Well, well, well!

Just as I feared. Obama is bent on following in President Lincoln's footsteps - tall order - to include opponents in his Administration. I wrote a few days ago that all Obama needs to make the Lincoln experience complete will be a Civil War. I predicted that with the Hillary Clinton appointment to State, a civil war was coming up.

Just imagine, Obama throws his loyal people under the bus and gives away the store!

Hillary plays hardball - The Independent UK

The first sign of friction in the Obama camp as Mrs Clinton demands - and gets - a purge of her critics before accepting Secretary of State role

Before Hillary Clinton has been formally offered the job as Secretary of State, a purge of Barack Obama's top foreign policy team has begun.

The advisers who helped trash the former First Lady's foreign policy credentials on the campaign trail are being brutally shunted aside, as the price of her accepting the job of being the public face of America to the world.

In negotiations with Mr Obama this week before agreeing to take the job, she demanded and received assurances that she alone should appoint staff to the State Department. She also got assurances that she will have direct access to the President and will not have to go through his foreign policy advisers on the National Security Council, which is where many of her critics in the Obama team are expected to end up.

The first victims of Mrs Clinton's anticipated appointment will be those who defended Mr Obama's flanks on the campaign trail. By mocking Mrs Clinton's claims to have landed under sniper fire in Bosnia or pouring scorn on her much-ballyhooed claim to have visited 80 countries as First Lady they successfully deflected the damaging charge that he is a lightweight on international issues.

Foremost among the victims of the purges is her old Yale Law School buddy Greg Craig, a man who more than anyone led the rescue of his presidency starting the very night Kenneth Starr's lurid report into the squalid details of the former president's sex scandal with Monica Lewinsky were published on the internet in 1998. Despite his long and loyal friendship with the Clintons, Mr Craig threw his lot in with Mr Obama at an early stage in the presidential election campaign. As if that betrayal to the cause of the Clinton restoration was not enough, Mr Craig did more to undermine Mrs Clinton's claims to be a foreign policy expert than anyone else in the some of the ugliest exchanges of the battle for the Democratic nomination.

Until this week he was poised to be the eminence grise of the State Department, organising as total revamp of America's troubled foreign policies on Mr Obama's behalf. Its turns out that Mrs Clinton's delay in accepting the president elect's offer to be his top foreign policy adviser had much to do with her negotiating the terms of the job and insisting on the right to choose her own state department staff and possibly even some of the plumb Ambassador postings. She wanted guarantees of direct access to the president - without having to go through his national security adviser. Above all she did not want to end up like Colin Powell who was completely out-manoeuvred by the hawkish Vice President Dick Cheney who imposed neo-conservative friends like John Bolton on the State Department and steered the US towards a policy of using torture to achieve its aims.

More

Does Obama not understand the Clintons can't be trusted; they have no loyalty to anyone -- that they have their own agenda and once they've used you to achieve personal ends you're toast?

Is this Hillary vindictiveness not contrary to Obama's reaching out? It's Clinton all the time.

Memo to Barack Obama:

Enjoy the disaster of your own making. Whatever made you think you needed Hillary to take your 3:00 AM calls.

What a collapse of confidence!

Dispicable.

Yesterday Senator Harry Reid, Majority Leader, had what amounts to a soft ball meeting with Joe Lieberman  - discussions were to relieve Lieberman as chairman of Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

But judging from reports via TPM video Joe not only wants to be forgiven he thinks it's unacceptable.

By the way Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) is said to disagree with stripping Lieberman of his chair. Good thing Senator that you were not selected for the VP slot.

Jane Hamsher, FDL, notes:

Lieberman was offered Veteran's Affairs, Not a Subcommittee.

Now that's also unacceptable because as I view it, Joe would be a disaster and does not deserve squat.

Lieberman Opposed Cutting Welfare Spending to Increase Funding for Veterans Health Care

S Con Res 57        Senate Vote 116        R 52-0; D 23-23         5/16/96

Lieberman voted against the Bond, R-Mo., amendment to the Exon, D-Neb., substitute amendment, to increase veterans spending by $13 billion in fiscal 1997-2002, to be offset by reductions in welfare spending.  The Senate adopted the amendment 75-23.

Lieberman Opposed $400 Million in Funding for Veterans Benefits

S 936            Senate Vote 168        R 50-5; D 8-36           7/10/97

Lieberman voted for the Thurmond, R-S.C., motion to table the Wellstone, D-Minn., amendment to require the Defense secretary to transfer $400 million to the secretary of Veteran's Affairs in fiscal 1998 for veteran's benefits.  The Senate agreed to the motion 58-41.

Lieberman Opposed $329 Million for Veterans Health Care

S 2057            Senate vote 175        R 5-47; D 33-8            6/25/98

Lieberman voted against the Harkin, D-Iowa, amendment that transferred $329 million from defense accounts to the Veterans Affairs Department for health care programs.  The amendment ordered the secretary of Defense to transfer the funds from defense programs that would result in the "least significant harm" to armed forces readiness and military personnel quality of life.  The Senate rejected the amendment 38-55.  

Lieberman Opposed Cutting Funds for the International Space Station to Fund Veterans' Health Care

More

But you would think Lieberman would be satisfied with another Committee chair. No. He wants to remain at HSGA.

Steven Benen asked Why the Begging?

Let's cut the nonsense. Reid offered Lieberman a chance to stay in the Democratic caucus, keep his seniority, and become the chairman of some other committee. Lieberman thinks that's "unacceptable" and reportedly "begged" to stay on as chairman of Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Bayh thinks this is about "revenge or retribution." It's not. For that matter, it's only partly about holding Lieberman accountable for his betrayals. This is actually about a specific power Lieberman is intent on keeping for a specific reason.

This seems to be routinely overlooked, but take a moment to consider what the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs actually does: it's the committee principally responsible for oversight of the executive branch. It's an accountability committee, charged with investigating the conduct of the White House and the president's administration.

As chairman of this committee for the last two years, Lieberman decided not to pursue any accusations of wrongdoing against the Bush administration. Lieberman's House counterpart -- Rep. Henry Waxman's Oversight Committee -- was a vigilant watchdog, holding hearings, issuing subpoenas, and launching multiple investigations. Lieberman preferred to let his committee do no real work at all. It was arguably the most pathetic display of this Congress.

And yet, now Lieberman acts as if keeping this chairmanship is the single most important part of his public life. Why would he be so desperate to keep the gavel of a committee he hasn't used? I'll let you in on a secret: he wants to start using the power of this committee against Obama.

Lieberman didn't want to hold Bush accountable, but he seems exceedingly anxious to keep the committee that would go after Obama with a vengeance, effectively becoming a Waxman-like figure -- holding hearings, issuing subpoenas, and launching investigations against the Democratic president.

Lieberman doesn't care about "reconciliation," he cares about going after a Democratic administration. Why else would he fight diligently to be chairman of one committee instead of another?

(highlights added)

Let Senator Harry Reid know we don't trust Joe Lieberman.

