Republican National Convention

September 22, 2008

CEM — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 09:56:53 -0700

Today we mourn the loss of Kenneth Harris, Sr., who was shot outside the New Haven Lounge at the Northwood Shopping Center in northeast Baltimore.

For years, Harris had been an advocate for the revitalization of the neglected areas and population of Baltimore plauged by violence and poverty. His death is a tragic example of the sort of violence he dedicated his life to preventing.

Eric Durham, Professor of Communications at Morgan State University; Lisa Leventhal, co-chair of the Northwood Plaza Working Group; Trinya Smith, a Baltimore teacher and a Peer to Peer organizer; Mark Carter, executive director of Kids On The Hill; Keiffer Mitchell, former Baltimore City Councilman and Anthony McCathy, host of the Anthony McCarthy Show along with a multitude of callers expressed their condolences for the Harris family and concerns for the welfare of our city.

Wednesday, September 24 at 6:00 PM, a community gathering is planned in the vicinity of the New Haven Lounge at the Northwood Plaza.

Under the banner of “Enough is Enough,” we are remembering Ken Harris and his work on behalf or our community. We are also expressing our determination to continue our efforts to correct the benign indifference plaguing Northwood Plaza and to restore this shopping area to a safe, vibrant and respected part of our community. --From faithinactiononline.com

Information about the rally to be held in Harris' honor can be found here.

On Wednesday, September 24, 2008, a public viewing will take place at Huber Memorial Church located at 5701 York Road from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.

The funeral will take place on Thursday, September 25, 2008 at Morgan State University in the Fine Arts building located at 2201 Argonne Drive. A public viewing will be held from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m. The funeral services will begin promptly at 11 a.m.

You can read messages of condolence for the Harris family on the WJZ (Channel 13, Baltimore) website here.

Yes He Can! The Moving Acceptance Speech of John McCain, by Richard Vatz

CEM — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:21:53 -0700

From RedMaryland;

John McCain gave a powerful acceptance speech tonight, devoid of artificial drama and devoid of gimmicks. More on that later.

Leading up to his speech was a moving tribute by his wife Cindy, a tribute which left no one in doubt about the genuineness of their union and both of their commitments to public service.

Preceding that address was a specific appeal which this critic found tremendously convincing.

Click READ MORE below!

The Senator from South Carolina, Sen. Lindsay Graham, made a clear, unambiguous focus of this convention the one available operational definition of the difference in military policies between John McCain and Barack Obama: the “Surge” in Iraq.

Sen. Graham said simply “The Surge has worked.” He cited Sen. McCain as the politician who led the fight to support Gen. Petraeus and his successful war strategy, while Sen. Obama and the Democrats almost succeeded – and came within 2 votes – in de-funding the war. The Democratic Senator who was the difference, according to Graham? Sen. Joe Lieberman, who has been threatened with political retaliation from his own Democratic Party for criticizing Sen. Obama as callow.

Sen. Graham convincingly argued that the “Surge” was a critical milestone in the war against terror, for its loss, about which Sen. Obama and the Democrats appeared to be sanguine, would have led to an al Qaeda success and the loss of any United States military credibility in the war against terror.

Devastatingly, Sen. Graham referenced the frequent iterations of Sen. Obama of how he “appreciates” the United States military, characterizing such protestations as disingenuous and “playing politics with our national security.”

His conclusion? Sen. Obama is a man who loves his country, but one who just “doesn’t get it.”

The lengthy but memorable acceptance address by Senator John McCain was the last speech of the convention, of course.

His appeal to conservatives already seemingly solidified through his Vice Presidential nominee, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, he seemed to focus on centrists of both parties and independents, a natural historic constituency of his.

Sen. McCain, amid constant – sometimes too interruptingly constant – cheers of “U-S-A;U-S-A,” pledged to be an active President whose primary missions would be to restore fiscal discipline, return prosperity and keep the country safe.

He pledged an honorable-but-tough campaign against a formidable opponent, Sen. Obama, whom he would not demonize, but also from whom he would not shrink from criticizing.

