Bailing out Congressional approval ratings

With Obama and Democrats throwing the kitchen sink into the bailout plan, it’s obvious that the bailout is not just for Wall Street or Main Street.  It’s really an attempt to bail the Congress out of DISMAL approval ratings, as Congressional incompetence has been put on display during this crisis.  The MSM usually hides Congressional fumbles, but there’s no way to avoid shining a spotlight now.  The Republicans in Congress that are most ready to jump on the bailout bandwagon are also the Republicans most in need of image makeovers, too.  Senators and Representatives are hoping to score points by all their talk of helping Main Street, but I’m not so sure Main Street is convinced this bailout is about them.  This is a pathetic attempt by Congress to appear to be heroic when they’ve already been exposed as self-dealing schemers whose actions show they want to continue to live their lives of privilege and to dodge responsibility for their abject failures.

“Blog Bunker” retrospect

At 5 pm today, the 23rd, I participated on the “Blog Bunker” program on Indie Talk 110, on Sirius, a subscription satellite radio medium.  The host for today was Joe Salzone.  He dedicated the entire show to the Wall Street meltdown and the bailout proposal before Congress.  I wanted to talk a bit about how that issue plays out in Ohio, especially from the perspective of a McCain supporter.  Mr. Salzone is one of those rare persons supporting Bob Barr.  The host was very gracious.  He allowed callers to have their say without interruption. The callers were excellent, and a few had some very poignant information to share.

I had to admit that polls show that voters favor Obama on the economy.  I acknowledged that Republicans in Congress are divided about how to proceed.  I also conceded that John McCain is still gathering and processing information on the matter, and is still crafting his approach to the matter.  I credited Ron Paul with being accurate in his predictions about our economy.  I acknowledged that there is plenty of blame to go around between Wall Street, the White House, past Presidential Administrations, and both parties in Congress.

I opined that McCain is still in the hunt because of his reassuring message of reform and his leadership image.  I opined that Obama hadn’t closed the deal yet because his economic proposals, as presented at townhall meetings, are often buried deep in a stump speech that is devoted mostly to blaming Bush, Wall Street lobbyists, and Republicans in Congress, notably McCain.  While the Obama camp may hope that he is capable of portraying McCain as Herbert Hoover, it hardly seems the stuff of leadership to just rant and rant and rant about McCain without putting his own proposals front and center, first and foremost.  By contrast, McCain and Palin have been highlighting their proposals BEFORE delving into their prepared stump speeches. They don’t dwell for dozens of minutes on end on playing the blame game, but they do spread the blame to everyone, including those in their party.  They reiterate that they’ve both had to upbraid members of their own party from time to time in order to do the right thing.  Their prepared stump speeches then reinforce their reform message, and coupling that message with that image of leadership has kept McCain from falling far behind Obama in Ohio.

I counted myself among those who are opposed to the bailout.  I noted how long the Japanese financial crisis has dragged on because they also attempted some artificial market interventions to soften the blow.  I said that we do need accountability, enforcement of existing regulations, correction and introduction of other regulations, plus more effective oversight, but I’m not in favor of socializing the financial sector and using $700 billion of taxpayer funds to bail out Wall Street.  I expressed skepticism that the bailouts would stave of severe economic shocks.  I am of the opinion that whether we proceed with bailouts or not, that other dominoes will fall, and that severe economic shocks will follow, so, why proceed with bailouts?  If we don’t proceed with bailouts, but we put good governance structures and regulations in place, I think the market can correct itself faster than if we proceed with bailouts.  I also admonished that families need to prepare themselves for future economic shocks, mentioning a prior blog article that encouraged families to stockpile household goods to better weather the bigger economic storm that may be headed our way.

The conversation was quickly-paced.  I’m not sure that I was always relevant or on point or had my wits about me all the time, but I had fun.

Deep-six Issue 6

Last night I saw a television advertisement promoting a “yes” vote on Issue 6.  Barf!

I want to urge all registered voters in Ohio to vote “NO!” on Issue 6.

I really wish the casino gambling industry would leave Ohio alone.  How many times have Ohio voters already voted “No” on these casino schemes?  So many that the casino industry should have gotten the message by now.

