Small-town American Value

I'm sure that everyone wants her to look nice, but spending three times a "average American's" yearly income on clothes for just two months seems a bit excessive to me.

The RNC has expensed over $150,000 for clothes and accessories for Palin and her family since she was selected as VP, including baby items. In two months, they've spent that much on clothes and shoes and whatever for the whole Palin family. Seriously? Does no one think that might be a bit extravagant in this time of people worrying about their jobs and trying to make ends meet and buy groceries or pay for their house? Ostensibly the clothes can be "donated" somewhere. Who knows. Apparently "real americans" spend 75 thousand dollars at a shot at Nieman Marcus. I know for sure that I don't. Does anyone? Does "small town america" think that's reasonable? I thought this ticket was all about the middle class. I don't konw what their definition is, but it isn't mine.

I'm sure it's a common thing, but the amount seems really high, to me. If I had donated to the RNC, I'd be pretty damn pissed that they squandered it on dressing Palin up instead of helping Republicans in key races. Legal or not (and there is some question), how are the struggling Americans supporting the Republican ticket going to feel about that? Dressing up the candidate could probably get a pass (although she's been a politician for years now, shouldn't she already have a wardrobe?), but gussying up the whole family? Add that to the outrageous expenditures and questionable behavior as governor and it's just too much. Who signed off on this? Who authorized the charges?

I guess the thing that bothers me about this is that the Republicans apparently spared no thought to spend nearly 200K on her clothes and makeup....but didn't seem to spend any time or money actually educating her on what she needs to know to be be VP. She still can't articulate what the role of the VP is (and is frighteningly, completely wrong on how they "Run the senate!"), is uninformed about world affairs, and is actively contradicting McCain. It's representative of how the party views her, though -- she isn't expected to DO anything, just look pretty. The Republican party's disdain for women and women's abilities is breathtaking.

If a $300 haircut was once the epitome of "elitist" and "out of touch", what are 300 dollar shoes? Or $8K in makeup for McCain? Apparently, it's only wrong if you're not a Republican.

And I Believe...

I've been hearing and reading a lot of people stating that "I believe x is true" or "I believe y is false" lately (especially in relation to political arguments), and I have to admit a bit of frustration. Belief is the purview of religious faith, or conjecture, or wishful thinking. You might believe that angels exist, or you might believe that your sister ate the last cupcake, or you might believe that it will rain tomorrow. None of these things is demonstrably true. I believe that it will be cold tonight and I believe that my dog really does have some sort of mental power that causes me to open the biscuit bin.

In that usage, I have no problem with it. Believe or don't believe in those instances and everyone knows what you mean: you wish/hope that angels exist, you want it to be true that your sister ate the cupcake, you wish that it will rain tomorrow. I want it to be cold tonight, I love cold weather, and I suspect that I am extremely well-trained by my dogs to fetch things for them.

Why does this come up? During the debate last night, John McCain stated that he would "fight for the line-item veto" as a way of eliminating ear-marks and the much-maligned pork in the budget. He obviously wasn't paying attention when the Supreme Court rejected the line-item veto as unconstitutional. He believes that it could be constitutional, that it is constitutional, but that the previous legislation was "flawed".

Sorry, that doesn't fly. This has already gone to the SC and it's not constitutional. That's fact. No belief required or allowed.

You don't get to "believe" contrary to facts. You might not like them, and you might wish that they weren't true, but that doesn't change the objective facts out there that simply are. Saying that you "believe something to be true/false" when there is objective evidence that it is true or false is just wishful thinking. Your belief in that case is unnecessary and can be absolutely wrong.

The Holocaust, Global warming, evolution, the age of the earth, (all things I've heard recently as "I don't believe in...") these things are not really up for the application of belief. Saying you "don't believe in global warming" or "don't believe in evolution" simply marks you as someone who is uninformed. We might not know the reason things happen, or what specific causes exist, but the facts are not in question. For example, do we know that human beings have caused global warming? Do we know exactly why or how a common ancestor behaved? No, but that doesn't change that facts, and it's frustrating to discuss any of these topics with someone who shoves their "belief" up front as if it is proof against all logic and reason. "I don't believe the holocaust actually occured, " I was reading this week. Huh? When the voluninous evidence for this event was presented, it was hand-waved away, with "oh, that's all fabricated". As the conversation got more heated, the initial poster suddenly started copmlaining that we weren't "respecting his belief". It was almost surreal. That sort of belief does not deserve respect, it deserved derision, not just because Holocaust-denial is considered anti-semitism of the highest order, but because that much-vaunted belief is contrary to reality and flat-out wrong.

For many, "I believe" is a shorthand for a lot of things. I have used believe in relation to Global Warming - as in, "I don't believe that humans are solely responsible for the rise in global temperature" when what I really mean is "Based on what I know, and the studies that I have read, there are many things that could be responsible for the effects, not just humans". It's sloppy wording, really.

But what I'm seeing a lot of lately is someone announcing "they believe X" and then getting all offended and pissy when you dare to question that belief.

The world is rarely black and white, so we all equivocate to some extent to avoid having to state with authority something which we don't know for certain. But I'm going to be far more careful of my use of "believe", or at least I will try to. It's picking nits, really, I know that. We all know what people mean when they say this; we don't equate "I believe the line-item veto is constitutional" with "I believe in unicorns". Or at least we shouldn't.

Contemptible

Seriously. What is WRONG with these people?

The latest newsletter by an Inland Republican women's group depicts Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama surrounded by a watermelon, ribs and a bucket of fried chicken, prompting outrage in political circles. It was sent out in an email newsletter to about 200 members, many of whom responded with outrage and anger. But the president of the organization seems surprised that anyone would find her "joke" to be offensive.

The graphic comes from here.

"It was strictly an attempt to point out the outrageousness of his statement [that he doesn't look like other presidents]. I really don't want to go into it any further," Fedele said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "I absolutely apologize to anyone who was offended. That clearly wasn't my attempt."

Fedele said she got the illustration in a number of chain e-mails and decided to reprint it for her members in the Trumpeter newsletter because she was offended that Obama would draw attention to his own race. She declined to say who sent her the e-mails with the illustration.

She said she doesn't think in racist terms, pointing out she once supported Republican Alan Keyes, an African-American who previously ran for president.

"I didn't see it the way that it's being taken. I never connected," she said. "It was just food to me. It didn't mean anything else."

She said she also wasn't trying to make a statement linking Obama and food stamps, although her introductory text to the illustration connects the two: "Obama talks about all those presidents that got their names on bills. If elected, what bill would he be on????? Food Stamps, what else!"

Her disingenous "oh, no, I'm not a racist, narrow-minded offensive bigot I have black friends" is pretty repulsive. No, she's not racist.Those images were just cute, meaningless examples. She never thought of it that way. You believe that, right? All in fun!

Yeah. Riiiiiiiight.

Here's the source of the graphic. There is no way she didn't "know" that this was a racist piece of crap, if she took half a second to actually read the disgusting email or website that she was sent:

Red Kool-Aid, fried chicken, watermelon, and even pork ribs are displayed on the document as a reminder", Plouffe continued, "The food stamp amount correlates to the cost of the item. For example, the $10 food stamp has things like ribs and chicken, while the $5 food stamp relevantly displays Collard Greens, diapers, and MD 20/20."