Assuring his audience that he picked the “right partner,” Gov. Palin, perfect in substance, vision and style [but lacking foreign policy credentials and knowledge to deal with the resurgent imperial Russia described to be on his radar during his presidency, as well as the continuing threat of al Qaeda], he pledged to fight prolific spenders, corrupt politicians and promised to make public the names of legislators supporting pork barrel spending. He pledged to stop the hemorrhaging from our treasury monies that go to potential foreign enemies who sell us oil. These arguments may work to, as the Senator implied, expropriate the concept of “change” for the Republican Party.

Sen. McCain’s signature line that he would rather “lose an election than lose a war” was detailed in his support of the “Surge,” a successful military tactic that he claimed believably may lead to an indisputable victory in the Iraq War. The Surge, he argued, as have all major speakers in the Republican Convention, was opposed by Sen. Obama and the Democrats in general and to this day has not been acknowledged as a military success. This was a major reason cited by Sen. McCain of his needed stewardship of the United States military and foreign policy. In a series of rousing rhetorical contrasts of public policy differences, Sen. McCain crystallized the powerful differences between Sen. Obama and hinself.

Sen. McCain reassured the country that he “hates war” because he has experienced war, and he took us through some of his experience as a P.O.W. to show the power of fellowship.

He ended his speech with a powerful crescendo of “Fight,” “Fight” and “Fight” for America...

When the ethos of the speaker is consistent with the message, a long speech does not disappoint; it energizes, and the convention hall and presumably most Republicans and maybe even most Reagan Democrats who witnessed this powerful address were excited by the rhetoric of “change,” the \Republican\ rhetoric of change.

Professor Richard E. Vatz teaches Political Rhetoric at Towson University

O' Say Can WHO See? from Dr. Eric Durham

CEM — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:12:26 -0700

Let's begin with the topic of CHANGE.

Click READ MORE below!

I noticed a phenomenon during the early portions of the Democratic
primary. A young man by the name of Barack Obama introduced himself as
an agent of CHANGE. He kept this topic as a recurring thesis in his
stump speeches; and he also placed the word on his campaign placards.
This one word became the goal, motto, direction, and purpose that he
ran on. THEN Hillary Clinton adopted CHANGE and put a "little twist" on
it by coupling it with experience. (Which, by the way, begin to signal
the disorganization of her campaign.) Then you begin to hear more and
more of the Democratic candidates squabble about who could be best to
bring about CHANGE. Now, I see the Republicans are doing the SAME
THING. Which baffles me, because, once they begin talking about CHANGE,
they come close to admitting that what they have done for eight years
is so messed up that it needs to be CHANGED. In short, I think it's
very important to note that CHANGE has become so attractive that
everyone has decided to adopt it. Why?...because this is what the
American people have said they want: CHANGE. ...and Barack Obama, in
his judgement and experience, knew it from the beginning.

Small note on Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery:

Over the course of the last two days, several Republican speakers
mentioned that THEIR party (the Republican Party) ended slavery. This
mention, just like their appropriation of CHANGE, is pure pandering.
Let me explain something to the voters of America. The constituents of
the Republican party that ended slavery are the same demographic of
people who constitute the contemporary Democratic party. The "political
ancestors" of the people we saw in the ExCel center over the last
couple days belonged to the "Dixiecrats," "Yellow Dog" democrats...the
members of the Solid South...those who wanted slavery...fought
Reconstruction...and I don't think is much of a leap, supported the
terrorists activity of the Ku Klux Klan upon other (black) Americans.
With FDRoosevelt's Public Works Programs enacted, the demographics of
the two major parties started to shift (1933-1945). Which is why a lot
of Blacks, some other ethnic groups, and liberals belong to the
Democratic party and fiscal and social conservatives are now
Republicans. So, for those that didn't know this bit of U.S. History,
now you do...don't be fooled by the petty pander. THEIR party was the
party of Herbert Hoover...but they didn't mention that last night.
Remember the "Hoover Pockets" of the Great Depression? I think it would
be a wonderful American fashion statement to bring back now..."Bush
pockets."

The Dissenters in the audience:

Not even the chants of "USA" could drown out the dissenters against the
War last night. By the way, one dissenter wore a shirt that read
VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR. This, I understand, as quite a "trump card."
...and I forget the number right now, but Obama has GROSSLY out-raised
McCain among troops in Iraq. So, as much as the RNC attempted to
"decorate" war and military service through their video productions,
let us not forget, THIS IS AN UNPOPULAR WAR. And the issue of the
"surge" is so laughable to me, I won't discuss it. Okay, one sentence
(question) on the surge: Are you seriously going to use a "surge"
(that's a couple months old) to speak about a 5-6 year poorly managed
war?