Joe must go.

Please join the campaign at Bold Progressives to urge Senator Reid, "Joe Must Go!"

Put on the brakes.

Huffpost reporting

Obama Wants Lieberman To Remain In Democratic Caucus

President-elect Barack Obama has informed party officials that he wants Joe Lieberman to continue caucusing with the Democrats in the 111th Congress, Senate aides tell the Huffington Post.

Obama's decision could tie the hands of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has been negotiating to remove Lieberman as chair of the Homeland Security and Government Reform committee while keeping him within the caucus. Lieberman has insisted that he will split from the Democrats if his homeland security position is stripped.

Aides to the president-elect did not return requests for comment. Senate officials were unclear whether Obama would be comfortable with Lieberman maintaining his current committee post.

[.]

If Lieberman were to continue caucusing with the Democrats without being punished for his campaign conduct -- Democrats say he broke a promise not to campaign negatively against Obama -- the progressive community will undoubtedly be up in arms. For Obama, however, the move may be a shrewd gesture towards reconciliation, in the process taking a potentially taxing political fight off the table.

Fellow Connecticut Senate Chris Dodd, who has spoken out in favor of Lieberman remaining in the party, explained as much to reporters on Friday: "What does Barack Obama want?... He's talked about reconciliation, healing, bringing people together. I don't think he'd necessarily want to spend the first month of this president-elect period, this transition period, talking about a Senate seat, particularly if someone is willing to come forward and is willing to be a member of your family in the caucus in that sense." A Democrat close to Lieberman, meanwhile, said he thought that keeping Lieberman in the fold "would be a good move for Obama as a way to make real his promise of new politics, a less partisan Washington and more unity. He would do so at some risk. Obviously there is a liberal wing of the party that wants Joe punished..."

Oh yes, considering what's at stake, we're are interested in the outcome.

Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The fate of a convicted felon will help determine the size of the Democrats' expanded power in the U.S. Senate, and may provide a new job opportunity for failed vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

After being found guilty of political corruption last month, Republican Sen. Ted Stevens, 84, of Alaska clung to a narrow lead on Thursday in his bid to win an eighth term.

With state election officials sorting through thousands of absentee ballots, a winner was not expected to be announced for at least several days.

If challenger Mark Begich pulls it out, it would increase to seven the number of Senate seats Democrats have gained from Tuesday's national election, boosting their majority to 58 in the 100-member chamber.

(highlight added)

Say it ain't so. If Stevens pulls this out and in turn is expelled from the Senate, there will be a special election.  

Can you see the movie "Sarah goes to Washington." ?!!?

Be still.

As the count continues, something smells and it isn't rotted fish. Two + two does not make four. Questions are being raised:

So what really happened in the Alaska election?  

 - an Andrew Sullivan catch

STOLEN ELECTION IN ALASKA?

Four years ago, 313,592 out of 474,740 registered voters in Alaska participated in the election-a 66% turnout. Taking into account 49,000 outstanding ballots, on Tuesday 272,633 out of 495,731 registered Alaskans showed up at the polls; a turnout of 54.9%.

 That's a decrease of more than 11% in voter turnout even though passions ran high for and against Obama, as well as for and against Sarah Palin! This year, early voters set a new record. As of last Thursday, with 4 days left for early voting, 15,000 Alaskans showed up-shattering the old record set in 2004 by 28%!

Consider the most popular governor in history-and now the most polarizing-was on the Republican ticket.

Consider the historic nature of this race; the first African American presidential candidate EVER! The second woman to ever make a presidential ticket; and she's one of our own. Despite that, we're supposed to believe that overall participation DECREASED by 11%.

Not only that, but this historic election both nationally and for Alaska HAD THE LOWEST ALASKA TURNOUT FOR A PRESIDENTIAL RACE EVER!!! That makes sense. REALLY??? Something stinks.

But wait, there's more...

[.]

AND

Nate Silver at Five Thirty Eight examines the claim.

What In The Hell Happened in Alaska?

Although Ted Stevens holds a small lead in Alaska and is the favorite to retain his seat, the outcome is not as inevitable as it might appear to be. Stevens currently holds a lead of 3,353 votes, or about 1.5 percent of the votes tallied so far. But, there are quite a large number of ballots yet to count.

According to Roll Call, these include "at least 40,000 absentee ballot, 9,000 early voting ballots, and an undetermined number of questionable ballots".

    Indeed, it seems possible that the number of "questionable" ballots could be quite high. So far, about 220 thousand votes have been processed in Alaska. This compares with 313 thousand votes cast in 2004. After adding back in the roughly 50,000 absentee and early ballots that Roll Call accounts for, that would get us to 270 thousand ballots, or about a 14 percent drop from 2004. It seems unlikely that turnout would drop by 14 percent in Alaska given the presence of both a high-profile senate race and Sarah Palin at the top of the ticket.

But even if Begich were to make up ground and win a narrow victory, this would seem to represent a catastrophic failure of polling, as three polls conducted following the guilty verdict in Stevens' corruption trial had Begich leading by margins of 7, 8 and 22 points, respectively.

The emerging conventional wisdom is that there was some sort of a Bradley Effect in this contest -- voters told pollsters that they weren't about to vote for that rascal Ted Stevens, when in fact they were perfectly happy to. Convicted felons are the new black, it would seem.

The problem with this theory is that the polling failures in Alaska weren't unique to Stevens. They also applied to the presidential race, as well as Alaska's at-large House seat. In each case, the Republican outperformed his pre-election polling by margins ranging from 12 to 14 point:

[.]

There are three plausible explanations I can think of to explain this discrepancy.....

[.]

    The second possibility is that a substantial percentage of the Democratic vote is tied up in the early and absentee ballots that have yet to be counted. We know that Barack Obama overperformed among early voters in many states, and Alaska may be no exception. (Although, I would guess that the absentee vote is predominately rural, whereas Begich's base is in Anchorage).

    The third possibility is that a lot of those "questionable" ballots are Democratic ones, and that there have been irregularities in the voting tally. Although this is the least likely possibility, Alaska is a provincial state with some history of corruption, and Democrats ought to be making sure that too many of their ballots haven't been disqualified.

(highlight added)

A Serious question indeed.

I'd be tempted to think we'll be told by Sarah Palin's appointees

a hungry Moose ate the ballots.

[UPDATE: Friday, November 7, 2008]

While the stats smells, Nate Silver is not ready to give Stevens the lead forever...Nate sees a glimmer in those early votes - all 9,500 to be counted....it's looking good for Begich.

Uncounted Votes May Push Begich Past Stevens

Although Ted Stevens currently holds a lead of approximately 3,200 votes in ballots counted to date in Alaska's senate contest, there is good reason to believe that the ballots yet to be counted -- the vast majority of which are early and absentee ballots -- will allow Mark Begich to mitigate his disadvantage with Stevens and quite possibly pull ahead of him.