Anyone reading this think that isn't racist? Anyone reading this who doesn't think it's offensive and patently racist? How could you not?

There is a contingent of right-wing voters who really are hung up on race, and seem to find no problems with expressing that. I guess when their candidate himself doesn't seem to mind the angry, racist shouts at his rallies, the rest of the "base" (and I mean that in all possible connotations) think it's ok. Nice.

Unfunny Comedy

Since my primary news source lately has been The Daily Show and Colbert Report, I'm watching a lot of Comedy Central. I've been seeing ads for the last week or so for a new show called Chocolate News - a spoof comedy news show "from an African-American perspective".

Some of the clips looks pretty funny, but for the most part they are squirmingly painful and embarrassing. Now, I'm about as white as white can be. I glow. I'm faintly blue. So maybe I just don't get it, but if I were black, I would be mortified to be associated with the stereotypes and mocking portrayals in the skits. I assume it's supposed to be self-deprecating humor, self-mocking, a "we can say whatever we want because we're laughing at ourselves" sort of show, but the caricatures aren''t funny. They're cruel and demeaning. I don't get the attraction. It's as if every African-American sitcom has to play a grotesque mockery of a character. It's all MadTV, all the time.

It's kind of the same way I feel about Sarah Silverman. When she's funny, she is really funny. But that's about 5% of the time. Most of her stand up and all of her television show are stupid and insulting and squirm inducing. Not funny at all, not even in an uncomfortable "ha-ha-" sort of way. She's just lame and seems to want to shock instead of amuse. I suppose there's an allure there, but I don't quite understand it.

Humor is a very personal thing; funny to one person is offensive or flat or boring to someone else. I'll be the first to admit that I have a strange sense of humor (I tend to laugh myself silly in movies where no one else laughs), but I can't summon even a moment of interest to watch the show.

National Grouch Day

Release your Inner Grouch!

October 15th is National Grouch Day, according to Sesame Street Magazine. And here I was wondering why I was so crabby on this gorgeous fall day!

"A Grouch's mission in life is to be as miserable and grouchy as possible, and pass that feeling on to everyone else. Only then will a Grouch feel in touch with his or her world and be happy. Yet, even though a Grouch may show happiness at anyone's misfortune (including his or her own), a Grouch would never admit to being happy. Such is the stability of a Grouch's life: so balanced, and yet so unbalanced.

This is the tenor of the campaign?

The Sacremento GOP site. (well, it's been removed now, but it was considered OK before!). Great job fomenting hate, there, McCain/Palin.

Happy Happy!

Watching the English

On the recommendation of a reader list online that I browse through, I picked up a book called Watching the English: The Hidden Rules of English Behavior, by Kate Fox - an anthropological view of the strange and exotic culture of England. Instead of spending time in remote Burundi or the Amazon rainforest, Kate Fox spends time cutting lines and watching pub behavior in her native country, and the result is an absolutely fascinating, funny, irreverent look at why the English are so English and why everyone else is so not.

The Adorable Husband made the mistake of picking it up from the pile of books in the bathroom (yes, we have piles of books in every bathroom. Everyone reads in the bathroom, even those people who deny it. We know you do!) and was actually late for work. I've been reading it at random and picking out bits. Having traveled to the UK, and knowing a couple of Veddy English People, some of these observations are absolutely dead on.

Queueing, for example. There are endless jokes about how the English line up for thing automatically, even if there really isn't a line, and the author describes the phenomenon of the "queue of one" - English people don't loll about at bus stops, or pace around the curb while waiting to cross, oh, no,. They will stand lined up with the sign, facing the road, looking for all the world like they are the first person in the queue. Even if it's only them. I had to laugh while reading this, because it's one of the things I noticed over and over in Ireland - people standing with an obvious purpose waiting for things, but with absolutely nothing around them.

And this bit on Toast, which had both of us laughing -- this is exactly our experience:

...Toast is a breakfast staple, and an all-purpose, anytime comfort food. What tea alone does not cure, tea and toast surely will. The 'toast rack' is a peculiarly English object. My father, who lives in America and ha become somewhat American in his tastes and habits, calls it a 'toast cooler' and claims that its sole function is to ensure that one's toast gets stone cold as quickly as possible. English supporters of the toast rack would argue that it keeps the toast dry and crisp, that separating the slices of toast and standing them upright stops them becoming soggy, which is what happens to American toast, served piled up hugger-mugger in a humid, perspiring stack on the plate, sometimes even wrapped in a napkin to retain yet more moisture. The English would rather have their toast cool and dry than warm and damp. American toast lacks reserve and dignity; it is too sweaty and indiscreet and emotional.

Sweaty toast? Well, that explains our experiences with the metal 'toast coolers' (which the Adorable Husband call them, too).

I definitely recommend the book - it is charming and funny.

Dissed at Daycare

We are banned from Puppy Camp.

We waited over six months after Rowan had his Very Bad Day, we haven't had any problems at home at all, so we tried a half-day at Camp.

He lasted 15 minutes. They mixed Rowan and Berit in with the other forty or so dogs and Rowan went after the first dog that followed him and they turned the hose on him again. No one was hurt, just lots of snarling and snapping, but he was definitely not on his best behavior.

I had just gotten home and started up the puppy cam to see how things were going when they called me and let me know what happened. I drove straight back out and picked them up. Rowan's a love with people, but he's definitely on the far end of the 'dog aggressive/dominant' range that Akitas seem to live in. Damn.

He's been very affectionate all afternoon, and has been trying to wedge himself under my desk and making big sad puppy eyes at me. He's definitely sorry!

Berit can go back, but Rowan is officially, "asked not to return".

Brilliant

This is brilliant. We should do this at every appearance by every political candidate. Way better than a "debate" that is little more than a scripted talk-show.

Is this the country you want?

McCain asked "who is Barack Obama?" and someone in the crowd yells out "Terrorist!" McCain doesn't react.

Palin trots our her newest soundbite "and he's pallin' around with terrorists!" and someone in the crow yells out "Kill him!" and as she blames the media for her failed interviews, someone tells a black sound-man for one of the networks to "sit down, boy!"

Sounds more like a klan rally than a political rally, doesn't it? Is this the sort of leadership that we want in the white house? McCain and Palin now seem to be deliberately targeting those with a pent up need to finally give their hate free reign and they are enjoying the attention that their baseless attacks are garnering. That's just dishonorable. Does anyone really want to be associated with these people?

When you base all your hopes on a campaign of hate and fear, you bring out the worst in people. This is the path McCain has taken. Liberal = unpatriotic = terrorist. What a great message.

And the base? Looooooves it.

Sarah Palin was on the verge of inciting a race riot in northern Florida yesterday. At her rallies, the Republican faithful hurled a racial epithet at a black sound man, and screamed "kill him" and "treason!" at Barack Obama.

"Boy, you guys just get it!" Palin responded. This reaction, presumably, was what Palin had in mind when she urged John McCain to "take the gloves off."

I am disgusted. And frightened.

New Math

I'm not watching the debate - I've already voted, it's not going to change my mind, I really can't stand the mudslinging any more. I'm keeping up with the transcript. However, I'm getting very tired this tired old canard:

"Obama voted 94 times for tax increases or against tax cuts." Palin used it, McCains brought it up again.