I think it's important to note that DNC didn't have any vocal
dissenters. And was the case, despite the fact that they didn't come
off as intimdating, sarcastic, or condescening. And by my count, the
Republicans had FOUR vocal dissenters last night...and ONE the night
before.

McCain's speech:

"We're all Americans....and that's an association that means more to
me, than any other." And the audience roars?!?!! How do you clap so
enthusiastically as a result of this "cooperative rhetoric" when you've
been so enthusiastic about the "divisive rhetoric" (Palin, Romney,
Giuliani)?

There were parts of the speech where McCain was laying blame on his
party...but he kinda muddled that...then he said BOTH parties messed
things up....but, WE lost their trust. It was so muddled, I don't even
know how to talk about. But, I will say, as a "scrutinizer of men," I
believe John McCain is a decent guy. I like him better than a lot other
people he's surrounding by. ...and I believe there were parts of his
speech that were muddled because he has to pander to different elements
within his party...and he's trying his best to do that...and "stick to
his guns." Yet, in still, I applaud him for seeming courageous enough
to tackle the task. In short, I saw this as him attempting to
honorable...but he's surrounded by a den of wolves! Tough task.

-Dr. Eric Durham

Dr. Durham is a Professor at Loyola College He blogs as the Good Doctor at http://drericdurham.blogspot.com/ .

From Lea - Not About the Issues, huh? and "The Mirrored Ceiling"

lea — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:45:44 -0700

As I try and recover from the most derisive, hateful and misleading (Rudy Guiliani representing the joys of family values and small town America?) convention I have ever had the non-pleasure to witness, I'm sitting and pondering about the next few weeks and trusting that the actual issues and not I'm-a- hockey-mom-and-you're-not-you-elitist-rich-non moose-eating Democrats, will make way to discussing our soaring unemployment rate, our bizarro trade deficit, our over 40 million fellow citizens with no health insurance, poverty, HIV-AIDS...shall I continue?

Click READ MORE below!

Rick Davis, John McCain’s campaign manager said this week, “This election is not about issues.” “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.” That is unbelievably frightening. Issues don't matter, huh? The last time we elected a president we wanted to have a beer with, we descended into eight years of hell.

So, I decided to torture myself just a bit more and check out the mainstream media web sites, and as I clicked across net-land, I came across this blog entry by Judith Warner for the New York Times. She brilliantly states my beliefs, and I wanted to share:

The Mirrored Ceiling
by Judith Warner
http://warner.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/the-mirrored-ceiling/?em

It turns out there was something more nauseating than the nomination of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate this past week. It was the tone of the acclaim that followed her acceptance speech.

“Drill, baby, drill,” clapped John Dickerson, marveling at Palin’s ability to speak and smile at the same time( http://www.slate.com/id/2199250/) as an indication of her unexpected depths and unsuspected strengths. “It was clear Palin was having fun, and it’s hard to have fun if you’re scared or a lightweight,” he wrote in Slate.

The Politico praised her charm and polish as( http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13147.html) antidotes to her lack of foreign policy experience: “Palin’s poised and flawless performance evoked roars of applause from delegates who earlier this week might have worried that the surprise pick and newcomer to the national stage may not be up to the job.”
“She had a great night. I thought she had a very skillfully written, and very skillfully delivered speech,” Joe Biden said, shades of “articulate and bright and clean” threatening a reappearance. (For a full roundup of these comments go here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13147.html)

Thus began the official public launch of our country’s now most-prominent female politician. The condescension – damning with faint praise – was reminiscent of the more overt misogyny of Samuel Johnson.
“A woman’s preaching is like a dog’s walking on his hinder legs,” the wit once observed. “It is not done well; but you are surprized to find it done at all.”

Palin sounded, at times, like she was speaking a foreign language as she gave voice to the beautifully crafted words that had been prepared for her on Wednesday night.

But that wasn’t held against her. Thanks to the level of general esteem that greeted her ascent to the podium, it seems we’ve all got to celebrate the fact that America’s Hottest Governor (Princess of the Fur Rendezvous 1983, Miss Wasilla 1984) could speak at all.

