Long-hand Edition

A you may have surmised from my incessant web-surfing, I'm not often away from the computer these days. I like it. I'm kind of a stay-at-home sort of gal these days, loosely lounging on the couch while tightly connected to my wireless laptop.

Today, however, I unplugged briefly. I sat in the San Francisco autumn warmth outside of a bakery/cafe, sipping pomegranate tea, conducting my interviews by cellphone and writing notes while enjoying the light breeze, the strange smell of whatever a public street cleaner used to scrub down the bike racks and listening to the music blaring from the taco place across the street. It was so pleasant that when I was done with work, I decided to write out the intro to this edition long-hand.

I mention all this because it reminded me of the days of yore before I was joined at the hip to the World Wide Web, when I used to it on nearly the self-same spot and keep a journal and read the paper--on paper. Those were the 90s, the Clinton years, and it struck me that back in those days, although I was still politically active and alert, I wasn't so panickily addicted to CNN or C-Span. It was as if I didn't quite feel the same urgent need to monitor 24/7 what was happening in the world, the markets, the economy. After all, we were paying a pretty good guy--a smart guy-- I figured, to do that job for us. In the past few days, Bill has been on the tube, on the View, on Letterman, on the Daily Show. Listening to him speak, I can't help thinking, "Why is it that these horrifically enormous problems--the financial crisis, the environment, jobs, the economy-- don't seem insurmountable when he talks about them? Why does he make me feel optimistic? And wouldn't it be so nice to feel, this year, like we've picked a guy who could handle all those problems, who would make us feel comfortable about detaching from obsessive monitoring of the world? Like we had a capable custodian of the public trust in office? Like I could comfortably detach from CNN and go sip pomegranate tea in the relaxed knowledge that someone smarter than me is working on the whole thing?

I know, I know, all is not roses and pearls. For as much as I wax misty-eyed at Clinton's appearances, there are others who still don't like him. (Chris Rock has some pointed remarks to make about the former Prez's tepid support of Obama.) But liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat, surely we all can admit that he was a sight smarter and a more effective manager than our current president, whom even die-hard right-wingers don't trust any farther than they can thrown him.

Anyway, I digress. That happen in warm sunlight. Back to the cold business at hand. A correction from yesterday: Leo quite rightly points out that I had a misstatement in yesterday rant about what a trillion looks like. I said that "If you were to stack up one trillion $1000 bills, the pile would reach past the troposphere, through the stratosphere into the thermosphere." What I meant to say was, "if you stack up $1 trillion worth of $1000 bills..." One trillion $1000 bills of course would be the same height as one trillion $1 bills!

And as Leo points out, the $1000 bill has not been printed since 1969, when Nixon halted their circulation in an effort to fight organized crime. Incidentally they featured the face of Grover Cleveland, a Democratic president whose second term coincided with the Panic of 1893 in which speculation (railroads, not mortgages) contributed to a series of bank failures (sound familiar?).

(See, Mr. McCain? It's very easy to admit to a misstatement and set the record straight.)

Speaking of "Pants on Fire," Politico reports that McCain's camp is peeved about being called "liars" all the time: "Sen. John McCain's top campaign aides convened a conference call today to complain of being called "liars." They pressed the media to scrutinize specific elements of Sen. Barack Obama's record. But the call was so rife with simple, often inexplicable misstatements of fact that it may have had the opposite effect: to deepen the perception, dangerous to McCain, that he and his aides have little regard for factual accuracy."

And yet, they offer us so many targets. Max Bergmann points out what McCain has "forgotten" about his positions on Northern Ireland. " John McCain was in Scranton today (apparently Scranton is the epicenter of the political universe these days) claiming to have been a long supporter of U.S. involvement in the Northern Ireland peace process - which just happens to be completely untrue."

Bergmann quotes Congressman Richard Neal's summary: "By contrast, John McCain has spent years ridiculing and minimizing U.S. efforts to help resolve the Troubles. In an article in Foreign Affairs, he said President Bill Clinton's efforts were "romantic" and accused him of undertaking his tireless work for peace in order to curry favor with Irish Americans. He criticized the decision to grant Gerry Adams a visa, a development now considered crucial to the success of the peace process. He claimed our role in Northern Ireland was severely damaging our relationship with Great Britain. Yet in a speech before Congress in 2003, British Prime Minister Tony Blair publicly thanked America for its support of the peace process. Quite simply, in the long march towards peace and stability in Northern Ireland, John McCain has been on the wrong side of history every step of the way."

And jeez-Louise, why is the McCain camp so p.o.'ed about the NYTimes when George Will is body-slamming you in every column over at the Washington Post? "It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?"

In that "Wait! The Conservatives are on MY side??" way, Will also points out what I've been saying all along: "Is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary."