Using the same methods that the McCain campaign used to calculate that number, McCain has voted for 477 tax increases.

Farmkid Quiz

Ok, match the tractor color to the manufacturer:

1. Red, 2. Green 3. Yellow, 4. Orange, 5. Blue, 6. Gray.

A. Allis-Chalmers, B. Ferguson, C. Ford, D. Int'l Harvester, E. John Deere, F. Mpls Moline.

It's not really quite that simple - most manufacturers made tractors in many colors, but there are some "traditional colors".

Answers: 1D, 2E, 3F, 4A, 5C, 6B

Donations wanted

Does anyone have a spare six million laying around, that they would like to donate to the Phouka Has Found Her New House Fund?

An entire island is for sale - Wee Cumbrae, of the Ayrshire coast in Scotland. 680 acres, a sprawling Victorian mansion, Gertrude Jekyll gardens, and an actual ruined castle!

It's perfect!

Well, except for the no electricity except for generators, and access only by boat, but otherwise... lovely, eh?

NOW does not endorse Palin

If you were worried that NOW (National Org for Women ) had lost its mind and was endorsing Gov. Palin, based on the fact that a woman named Shelly Mandell, identifying herself as the president of the LA NOW introduced Palin at a California event and heartily endorsed her -- well, you can relax. Or get pissed, pick your poison.

Shelly Mandell was acting on her own, apparently invoking her position in NOW to mislead people into thinking that the womens' organization endorsed Palin. NOW in NO WAY supports or endorses Palin.

Statement from CA NOW President, Patty Bellasalma:

A member and officer of the Los Angeles NOW chapter, Shelly Mandell, recently introduced Governor Sarah Palin at an event in Carson, California. Ms. Mandell was speaking as an individual and was not authorized to represent NOW, the NOW PAC or LA NOW in any capacity in connection with a federal candidate endorsement. As NOW President Kim Gandy said upon Palin’s selection , "Not every woman supports women's rights."

The use of Shelly Mandell’s Los Angeles NOW title was apparently intended to mislead the public, and indeed has resulted in local television outlets and internet reports misstating that LA NOW has “endorsed” Sarah Palin or that she has a record of supporting women’s rights. This in fact is not the case.

As President of California NOW and as a member and officer of Los Angeles NOW, I can assure you that there is no local or state affiliate of NOW, including LA NOW, which endorses or supports the McCain/Palin ticket. John McCain and Sarah Palin oppose many of the rights and freedoms we have fought for throughout NOW's 42 years, and we will not be pushed back to the days of back-alley abortions, forced pregnancies, and pay discrimination without remedy.

Shelly Mandel should be removed from her position of authority in the LA chapter. She certainly does not represent the organization's long and hard-fought gains for women.

And it goes with the CLOCK!

Other than an ottoman, the living room is pretty much done! DONE! Yeah! I should have taken pictures when the sun was shining, but here's a quick look:—



Pretty different, eh? It's amazing how much warmer the room feels -- and we can actually sit down and talk to each other without getting neck strain!

You can't actually see the couch pattern very well -- here it is, a dark gold, black, and red paisley. The pillows are merlot and merlot/dark green stripe. Mark's new recliner (which I didn't get a picture of, it looks like a blob in this light) is chocolate brown.

And in this corner....

The latest attack ad by the mcCain camp is to try to link Obama's ideology to that of William Ayers and claiming that he's "palling around with terrorists". This is pretty shaky, at best, considering that their "relationship" consists of being on a community board together almost 30 years after Ayers actions with the WUO. They aren't "buddies", they don't "pal around".They have met. Which, apparently, is enough for McCain/Palin to start announcing that Obama has terrorist intentions. Lies and distortions. Well, I shouldn't be surprised. That seems to the be new "plan" for the campaign.

Obama is close enough to Ayers that it is relevant to inquire about Ayers beliefs, and ask whether Obama shares them.

But, let's see here. If picking up on every acquaintance and associate in a candidates' past is fair game, to see if they might have some dirt to divulge, let's see what we should be looking at:

• John McCain is close enough to Raffaello Follieri that is is relevant to inquire about Follieri's beliefs and ask whether McCain shares them.
• Sarah Palin is close enough to Pastor Muthee that is is relevant to inquire about Muthee's beliefs and ask whether McCain shares them.
• John McCain is close enough to Charles Keating that is is relevant to inquire about Keating's beliefs and ask whether McCain shares them.
• Sarah Palin close enough to the AIP that is is relevant to inquire about the AIP's beliefs and ask whether McCain shares them.
• John McCain and Sarah Palin are close enough to George Bush that is is relevant to inquire about Bush's beliefs and ask whether McCain shares them.

Why would anyone with any hint of scandal in their past get into the ring and start swinging? Do they think people aren't going to remember or ask questions?

Negative campaign ads annoy the hell out of me. I'd love to see a rule that you can't mention the other candidate in your ad - only your own abilities and ideas. Maybe that would raise the level of discourse and actually, you know, educate the voters about what the two different sides are.

Nah, that wouldn't be fun. It wouldn't get ratings, I guess.

Misquoting

One of the most incomprehensible arguments I hear for voting the Republican ticket is, "you're a woman, you should vote for Palin! You should vote for a woman!" as if having a vagina is enough qualification for me to turn off my brain and ignore the fact that she represents exactly 0 of my views. As I've noted before, I find it insulting that they assume I'd vote my genitalia despite my beliefs.

At a rally on Saturday in California, Sarah Palin offered up a rather jarring argument for supporting the Republican ticket. "There's a place in Hell reserved for women who don't support other women," the Alaska Governor said, claiming she was quoting former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

The statement came after Palin had recounted a "providential" moment she experienced on Saturday: "I'm reading on my Starbucks mocha cup, okay? The quote of the day... It was Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State [crowd boos] and UN ambassador. ... Now she said it, I didn't. She said, 'There's a place in Hell reserved for women who don't support other women.'"

Well, at least we know what Palin reads now. Starbucks cups. And she gets them wrong.

The actual quote is "There is a special place is hell for women who don't HELP other women."

Albright, in response, noted that the quote was not political in nature, and that it was entirely misrepresented by Palin. "This is yet another example of McCain and Palin distorting the truth." she said.

Given that Palin is anti-choice, anti-contraception, anti-sex ed, signed off on rape victims to paying for their own rape kit and evidence collection, and would force them to carry a rapists baby to term...well, she's not exactly helping or supporting other women, is she? Palin (deliberately?) substituted in the word "support" for "help." Entirely different meaning. Perhaps she out to shell out a couple of bucks for a pair of fireproof pants for her own trip to hell.

Palin, honey? That quote is about women like YOU.

Things I Learned

Should I ever have the privilege of standing on the stage as a political candidate, here are a few things I learned from watching/reading the presidential debate last week and the vp debate last night:

1. Learn to say 'nuclear'. It is not pronounced nu-ku-lur. Why politicians can't manage to learn how to say this simple three-syllable word properly is a mystery. Nu-clear. How hard is that? If you can manage to spout Ahamdinejad, work on nuclear, please.