Could there be a more thoroughgoing humiliation for America’s women?
You are not, I think, supposed now to say this. Just as, I am sure, you are certainly not supposed to feel that having Sarah Palin put forth as the Republicans’ first female vice presidential candidate is just about as respectful a gesture toward women as was John McCain’s suggestion, last month, that his wife participate in a topless beauty contest.

Such thoughts, we are told, are sexist. And elitist. After all, via Palin, we now hear without cease, the People are speaking. The “real” “authentic,” small-town “Everyday People,” of Hockey Moms and Blue Collar Dads whom even Rudolph Giuliani now invokes as an antidote to the cosmopolite Obamas and their backers in the liberal media. (Remind me please, once again, what was the name of the small town where Rudy grew up?)
Why does this woman – who to some of us seems as fake as they can come, with her delicate infant son hauled out night after night under the klieg lights and her pregnant teenage daughter shamelessly instrumentalized for political purposes — deserve, to a unique extent among political women, to rank as so “real”?

Because the Republicans, very clearly, believe that real people are idiots. This disdain for their smarts shows up in the whole way they’ve cast this race now, turning a contest over economic and foreign policy into a culture war of the Real vs. the Elites. It’s a smoke and mirrors game aimed at diverting attention from the fact that the party’s tax policies have helped create an elite that’s more distant from “the people” than ever before. And from the fact that the party’s dogged allegiance to up-by-your-bootstraps individualism — an individualism exemplified by Palin, the frontierswoman who somehow has managed to “balance” five children and her political career with no need for support — is leading to a culture-wide crack-up.
Real people, the kind of people who will like and identify with Palin, they clearly believe, are smart, but not too smart, and don’t talk too well, dropping their “g”s, for example, and putting tough concepts like “vice president” in quotation marks.

“As for that ‘V.P.’ talk all the time … I tell ya, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me, What is it exactly that the ‘VP’ does every day?” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9poCWnGIb8 )Palin asked host Lawrence Kudlow on CNBC sometime before her nomination. “I’m used to bein’ very productive and workin’ real hard in an administration and we want to make sure that that ‘V.P.’ slot would be a fruitful type of position.”

And, I think, they find her acceptably “real,” because Palin’s not intimidating, and makes it clear that she’s subordinate to a great man.
That’s the worst thing a woman can be in this world, isn’t it? Intimidating, which appears to be synonymous with competent. It’s the kiss of death, personally and politically.

But shouldn’t a woman who is prepared to be commander in chief be intimidating? Because of the intelligence, experience, talent and drive that got her there? If she isn’t, at least on some level, off-putting, if her presence inspires national commentary on breast-pumping and babysitting rather than health care reform and social security, then something is seriously wrong. If she doesn’t elicit at least some degree of awe, then something is missing.

One of the worst poisons of the American political climate right now, the thing that time and again in recent years has led us to disaster, is the need people feel for leaders they can “relate” to. This need isn’t limited to women; it brought us after all, two terms of George W. Bush. And it isn’t new; Americans have always needed to feel that their leaders were, on some level, people like them.

But in the past, it was possible to fill that need through empathetic connection. Few Depression-era voters could “relate” to Franklin Roosevelt’s patrician background, notes historian Doris Kearns Goodwin. “It was his ability to connect to them that made them feel they could connect to him,” she told me in a phone interview.

The age of television, Goodwin believes, has made the demand for connection more immediate and intense. But never before George W. Bush did it quite reach the beer-drinking level of familiarity. “Now it’s all about being able to see your life story in the candidate, rather than the candidate, with empathy, being able to relate to you.”

There’s a fine line between likability and demagoguery. Both thrive upon manipulation and least-common-denominator politics. These days, I fear, this need for direct mirroring — and thus this susceptibility to all sorts of low-level tripe — is particularly acute among women, who are perhaps reaching historic lows in their comfort levels with themselves and their choices.

Just look at how quickly the reaction to Palin devolved into what The Times this week called the (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/us/politics/02mother.html?em) “Mommy Wars: Special Campaign Edition.” Much of the talk about Palin (like the emoting about Hillary Clinton before her) ultimately came down to this: is she like me or not like me? If she’s not like me, can I like her? And what kind of child care does she have?