The reasoning behind this is simple: some early ballots have been processed, and among those ballots Begich substantially leads Stevens. A tally of Alaska's 40 house districts as taken from Alaska's Division of Elections webpage suggests that Begich has won about 61% of the early ballots counted so far, as compared with 48% of ballots cast on Election Day itself.

More..read the whole article for tables and charts

In Vermont, we're pushing our chests out - over the airwaves - that this Victory on Tuesday was crafted here in Vermont. The once maligned fifty state strategy of former governor Howard Dean, current chairman of the Democratic National Committee, went a long way to reviving the party at the state and national levels.

from Steve Benen's jottings:

I do think it's fair to credit Dean with coming up with the game plan. He needed a candidate who was committed to "stretching" the map, and capable to taking the Democratic message to areas that usually don't give Democratic candidates a second look. And Barack Obama fit the bill nicely.

DEAN CAN TAKE A BOW

.... As is often the case after an election, there are plenty of lists being published noting the various "winners and losers." If Howard Dean isn't very high on the list of winners, it's a dramatic oversight.

    The Democratic National Committee (DNC) on Wednesday touted its 50-state strategy, which sought to expand the party's competitiveness deep into red states, as one of the reasons for Democrats' success on Election Night.

    DNC Chairman Howard Dean said at the National Press Club that President-elect Barack Obama "was right in 2004, when he said there are no red states and no blue states; there are only American states, and we all share the same values."

    "You cannot be a national party if you are willing to write off entire parts of our country," Dean stated. "Based on that pretty straightforward idea, we changed the way our party ran campaigns and reached out to voters."

    In a memo, the DNC touted Dean's strategy, which was often maligned at its inception. "Through the 50-state strategy the DNC put paid staff on the ground (2-4 per state) in every state from Alaska to Mississippi, New Mexico to Indiana," the DNC memo said. "When Obama became the nominee there were 183 people on the ground who have been there, been trained, and were working for the nominee. Through the course of this campaign, those staff worked to organize at least 892 field events around McCain-Palin events."

Dean also deserves credit for focusing heavily on the West, which included moving Nevada up in the primary process and choosing Denver as the host city for the convention. The results speak for themselves: Obama won New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada, and Democrats made gains up and down the ballot throughout the region, including Brian Schweitzer's landslide in Montana and a key victory in a House race in Idaho.

Two weeks ago, J. Patrick Coolican wrote in the Las Vegas Sun, "Dean, who wears an ill-fitting suit I'm pretty sure I've seen at Target, also wears a smart smirk, the look of a guy who knows more than he lets on, and more than anyone gives him credit for. He's usually associated with the loony wing of the party, the MoveOn crowd and the liberal bloggers. But in reality, he had a vision for Democrats capturing the center, and it's coming to pass."