The tired old message of the advertisement was that some Ohioans travel out of state to gamble.  Big whoop-de-doo.  I’d venture to say that those making the casino trips are becoming fewer in number as time passes.  For one thing, it seems same-store revenues have leveled off and are currently waning in Indiana, Michigan, and West Virginia.  Even those who stay home and play the lottery are not participating as much.  Keno was supposed to fuel a new infusion of revenue into the lottery, but the word on the street is that Keno’s debut wasn’t all that successful.  Are these neighboring states really raking in a huge windfall from gamblers that are Ohio residents?  It sure doesn’t seem like it, with the way the economies of those states are tanking just like Ohio’s.  In every issue campaign to expand gambling in Ohio so far, the gambling industry has always tried to portray itself as a cure-all for what ails Ohio.  Yet, gambling surely hasn’t cured anything in neighboring states.

Issue 6 backers have their own web page.  The first tab I clicked on was labeled “Myths and Truths,” which only had a message of “Coming Soon,” on it.  Since, as of this writing, they haven’t discussed any myths or truths, let me share just a few.


Truth: All the grandiose claims of the new jobs and tax revenues that the casino will generate is based upon . . . LOSERS!  The casino industry exists because it’s designed to make you LOSE money.  The casino can’t pay any taxes or any of its payroll unless customers lose.  However, the casino lures customers by pumping up their hopes of WINNING.  Another word for this seeming paradox is FRAUD.  Legalizing casinos is legalizing fraud.  A customer goes to the casino buying into all the hype about winning, but leaves empty-handed.  The customer did not receive what they paid for.  Fraud.

All the other myths, including the one on the website’s front page about the casino generating up to 5,000 new jobs, tie into the biggest myth of all, and tie in to the truth behind the myth, which is that people LOSE.

And what about that claim of up to 5,000 new jobs generated by the legalization of this solitary casino along a stretch of I-71 between Columbus and Cincinnati?  The key words are “up to,” which renders the number, itself, meaningless.  “Up to” means it might get as high as that number, but it might not.  So I can say the casino might create up to 5 jobs.  It might generate 5 jobs.  It might not.  I can say the casino might create up to 50 jobs.  I can say it might create up to 500 jobs.  It might create up to 5,000 jobs.  It might create up to 50,000 jobs.  It might create up to 500,000 jobs.  It might create up to 5,000,000 jobs.  What if I said legalizing this casino might create up to 50,000,000 jobs, but it, in reality, only created 50 jobs?  Did I lie?  No.  Because I used the words “up to,” which doesn’t indicate any minimum, only a maximum.  I never used the words “at least,” which would would have indicated a minimum.  So, don’t pay any attention to the number, as it’s meaningless when preceded by the words “up to.”

Another myth is what each county will receive in taxes on gambling revenues.  The projections mean nothing because they really don’t know how much revenue they would receive.  Also, the assumptions about the tax rates are based on the assumption that this casino would enjoy a monopoly in Ohio, with no competitors.  That’s a really huge assumption.  Can this solitary casino maintain it’s monopoly in Ohio?  Nope.  Native American nations, like the Eastern Shawnee, have already staked claims for where they will build casinos.  The only catch is that Ohio doesn’t allow casinos, so these claims have laid dormant.  Once Ohio allows this first casino, there is no way that the other claims can be denied.  The first casino may fight the efforts to allow competition (here’s their flimsy, wishful-thinking argument) from the Eastern Shawnee and other Native American nations, but once the issue reaches the courtrooms, forget about it.  Existing Federal laws will permit the Native American nations to operate casinos in Ohio once the state opens the door for the first casino.  The tax deal accompanying Issue 6 says that if the first casino doesn’t maintain its monopoly in Ohio, that it would be taxed at the same rate as the competitor that pays the lowest taxes.  The Native American nations are exempt from paying taxes on their casino revenues.  Therefore, once the Native American nations break the casino monopoly, $0 tax dollars will be generated by the casino legalized by Issue 6.

Middle-class Americans fork over their hard-earned dollars to Middle East oil barons, and we run the risk of terrorist threats because of it.  Middle-class Americans fork over their hard-earned dollars to pay the mortgage, and Wall Street mishandles it.  Middle-class Americans fork over their-hard earned dollars to the Federal government, and the Federal government uses it to bail out the same Wall Street bigwigs that mishandled the money we sent them.  Why should middle-class Ohioans fork over their hard-earned dollars to line the pockets of some filthy stinking rich casino owners?  I’m sick and tired of the filthy stinking rich, whether they be in the Middle East, in Washington, on Wall Street, or anywhere else, always conniving new ways of reaching into our pockets.  Stay out of my pocket!  And that includes the casino owners!