“This election is not about issues,” Rick Davis, John McCain’s campaign manager said this week. “This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.” That’s a scary thought. For the takeaway is so often base, a reflection more of people’s fears and insecurities than of our hopes and dreams.

We’re not likely to get a worthy female president anytime soon.

Thanks Judith.

Just my opinion folks, and you know what is said about those...

-Lea

Whatever you sellin', I ain't buying, by Guest Blogger Ronnie Djoukeng

CEM — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:42:45 -0700

It’s the economy stupid! The famous words from Democratic political strategist James Carville flashed in my mind while Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin gave her speech. The McCain ticket is gambling big time that the trifecta: toughness, Iraq, and military service will pre-occupy voters mind. There’s something Reaganesque about the McCain approach too – it’s tried, true, and tired.

Click READ MORE below!

Here we are in the 2nd millennium and the Republican National Convention is homogenous and monolithic—it lacked diversity. The cowboy stance of fighting terrorism isn’t currying favor with Americans or the rest of the world and Republicans couldn’t be more indifferent. The RNC permitted Guiliani the glib speaker to be a man of contradictions. In order to elevate Palin, he shot himself in the foot. In order to contrast Palin and Obama’s political upbringing, Guiliani chose the words cosmopolitan and flashy to describe Barack and Chicago since Palin is from a dull small-town of Wasila with a scant population less than 10,000. During his speech, one had to wonder what descriptive language Guiliani would have used to portray New York City in all of its glory? If Guiliani was supposed to be selling Palin, it was more akin to window shopping—ogling at the shiny merchandise from the window but never enticed to actually purchase. And if Palin was supposed to be selling the need for the McCain/Palin ticket, she demonstrated their ticket constitutes a want not a need.

The rhetoric might have felt good last night, but it is unclear what role if any Palin would play to ensure Americans feel this way for the next 4 years? Palin deliberately chose not to articulate any policy positions. The feel good mainstream references and false aphorisms she spoke will have to resonate with the rest of America and independents before the elections take place. The most celebrated mainstream axiom of all – “where’s the beef”— fittingly describes Palin’s speech. Palin touched on job creation vis-à-vis her position on energy, but the scope of her detail appeared esoteric to Alaska excluding the steel plant workers of Ohio or motor city assemblymen of Michigan.

It is unclear what direction McCain’s speech will take tonight. If he is trying to sell his patriotism, he doesn’t have too – Americans are aware that he is a decorated veteran. Although, he should wonder how patriotism will resonate with voters considering his Party dismissed his war record during the 2000 elections. And it was his Party that selected a candidate without a veteran record in the form of George W. Bush. And don’t forget it was his Party that trivialized the patriotism of another war hero’s candidacy for president. Indeed, Hillary was right last week when she declared – “McCain is more of the same” this is Bush III after all.

Ronnie Djoukeng

Ronnie Djoukeng is a Maryland blogger who can be found at her group blog, http://5andapossible.blogspot.com/ .

Marc's Reflections on the Republican Campaign

marc — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:06:19 -0700

Besides the usual tax and big government and vitriolic attacks against their opponents, several themes arose last night that may be the battlegrounds of the next two months.

Remember in 1992 when Clinton campaign chiefs Paul Begala and James Carville coined the phrase "It’s the economy, stupid?" It worked for Clinton. They tapped into the American angst of that moment.

Click READ MORE below!

Now I think it is "It's your wallet, stupid." The housing crisis and oil prices have people very worried. People are terrified about the high price of gas, the diminishing value of their paychecks, the insecurity of their jobs, fear that oil prices are being controlled by foreign powers. We are worried about the future.

While polls indicate that most Americans want solar, wind and alternative energy for our future, they also put the need for new energy sources ahead of environmental concerns. Over 60% of American support drilling. So, both McCain and Obama have changed their positions on off shore drilling. At one time, they were both opposed, now they are behind the idea.

Even though our own Department of the Energy says we cannot drill our way of this mess, people are more worried about their wallets, their money, the cost of oil and the Democrats have not made their case about how this new Green Economy will work. Americans are comfortable with oil. It is part of the American persona and mythology. We are addicted to it. We know our cars, not mass transit. We are reluctant to give up our lifestyles. If we think that drilling will make gas for our cars, and oil and electricity for our homes, less expensive, as well as keep us secure from our enemies and provide jobs, then that is what we want. People want to keep more money in their wallets and want to know we will not be at the mercy of "foreign devils" that control our oil.