Take a bow, gov.

~~~~~~~~

more from The Hill

DNC touts success of 50-state strategy

Dean said following an election that saw Democrats take the White House and make substantial gains in both chambers of Congress that he "always believed that our party's message and values are core American values."

"What we have lacked is a full-time professional party to help communicate those values every single day and organized around them," he said. "And what we have lacked is a leader to inspire people to that cause. And in Barack Obama, we have found that leader."

The memo also praised Dean's decision to seek votes in the West, saying that the chairman "believed that the future of our party and the road to the White House runs through the West."

The document touts Dean's decision to move up Nevada in the Democratic primary process and to hold the Democratic convention in Denver.

Western Democratic leaders on Wednesday said the election had shown that the West has turned blue.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) joined Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer and Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter to trumpet the party's gains. They pointed to Obama's wins in Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico, and Reid also reminded reporters that Democrats now control governor's mansions in five of eight states in and around the Rocky Mountains.

In addition to those gains, Democratic Rep. Tom Udall captured the New Mexico Senate seat with 61 percent of the vote, and his cousin, Rep. Mark Udall, won the Colorado Senate seat with 52 percent.

"We all have looked forward to this moment," Reid said. "Just six years ago, Republicans held every governor's mansion in the West and seemingly had a lock on congressional elections."

Let's not overlook Dean's breakthrough - the internet platform for fund-raising - expanded by President-elect Obama. Just spectacular!

And together with Obama, Governor Dean resurrected the youth and this bodes well for the future.

So Howard Dean, you're looking good in a Target.

So is this an attempt to be fair and balanced? The Times' Sunday edition has very damning allegations against Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UTAH). Have this not been published in the U.S. before or am I dreaming? Anyhow The Times of London needs to be seen as - fair and balanced:

Republicans try to use Oxford don to smear Barack Obama

The Republicans have made a last-minute attempt to prevent Barack Obama's ascent to the White House by trying to recruit an Oxford academic to "prove" that his autobiography was ghostwritten by a former terrorist.

With two days before the election, Obama is poised to become America's first black president, according to polls showing he has an average six-point lead over John McCain, his Republican opponent.

Dr Peter Millican, a philosophy don at Hertford College, Oxford, has devised a computer software program that can detect when works are by the same author by comparing favourite words and phrases.

He was contacted last weekend and offered $10,000 (£6,200) to assess alleged similarities between Obama's bestseller, Dreams from My Father, and Fugitive Days, a memoir by William Ayers.

[.]

The offer to Millican to prove that Ayers wrote Obama's book was made by Robert Fox, a California businessman and brother-in-law of Chris Cannon, a Republican congressman from Utah. He hoped to corroborate a theory advanced by Jack Cashill, an American writer.

Fox and Cannon each suggested to The Sunday Times that the other had taken the initiative.

Cannon said that he merely recommended computer testing of the books. He doubted whether Obama wrote his autobiography, adding: "If Ayers was the author, that would be interesting."

Fox said he had hoped that Cannon would raise the $10,000 to run a computer test. "It was Congressman Cannon who initially pointed me in that direction and, from our conversation, I thought he might be able to find someone [to raise the $10,000]."

He believed that if "proof" of Ayers's involvement was provided by an Oxford academic it would be political dynamite.

Fox contacted Millican, who said: "He was entirely upfront about this. He offered me $10,000 and sent me electronic versions of the text from both books."

Millican took a preliminary look and found the charges "very implausible". A deal was agreed for more detailed research but when Millican said the results had to be made public, even if no link to Ayers was proved, interest waned.

(highlights added)

Related

The Times of London is a Murdock rag. It was a venerable paper prior to Murdock's acquisition. Rawstory has a piece noting Murdock's preference was Hillary Clinton; Murdock held fundraisers for her and is quoted as saying Obama could worsen financial crisis. (Broken link)

Just as Obama suspected He warned of last ditch 'dirty tricks campaign' to scare away supporters.

The Democratic candidate urged voters not to take victory for granted as he expected his opponents to launch a dirty tricks campaign to scare away voters.

Referring to previous smears and insinuations about his background and associations, the Democratic candidate said: "Don't believe for a second this election over. Don't believe for a moment that power concedes anything. It's going to get nasty in the next four days. They will throw everything at it."

Despite his healthy lead in the polls, he implored a crowd of more than 20,000 in Columbia on Friday not to forget to vote and asked them to take five friends along and "dig deep and make history".

Addressing the most recent attacks from the campaign of his rival Senator John McCain, he adopted a mocking tone. "They can't even decide what to call me. They are calling me every name in the book but they can't decide on a single angle," he said.

The Republicans are still running on their old, tiring dirty tricks; so Rovian. Never expect a fair fight.

Know Hope.  

It'll be a landslide.

A repudiation of the last eight years...of Bushism and McCain's sleaze.

On Tuesday, turnout will be huge and I expect Polls will not close at the scheduled hour.

The $700 billion rescue package was sold to us as:  Hurry, don't blow this up; the financial system is in meltdown; the system is frozen and we need to buy up bad home mortgages that will get the banks lending again and Joe-the-plumber back on his feet.

It's quickly becoming -

The Big Boys Bailout: The Paulson bait and switch - NYTimes

So When Will Banks Give Loans?

It was Oct. 17, just four days after JPMorgan Chase's chief executive, Jamie Dimon, agreed to take a $25 billion capital injection courtesy of the United States government, when a JPMorgan employee asked that question. It came toward the end of an employee-only conference call that had been largely devoted to meshing certain divisions of JPMorgan with its new acquisition, Washington Mutual.

[.]

In point of fact, the dirty little secret of the banking industry is that it has no intention of using the money to make new loans. But this executive was the first insider who's been indiscreet enough to say it within earshot of a journalist.

(He didn't mean to, of course, but I obtained the call-in number and listened to a recording.)

"Twenty-five billion dollars is obviously going to help the folks who are struggling more than Chase," he began. "What we do think it will help us do is perhaps be a little bit more active on the acquisition side or opportunistic side for some banks who are still struggling. And I would not assume that we are done on the acquisition side just because of the Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns mergers. I think there are going to be some great opportunities for us to grow in this environment, and I think we have an opportunity to use that $25 billion in that way and obviously depending on whether recession turns into depression or what happens in the future, you know, we have that as a backstop."

Read that answer as many times as you want -- you are not going to find a single word in there about making loans to help the American economy.

On the contrary: at another point in the conference call, the same executive (who I'm not naming because he didn't know I would be listening in) explained that "loan dollars are down significantly." He added, "We would think that loan volume will continue to go down as we continue to tighten credit to fully reflect the high cost of pricing on the loan side." In other words JPMorgan has no intention of turning on the lending spigot.

It is starting to appear as if one of Treasury's key rationales for the recapitalization program -- namely, that it will cause banks to start lending again -- is a fig leaf, Treasury's version of the weapons of mass destruction.

In fact, Treasury wants banks to acquire each other and is using its power to inject capital to force a new and wrenching round of bank consolidation. As Mark Landler reported in The New York Times earlier this week, "the government wants not only to stabilize the industry, but also to reshape it." Now they tell us.

Indeed, Mr. Landler's story noted that Treasury would even funnel some of the bailout money to help banks buy other banks. And, in an almost unnoticed move, it recently put in place a new tax break, worth billions to the banking industry, that has only one purpose: to encourage bank mergers. As a tax expert, Robert Willens, put it: "It couldn't be clearer if they had taken out an ad."

Friday delivered the first piece of evidence that this is, indeed, the plan. PNC announced that it was purchasing National City, an acquisition that will be greatly aided by the new tax break, which will allow it to immediately deduct any losses on National City's books.

 As part of the deal, it is also tapping the bailout fund for $7.7 billion, giving the government preferred stock in return. At least some of that $7.7 billion would have gone to NatCity if the government had deemed it worth saving. In other words, the government is giving PNC money that might otherwise have gone to NatCity as a reward for taking over NatCity.

I don't know about you, but I'm starting to feel as if we've been sold a bill of goods.

                         ~~~~~~~

(emphasis added)

I've always held doubts about having a fox in charge of security at the chicken coop. The same fox who ate the chickens is charged with cleaning up the feathers...and supervise the raising of our newly hatched chicklets.

 On April 24, 2004, there was a meeting at the SEC that led to-

U.S. regulator's 2004 rule let banks pile up new debt

As rumors swirled in March that Bear Stearns faced imminent collapse, Christopher Cox was told by his staff that Bear Stearns had $17 billion in cash and other assets - more than enough to weather the storm.

Drained of most of that cash three days later, Bear Stearns was pushed into a hastily arranged merger with JPMorgan Chase - backed by a $29 billion dowry of taxpayers' money.

Within six months, other lions of Wall Street would also either disappear or transform themselves to survive the financial maelstrom - Merrill Lynch sold itself to Bank of America, Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy protection, and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley converted themselves into commercial banks.

.....Many events in Washington, on Wall Street and elsewhere around the United States have led to what has been called the most serious financial crisis since the 1930s.

But decisions made at a brief meeting on April 28, 2004, explain why the problems could spin out of control. The Securities and Exchange Commission's failure to follow through on those decisions also explains why regulators did not see what was coming.

On that bright spring afternoon, the five members of the SEC met in a basement hearing room to consider an urgent plea by the big investment banks. They wanted an exemption for their brokerage units from an old regulation that limited the amount of debt they could take on. The exemption would unshackle billions of dollars held in reserve as a cushion against losses on their investments. Those funds could then flow up to the parent company, enabling it to invest in the fast growing but opaque world of mortgage-backed securities, credit derivatives - a form of insurance for bond holders - and other exotic instruments.

Five investment banks led the charge, including Goldman Sachs, then headed by Henry Paulson Jr. Two years later, he left Goldman to become the U.S. Treasury secretary.

A lone dissenter - a software consultant and expert on risk management - weighed in from Valparaiso, Indiana, with a two-page letter to warn the commission that the change would be a grave mistake. He never heard back from Washington.

[.]

After 55 minutes of discussion, which can be heard on the Web sites of the agency and The Times and its international edition, the International Herald Tribune, William Donaldson, then the SEC chairman and a veteran Wall Street executive, called for a vote. It was unanimous. The decision, changing what was known as the net capital rule, was completed and published in the Federal Register a few months later.

With that, the five big independent investment firms were unleashed.

In loosening the capital rules, which are supposed to provide a buffer in turbulent times, the SEC also decided to rely on the firms' own computer risk models, essentially outsourcing the job of monitoring risk to the banks. Over the following months and years, all would take advantage of the looser rules.

The leverage ratio - a measurement of how much the companies were borrowing compared to their total assets - rose sharply at Bear Stearns, to 33 to 1. In other words, for every dollar in equity, it had $33 of debt. The ratio at the other companies also rose significantly.

(emphasis added)

As it turns out the $700 billion rescue package is being diverted.

Next week its GE's turn.

Read again how that article is framed, "to throw it's weight behind the central bank's effort to unlock the credit markets" No, no, no - GE does not need to stand at the begging bowl...they're just easing the stigma...for others. We know otherwise and  

The Insurers will be next.

So when will those bad mortgages get bought up?  Here's another dirty little secret: They were chopped up into one hundred bits of paper and sold so which every investor has to agree and anyway, there's not enough money. It'll cost trillions. But not being shy, they'll return to ask for more --- to print more trillions and stick us with the bill.

The 2009 U.S.Deficit is estimated at $2 trillion

Eventually, the dollar will.....  It's NOW, our creditors, the Chinese are alarmed. Look into this window to see Chinese thinking in regards to the dollar. Usually they speak in subtleties. This rather blunt article by Reuters is startling.

U.S. has plundered world wealth with dollar: China paper

BEIJING (Reuters) - The United States has plundered global wealth by exploiting the dollar's dominance, and the world urgently needs other currencies to take its place, a leading Chinese state newspaper said on Friday.

The front-page commentary in the overseas edition of the People's Daily said that Asian and European countries should banish the U.S. dollar from their direct trade relations for a start, relying only on their own currencies.

A meeting between Asian and European leaders, starting on Friday in Beijing, presented the perfect opportunity to begin building a new international financial order, the newspaper said.

The People's Daily is the official newspaper of China's ruling Communist Party. The Chinese-language overseas edition is a small circulation offshoot of the main paper.

Its pronouncements do not necessarily directly voice leadership views. But the commentary, as well as recent comments, amount to a growing chorus of Chinese disdain for Washington's economic policies and global financial dominance in the wake of the credit crisis.

"The grim reality has led people, amidst the panic, to realize that the United States has used the U.S. dollar's hegemony to plunder the world's wealth," said the commentator, Shi Jianxun, a professor at Shanghai's Tongji University.

[.]

"The U.S. dollar is losing people's confidence. The world, acting democratically and lawfully through a global financial organization, urgently needs to change the international monetary system based on U.S. global economic leadership and U.S. dollar dominance," he wrote.

Shi suggested that all trade between Europe and Asia should be settled in euros, pounds, yen and yuan, though he did not explain how the Chinese currency could play such a role since it is not convertible on the capital account.

Ripple effects are usually observable six to twelve months out.

Summer 2009 will be brutal.

What will you tell your children and grand children - on how and why you stood for over three hours in line to vote?

From Politico Ben Smith's, readers
Worth a tear or two

The history argument - a Cincinnati reader

"Upon arriving at the Hamilton County Board of Elections in Cincinnati to vote early today I happened upon some friends of my mother's -- three small, elderly Jewish women. They were quite upset as they were being refused admitance to the polling location due to their Obama T-Shirts, hats and buttons. Apparently you cannot wear Obama/McCain gear into polling locations here in Ohio.... They were practically on the verge of tears.

After a minute or two of this a huge man (6'5", 300 lbs easy) wearing a Dale Earnhardt jacket and Bengal's baseball cap left the voting line, came up to us and introduced himself as Mike. He told us he had overheard our conversation and asked if the ladies would like to borrow his jacket to put over their t-shirts so they could go in and vote. The ladies quickly agreed. As long as I live I will never forget the image of these 80-plus-year-old Jewish ladies walking into the polling location wearing a huge Dale Earnhardt racing jacket that came over their hands and down to their knees!

Mike patiently waited for each woman to cast their vote, accepted their many thanks and then got back in line (I saved him a place while he was helping out the ladies). When Mike got back in line I asked him if he was an Obama supporter. He said that he was not, but that he couldn't stand to see those ladies so upset. I thanked him for being a gentleman in a time of bitter partisanship and wished him well.

After I voted I walked out to the street to find my mother's friends surrouding our new friend Mike -- they were laughing and having a great time. I joined them and soon learned that Mike had changed his mind in the polling booth and ended up voting for Obama. When I asked him why he changed his mind at the last minute, he explained that while he was waiting for his jacket he got into a conversation with one of the ladies who had explained how the Jewish community, and she, had worked side by side with the black community during the civil rights movements of the '60s, and that this vote was the culmination of those personal and community efforts so many years ago. That this election for her was more than just a vote ... but a chance at history.

Mike looked at me and said, "Obama's going to win, and I didn't want to tell my grandchildren some day that I had an opportunity to vote for the first black president, but I missed my chance at history and voted for the other guy."

