and a compassion for American manufacturers!)

I look forward to a divorce of modern conservatism from the chains of hard-liner social conservatism, that has turned American conservatism into Christian populism, and has eschewed elites for "joe six-packs."

Reagan busted up unions, but also fought for the American worker. Goldwater openly denounced the Christian Coalition. Where has this integrity gone? Have we become so beholden to the Religious Right? to the Banking Industry that has sold our soul to globalism at any and every cost? I am a globalist, but I believe the only way to enter a global economy is with strength and solidarity. The financiers have betrayed us. We can't even clothe ourselves without the help of the Chinese now...

Conservatism must enter the fire and reemerge stronger, more focused, and leaner. It must accept smart regulatory practices, and pledge to actually limit government. Quite frankly, so must liberalism, which has become vapid and emotional and absurd.

Perhaps a new center will emerge. Smart, lean, strong, and ready to actually work for America. Perhaps.

I suppose lately I am leaning more toward an Andrew Sullivan brand of conservatism--pro gay-rights; hawkish but not too hawkish; fiscally sensible; and not governed by absurd party lines. He describes himself as a Classical Libertarian Conservative.

He views true conservatism as classical libertarian conservative, where economic control of a citizen's daily life by the government is very limited. However, this style of conservatism differs from classic libertarianism in that some governmental control or regulation is acceptable in order to preserve a functional society as it currently exists. Stances on social or cultural issues, under this style of conservatism, resemble the stances of classical libertarianism or modern U.S. liberalism. While stances on foreign policy are more hawkish than classic libertarianism, this style of conservatism differs from current neo-conservatism and arguably more closely resemble U.S. liberalism from the early 1930s up until the late 1960s. In the foreign policy sphere, Sullivan's foreign policy views have become somewhat less hawkish following the difficulties of the Iraq War.

And at this point, I'm in almost complete agreement with Sullivan on Obama, McCain, Palin, etc. Conservatives may howl at this, but at this point I think Obama would be a better choice for the country than McCain/Palin. It's just time, yes, for a change. It's time to re-evaluate what it means to be conservative, American, part of a global world. It's time.

Four reactions to the debate

Culture 11 is a relatively new, and very modern Conservative website. I actually like it a great deal, and plan to spend more time there in the future. I especially like this new four-part editorial

David Kuo writes:

Today’s conservatism is lost. It is so lost it doesn’t actually know if it lost at sea, lost in space, or lost in a desert. It lacks moral courage, a philosophical core, and intellectual certitude. McCain’s defeat will help change all of that because his defeat will lead to a debate within conservatism unlike anything in several decades.

Peter Suderman writes:

Obama, as always, appeared sophistacted, urbane: He held the mic in that delicate, refined way of final-level American Idol contestants, and constantly seemed to be holding an imaginary pen in the air and trying to visualize it. He will solve America’s energy crisis with telekinesis.

McCain, on the other hand, came off as less the high-toned maverick and more the self-satisfied frat-boy goof: He started several of his answers with an Igor-via-Beavis-and-Butthead chuckle: heh-heh, heh-heh. Sorry dude: not funny.

One thing that’s clear from this debate is how little there is to John McCain and his campaign.

Conor Friedersdorf writes:

One striking thing is what didn’t happen. After days of staring into television cameras telling America that Obama is a closet terrorist sympathizer, Senator McCain blinked when they were face to face. How will Americans who watched those speeches and ads — and then watched this debate — react? My guess is that they’ll find the Illinois Senator a pretty regular, level headed guy, whatever they think of him on the issues. Talk about lowering expectations before the debate! The McCain campaign prepared the nation for a new Che Guevara. What we got is a candidate who Aaron Sorken might’ve written onto The West Wing.