The Democrats have to make their case, and it can’t be complicated. How do we make this transition to the Green Economy? People want it, but want to understand simply how we get there. How will it work? Is it real or fantasy? What about our jobs?

While most Americans think it was a mistake to go into Iraq, polls show the American electorate is divided on whether the surge worked and whether we should pull out now or stay till the job is done. The Republicans are pushing the idea that the surge worked, that we are winning.

The Democrats' opposition to the war has been tepid, at best. The American people were lied to about why we had to go to war. More and more evidence ties this war to a debatable geopolitical position in the Middle East and to securing Iraq’s oil. Over the last five years the Democrats have not pushed their opposition to the war; they have not demanded investigations of the beginning of the war or the complicity of big oil. Now they have to come up with a plan that stirs as much passion and interest among the people as the Republican message that McCain was right and the surge is working.

So, tonight we hear McCain. We can talk about that tomorrow together, right here.

Fact Checking Palin's Speech

CEM — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 11:40:04 -0700

The following article from the Associated Press takes a look at some of the claims Sarah Palin made in her speech last night. We grabbed it from Yahoo News.

Click READ MORE below!

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press WriterWed Sep 3, 11:48 PM ET

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters held back little Wednesday as they issued dismissive attacks on Barack Obama and flattering praise on her credentials to be vice president. In some cases, the reproach and the praise stretched the truth.

Some examples:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

MCCAIN: "She's been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America's energy supply ... She's responsible for 20 percent of the nation's energy supply. I'm entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson.

THE FACTS: McCain's phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she's no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.

MCCAIN: "She's the commander of the Alaska National Guard. ... She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.

THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska's national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.

FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."

THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor's election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries.

FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: "We need change, all right — change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington — throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin."

THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.

___

Associated Press Writer Jim Drinkard in Washington contributed to this report.

The Best Response to Palin's Speech

justin — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:54:50 -0700

No offense to other responses to Palin's speech at the RNC last night, including all of the great ones on this site, but this one takes the cake. It's a "Reasonably Hand-Drawn Facsimile of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's Jet" for sale on eBay, described as follows:

You are bidding on a "reasonably hand-drawn facsimile" of the Westwind II Jet sold by Sarah Palin on eBay in 2007 for $2.1 million.

I look forward to selling my jet on eBay and garnering the same praise and admiration that Sarah Palin received.

ALL the proceeds of this auction will go directly to The Obama/Biden Campaign.

Let's try to raise more than $2.1 million!

The drawing was crafted with crayon, pencil and marker and measures 8.5" x 11". It is hand-signed and dated by the artist and comes in a wooden frame.

Proof of donation to campaign will be provided.

Happy Bidding!

Marc's Response to Palin's Speech

CEM — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:15:21 -0700

The Republicans really kicked it out last night. They laid out their battle plan and came out swinging a message that will resonate with that portion of the American public that could go either way in the election. Their votes could be the ones who will decide who becomes the next President of the United States.

Palin proved herself a combatative, tough, smart and savvy politician last night, and those who spoke before her provided a powerful build up to her speech. On Tuesday night, I thought well, these guys are boring and have no spark. I was surprised knowing how smart, and at times underhanded, their campaign strategists can be. They have the Karl Rove team in place, after all.

Click READ MORE below!

Well last night they pulled it off. First, former Md. Lt. Governor Michael Steele spoke and gave the conventioneers a new slogan that caught on like wild fire. Remember when McCain, in North Carolina I believe, said we have to “Drill now, Drill here?” Well, Steele came out with a play on that shouting “Drill, Baby, Drill!” which itself was a play on the sixties slogan, "Burn, Baby, Burn!" that people chanted in the inner city riots of 1965 and 1968. The delegates ate it up and chanted this new slogan all night long. It will be a campaign cheer to whip up the crowds from here on through November 4th. Ahh, some white folks just get so titillated at hip Black speak.

When former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani spoke, the crowd spontaneously broke out in the cheer "Drill, Baby, Drill!". First it was clear the Rudy had not listened to the Steele’s speech because he smiled, repeated the phase with an incredulous laugh. It showed the rallying power of that slogan, but it also showed how no one in power listens to Steele. He is their symbol with so little real substance. They don’t have many African American voices so his role is important to them.