For those who are Libertarian who think that Ohio ought to allow casinos, let me assure you that Issue 6 is no Libertarian proposal.  If it were a Libertarian proposal, then we wouldn’t be talking about legalizing a casino monopoly within the state.  If it were a Libertarian proposal, it would simply be a blank check allowing anyone to open a casino in any community in the state without any barriers to competition, much like anyone can open a restaurant or a convenience store in any community in the state.  Issue 6 still makes it illegal for the ordinary person to open a casino.  Only one entity will be permitted to open a casino, and that entity is described thusly:

The project is a joint venture with Lakes Entertainment, Inc. (NASDAQ: LACO), operators of premier gaming facilities located nationwide.

Looking over the petition language, I am reminded of the handiwork of disgraced former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, who always carried water for the gambling interests.


Without passing on the advisability of the approval or rejection of the matter referred, but pursuant to the duties imposed on the Attorney General’s Office under Section 3519.01(A) of the Ohio Revised Code, I hereby certify that the summary is a fair and truthful statement of the proposed initiated constitutional amendment, adding Article XV, § 6a(A)-(G).

Marc Dann
Attorney General
December 20, 2007

Finally, I want to talk a little bit about gambling’s REAL impact on the economy.

If I were to buy a sofa from a store, I would gain something tangible, a sofa.  The store I bought it from would gain something tangible, my cash.  With the cash, the store would meet its financial obligations, like paying rent to the leasing agent, and paying the wages of the sales associates.  Furthermore, the store would seek to replenish its inventory, so it would place an order for a sofa to be shipped from a distribution center.  The distribution center would ship another sofa to the store.  The distribution center would receive more sofas from the manufacturer to maintain the distribution center’s inventory.  The manufacturer would keep on churning out new sofas.  In addition to paying worker wages, the manufacturer also orders components and supplies with which to make the sofas, so orders are placed for wood, fabric, screws, etc.  Buying a sofa has a multiplier ripple effect on the economy.  A lot of economic activity is sustained by purchasing a product.

In contrast, if I took the same amount of money needed to buy a sofa and I lost it all while gambling in the casino, I bring home nothing tangible.  The casino owner has to pay a few employees and a few utility bills in order to keep operating, but that’s it.  Since you went home empty handed, no inventory had to be replenished, so your hard-earned cash never went up any supply chain creating more ripples in the economy.  Your money went into the pocket of a casino owner, who was rich to begin with, and didn’t really need your money, even though the casino owner was greedy for your money.  What does the casino owner do with the money?  Maybe the money gets stashed in an off-shore bank account in the Cayman Islands.  The money was siphoned out of the economy.  It’s no longer in circulation.  The money is gone and you’ve got nothing to show for it.  This is why Indiana’s economy is not being helped by the casinos.  This is why Michigan’s economy is not being helped by the casinos.  I could keep going.  The point is, Ohio’s economy won’t be helped by a casino.  It will only seek to further impoverish Ohio’s population to satisfy its own greed.

DJW debut on satellite radio

Yours truly, the Buckeye RINO, has been invited to participate today, September 23rd, on “The Blog Bunker,” a Sirius satellite radio talk show on Indie Talk 110, beginning at 5 pm EDT.  On the Indie Talk Channel 110 program line-up page, the listing for “The Blog Bunker” is accompanied by this program description:

A cutting-edge roundtable featuring a selection of the over 100 million bloggers around the globe.

If you are a Sirius subscriber, you are welcome to listen in and call the program with your comments.  I don’t know how well or how poorly I will do, but, if you’ve seen my photo on my “About” page, you surely realize that, at least, I have a face for radio.

“Viral video” lies about Palin? Nope, Democrat lies about Palin

Specifically, an online video campaign that asserted Palin once belonged to a political party that favors Alaska’s secession from the United States (and tried to cast doubts on Palin’s patriotism) has been ferreted out.

These weren’t some mischievous teens or anarchist college students that hatched this video.