James Poulos writes:

A crippled economy and a stalwart opposition gives a transformational president little to work with. But, paradoxically, perhaps that’s the greatest hedge against overactive presidencies from either Obama or McCain. It’s easy to think we’re headed for more sweeping change in government, given what’s wracked the world private sector. But the weight of bureaucracy and the inertia of government means we’re largely locked in. Ironically, it may be the case that Obama will not be truly transformational enough, and McCain will be too apt to precipitous, impulsive change.

Playing with fire...

I was talking with my father-in-law yesterday about the increasing negativity and almost mob-like behavior on exhibition at McCain rallies lately.

McCain seems perfectly willing to stoke the fires of his base, even though we're beginning to hear some very far-right, nutty things. This is getting dangerous, I think. If someone were to assassinate Obama this would be a tragedy beyond comprehension. It could shatter the country. Yet McCain does nothing, piling fuel on the flames.

Andrew Sullivan writes:

There was always going to be a point of revolt and panic for a core group of Americans who believe that Obama simply cannot be president - because he's black or liberal or young or relatively new. This is that point. As the polls suggest a strong victory, the Hannity-Limbaugh-Steyn-O'Reilly base are going into shock and extreme rage. McCain and Palin have decided to stoke this rage, to foment it, to encourage paranoid notions that somehow Obama is a "secret" terrorist or Islamist or foreigner. These are base emotions in both sense of the word.

But they are also very very dangerous. This is a moment of maximal physical danger for the young Democratic nominee. And McCain is playing with fire. If he really wants to put country first, he will attack Obama on his policies - not on these inflammatory, personal, creepy grounds. This is getting close to the atmosphere stoked by the Israeli far right before the assassination of Rabin.

For God's sake, McCain, stop it. For once in this campaign, put your country first. [emphasis added]

Guns, guns, and more guns....

Heh. Obama panders to a crowd he surely won't win over. I'm all for gun rights, though I believe local government should have some say in the matter.

Oh, and I've never owned a gun...

Rage

Barney vs. Papa Bear

My blog has been locked

Blogger has flagged my blog as a potential Spam Blog, which is so ludicrous I can hardly believe its true. First off, this blog is pretty much brand new. I think it's been up two weeks, almost half of which time now as a locked blog.

And of course, there's no way to actually contact anyone at Blogger/Google about this. You just have to wait it out while their mysterious "review" process moves forward...

UPDATE: to get Blogger/Google to review your blog you have to fill out a little form with a CAPTCHA (I even need a CAPTCHA to post now on my own blog) and I did this on Monday and again on Tuesday and then once again yesterday, and now finally a message is popping up when I go to fill it out that they received my review request on the 8th. Yesterday.

"Please be patient...."

Is this a responsible business practice, or the acts of a company that is so monolithic that they have lost sight of the customer service component of what they do. I don't find it acceptable for a tech company to not receive my electronic request the day I submit it. There should not be a 48 turn around when I click a button. The internet is instant.

I love Blogger. I think it's a great platform. But this is a serious flaw in its management.

Taliban Talks Peace

Well this could be an interesting development in the Long War:

Taliban leaders are holding Saudi-brokered talks with the Afghan government to end the country's bloody conflict -- and are severing their ties with al Qaeda, sources close to the historic discussions have told CNN.

The militia, which has been intensifying its attacks on the U.S.-led coalition that toppled it from power in 2001 for harboring Osama bin Laden's terrorist network, has been involved four days of talks hosted by Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, says the source.

The talks -- the first of their kind aimed at resolving the lengthy conflict in Afghanistan -- mark a significant move by the Saudi leadership to take a direct role in Afghanistan, hosting delegates who have until recently been their enemies.

They also mark a sidestepping of key "war on terror" ally Pakistan, frequently accused of not doing enough to tackle militants sheltering on its territory, which has previously been a conduit for talks between the Saudis and Afghanistan.

According to the source, fugitive Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar -- high on the U.S. military's most-wanted list -- was not present, but his representatives were keen to stress the reclusive cleric is no longer allied to al Qaeda.