(1b. And, while we're at it, pronounce the whole word, don't drop the 'g. Words have final consonants in English. It's not folksy, it's not cute, it's a weird affectation.)

2. Answer the questions that you are asked. Don't just spout words on a topic that you pick, so that the moderator has to ask you if you intend to 'address the topic'. You just look disorganized and an awful lot like a droid spouting words you don't understand if your answer isn't related to the actual question.

3. Keep track of your comparisons so that you don't argue that a = b for your side, but that a <> b for your opponent. McCains programs are a tax cut because of tax savings in other areas, but Obamas programs are a tax increase despite a tax savings in other areas. People are smart enought to notice that, and will be angry that you think they're stupid. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

4. Know when your mike is on and when it is not. Don't mutter, don't speak under your breath, and don't gush.

5. Speak in complete sentences. Yes, I know that we often speak in sentence fragments and short bursts, that's just the way the spoken language works. But when you are trying to explain something or present an idea, use a complete sentence with a subject, a verb, and an object. Try to express a complete thought before moving on to the next one. Talking in little sound-bites that are all over the place makes people sound stupid and ill-informed, even if they are brilliant.

6. Pay attention to what your opponent says and does. At least acknowledge a personal revelation or moment of difficulty with some sort of approrpriate response. And make sure you know what sort of family history or family tragedy is involved so you don't stick your foot in your mouth. A brief moment of sympathy or a nod of understanding will go a long way.

7. Don't stare into the camera all the time, thinking it means you're 'connecting with the people', it comes off kind of scary. Look at your opponent, look at the moderator, and try not to grimace like it's painful. But also don't smile like a goofball, either. Practice in front of the mirror. Don't squint so your eyes disappear, either, especially if you have wrinkles.

8. Folksiness only works when it's real. It's easy to overdo. "Doggone", " darn it". "you betcha", "yup", "ain't", "joe six-pack" are ok once or twice, but repeated they start to sound condescending and dimwitted. Intelligent, capable people do not talk like this when addressing the electorate. We aren't afraid of big words, really.

9. Make sure you actually understand the positions of your own party and can explain them correctly. Contradicting yourself or your running made doesn't inspire confidence. If you manage to contradict yourself in only a few sentences, that's even worse.

10. Don't try to give yourself a nickname and make it stick. Everyone remembers the geeky, weird high-school kid who made up his own nickname and started to use it all the time, hoping it would catch one. It's pathetic and painfully awkward. You cannot give yourself a nickname or a catchphrase; someone else has to give it to you. Period.

Work fun

So I get a call this morning from my client, a bit hysterical. The external part of the application we built (in a web-based toolkit) for users outside of their company to access 'doesn't work". The users in the remote location "can't get in".

I have to admit I started laughing like a hyena. The system is supposed to go LIVE on Monday. This part of the app has been done since MARCH. Do you think they might have tested things, oh, I don't know, before today?

Oh, it was well tested for functionality by the internal users. But in the last nine months, no one thought to get ONE USER from outside the network to try to access the application? Really?

I read the horror stories about client projects all the time in the various technical magazines....I apparently should start writing them!

You Betcha

The Adorable Husband says I'm very worked up. Watched part of the vp debate, but pretty much resorted to reading the transcript live instead of watching when Palin started winking and saying 'nukulur'.

Palin did much better than I expected, really. But I simply expected that she wouldn't be a complete idiot and would have been prepped well enough not to drool on herself. Biden wasn't as fiery as I have seen him before, but he was dead-on with the issues even if he wasn't as aggressive as I would have liked. Palin isn't a vp candidate, she's a game show contestant, and it showed. Biden has the chops.

But the biggest thing I cam away with? Palin failed in her job to educate the voters on her running mate's plans and issues. Biden spent a lot of time criticizing McCain and less time clarifying the issues (although he did ten times better than Palin did on issues).

Palin didn't answer the questions. She refused to go with the moderator's questions. They weren't what she'd been relentlessly drilled on, so she picked the topic and spoke on it. She had a set of memorized "speeches" that she had to get in, and she did a great job of doing that. But there was no substance there whatsoever. She was glib and managed to speak in reasonable sentences (a huge change from her crash-and-burn interviews this week), but it was just a series of cliches and fake-folksey 'you betchas'.

The fact-checking was definitely in Biden's favor - and in the end, this isn't going to change anyone's opinion. That's the purpose here - the vp candidates were supposed to sway the independent voters and while Palin managed to present herself well, she didn't have anything on the issues that wasn't a talking point directly from the campaign. Nothing new. Nothing interesting from the Republicans.

I'm sure someone was convinced. People seem to like her because she's "feisty". I don't see it.

She may have hurt McCain a bit, too -- her answers on global warming, gay marriage, and -- most notably -- the powers of the VP's office were the frantic bullshitting of someone who didn't really understand the question; the questions startled her, they didn't' match any of her carefully memorized talking points, and she boofed it. Contradictory platitudes and buzzwords.

Creepy

Have you seen these? Lifelike (very very lifelike) baby dolls. I know that most of these are owned by collectors, but they creep me out.

There are DOZENS of these doll makers on the web. Here's another. They call them "reborn" babies. Ick Ick Ick Ick.

aAAAAAaaaaRGHH!

Embarassing

Well, this is embarrassing and tasteless and inappropriate. The police department of Denver is selling a t-shirt 'commemorating' the Democratic convention. Who thought that this was appropriate or ok?

I guess it's supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, but really guys, just not funny.

Not one?

Ok, I'm really picking on Palin lately, but I've been watching the interviews with Katie Couric online and they are becoming almost surreal. Today they released clips of the discussion of Roe.v Wade and abortion rights, and Couric asked her opinion on other SC cases.

This is a perfectly valid question - positions on the Supreme Court are going to open up in the next four years, and some idea of how the candidates would look to populate the bench are critical for many of us - do they think the court is too liberal, too conservative, too something? Do they generally agree with cases that support personal freedoms vs government oversight? Do they disagree or agree with cases that relate to religion, guns, race, sex, gays? I want answers from everyone on this topic, as do a lot of people, since the decisions of the Supreme Court will impact life for whole lot longer than any individual president.

COURIC: What other Supreme Court decisions [than Roe v. Wade] do you disagree with?

PALIN: Well, let's see. There's --of course --in the great history of America rulings there have been rulings, that's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are--those issues, again, like Roe v Wade where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know--going through the history of America, there would be others but--

COURIC: Can you think of any?

PALIN: Well, I could think of--of any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a Vice President, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.

She can't think of ANYTHING? Not the decision that prayer in schools is unconstitutional? Not segregation? Miscegenation? Right to council? Sodomy laws? The recent presidential election? Separation of church and state? Gun control? Equal pay for equal work? Assisted Suicide?

Even if she couldn't name a case specifically, she couldn't come up up with one decision to talk about? Whether she agreed with it or not, at least name a topic! Her answer is pure buzzword bafflegab.

I had to look up the specific case names for some of them, but the decisions at least jogged my memory and I could have answered the question. Brown vs the Board of Education? Loving vs Virginia? Bush vs Gore? Nothing?