Michelle Malkin directed her readers to this nifty piece of research from The Jawa Report, which findings were posted shortly after midnight in the wee hours of the morning.

Michelle Malkin, in her own piece, then reported how quickly the supposedly “viral video” was scrubbed, which cries out “Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!”  The online video evaporated within those same wee hours of this morning.  The perpetrators apparently didn’t want the MSM to follow the same trail of evidence that The Jawa Report found, a trail that possibly leads all the way up the chain to David Axelrod, Obama’s chief media strategist.

Of course, one has to wonder why the Obama camp is so paranoid about Sarah Palin that they have to sink to such a low level.  Don’t they think they can win on the issues?  Oh, that’s right!  Apparently not, because Obama turned down the chance to appear in unscripted joint townhalls with John McCain.  Hmmm . . . I see.

Trying to find a way for McCain to win without Texas

In my prior post, I stated that Bob Barr is right.  John McCain and Barack Obama should not appear on the Texas ballot because, according to Texas law, McCain and Obama did not meet the deadline to have their names appear on the ballot.

So I’ve been trying to figure out if it’s possible for John McCain to win without Texas.  I went to the web site for Real Clear Politics, where they have an interactive map so that you can play around with various scenarios.  Just click on a state, and the interactive map will allow you to designate it as McCain, Obama, or toss-up.

Since Bob Barr is not an option, I changed Texas to toss-up, and left it that way.  I assumed Obama had locked up California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and the District of Columbia.  I also assumed McCain had locked up Alaska, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina (that might be a tall order to even assume that McCain has grabbed onto Missouri and North Carolina).  So the battleground states that I was experimenting with were New Hampshire, Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.

If 34 electoral votes from Texas go to Bob Barr, it’s possible that no one would claim a majority of the Electoral College.  If that were to happen, it’s almost certain that Barack Obama would be the next president, because the U.S. House of Representatives votes to choose the president when the Electoral College fails to reach a majority decision.

The number of electoral votes needed to capture a majority of the Electoral College is 270.  McCain needs at least 270.  If McCain ends up with 269 or less, Obama wins.

Playing around with the map, I discovered that it is possible for McCain to win without Texas, but it’s a tall order.  How tall?  McCain would need some big states in his corner, like Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan, plus at least three, perhaps more, smaller states (McCain would need to cobble together at least 30 more electoral votes from the combination of smaller states with those big four in his pocket).  That’s already a tall order to sweep Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan, let alone win the other battlegrounds.

If McCain could pick up Florida plus all the Great Lakes states except for Illinois and New York, he could do it.  That means McCain would have to grab Indiana, Wisconsin, and Minnesota in addition to the big four.  If he lost either Minnesota or Wisconsin, he could still win if he managed to pick up Colorado.  If he lost both Minnesota and Wisconsin, he’d have to get Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico all in his corner.  If he lost the smallest of the big ones, Michigan, he’d have to nab Virginia and New Hampshire to replace it.  If he lost Indiana, he’d have to pick up Virginia.  Many envision Obama winning Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, though.  McCain would have to have Virginia, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado in order to counter that.  But if Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin are all comfortably in the Obama camp, then New Hampshire, Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado are probably also in the Obama column.  Ouch.

You get the picture.  A McCain win without Texas will require some surprises in a few states.  It’s not impossible, but it is daunting.

Go ahead.  Play with the interactive map at Real clear Politics.  You know you want to.

34 electoral votes in Texas

Bob Barr is right.  John McCain and Barack Obama should not be on the ballot in Texas.

The state of Texas has already printed absentee ballots with the names of McCain and Obama on them, even though they failed to meet deadlines imposed by Texas law.

The fact that the ballots already have the names of McCain and Obama on them demonstrates how this will likely turn out in the end:  Barr’s principled stand will be defied by the powers that be in Texas.

Even though I favor McCain, and even though I don’t know how McCain reaches the minimum threshold of 270 electoral votes to become the next president without the 34 electoral votes of Texas (listed as safely in McCain’s camp anywhere you look from any polling source or news organization), I admit that it would be wrong to include the names of McCain and Obama on the Texas ballot.

If I were a Texas voter, I’d be angry at any state legislator that didn’t attempt to remedy the problem in advance.  Texas legislators know (or ought to know) what the election laws are, including the deadlines for getting on the ballot.  They also knew well in advance when the conventions were going to be held.  They had ample opportunity to act in order to accommodate the schedule of the two major parties.  But they did not.