And thanks to Betty, who passes along this fascinating deconstruction of what "costs $700 billion" really means, from the Dealbook blog on the NYTimes. "The $700 billion is only the maximum amount the government can hold of these assets at any one time. In fact, over time, the government may purchase far more than $700 billion of securities, as it repeatedly purchases and then sells these assets. Finally...based on how the bill accounts for the costs of these assets, Mr. Paulson can conceivably spend much more than $700 billion at any one time under the bill's current wording." Ex-squeeze me?

More on everyone's favorite governor: Andrew Sullivan at the Atlantic sticks to his guns on the Twelve Lies of Sarah Palin. "Just for the record, I asked an intern to go back and double fact-check the twelve documented lies that Sarah Palin has told on the public record. These are not hyperbolic claims or rhetorical excess. They are assertions of fact that are demonstrably untrue and remain uncorrected."

And not that we didn't know this about Sarah Palin, but David Talbot at Salon recounts how Palin's mayoral election in Wasilla took on tones of nastiness that echo the current campaign. "According to some political observers in Alaska, this pattern -- exploiting 'old-boy' mentors and then turning against them for her own advantage -- defines Sarah Palin's rise to power. Again and again, Palin has charmed powerful political patrons, and then rejected them when it suited her purposes."

Relations with the press have totally deteriorated for the erstwhile "Straight Talk Express," who is now the Clam Shell Express, particularly when it comes to a certain Governor from the State of Alaska....

McCain's folks decided today that they wanted the world to see photos of Palin lookin' all presidential-like while meeting with world leaders at the UN, but they didn't want any pesky reporter-types actually asking her questions or going editorial about her meetings. So they banned the editorial pool reporters from covering the event, and planned to allow only a cameraperson. (Usually the "pool" sends a few photographers and reporters as representatives of the whole group. The reps attend the event and return to share their information with the rest of the pool so everyone can get the story written.) The Media, who've been kept on a short leash around Palin, finally grew a spine and rebelled. CNN (who had the designated pool cameraperson) threatened to pull their crew entirely before McCain's campaign relented.

In other updates, remember McCain adviser Rick Davis, whom I mentioned yesterday as the recipient of the Freddie Mac "Take this $30,000 and Once More Around the Regulations, My Good Man" Championship? Maybe you inferred from yesterday's story that he had STOPPED getting money from the mortgage giants back in 2005? Well, new information shows that Davis' consulting firm has been getting paid $15,000 a month THROUGH LAST MONTH until, you know, Freddie was taken over by the US. Government. "On Sunday, in an interview with CNBC and The Times, Mr. McCain responded to a question about that tie between Mr. Davis and the two mortgage companies by saying that he 'has had nothing to do with it since, and I'll be glad to have his record examined by anybody who wants to look at it.'" Thanks, Johnny Mac-- we just might do that.

Well, all this brouhaha has been good for fundraising--for Obama. Helene, I think your solution of "donation therapy" (whenever the Republicans make you feel depressed or angry, send Obama $5) is catching on!

An article in today's Wall Street Journal notes that according to a study by Women's Campaign Forum Foundation --Palin notwithstanding--women have donated twice as many of their dollars to Obama as they have to McCain."$75.3 million to Sen. Obama and $34.2 million to Sen. McCain through July 31, according to the report. In 2004, women sent $58.1 million to Mr. Bush and $57.1 million to Mr. Kerry."

The article further notes some...um..interesting points...

• Women are heavy users of social-networking and campaign Web sites that put them in a position to make online donations. (What? What're you lookin' at me for? So I use Facebook and I "became a fan of Obama")
  
• 92% of the women who responded visited campaign Web sites (How else am I supposed to get information for my e-mail Rants?)
  
• 79% signed up for email news from campaigns (Hey, I signed up for McCain's emails too.. just to see how lame their online machine is...)
  
• 60% signed online petitions. (It only takes five seconds)
• Of the women who made two or more donations in the last year, 28% gave $50 or more. (But it was in $5 increments)
  
• The frequent female donors also tended to be more active using online resources to recruit supporters to their candidates. (Um...)
  
• Four of five of these frequent donors forwarded emails or news about politics to friends, (...ummm...)
  
• while 37% asked friends to make donations. (Hey, I only say that as a public service--to combat depression with donation therapy!)
  

Here's the link to the website to donate to Obama's campaign, by the way. In case you need...you know...a little lift....
(Does all this mean that I'm "in the tank" for Obama?)