Knowing these things backwards and forwards is NOT a requirement for holding office - I wouldn't expect comprehensive knowledge here - but everyone I talked to could come up with at least one other than Roe v Wade, off the top of their head. Someone who is running for office should be able to at least answer the question instead of trying to bullshit an answer. If you can't think of one you disagree with, at least mention one or two of the others as examples of the fine work that the Supreme Court does.

No, not comedy

Just in case you thought that the word-salad answer that Tina Fey spouted in her SNL skit as Palin, when asked about the current economic crisis was comedy....nope, most of that is pulled from the transcript answer from Palin's actual interview with Couric.

Which makes it even funnier, I think. And scarier.

Fey as Palin: "Like every American I'm speaking with, we're ill about this. We're saying, 'Hey, why bail out Fanny and Freddie and not me?' But ultimately what the bailout does is, help those that are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy to help...uh...it's gotta be all about job creation, too. Also, too, shoring up our economy and putting Fannie and Freddy back on the right track and so healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reigning in spending...'cause Barack Obama, y'know...has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans, also, having a dollar value meal at restaurants. That's gonna help. But one in five jobs being created today under the umbrella of job creation. That, you know...Also..."

Palin: I like every American I’m speaking with, we're ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the tax payers looking to bailout. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up the economy– Helping the — Oh, it’s got to be about job creation too. Shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade we’ve got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive scary thing. But 1 in 5 jobs being created in the trade sector today. We’ve got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.

You can't make this stuff up.

Kids is Weird

The weird dancing kids ad for Mastercard is back again. Makes me laugh every time!

Posse Comitatus?

Several bloggers today have pointed to this obviously disturbing article from Army Times, which announces that "beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the [1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry Division] will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North" -- "the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities." The article details:

They'll learn new skills, use some of the ones they acquired in the war zone and more than likely will not be shot at while doing any of it.

They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack. . . .

The 1st BCT's soldiers also will learn how to use "the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded," 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.

"It's a new modular package of nonlethal capabilities that they're fielding. They've been using pieces of it in Iraq, but this is the first time that these modules were consolidated and this package fielded, and because of this mission we're undertaking we were the first to get it."

This is apparently intended as a permament deployment. Isn't this prohibited by the Posse Comitatus act? Deploying military troops on American soil except as an ad-hoc response to a crisis, is prohibited, and I am curious about this deployment and the reason behind id. With the unprecedented grab for executive power by this administration, this is actually worrying.
There are other avenues for this sort of force, and it's not from the military.

And - this is on the "dwell time" for units , that time when they are supposed to be stationed at a post between deployments overseas. I wonder how the military is viewing this, and more importantly, I wonder why we're not hearing a whole lot about it.

Husband Reboot

Well, the Adorable Husband had another episode of Atrial Fibrillation (basically, one of the atria in his heart just goes haywire), and was on the receiving end of cardioversion today -- rebooting his heart to get back to a normal rhythm. So he's got a big shaved patch on his chest where they put the electrode pad used to shock him, and a full-body ache from zapping him with enough electricity to shock him back into sinus rhythm. Basically a "reboot" -- and all his background processes and CPU seem to be fine, luckily.

This is not really life-threatening, as long as it is treated, and he is back home and just fine - more whacked out from the anesthesia (they knocked him out cold to do the cardioversion) than anything else. He slept most of the afternoon, and seems to be doing fine, albeit still tired.

Of course, we can probably still pick on him that this started yesterday and he didn't tell me until today. Called me from the hospital to ask if I could pick him up. Why, yes, I'm a little irked.

Breaking Rules

Twenty five years ago today, a Russian Soviet Air Defence Forces lieutenant colonel saved your life by breaking the rules.

Squee!

Amelia makes art - needlefelted dog dopplegangers.

Take that, dastardly brush!

Just a few moments of mindless cuteness. We all need a break from politics.

Carpet!

We (well, I should say, the Adorable Husband) pulled up all the old carpet in the living room and dining room last night. Then he spent about two hours pulling the staples out of the floor after getting the pad pulled up.

The dining room was a mess -- really, quite gross under the carpet. I painted the floor with Killz, which is recommended to seal the floor and hide odors. So now we have a room surrounded by super-sharp tack strips and nicely painted white floors...and all the furniture is out on the porch!

Well, most of the furniture. The television armoire is still in the living room, with a swath of carpet underneath it. The Husband needs help to get the television out of it -- that thing weight about 300 pounds!

But, the carpet people come tomorrow and I will put up the drapes over the weekend and we will be almost done! (I say almost because we still are looking for an ottoman). Yeah!

Suspended what?

WHAT DOES A 'SUSPENDED' CAMPAIGN LOOK LIKE?.

• McCain campaign offices in battleground states are open and operating, just like yesterday.
• McCain's television ads are on the air, just like yesterday.
• McCain media flacks are all over the news networks, just like yesterday.
• McCain's campaign staffers are working, just like yesterday.
• McCain's campaign website is up, soliciting contributions and promoting McCain's message, just like yesterday.
• For the big White House meeting today, Barack Obama was told not to bring any campaign aides, so he's bringing a legislative assistant from his Senate staff. John McCain is bringing a campaign advisor.

And we could add - doing interviews with Katie Couric, giving a speech at Clinton's Global Initiative meeting, and doing a purely political photo-op.

Letterman

I don't usually watch Letterman, but I tuned in to see his opening bit after hearing that John McCain canceled his planned appearance on the show late this afternoon. He "had to go back to Washington" and deal with the crisis.

Except not so much. He joined his running mate and did an interview with Katie Couric during the taping of the show, when he should have been on Letterman. Just down the street. Letterman was stood up. Letterman might host a late-night talk show, but he's no lightweight to piss off with a capricious and false excuse.

If McCain wanted to cancel, just cancel. Why weasel out of this and then do another, friendlier interview elsewhere instead? Oh, wait! I think I just answered my own question. Can't actually face anyone who isn't friendly. Nope!

And I'm waiting for Palin to find one example of McCain's actions to manage regulation and the markets and "bring it to you", as she finally managed to stammer when pressed in the interview.

This is reaching epic proportions of comic ridiculousness. This is a presidential candidate?

The Dog Ate my Homework

I can decide if I should laugh or cry. McCain wants to postpone the debates , nay, the very campaign, so he can be in Washington to "work on the bailout proposal" with the President and congressional Republicans.

As if he as anything substantive to do with it. He doesn't sit on any of the committees that might be convened, he doesn't hold any sort of tie-breaker vote, he doesn't seem to have any sort of plan of his own that he needs to propose. Sure, the president needs all hands to flog this idea, but this sudden need to be involved is a pretty thin, pretty pathetic excuse to not debate Obama on Friday. He has no primary role in this economic crisis, except to campaign. Neither of the candidates do - and if they are needed in Washington on Friday to discuss the proposal in congress, they should both be able to manage a debate that night. That's not an unreasonable expectation from someone, anyone, who want to be the President.

He claims that we all need to focus on this economic problem, that he needs to stop everything he's doing to be there in Congress and get his spoon on the pot.

What the hell? He can't actually manage to do more than one thing at a time? He can't deal with more than on crisis without running away? And this is a person who could be the President? Does he think that when competing problems erupt -- and they do -- he can just skip out on one if he doesn't want to deal with it. I would like a president who realizes that you have to multi-task, or at least be able to deal with the rigors of a very stressful, very difficult job.