In between Steele and Giuliani, former presidential candidate Governor Huckabee of Arkansas spoke. He was the soft opening. His was a pleasant kind voice during an evening of non-stop assault on the Democrats. He spoke of hatred of racism, growing up poor and coming from proud working class roots. His line of the night was that he decided to work his way out of poverty and not wait for the government to pull him out.

Rudy Giuliani was a pit bull. He stoked the crowd, belittling Barack Obama and the Democrats in general. I thought he would never end but he did his job. He loved being up there, the bad boy New Yorker taking on his Democratic neighbors.

Governor Sarah Palin clearly will be the one who go for the jugular against the Democrats in this campaign. She told America that she has a loving family with all the foibles and problems of every other family. She was the every woman of hard working mothers. Yeah, my baby has Down Syndrome, I love him and I have to keep going and working. I will be the advocate for Special Needs families in the White House.

One of the central themes of the campaign emerged, as Sarah Palin and the other speakers took the stage. They will argue that McCain’s POW experience, serving America, not bending in front of his evil (and that was one of the word of the night) tormentors at the Hanoi Hilton is the kind of courage and integrity America needs. They will argue that the Democrats are untested, Palin has a run a state and McCain stands up for what is right and they will take on the Beltway establishment.

Their themes were clear:

McCain was right about the War and the Surge. He had the courage to fight and we are winning the war in Iraq because of it. The Democrats are defeatist with no understanding of victory.

The Democrats want to raise taxes on small business and on all of us to make government larger, which is not what we need for the economy and the 21st century.

America needs to be energy independent, which means drilling for oil, and we will use alternative energy too. Democrats don’t get it; we can have our own oil and not be dependent on the world.

They touched that part of America’s soul that is conservative. They did it deftly with a saber, while belittling the Democrats and their candidates.

The war is on. Obama may have the lead now, but you can see where the blood will be drawn in the next two months.

McCain’s turn tonight. We will see what he does and how the Democrats respond.

What did you think?

-Marc

Lea Gilmore - Sarah Palin Speaks

lea — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 06:36:07 -0700

Sarah Palin speaks. Lets give it to her, she was phenomenal. Her presentation, her engagement, her fiery delivery wowed the Republican base, and a new conservative mega-star was born.

As the loudspeakers played the Sly Stone dance maker “I'm Everyday People,” there was a moment of irony for me. Because unlike the Democratic convention, I didn't see the rainbow of “everyday” people I know. I saw an overwhelming white audience, oh yes they did find some black Conservatives and Latino delegates to be within camera shot.

Click READ MORE below!

Palin's speech vehemently energized the Republican base. But will the searing attacks on Obama and so-called liberal ideals speak to Independents? That being said, her role has clearly been defined as the “attack dog.” Joe Biden will have to step lightly when “attacking” back given the obvious dynamics, a fact that I am sure was taken into consideration during the vetting process that produced this unlikely nominee – a 72 year old heartbeat away from being the next leader of the free world.

Palin hit this speech out of the proverbial ball park.

It looks like it is time for Hillary to practice the glowing support she gave Senator Obama last week. By passionately speaking out now, Hillary can end the comparisons and stop the McCain camp in it's tracks for going after her “18 million supporters.” Silence from her will just be giving permission that those oh so important voters are fair game. Hillary can make it known that just because two powerful, dynamic politicians share the same internal plumbing, women are not interchangeable and to believe so is an insult to us all.

Back to the speech...

Going for Obama and those who have questioned her small town experience Palin stated, "Since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities." Ouch.

Palin delivered a populist message, referring often to her young family. She also touched on the theme of the day – Reform. "Here's how I look at the choice Americans face in this election," Palin said. "In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change."

With her family sitting in the audience, thousands of cameras focused on her 17 year old daughter Bristol and her fiance', and now with the world focused on Palin, we are being thrown into a campaign of 'your style versus my style'. I would much rather it be 'your ideals versus mine'.

I may adore her new shoes, but I fundamentally disagree with most of Palin's ideology. The former is not how I choose my vote. The issues matter, and the dressing of the messenger doesn't, and that goes for both political parties.

McCain speaks tonight.

-Lea