~~~~~

A medical student in Evansville, Ind.:

" I squeaked in just before the 7pm deadline to find two very frustrated poll workers and a line of a couple dozen people, due to problems with the computerized voting system not accepting people's driver's licenses. It was taking about 7-10 minutes per person just to get the computer to accept them as valid and to print out their ballot, causing very long delays.

For me the most moving moment came when the family in front of me, comprising probably 4 generations of voters (including an 18 year old girl voting for her first time and a 90-something hunched-over grandmother), got their turn to vote. When the old woman left the voting booth she made it about halfway to the door before collapsing in a nearby chair, where she began weeping uncontrollably. When we rushed over to help we realized that she wasn't in trouble at all but she had not truly believed, until she left the booth, that she would ever live long enough to cast a vote for an African-American for president. Anyone who doesn't think that African-American turnout will absolutely SHATTER every existing record is in for a very rude surprise.

There were about 20 people in front of me but remarkably not a single person left the room without voting over the 2 hours it took to get through the line."

Video via Sullivan:

Ordinary Republicans for Change we can believe in

It's gone from a torrent to an avalanche

Avalanche! Early voting at record pace

[In] 2004, one out of every five Americans voted early, and if reports so far this year are any indication, an even larger proportion will wake up on Nov. 4 with their ballots already cast. More than 30 states -- including most of the key swing states that will decide the race between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain -- allow their citizens to vote early, whether by mail or in person.

In Georgia, almost 800,000 votes have been cast so far -- already more than the tally in 2004 with over a week to go. By Thursday morning in North Carolina, more than 750,000 people had voted since the polls opened a week ago.

Nevada, where more than half of all voters cast early ballots four years ago, kicked off voting last weekend and ramped up access to early polling sites in places such as supermarkets and libraries.

[.]

So far, it appears that the Obama campaign's drive to get people to the polls in October is paying off, at least according to data from several swing states that track voter demographics: More than 55 percent of early voters in Georgia were female, for instance, and more than 35 percent were African-American; in North Carolina, fewer than a third of those who voted early identified themselves as Republicans; and more than 60 percent of first-day early voters in Clark County, Nev., were Democrats.[.]

[.]

Is early voting turnout leading McCain to throw in the towel?

No kidding, he's folding ads in some states - MI, CO and NH.

It's twelve days to go and we read:

McCain might skip his own election-night party

NEW YORK - John McCain's election night watch party might be missing John McCain. Instead of appearing before a throng of supporters at the Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix on the evening of Nov. 4, the Republican presidential nominee plans to deliver postelection remarks to a small group of reporters and guests on the hotel's lawn.

Aides said Thursday that the arrangement was due to space limitations and that McCain might drop by the election watch party at some other point.