I know this was supposed to play to the US Public as McCain being concerned about the crsis, jumping in to focus on the big issue and be all presidential. Unfortunately, it has come across to most people as "I dont' want to talk about economic issues with Obama on Friday." You can supply the reason - not prepared, don't have a position to articulate, overly stressed, whatever, but it isn't coming across as noble and self-sacrificing, it's a gimmick, and z shallow, transparent one at that.

If McCain really does need to be in Washington, then they should shuffle the debate schedule and have the VP debate on Friday (instead of "rescheduled at some point in the future"). Biden and Palin should be ready, right?

Right?

Bailout? Not like this.

I wonder why the powers-that-be aren't publicizing this particular statement in the bailout proposal:

"Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

Got that? NO oversight. NO review. Just give him the money and go away. No need to know how it will be spent or how it is disbursed. Nope. Just trust us. Give us the money, and release all control. Give the Executive Branch full and unfettered authority to do whatever it wants with it, and just shut the hell up.

Sorry, as a taxpayer, this is not an acceptable solution.

Yes. This.

I'm sure you know that I'm not a Palin fan (if you don't, it's probably because I haven't spoken to you, yet!) but this call by Campbell Brown that everyone -- the media, the Republican party, the McCain campaign, everyone -- start actually treating Sarah Palin as a real, live candidate is exactly what I've been thinking.

Tonight I call on the McCain campaign to stop treating Sarah Palin like she is a delicate flower that will wilt at any moment," said Brown. "This woman is from Alaska from crying out loud. She is strong. She is tough. She is competent. And you claim she is ready to be one heart beat away form the presidency. If that is the case, then end this chauvinistic treatment of her now. Allow her to show her stuff. Allow her to face down those pesky reporters... Let her have a real news conference with real questions. By treating Sarah Palin different from the other candidates in this race, you are not showing her the respect she deserves. Free Sarah Palin. Free her from the chauvinistic chain you are binding her with. Sexism in this campaign must come to an end. Sarah Palin has just as much a right to be a real candidate in this race as the men do. So let her act like one." [catch the video here]

I may not agree with Palin's policies or her ideas, but frankly, I've been unable to actually figure out what some of them are, since she's been so carefully cocooned from the press, hasn't answered any unscripted questions, and is pretty much kept under wraps and trotted out as the "token female" in the Republican party. Why? If she's up to the job, she should be able to handle it. What are they so afraid of? The more she is hustled off stage, the more the campaign demands that we show her "deference" (wtf? Is she the queen?), the less likely it is to me that she's actually capable of the job. I think she probably has something else to say, and she should be scrutinized and questioned and evaluated just like any other candidate. It's not sexist to question her abilities, it's not sexist to demand proof of her statements. It's not sexist to suggest that she is unqualified, or that she holds certain opinions any more than levelling that sort of question or observation about a male candidate would be sexist. That's just how we, the people, can vet candidates. Trying to parse any criticism as sexism is just bullying the public into shutting up and not asking any questions.

Women can do anything they want. A woman can be qualified for anything. So what's with the kid gloves and 'delicate flower' treatment? It does a disservice to her, and to any woman trying to rise to a position of power. It's insulting and patronizing-"oh, we have a woman on the ticket! Isn't that just too cute? Yeah, we're all equal-opportunity! See? She wears skirts, and she's a real, honest-to-goodness woman!" I'm really not getting the message that the conservatives are actually taking her seriously, and if I was her, I'd be pissed off. If there's some substance there, let's see it. Quit trying to shield her from the press, quite trying to make sure she never has to answer a tough question. I may not like the answers (I'm quite sure I don't so far), but damn, Republicans/McCain, at least show women in this country the respect of acknowledging that you really believe a woman can do the job instead of bringing her along like a trophy wife.

The timing is off

I got an astroturf email today from some random person (who I think is trolling the forum and snagging email addresses, ah, well) going on and on about Muslim extremists and how Muslim terrorists are the root of all evil and we need to return to that good old timey religion and conservative politics to survive. It's pretty common rhetoric, and I was about to delete it as junk when the following claim leapt out at me as just too much to pass up:

According to the Book of Revelations:

The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, he will destroy everything.

I had to comment.

No verses in Revelations mention the Antichrist. The only time the term is mentioned is in 1 and 2 John. Revelations has beasts and dragons aplenty, though, and is a rather fever-dream apocalyptic sort of story, but no anti-christ, and certainly not specifics. In fact, references occur in John to multiple anti-christs, always lower cased.

Revelations was probably written in the first century AD (estimates are roughly 65-93). Muslims didn't exist. Islam was founded around 600 AD. According to most interpretations, Islam is the one religion that the antichrist could not come from. There are quite a few protestant sects that are quite sure that the Pope qualifies, though. That was a bit surprising.

Claiming the Bible says something when it does no such thing is awfully common among people with an axe to grind. The person starting this email did a rather poor job of it, actually. We can all go and look this stuff up. If you're going to email a xenophobic rant, at least get your facts straight!

Who do you agree wtih?

This quick quiz showed up in one of the forums I read -- it was really interesting to see who I really agreed with!

Pick the statement you agree with more, for a dozen categories, and it will tell you who you agree with. Interesting!

Childhood Desires

I meant to post this last week, since it was my sister's birthday (Happy Birthday! Yeah!), but I got a bit sidetracked.

About a year ago, her son had a complete meltdown in Target because he wanted some toy. Hey, at 6 years old, that can be a big problem! Since Nin wasn't going to buy said toy, she sat him down and explained to him that when she was a little girl, she really, really, really wanted a Cabbage Patch doll. They had just come out and they were The Thing to have and they couldn't afford it and they were very hard to find, and so she just didn't get a Cabbage Patch doll. Sometimes you just don't get what you want.

So, last week, he and Grandma went to Target to pick out a present -- and he spent his allowance to get mom a Cabbage Patch Doll.

Aaaaawwwww. How unbelievably sweet.

Gluttony and Sloth

An absolutely perfect day for the Winefest - breezy, cool (except for a brief bit right after lunch), 40 wineries, and food galore. It was a lot of fun. We met two couples from Salt Lake City, and spent the day tasting new wines and eating tasty food in the tent.

But the highlight was the Wine Maker's Dinner at the Chateau at Two Rivers, catered by The Cowboy and the Rose-- a seven course dinner paired with wines from Two Rivers (and other wineries). We attended this dinner last year, and it's definitely going to become a yearly event.

1st Course
Two Rivers Reisling
Salmon and Cheese

2nd Course
Two Rivers Merlot
Red Pepper Gouda Soup
Garlic Parley Soup

3d Course
Grand River Viognier
Stuffed Roma Tomato with Micro Greens, Balsamic Vinaigrette,
Mozzarella, Crispy Proscuito, Carpaccio

Intermezzo
Black Currant Sorbet

4th Course
Slate Point Pinot Gris
Squid ink Linguini Stuffed Calamari w/Lobster Sauce,
Baby Zucchini, Roasted Heirloom Tomato

5th Course
Two River Syrah
Smoked Quail with Dried Cherry Sauce, Purple Potato, Quinoa
and Pearled Onion

6th Course
Two River Vitners Blend
Buffalo Tenderloin with Cabernet Sauce
Hericot-Vert beans, and Baby Carrots

7th Course
Garfield Estates Vin de Glace
Key Lime Pudding Cake with Guava and Raspberry Puree
and Grilled Pineapple

The buffalo was just about the best thing I've ever had -- so tender it didn't even require a knife. And - someone spent a lot of time on presentation and plating. The seafood course was parboiled squid that was stuffed with linguini, so it looked like a squid swimming lobster sauce. They even tied the beans together with a chive. It was lovely.