Keating Politics

Wall Street Blues

Neo-neocon writes:

I saw a brief statement from George Bush today that counseled patience while the details of the bailout plan are worked out. He was speaking from San Antonio, and he projected a sense of weariness and the impression that he can hardly wait for January, when he goes home and leaves this mess to his successor. I can’t quite imagine why anyone would want the job at this point, though, or who would be up to it. And I’m being bipartisan here; that includes all the candidates.

No kidding. What a lousy, thankless profession the Presidency is. By the time the rivers of history polish your record, you're long dead...

Swiftboating

Writes Howard Wolfson:

Why won't the swiftboat tactics work this year?

Its easy to lose sight of it in the day to day coverage, but the collapse of Wall Street in the last weeks was a seminal event in the history of our nation and our politics. To put the crisis in perspective, Americans have lost a combined 1 trillion dollars in net worth in just the last four weeks alone. Just as President Bush's failures in Iraq undermined his party's historic advantage on national security issues, the financial calamity has shown the ruinous implications of the Republican mania for deregulation and slavish devotion to totally unfettered markets.

Republicans and Democrats have been arguing over the proper role of government for a century. In 1980 voters sided with Ronald Reagan and Republicans that government had become too big and intrusive. Then the economy worked in the Republicans' favor. Today the pendulum has swung in our direction. Republican philosophies have been discredited by events. Voters understand this. This is a big election about big issues. McCain's smallball will not work. This race will not be decided by lipsticked pigs. And John McCain can not escape that reality. The only unknowns are the size of the margin and the breadth of the Democratic advantage in the next Congress.

What I'm reading....

Okay, I just finished The Devil in the White City, and after that a memoir called Loose Girl that just completely scared the hell out of me in anticipation of my daughter entering her teens. Of course, she's one-year-old, but they say time flies...

Now I'm reading The Amulet of Samarkand, a young adult fantasy novel (often the best fantasy is for this age-group, like Harry Potter) and the 9/11 Commission Report, which I'm ashamed to say I haven't read yet...

Oh, and check out these creepy old ads...we are evolving, sort of...

No War for Oil

Well, actually, oil isn't a terrible reason to fight a war, though I think security and ending genocide are quite good...

"How 'bout that Sarah Palin?" Heh.

Hat tip: LeftHawk



This is kind of creepy to me.

Top Israeli Officials on Obama

Retired Generals of the Israeli Defense Forces and high-ranking Mossad officials on Barack Obama... from www.JCER.info on Vimeo.

Tightening the noose

Obama is up 50 to 42 according to Gallup. I don't think the negative campaigning is working. The reason I used to admire McCain was his honor and dignity, and I don't like this new man. He's not the AZ Senator I voted for.

Mike Murphy agrees:

Chuck the hacky and ineffective negative ads and switch to man on the street spots with real people voicing their real doubts about Obama; too weak to stand up to Washington’s mighty special interest cartel or the newly empowered Democratic bosses of the Congress and Senate, too liberal to know how to fix the economy, too inexperienced to handle a dangerous world. On Tuesday, McCain should look into the camera and connect to the 80 million scared and worried Americans who will be watching him. McCain is losing. To regain a chance to win, McCain must run as who he truly is; pragmatic, tough, bi-partisan and ready to break some special interest china to get the right things done in Washington. Fix the message, and you will fix the states.

Movie Review: Gone Baby Gone

Gone Baby Gone

Directed by Ben Affleck

Based on a novel by Dennis Lehane, Gone Baby Gone is actor Ben Affleck's first foray into the directing business, and proves quite impressively that he is a far better director than he is an actor. Indeed, what struck me about the movie as I watched it and in the minutes following its conclusion, is how similar to a Clint Eastwood movie it felt, both in terms of style and mood. Part of this is possibly due to the film Mystic River, also based on a Lehane book, directed by Eastwood.