If I were the judge hearing Bob Barr’s case, I’d strike the names of McCain and Obama from the ballot, and not feel sorry for the state legislators that had to put up with the earful that angry voters will be sure to give them.

34 electoral votes for Bob Barr.

But I think we’ll find that judges aren’t immune to politics, and will rule against Barr, which will make me very unhappy with the judges.

But Barr is right.

Manufacturing nothing

From the Norwalk Reflector: “Norwalk Furniture is history.”

I’m more concerned about firms like Norwalk Furniture going belly up than I am about Wall Street firms going belly up.  Can you guess why?

Democrat operatives hack Palin’s personal e-mail?!

A lot is not yet known about this, and I just heard the news headline myself, but if it’s true, I don’t want any more to do with the Democrat party and it’s Big Brother vision of America.

Though I am Republican, I have often engaged in split-ticket voting.

If Palin’s personal e-mail has been hacked, that, to me, is akin to Watergate.

Carnival of Ohio Politics #134 posted

I’d like to urge afficionados of Ohio political blogs to head over to the Carnival of Ohio Politics for a sampling of what the Ohio blogosphere has to say this week.  Carnival #134 marks my rookie effort as editor, but, even though it’s my first time out of the gate, I’m thick-skinned.  You can tell me if I blundered.

Wall Street woes

The MSM is in uproar over what’s happening on Wall Street.  Merrill Lynch ran into the arms of Bank of America while Lehman Brothers essentially went bankrupt, with parts being bought by Barclays.  AIG is on the ropes.  The MSM shows images of workers leaving their offices after having cleaned out their desks.  I suppose we’re supposed to be horrified by these images of Wall Street workers out of a job.  I don’t wish for people to lose their jobs, but those losing their jobs on Wall Street seem like a blip on the radar of many Ohioans who have seen jobs leave the state for several years on end.  Wall Street has played a role in the economic crisis in Ohio, so I don’t think Ohioans are weeping that economic woes have finally come full-circle from Main Street all the way back to Wall Street.  Actually, though we, as Ohioans, may be tempted to tell Wall Street “Welcome to our world,” the truth of the matter is, the jobs outlook on Wall Street is still healthier than the jobs outlook in Ohio.  They don’t know the meaning of the word “bleak” yet.  But I understand the hype of Wall Street’s problems in the MSM.  After all, the capital of the MSM is New York City, which is where Wall Street is, so the story hits closer to home for the journalists covering it.

Nevertheless, the woes of Wall Street could worsen, and there could be dramatic ripples through the rest of the economy, which is why I wrote a post encouraging family preparedness.

The market does need to correct itself without the Federal government bailing it out, so I implore the government to stay away from AIG.  I still think the Federal government should not have bailed out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

“Trooper-gate” and Alaskan earmarks

What happens when one challenges the status quo?  What happens when one upsets the apple cart?  What happens when one deals a blow to the good old boys and politics as usual?

The politicians get angry.  They have an axe to grind.  They scheme of ways to get even, bring down the crusader, and reinstate the status quo.

The public, though, is pleased.

The job approval ratings of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin hover in the vicinity of 80%, and it’s been that way for two years.  They respect that she ousted the head of Alaska’s Republican Party who used his time on the job as an oil commissioner to run the state GOP.  They respect that she divested herself of some of the perks that the prior good-old-boy governor had accumulated.  They respect that a natural gas pipeline project that had sat idle for 30 years is now on the front burner.  They respect that the Alaskan government is more transparent, including putting the state checkbook onlineTransparency has heightened the need to be more prudent with expenses, so Sarah Palin has vetoed $500 million of wasteful spending, and she has dramatically chopped the number and amount of Federal earmarks that Alaska is seeking.

Those spending cuts anger state legislators.  The legislature approves the spending just to have Palin veto it.  Every earmark that Palin rejects creates more enemies, and those enemies are powerful special interests, or at least, special interests who used to enjoy power and who would like to reassert their power vis-a-vis the current Alaskan governor.

The Alaskan public remains delighted with the strides that Palin has made, and wishes other politicians had acted in much the same way a long time ago.