McCain's remarks will be piped electronically into the party and media filing center, aides said. Only a small press "pool" -- mostly those who have traveled regularly with the candidate on his campaign plane, plus a few local Arizona reporters and others -- will be physically present when he speaks.

Do you have a question here?

Me too. What kind of message is that?

[UPDATE:] In less than "24 mins ago" AP changed the headline on it's article from "McCain might skip his own election-night party" to "McCain will depart from election-night tradition" The article has been edited - compare:

NEW YORK – Republican John McCain is not going to make his election night remarks in the traditional style — at a podium standing in front of a sea of campaign workers jammed into a hotel ballroom.

Oh, the throng of supporters will hold the usual election night party at the Biltmore Hotel in Phoenix on the evening of Nov. 4.

But the Republican presidential nominee plans to address another group of supporters and a small group of reporters on the hotel lawn; his remarks will be simultaneously piped electronically to the party inside and other reporters in a media filing center, aides said.

Aides said Thursday that the arrangement was the result of space limitations and that McCain might drop by the election watch party at some other point.

What do you know. The blogosphere leads and Big News Orgs follow. Give a shout out to Talking Points Memo. They've been relentless on McCain's sleazy robo calls - the McCain underground campaign.

Kudos to TPM as big News orgs follow their lead to shine a light on McCain's sleaze:

TPM

Big News Orgs Picking Up On Magnitude Of McCain's Robo-Slime Campaign

The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN are now getting serious about picking up on the story of John McCain's robo-slime campaign, all weighing in with pieces that endeavor to demonstrate the true breadth and scope of McCain's under-the-radar smear effort.

The Times piece is  here. WaPo's is here.. And you can watch CNN's report on the video below.

The Times piece directly hits on two key points: First, the calls are "misleading," as the paper puts it, perhaps too delicately. And second, the calls show McCain yet again jettisoning a formerly claimed principle as he faces the increasingly likely prospect of defeat. As the paper notes, McCain high-mindedly denounced such tactics when he was the target of them in 2000, and again during the GOP primary this year, when he described the robo-slime being directed at him as "scurrilous stuff."

It's worth stepping back to ponder what's really going on here. While McCain and Sarah Palin try to persuade you that they're running a relatively clean campaign and don't question Obama's patriotism or love of country, they are running an enormous shadow campaign to smear Obama in the ugliest of ways, one that's designed to portray him as a friend of terrorists, as a vaguely sinister other, as not genuinely committed to defending our country, and as callously indifferent to the lives of newborn babies.

[.]

There are two McCain campaigns operating simultaneously right now. There's the one that McCain and Palin are running in front of the cameras, and then there's the subterranean robo-slime campaign, which is bombarding thousands upon thousands of voters with multiple messages that McCain would never associate himself with in the glare of the klieg lights. That's the real story here.

[.]

CNN video at link.

Who will now shake McCain's hand? Pure slime.

Here we go again.

Looks like the voting machines are sensitive to votes for Democrats.

Votes for Obama registered for McCain and voters told it's OK - "everything is alright."

Some early W.Va. voters angry over switched votes
Jackson County touch-screens switched votes, 3 residents say - West Virginia Gazette

At least three early voters in Jackson County had a hard time voting for candidates they want to win.

Virginia Matheney and Calvin Thomas said touch-screen machines in the county clerk's office in Ripley kept switching their votes from Democratic to Republican candidates.

"When I touched the screen for Barack Obama, the check mark moved from his box to the box indicating a vote for John McCain," said Matheney, who lives in Kenna.

When she reported the problem, she said, the poll worker in charge "responded that everything was all right. It was just that the screen was sensitive and I was touching the screen too hard. She instructed me to use only my fingernail."

Even after she began using her fingernail, Matheney said, the problem persisted.

When she tried to vote for candidates running for two open seats on the Supreme Court, the electronic machine canceled her second vote twice.

On her third try, Matheney managed to cast votes for both Menis Ketchum and Margaret Workman, Democratic candidates for the two open seats.

Calvin Thomas, 81, who retired from Kaiser Aluminum in Ravenswood in 1983 and now lives in Ripley, experienced the same problem.

"When I pushed Obama, it jumped to McCain. When I went down to governor's office and punched [Gov. Joe] Manchin, it went to the other dude. When I went to Karen Facemyer [the incumbent Republican state senator], I pushed the Democrat, but it jumped again.

"The rest of them were OK, but the machine sent my votes for those top three offices from the Democrat to the Republican," Thomas said.

"When I hollered about that, the girl who worked there said, 'Push it again.' I pushed Obama again and it stayed there. Then, the machine did the same thing for other candidates.

"Why didn't she [the polling clerk] tell me before I even used the machine that might happen? And how many people, especially my age, didn't notice that?

Use your fingernail  !!!!?!!!!

How about a pencil and paper that provides a trail -

a paper trail. ATMs have it..... why not voting machines?

let's have paper ballots and we wait for the count.

[Early Voting Update:] in North Carolina, it's Block the Vote

Thinkprogress

...irate McCain supporters gather to protest and heckle a crowd of people . . . voting . . . in North Carolina:

Photographer Joe Eddins and I headed over to the closest one and found a steady line of voters hoping to cast ballots early. Most seemed to be Obama supporters and several had come from the rally. Nearly all the voters were black.

Also at the polling site was a group of loud and angry protesters who shouted and mocked the voters as they walked in. Nearly all were white.

As you can see from these videos, no one held anything back. People were shouting about Obama’s acknowledged cocaine use as a young man, abortion and one man used the word “terrorist.” They also were complaining that Sundays are for church, not voting.

[.]

McClatchy

Daring to utter the 'L' word: Obama on track to a landslide

WASHINGTON -- Barring a dramatic change in the political landscape over the next three weeks, Democrats appear headed toward a decisive victory on Election Day that would give them broad power over the federal government.

The victory would send Barack Obama to the White House and give him larger Democratic majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate -- and perhaps a filibuster-proof margin there.

That could mark a historic realignment of the country's politics on a scale with 1932 or 1980, when the out party was given power it held for a generation, and used it to transform government's role in American society.

Obama, a 47-year-old first-term senator from Illinois, is now well positioned to win the Electoral College. He's comfortably holding most of the "blue" states that went for Democrats Al Gore and John Kerry in past elections, polls show, and he's gaining momentum to take away several "red" states that have voted Republican in recent elections, including Florida, Ohio, Colorado and Virginia.

The Democrats are also widely expected to take big gains in House and Senate races. Like Obama, they're reaching deep into once solid Republican territory. Even such stalwarts as North Carolina Sen. Elizabeth Dole and Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, could be in jeopardy.

Former Reagan political adviser Ed Rollins likened today's landscape to that in 1980, when voters were angry at President Jimmy Carter and the Democrats and turned to Reagan in droves once they felt comfortable with the idea of him as president.

"Barack has met the threshold," Rollins said. "Once Reagan met the threshold, people wanted to get rid of Carter and they did in a landslide. This is going to turn into a landslide."
"This election right now is exclusively about economy," said independent analyst Charlie Cook. "Despite the fact that the House and Senate are in Democratic hands, Republicans seem to have total ownership of the problem. Fair or not, it's true."