================
Back to Foreign Policy

Here's a well-organized chap: Marc Ginsberg, former U.S. Ambassador to Morocco under Clinton, warns Obama to be ready for the following lines of attack on Friday at the Presidential debate:

The "Commander-in-Chief" Judgment Test & Iraq: Beware of McCain's plan to leverage the Iraq surge's success and your opposition to it as an attack on the honor and valor of the U.S. military. McCain will assert that your election will create a "crisis of confidence" in the U.S. military given your position on the surge. McCain will also try to "disqualify" you as an effective CinC given your lack of military service. He will try to equate your opposition to the surge as a failure to understand the real stakes in the struggle against "radical Islamic extremism" (see more below on this topic).

The "3am Wake Up Call": McCain may be accorded by Lehrer the opportunity to turn to you and ask a "doomsday" type of question such as explain how would you react if you were called by your national security advisor and told that the civilian leadership in Pakistan had been killed in a suicide bomb or that Israel has attacked Iran's nuclear installations.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee: You know McCain will haul out the canard that you failed to convene any hearings as Chairman of the European Subcommittee and that is indicative of how little you cared about foreign policy when you were accorded the responsibility and he will rattle off a number of European crises to drill the point home.

Summits With Adversaries/Iran: You already know that McCain will attack you on your stated willingness to meet with adversaries. But he may go a step further and assert that your embrace of tough diplomacy is nothing more than semantics to camouflage the controversy. McCain will try to trap you into sounding more tentative about how you would handle Iran's nuclear program and what you would do if you were told that Iran had developed a nuclear weapon. He will equate your opposition to the overthrow of Saddam as an indication that you would be reluctant to use force against Iran despite your statements to the contrary.

Russia: McCain will assert that during the Georgia crisis your attentions were elsewhere and tentative in your response. He will try to lure you into an argument whether Georgia should become a full-fledged member of NATO. He will also challenge you on your position opposing Russia's removal from the G-8 group of democratic nations and assert that consequently you do not appreciate the gravity of Vladimir Putin's threats against Eastern Europe.

China: Beware of the Taiwan defense question with respect to China. McCain will try to trip you up on the Shanghai Declaration by claiming you do not understand the complexity of the U.S. - China relationship.

Bin Laden & Al Qaeda: Ironically, the "I will pursue Bin Laden to the gates of hell" McCain will assert that U.S. attacks on Al Qaeda and the Taliban inside Pakistani territory have destabilized Pakistan's government and you are a proponent of such attacks without understanding how important it is to preserve our alliance with Pakistan.

The Middle East/Iraq: McCain will contest your priorities in the Middle East. He will assert that had you had your way Al Qaeda would have taken over in Iraq and that you are going to commit the same errors Clinton committed in zealously pushing a Middle East peace process and negotiations with Syria (catering to those FL undecided voters no doubt). He will try to trip you up into refusing to assert that the real enemy in the region is "Radical Islamic Extremism" and that your refusal to use the phrase is testament to your misunderstanding of the nature of the enemy we face.

United Nations: McCain will try to paint you out as a naïve multilateralist who would place the future of U.S. security back in the hands of an institution that opposes U.S. interests.

Preemptive Unilateralism: McCain will assert that the U.S. must reserve the right to preemptively attack a country if it constitutes a "clear and present danger" to U.S. security and assert your opposition to this version of the Bush Doctrine will leave the U.S. weaker and that this proves you will never be willing to stand up to Iran.

Trade: McCain will claim your opposition to free trade will cost American jobs and an example of your being captive of special interests in Washington. He will try to show how your trade pact hesitation proves that you really reject one of the great legacies of the Clinton Administration.

Global Financial Crisis: McCain will come prepared with a laundry list of "to dos" to solve the international financial system and claim you have no plan to deal with it.

North Korea: North Korea claims it is rebuilding its nuclear reactor and McCain will claim that the U.S. must do everything possible, including the use of military force, to stop North Korea's nuclear program, and you may be pressed on this issue, as well.

Ginsberg add that "My next post will provide Sen. Obama my take on the likely questions he may be asked by Jim Lehrer (I've been reading previous presidential debate transcripts). And my third will recommend lines of attack against McCain." Stay tuned!

=========================

True story: As we walked up to the door of our apartment building tonight, a couple passed behind us, deep in the throes of what looked like a friendly argument. Overhead as they walked by: "No, so, let's say it's personal, let's say YOU had to declare bankruptcy. Would you get a bailout?"

Yes, we should all be talking about this. These are important times.

42 days to the election. Reminder again that, for many states, would-be voters must register well in advance of the elections. RockTheVote's list of voter registration deadlines. And if you're voting absentee, Declare Yourself has links to each state's voter information page where you can find out how to get your absentee ballot. Feel free to harangue your friends in the swing states. And since I appear to be in that demographic of women using online resources to spread political viewpoints in an attempt to garner support for Obama, well, what the hell, go ahead and forward this on to anyone you think might be interested.