And the Vin de Glace with dessert? One of my favorites. We bought two bottles at the festival during the day and were so pleased it was on the menu!

I'm calling to get on the list for next year's dinner as soon as possible.

Threat Level Orange

We are in Grand Junction at the Colorado Wine Festival, enjoying a weekend of sloth and gluttony (lovely wine, lovely food, chocolate, you name it!) and went out to dinner tonight at The Winery Restaurant downtown, which was recommended by my in-laws, who were out in Grand Junction two weeks ago.

Neat place, in a 100 year old firehouse, good food. We were not familiar with the fish that was offered as the special for the night - escolar. We asked what it was and the waiter told us it was a mild white fish, "much like tuna". Huh? Tuna is anything but a light white fish, so The Adorable Husband pulled out the handy-dandy interwebs on his iPhone and looked it up.

This fish should really be called Horrible Orange Explodey Butt fish. Seriously. It's banned in Japan and wikipedia has the following to say about eating it:

Like its relative the oilfish (Ruvettus pretiosus), it cannot metabolize the wax esters (Gempylotoxin) naturally found in its diet, which accumulates to give an oil content in the muscle meat of 18–21%. These wax esters may rapidly cause gastrointestinal symptoms following consumption; however, these effects are usually short lived.

The gastrointestinal symptoms, called "keriorrhoea", caused by these wax esters may include oily orange diarrhea, discharge, or leakage from the rectum that may smell of mineral oil. The discharge can stain clothing and occur without warning 30 minutes to 36 hours after consuming the fish. The oil may pool in the rectum and cause frequent urges for bowel movements due to its lubricant qualities and may be accidentally discharged by the passing of gas. Symptoms may occur over a period of one or more days. Other symptoms may include stomach cramps, loose bowel movements, diarrhea, headaches, nausea, and vomiting.

Oh, fun! That sounds like something I'd like to eat, yummy! It should come with a warning. A bright orange warning sticker or something.

To be fair, of course, the solution is strict portion control and cooking by grilling or some other method to reduce the oil, which is how this was offered. We kept looking over at the table sitting next to us and wondering if we should share our Wikipedia knowledge with them as they considered the special.

Where's Waldo?

Oh, this made me chuckle a bit.

Notice a distinct lack of the current president hitting the stump for Republican nominees? That he didn't speak at the convention? It's not really a coincidence, according to Bloomberg news.

The president, who toured the Beijing Olympics last month, spent more time in front of cameras with the U.S. women's beach volleyball team than he has lately with the Republican nominee.

It seems that poor Dubya is considered a liability. He's still the Fund Raiser in Chief -- and as a money-maker, he does a bang-up job-- but no one really wants to be seen with him. Everyone is desperately trying to avoid being linked to the current administration.

Queen of Klutziness

Behold me! Queen of the Klutz People! Unable to walk in her own backyard!

So, I tripped in a hole in the backyard, twisting my right ankle.

Which flung me willy-nilly into one of the big sprinkler heads with the exact center of my left kneecap and twisted my knee. It's possibly sprained. Swelled up like a canteloupe.

So I can't really walk well, my knee hurts, my ankle hurts. I can't drive (no clutching for me).

Ta-da!

Diagram that Sentence

“Disapointed that taxpayers are called upon to bailout another one,” she said. “Certainly AIG though with the construction bonds that they’re holding and with the insurance that they are holding very, very impactful to Americans so you know the shot that has been called by the Feds its understandable but very, very disappointing that taxpayers are called upon for another one.”

I'll give $50 bucks to anyone who can actually diagram that sentence.

Yeah, I know, it's a bit ridiculous, but we have to have fun somehow!

AIG bailout

It's been an interesting week at work -- or, well, interesting for my client I guess. They do the bulk of their business with AIG insurance and have been fielding calls from panicking clients wanting to know what's going to happen with their insurance.

And left us twiddling our thumbs for a bit, since the new system we wrote is customized specifically for AIG business and would need to be changed/de-linked if AIG disappeared or was downgraded to such a credit risk that they could no longer do business with them. There were some very tense calls ysterday. I don't think we've seen the whole fallout yet, but it was certaining an up-close-and-personal view of how this was happening.

Fun, too, to listen to the politicians trying to make hay on this one. McCain claimed (wrongly) that his committee (the Commerce committee) was in the thick of things and could affect change -- which is 100% wrong, by the way, commerce is specifically excluded from the banking and finance industries) and, even better, that he (McCain) had warned about this coming mortgage crisis and his prescience simply went unheeded. Which is also wrong. Just before the primary, he was talking about how he didn't see this coming and really didn't understand the forces at work. I didn't hear Barack's speech, I'l lhave to go listen to it online, I guess. I do know that he talked about mortgage relief and new bankruptcy laws, but I don't know the details.

It looks like the government is going to bail them out -- o the tune of 85 billion dollars -- in order to keep that sector in finance from collapsing completely. It was not a sure thing -- and may still be in the works -- but here's hoping that it stabilizes things.

Taxes as a primary issue

One of the issues that is bandied about a lot in this political season are "tax cuts" - everyone wants tax cuts, everyone thinks they pay too much tax. However, everyone I talk to seems to think that the Republicans will always do better than the democrats -- I suppose that's true, if you're in the top 4% or so of earners. Otherwise, the myth of the middle-class-tax-cut by the Republicans is just that - a myth. Most voters believe that Obama will "raise their taxes", which is more a nod to the success of the Republican campaign to paint it that way, than any real numbers. In fact, for nearly everyone I have talked to about taxes, they are not sure or are misinformed about what the impact really is.

Now this is not a complete picture - we're talking only about SS and income taxes, but CNN Money did a very clear analysis of what a 2009 tax bill would be for each income bracket, if either Obama's plan or McCain's plan were implemented. (Note that this assumes the whole shebang - which is probably unlikely in either case).

In general, if you make > 150K household income, your bill will be lower under McCain's plan. If you make less than that -- like 95% of the country -- then Obama's plan will be better for you.

                    MCCAIN                OBAMA
Income             Avg. tax bill     Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M      -$269,364         +$701,885
$603K and up    -$45,361          +$115,974
$227K-$603K  -$7,871               +$12
$161K-$227K     -$4,380               -$2,789
$112K-$161K     -$2,614               -$2,204
$66K-$112K      -$1,009               -$1,290
$38K-$66K       -$319                 -$1,042
$19K-$38K       -$113                 -$892
Under $19K      -$19                  -$567

The summary of the tax plans is usually explained as:

McCain: The average taxpayer in every income group would see a lower tax bill, but high-income taxpayers would benefit more than everyone else.