It's also made it much more difficult for Republican John McCain to score with his escalating attacks on Obama for his ties to such controversial figures as William Ayers, a former member of a violent Vietnam-era protest group. "You can't break through with the economy being so overwhelming," Rollins said. "No one cares."

Obama's strength is evident on the political map.

Related: Election Maps at The Cook Political Report

Current Outlook at October 8, 2008:

"It would take a major external event, the proverbial October Surprise, to shift the spotlight to national security or some other subject that would allow McCain to highlight his strengths. At this stage, the most relevant question would seem to be: "How big will the train wreck be for the Republican Party up and down the ballot in November." Obama currently has a 260 to 163 Electoral vote edge, with 115 Electoral votes in the Toss Up column. 270 are needed to win."

FiveThirtyEight Daily Electoral Projections at 10/11

In my view, we've had our October surprise. WMFDs - weapons of mass financial destruction - otherwise known as Derivatives. A small handful in the category of CDS toxic bonds - credit default swaps - exploded. BushPaulson allowed the Lehman Investment Bank to fail, now seen as a huge mistake, that left unintended consequences.

What could be more scary than total financial collapse,  the stock market crashs with world leader floating the likely closure of banks and stock markets for one week, pensions and jobs at peril?  But I digress.

Many, including moi, are outright skeptics. How reliable are these Polls.?  How will the issue of race play in the voting booth?

Last week we received heavy doses of hate and incitement from Mr. and Mrs John George Wallace McPalin.

You  bet apologies are in the mail.

But let's keep your eye on `That One'  

Never underestimate a  Community Organizer.  

It is said Jesus was a community organizer; he stirred the you know what. Pretty soon he had twelve team members that grew to thousands and then millions.

As Wapo observes, even from Karl Rove, our No:1 enemy, there are a few useful lessons.  

MSNBC links

Obama camp relying heavily on ground effort

Campaign borrowing from top GOP strategist Karl Rove's 2004 playbook

In 2004, Democrats watched as any chance of defeating President Bush slipped away in a wave of Republican turnout that exceeded even the goal-beating numbers that their own side had produced.

Four years later, Sen. Barack Obama's campaign intends to avoid a repeat by building an organization modeled in part on what Karl Rove used to engineer Bush's victory: a heavy reliance on local volunteers to pitch to their own neighbors, micro-targeting techniques to identify persuadable independents and Republicans using consumer data, and a focus on exurban and rural areas.

But in scale and ambition, the Obama organization goes beyond even what Rove built.

The campaign has used its record-breaking fundraising to open more than 700 offices in more than a dozen battleground states, pay several thousand organizers and manage tens of thousands more volunteers.

A few days ago BooMan called us to own a piece of history. Don't be a spectator.

You can help without leaving home. Or even in your neighborhood

I'm leaning to the view, we need not be concerned over the Diebolds and the vote count. Events have unfolded as they should.  This is one election the Repugs are praying they'll lose. They own this financial meltdown and haven't got the stomach or the nugs to clean it up. It's at saturation point as only Bush knows how.

World trade has been disrupted.

Next up. Shortages.

This economic mess won't be resolved before November 4, 2008. It exploded on Bush's watch and on January 20, 2009, it'll become the burden of 'That One'

Reuters:

Breaking News

Alaska ethics probe report says Governor Sarah Palin "abused" her power in order to benefit personal interests

Developing....,

Alaska ethics probe finds Palin abused her power

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - An Alaska ethics inquiry found that Gov. Sarah Palin, the U.S. Republican vice presidential candidate, abused the power of her office by dismissing the state's public safety commissioner, a report released on Friday said.

The investigation centered on whether the firing of the state's public safety commissioner was linked to Palin's personal feud with a state trooper who was involved in a contentious divorce with the governor's sister.

More soon.

Enjoy the McCain camp spin. Earlier today the McCain-Palin camp made available their version of events with a complaint from Sarah Palin - she was never interviewed.

[UPDATE: link to the Full Text of The Alaska Ethics Probe Report (263 of 1300 pages) provided by Connecticut Man1] The interview of witnesses:

.PDF:

Stephen Branchflower Report To The Legislative Council

Nixon, Reagan and Bush II are all from the same cloth; Abuse of Power.

For Palin and other wingnuts this report will be worn as a badge of honor.

The old adage. "If you live in a glass house  - Never, never point fingers or throw stones at your opponent when there are skeletons more damning in your closet.

We've found McCain's house No: 9 - It's all glass.

(H/T: Huffpost - a repost link to AP story)

What do we have here?

McCain sat on Board of Radical Group

Why McCain's Time With Council of World Freedom Matters

"John McCain sat on the board of...the U.S. Council for World Freedom," said Begala, "The Anti-Defamation League, in 1981 when McCain was on the board, said this about this organization. It was affiliated with the World Anti-Communist League - the parent organization - which ADL said 'has increasingly become a gathering place, a forum, a point of contact for extremists, racists and anti-Semites.'"

But McCain's involvement in the U.S. Council for World Freedom, which extended from 1981 through, possibly, 1986 is significant -- not merely because it ties him to unsavory characters but because it firmly associates him with a foreign policy that was, at the time and still, controversial.

"I didn't know that [McCain had] served on the board," said Shannon O'Neil Douglas Dillon Fellow for Latin American Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. "It is a little bit surprising to me. But all of those organizations did come from the Republican side mostly. Often the people were tied to the military and they saw the world in black and white terms... My impression is [McCain] still sees the world in back and white."

[.]

AP: link

"McCain linked to private group, an international organization linked to former Nazi collaborators and ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America."

WASHINGTON -- GOP presidential nominee John McCain has past connections to a private group that supplied aid to guerrillas seeking to overthrow the leftist government of Nicaragua in the Iran-Contra affair.

McCain's ties are facing renewed scrutiny after his campaign criticized Barack Obama for his link to a former radical who engaged in violent acts 40 years ago.

The U.S. Council for World Freedom was part of an international organization linked to former Nazi collaborators and ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America. The group was dedicated to stamping out communism around the globe.

The council's founder, retired Army Maj. Gen. John Singlaub, said McCain became associated with the organization in the early 1980s as McCain was launching his political career in Arizona. Singlaub said McCain was a supporter but not an active member in the group.

"McCain was a new guy on the block learning the ropes," Singlaub told The Associated Press in an interview. "I think I met him in the Washington area when he was just a new congressman. We had McCain on the board to make him feel like he wasn't left out. It looks good to have names on a letterhead who are well-known and appreciated.

"I don't recall talking to McCain at all on the work of the group," Singlaub said.

The renewed attention over McCain's association with Singlaub's group comes as McCain's campaign steps up criticism of Obama's dealings with William Ayers, a college professor who co-founded the Weather Underground and years later worked on education reform in Chicago alongside Obama. Ayers held a meet-the-candidate event at his home when Obama first ran for public office in the mid-1990s.