Meanwhile, the conniving politicians who want revenge hope that they have found a turning point that will allow them to stop the roll-back of their political power in its tracks in the person of Walter Monegan, a former administrator responsible for Alaska’s safety forces.  Walter Monegan was offered a choice of assuming another position within the administration or being terminated.  He chose termination, and then made an issue of it, alleging that Palin was misusing her power.  When that allegation was made, the heads of the spurned politicians turned.  Instead of allowing Palin to continue on the path of shaking up Juneau, they could charge her with misusing power.  Perhaps this was the first way to check Palin’s immense popularity, if they could redefine her as a powermonger rather than reformer.  The state legislature decided to launch an investigation.  Clearly, they have a motive for finding fault with Palin.

Meanwhile, the public, I’m sure, is laughing off the redefinition of Palin as a powermonger instead of reformer.  Their former governors were powermongers.  Their former governors made no attempts at reform.  The public was able to tell the difference between Palin and her predecessors.  After the “trooper-gate scandal” first went public, Palin’s approval ratings dropped to . . . 76%!!!!  How many governors in America enjoy approval ratings of 76%?

Did Palin abuse her power by dismissing Monegan?  Was the termination the result of Palin’s frustration that she couldn’t get Monegan to fire her ex-brother-in-law?  I think not, and here’s why:  1) Monegan says that he wasn’t asked to fire anybody, that he’s just trying to read between the lines.  2) Monegan was offered another position within the administration. 3) Most importantly, Monegan’s replacement has not fired the ex-brother-in-law.  If it was all about getting the ex-brother-in-law fired, wouldn’t dismissing Monegan be all about putting someone else in that position to take care of that one little detail?  If the ex-brother-in-law was fired after getting Monegan out of the way, then one might conclude that it was indeed personal.

Now that Palin has become the VP nominee, the MSM has piled on, and the “trooper-gate” is becoming larger than life.  Politicians with an axe to grind now have the MSM and the Obama campaign in their corner.  The McCain camp stated today that the fix is in, and that the state legislature’s investigation has become a political machine determined to make a ruling against Palin.  I think the only reason the vengeful state legislature hasn’t already ruled against Palin is that they are timing the announcement according to the needs of the Obama campaign in order to inflict maximum damage on Palin, weakening her as much as they can in order to begin their push to reinstate politics-as-usual.

If American voters, though, follow the lead of the Alaskan public instead of jilted Alaskan politicians, they’ll recognize this episode as the bogus witch-hunt that it is and see that Palin truly does stand on the side of the people, which is why the Alaskan people stand on the side of Palin.

Photographer bias

Michelle Malkin has a story of a photographer who made a deliberate decision to cast John McCain in the worst light possible.

In 2002, during my first run for office, I was in for a rude awakening, too.  My first-ever pic in the Elyria Chronicle-Telegram had a sickly green tint to it.  My opponent’s pic was a healthy pink by comparison.

It happens.

Politics of hope and fear

Two VP candidates hit the campaign trail this morning.  Sarah Palin was in Golden, Colorado, speaking of the things that she and John McCain would do if elected to the White House.  The message of reform was one that provides hope.  Joe Biden was in Saint Clair Shores, Michigan, speaking of pocketbook fears, predicting what John McCain would not do.  After listening for 15 minutes of attack after attack on John McCain, I realized that Biden had not even mentioned Senator Obama, let alone what Senator Obama plans to do about Wall Street jitters.  One campaign has a message of what they’ll do, and one campaign has no message, maybe not even a clue, about what they’ll do.  Isn’t this a huge flip-flop for the Obama campaign, to run on the message of fear and not hope?  Isn’t this a huge flip-flop for the Obama campaign to run on the old-style politics instead of a new kind of politics?

Eager to see more Palin interviews

Among the things that Sarah Palin seems to do well is that she gets better with practice.  Perhaps the “gotcha” mentality of the press isn’t so bad.  Since the MSM is so eager to capture a “gotcha” moment on videotape, Palin will be certain to have no shortage of opportunities to appear on TV.  I think she’s good for TV ratings, and I think more people will hear her message, and I think more people will accept her message.  These interviews, I believe, will do more good for the McCain-Palin ticket than paid advertising will do.  I hope there will be several more prime-time and evening news interviews in the very near future.