Mystic River was another gloomy, harrowing film that ended with anything but a happy ending. Suffice to say, Gone Baby Gone was its equal in its depressing, tense, and ultimately overwhelmingly tragic unraveling of events. If you're not out to be depressed by a movie, perhaps this one is not for you. Nevertheless, Gone Baby Gone is one of the best films I've seen in a while--at least, one of the best dramatic films I've seen in a while, and I'm not alone in this assessment. Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a 94% rating. It's not a rule of thumb, as there is no accounting for taste, but basically any movie that gets above a 90% on Rotten is a safe bet. Gone Baby Gone was no exception.

Starring Casey Affleck, Morgan Freeman, and Ed Harris, it is a narrative full of unexpected twists, painting a grim picture of modern-day Boston and the even grimmer reality of the plight of children there. As a relatively new parent, watching a movie about the disappearance of a young girl was almost too much to bear. My daughter is a toddler, and some of the moments in this movie were so emotionally harrowing, I could barely watch.

This continues throughout. The end, though completely unexpected, offers no relief.

The acting, cinematography, writing--all of these were excellent. But what stole the show was the brilliance of the plot. I have never read a Lehane novel, but after this film I will. Most movies that employ "twists" are rather transparent. I usually see them coming. There have been a few that have caught me off guard. Twelve Monkeys comes to mind. But Gone Baby Gone surprised me, and then left me even more emotionally confused then before.

I won't go into great detail over the plot of this film. Suffice to say, Patrick Kenzie (Casey Affleck) is a street-wise private detective in over his head, but up to the job, when he starts investigating the disappearance of young Amanda McCready (Madelline O'Brien). Things get complicated, and dark, quite quickly. Not all is what it appears.

114 minutes later you have all your answers, and innumerable hard questions that transcend the film itself. This is a thought-provoking film, and your ruminations will not stop when the credits role....

New NRCC ad is very strong, poignant

This is the sort of message McCain should be sending out...if he wants to win.

Three Well-Placed Bullets...

...would still leave a whole lot of asshole anti-Semitic terror-spreading Islamist shitheads out there, sadly...

Delusional

Are conservative bloggers delusional, crazy, or...simply spending too much time in the echo chamber?

Nobody can deny that Sarah Palin didn't improve her poise and grace in last night's debate, that she didn't come off as the uber-bumbler of the Gibson and Couric debates, but she did not, by any means, restore her image in my mind, nor did she, if we are to trust the polls at all, win the debate. I don't particularly like Joe Biden, and I don't think he defeated Governor Palin utterly, but it was at best a tie, and judging by the numbers, more a Palin loss than anything else.

I think most Americans simply don't want someone who relies upon phrases such as "gosh darn it" to fill gaps, or who waxes colloquial rather than display any real grasp of the subjects at hand. They want substance, knowledge, and intellect. And despite his gaffes, his mistakes, (or as Rove put it, his lies!) and his obvious gaps in knowledge, at least Biden showed that he truly does understand international and domestic politics.

Palin insisted that she was not an "East Coast" politician. She reminded us often that she was an outsider, a maverick, as though we are so foolish as to believe that any outsider who comes to the White House will somehow remain one once they're there. Like Bush, right? The outsider, the governor, the cowboy.

Look at these numbers:

CNN Biden 51 Palin 36

CBS Biden 46 Palin 21
Fox Biden 61 Palin 39

The Fox poll (yes, Fox) gives Biden a 22 point lead over Palin. That's a pretty big number for a right-wing poll. Or wait, Fox is fair and balanced--they're not, and I'm glad they're not. I like having some conservative news out there...

So is the conservative blogosphere and the political pundarati delusional when they proclaim her the winner?

Rich Lowry writes:

By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America. This is a quality that can't be learned; it's either something you have or you don't, and man, she's got it.

Michelle Malkin proclaims "Sarah Rocks!"

First, I would like to see all the Sarah doubters and detractors in the Beltway/Manhattan corridor eat their words.

Eat them.

Sarah Palin is the real deal. Five weeks on the campaign trail, thrust onto the national stage, she rocked tonight’s debate.