[.]

The renewed attention over McCain's association with Singlaub's group comes as McCain's campaign steps up criticism of Obama's dealings with William Ayers, a college professor who co-founded the Weather Underground and years later worked on education reform in Chicago alongside Obama. Ayers held a meet-the-candidate event at his home when Obama first ran for public office in the mid-1990s.

Obama was roughly 8 years old when Ayers, now at the University of Illinois at Chicago, was working with the Weather Underground, which took responsibility for bombings that included nonfatal blasts at the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol. McCain's vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, has said that Obama "pals around with terrorists."

Months before the cutoff, top Reagan administration officials ramped up a secret White House-directed supply network and put National Security Council aide Oliver North in charge of running it. The goal was to keep the Contras operational until Congress could be persuaded to resume CIA funding.

Singlaub's private group became the public cover for the White House operation.

Secretly, Singlaub worked with North in an effort to raise millions of dollars from foreign governments.

McCain has said previously he resigned from the council in 1984 and asked in 1986 to have his name removed from the group's letterhead.

"I didn't know whether (the group's activity) was legal or illegal, but I didn't think I wanted to be associated with them," McCain said in a newspaper interview in 1986.

Singlaub does not recall any McCain resignation in 1984 or May 1986. Nor does Joyce Downey, who oversaw the group's day-to-day activities.

At least Mr. Ayers is rehabilitated. Is McCain?

Now, in this season of electioneering it's guilt by association. I'm eager for McCain's response to this little reminder of his past links to death squads, racists and anti-Semites.

Palin's stunning performance BooMan observes - a performance that left him feeling stupid - but,

"Sarah Palin was propped up by written responses"

Can we have a debate without props or cheating?

Why was this allowed?

Thinkprogress provides this Video

Sarah Palin Read Her Answers in Last Night's Debate

For Sarah Palin, last night's debate was an open-book exam. She spent much of the evening methodically reading and rehearsing answers from "carefully scripted talking points." Palin's notes were largely hidden from plain view, resting behind the lectern where she stood.

Because the cable and network television stations did not show a split screen of the debate, most viewers could not see that, during Joe Biden's answers, Palin spent almost all her time looking down and studiously reading her notes. But viewers did see that when Palin delivered her answers, she would repeatedly glance down to check her talking points.

ThinkProgress has compiled a video documenting some of the instances where it was clear to the audience that Palin was propped up by written responses. Watch a video compilation:

[.] Video at link at link above

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

[.]

(highlights added)

Hey, all the propping won't make her ready in the next four weeks or the next six months.

TPM: notes conservatives are raising the white flag "One thing to watch for: Prominent conservatives essentially conceding that the race is over."

In Wapo -Krauthammer:

Krauthammer's Hail Mary Rule: You get only two per game. John McCain, unfortunately, has already thrown three. The first was his bet on the surge, a deep pass to David Petraeus who miraculously ran it all the way into the end zone.

[.]

Then, seeking a game-changer after the Democratic convention, McCain threw blind into the end zone to a waiting Sarah Palin. She caught the ball. Her subsequent fumbles have taken the sheen off of that play, but she nonetheless invaluably solidifies his Republican base.

When the financial crisis hit, McCain went razzle-dazzle again, suspending his campaign and declaring that he'd stay away from the first presidential debate until the financial crisis was solved.

He tempted fate one time too many. After climbing up on his high horse, McCain had to climb down. The crisis unresolved, he showed up at the debate regardless, rather abjectly conceding Obama's mocking retort that presidential candidates should be able to do "more than one thing at once." (Although McCain might have pointed out that while he was trying to do two things, Obama was sitting on the sidelines doing one thing only: campaigning.)

[.]

In the primary campaign, Obama was cool as in hip. Now Obama is cool as in collected. He has the discipline to let slow and steady carry him to victory.

[.]

He's been moderate in policy and temper ever since. His one goal: Pass the Reagan '80 threshold. Be acceptable, be cool, be reassuring.

Part of reassurance is intellectual. Like Palin, he's a rookie, but in his 19 months on the national stage he has achieved fluency in areas in which he has no experience. In the foreign policy debate with McCain, as in his July news conference with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, Obama held his own -- fluid, familiar and therefore plausibly presidential.

Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously said of Franklin Roosevelt that he had a "second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Obama has shown that he is a man of limited experience, questionable convictions, deeply troubling associations (Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko) and an alarming lack of self-definition -- do you really know who he is and what he believes? Nonetheless, he's got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament. That will likely be enough to make him president.

One of the few times I agree with Krauthammer. With what's ahead, we'll need an FDR...not a McBushCheney or a "Bush in a skirt"

It was a ploy.

The Minnesota Independent reports getting hold of the GOP Memo: 'McCain-Palin TIME OUT' sent to the wrong list.

....talking points accidentally sent out by a GOP spokesperson on how to discuss the suspension of McCain's campaign. The memo, titled "TALKING POINTS: SUSPENDING THE CAMPAIGN," was sent out in error to the entire Colorado media list by McCain represenative Tom Kise. It includes his warning: "Please do not proactively reach out to the media on this."

According to PolitickerCO's Jeremy Pelzer, Kise wasn't pleased when he discovered that the list, meant only for volunteers, was so widely distributed. "F*ck, tell me I didn't send it to the wrong list," he reportedly said. The eight-point memo begins:

    ~ To address our nation's financial crisis, John McCain will suspend his campaign and return to Washington. He has spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of his decision and asked Senator Obama to join him. The campaign is suspending its advertising and fundraising.    

Obama, in a press conference Wednesday, agreed that "there are times for politics and there are times to rise above politics and do what's right," but says the debate must go on: "This is exactly the time when people need to hear from the candidates."

The Obama campaign contests the McCain camp's assertion that the Republican candidate had "asked Senator Obama to join him," -- as the talking points state -- saying it was Obama who initiated the communication about joint action on the economic crisis.

[.]

(highlights added)

Sounds a bit more than a simple postponement of the debate. Why suspend advertising and fundraising?

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) told BloombergTV last night, "a deal is 98% done and Bush is trying to help out McCain by parachuting him into to the middle of negotiation which will slow things down"

I may add, slowing down negotiations will give McCain his rationale for postponing the debates.

McCain stated his ultimatum. "No bailout deal by Friday, no debate.  As Obama pointed out, We both have jets to fly in for the debates and back to DC.

The University of Mississippi, host of the debate on Friday, is reported as stating the debate will be held. Obama has said he'll be at his podium.
The VP debate is scheduled for October 2. Senator Lindsey Graham told CNN that too is to be postponed.

As for the McCain's ploy of "postponing the debates" Bloomberg reported on historians noting "that the Civil War, the Great Depression and World War II didn't prompt suspensions of presidential campaigns.

This is the real McCain. Reckless. A cowardly hero who can't walk and chew gum at the same time.