She was warm, fresh, funny, confident, energetic, personable, relentless, and on message.

Michelle, did you notice the polls? Not the conservative blogosphere polls, but the real ones? Americans obviously don't agree with you, so even if the Beltway does have a change of heart, even if those elitist conservatives who decried Palin last week think that she's okay now, after a rather polished, empty performance, they'll be wrong....I personally won't eat my words. My divorce from the Palin enthusiasm is complete. I don't look for down-home "real" people, or hockey moms, to lead me. What happened to the standards of the Republican Party?

Didn't conservatives used to be elitist on purpose, or at least expect their leaders to be? Don't they believe in the "natural aristocracy" to some degree? Since when did conservatives decide the most important thing in a candidate was his or her ordinariness? Have we as a nation stooped so low as to celebrate mediocrity even at the highest level? I notice most GOP strategists--the movers and shakers--are all highly educated, extremely smart people. So why should the number 2 on their ticket be, well, so regular?

The Daily Conservative writes that "Biden didn’t come off too well for anyone not already a supporter of his ticket."

Since the national polls give Biden a 20 point lead in last night's debate, I'd say this is bad, bad news for McCain. That would mean that realistically, Obama has about a 20 point lead. And if that's not what it means, then Biden must have impressed some conservatives, or all of the independents out there.

Both liberals and conservatives spend too much time in their own echo chambers. Go to either fairy-tale world and you'll find the partisan lens so strong, that of course Biden won. Of course Palin won. Biden. Palin. Biden. Palin...

But they can't both win, can they?

No. And the national polls are probably a better barometer than the very skewed ones you find on a conservative blog.

Neocon News writes:

This is what I had been waiting for. We can clearly see now that despite her apparent lack of in-depth knowledge on some issues, SarahPalin is what John McCain told us she was: a bold, intelligent executive with her eyes set on the future who WILL do just fine with some on the job experience.

I can appreciate this. I was enthusiastic, at first, over Palin. I too began to drift, and was hoping that something would pull me back in to the fold, as it were. I wanted to believe in McCain again, and this debate was an opening for just that.

Little did I know, my faith was already drained. All I could hear were empty words, relatively well spoken, from a woman who I honestly believe is completely unqualified for the job. She does not have it in her to lead the free world.

I identify with the neoconservative belief in democracy promotion and the accompanying belief in free trade, and globalism.

Is Palin the one who will lead us into a new global society, a freer world...can she usher in democracy and peace, and broker the sorts of peace deals and diplomacy we need to move this country and this world into an age of peace? Or will she be seen as just another cowboy crusader a la G.W.B.?

Fred Kaplan writes:

So Gov. Sarah Palin can speak spontaneously in complete and coherent sentences.
Let's judge her, then, as we would a presumptively seasoned and competent political leader. By that standard, on issues of foreign policy, she was outgunned by Sen. JoeBiden at every turn.

This cuts to the heart of my argument. So what if Palin was warm, coherent, pretty, or any other damn thing? Shouldn't we expect the nominee to be coherent, cogent, smart, thoughtful, etc. coming into the debate? Is this honestly what thesebloggers and commentators are crooning on and on about? That she can speak in full sentences? Seriously? Is this the bar by which we will now judge her...a simple improvement over her previous interviews?

At this point I would like to see Palin hold her own in a press conference. She can obviously beat around the proverbial bush. The last thing I want is another national leader who bases their term on obfuscation, deception, and dodges.

Robert Schlesinger has some advice:

...Be supporters and others who are quick to suggest that Palin's performance Thursday night should expunge from memory her comically faltering inability to answer fairly basic political questions from Katie Couric and others. This was no exoneration of Palin. Here, Palin got to answer predictable questions with little flak from Biden. And when she lacked an actual answer and had to pivot to a talking point, Palin managed to avoid the uncomfortable "We both know you've stumped me but I'm going to try to squirm out of it" grin that she flashed so often with Couric.