Obama: High-income taxpayers would pay more in taxes, while everyone else's tax bill would be reduced. Those who benefit the most - in terms of reducing their taxes as a percentage of after-tax income - are in the lowest income groups.

The data is supported By the Tax Policy Center research -- a long, detailed analysis of the proposed plans. It's well worth a read and is probably far more detailed than most people would need, but it is the best source I've found so far for unbiased information. I'm still not entirely sure I understand all the details!

But let's also keep in mind that McCain plans to end the largest tax break that affects every working American -- he proposes to remove the exemption for health insurance (currently paid for with pre-tax dollars for over 60 million workers) and apply income tax to that amount.

In general, though, those of us over the cutoff point are likely to see a tax increase (really the revocation or non-renewal of the Bush tax cuts, if I understand correctly) back to the levels before 2000, and those in the lower tax brackets will see a cut. The bunch of people who are comfortable and making 100K-ish, are probably more in the gray area- maybe better, maybe worse, depending on the rest of the pictures (dependents, etc).

SNL

You have GOT to see the opening from SNL - Tina Fey does such a spot-on impression of Palin that it's almost eerie. For just a second, I actually thought they'd gotten the real deal! Pohler's Hillary is good, too, and the opening is absolutely hysterical.

Tina Fey has her own show now, and it was a coup of monumental proportions to get her in.

Here's the video from Hulu.

Freakiest Cake Ever

You all know I love to read the Cakewrecks blog, it's all good snark.

But this. This thing. Eeeu.

THIS has to be the most disturbing, gross, disgusting cake ever. Yes, it IS a cake. A groom's cake at a wedding, no less. I mean, the decorator was gifted, but...WHY?

I don't think I could eat this. I don't even want to look at it.

[image from cakewrecks]

We're still here!

Well, the new Hadron Collider has been tested, and despite some fears that it would actually destroy the earth, we're all still here. There were actually worries that this test could trigger a black hole that would swallow the earth, or something.

But so far, the tests have been going well.

Well, they haven't actually bashed anything together yet, I guess, but you can check out the liveblog here, from the folks at Cosmic Variance.

Bad Credit Ads

I really dislike the FreeCreditReport.com ads - you know, with the weird-looking guy singing about how he has to live in his in-laws basement because his new wife has bad credit, or he has to drive a jalopy becuase he didn't check his credit first? They are SO ANNOYING.

I do, however, hate him less now that I know he's a French Canadian actor lipsynching to words he doesn't really understand (he's not fluent in English).

That makes them sort of charming, in a weird way.

It's about Time!

Lieberman has been kicked out of the Democratic caucus lunches and meetings. Considering that he's one of the Republican's biggest cheerleaders (and spoke at the RNC, and not in support of the democratic candidate), all I can say is, it's about time.

He became and "independent" because he couldn't get support for a presidential nod from the Dems, but at least said he was going to caucus --and thus support -- the Democrats. But the reality has been quite different. Old Joe has an ideology far closer to the R than the D, if you ask me, and apparently this was the last straw. He had ceased to be a "colleague" for quite awhile.

Of course, his people say he voluntarily left. Not true. Reid booted him. Hah!

Technically Ethical

While this is technically allowed, I wouldn't feel to terribly comfortable charging expenses to my client for a night that I spent at home, in my own bed, working from my own desk. This is something I do often, so it's not a hypothetical in my case: I'd have no problem expensing the travel from home to work site, but expenses while at home? Uh, no.

This seems backwards. Rules or no rules, it seems very odd. What's the scoop elsewhere for government servants?

This is permitted in Alaska (I assume because of the vast distances involved and sparcity of population centers), but the previous Governer had the same travel patterns and didn't claim the expenses for working from home. Do any others?

Can't have it both ways

Declaring that clergy “have a constitutional right to endorse political candidates from their pulpits, the socially conservative Alliance Defense Fund is recruiting several dozen pastors to do just that on Sept. 28, in defiance of Internal Revenue Service rules.” [TP]

Yes, of course they do - they can pretty much say whatever they want to in church. Endorse a candidate, go ahead. I fully support churches exercising their right to free speech from their own pulpits.

But then, of course, they must lose the lovely federal tax exemption that they have gladly accepted, on the condition that they do not act in a political manner. As soon as they give up their tax exempt status, go for it.Say whatever you want.

Can't have it both ways. Become a political entity - pay taxes, like every other political entity. Churches should get no special treatment.

Scottish/Celtic Festival

We actually managed to catch the last day of the Scottish/Celtic Festival in Estes Park, CO today -- what fun! The weather was perfect, the drive up was lovely, and we had the chance to listen to the massed pipe band, military bands from the Navy and West Point(including the "Party Band" from the Marine Corp and over a hundred bagpipers playing Amazing Grace and Scotland the Brave.

There were a ton of people. Watching all the men in kilts was a nice afternoon's work, and we even got to see some caber tossing.

I'll post some pics as soon as I can snag them off the camera!

Talking about who?

"You know that choices presidential nominees make for a running mate say a lot about them," Palin said. "And when our opponent made his choice, he went for a fine man, a decent man. Sen. Biden can claim many chairmanships across many many years in Washington, and certainly many friends in the Washinton establishment. But even those admirers would not be able to call him agent of change."

--Sarah Palin, 9/6/08.

Hey! Doesn't that description - "many years in Washington...many friends in the washington establishment" also describe McCain?

Perfectly?

I guess McCain can't be an agent of change, either.

Gobbledegook

I wonder where the video is of Palin speaking in tongues. Wouldn't that play well with the Republican base?

Until a few years ago (when she got involved in politics and was apparently looking for something a bit more mainstream, I guess), she was a member of the pentacostal church- specifically, Assembly of God.

Speaking in tongues is one of the sixteen fundamental truths of her faith.

8. The Initial Physical Evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit - The baptism of believers in the Holy Spirit is witnessed by the initial physical sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit of God gives them utterance. (Acts 2:4). The speaking in tongues in this instance is the same in essence as the gift of tongues, but is different in purpose and use. (1 Corinthians 12:4-10, 1 Corinthians 12:28)

That's way too crazy. Not too much in common with the regular mainstream evangelicals. That sort of weirdness starts pinging even their weird-o-meter. No wonder the campaign is downplaying her actual religious beliefs and peddling this soft-sell "shes just like you" schtick.

We may Starve

For the past few months, the Adorable Husband and I have been going to Entree Vous and getting frozen entrees for about half of the month, so we can eat at home more. With our schedules, we usually end up going out too much, or eating crap at home, since neither one of us really has the energy or inclination to cook anything.

Enter Entres Vous (or Supper Solutions, or any of the other 'come and make it here and bring it home'-types of meal services.) Good meal options, good price, the convenience of a 30-minute dinner prep. Pick something out of the fridge, and bake or grill. Love it!

We haven't had anything yet that we didn't really like -- you can view their monthly menus here-- and it's a great solution for just the two us. We stock up on frozen veggies (or fresh in the summer) and voila! Dinner.

But the one near us CLOSED! They apparently closed three of the five franchises in Denver! There is still one in Superior, but it's not convenient.

What a ridiculously tiny first-world sort of problem, eh? The company that prepares and packages my fresh dinners for me, is not convenient anymore.

It is to weep! Pity me.

Fighting for the LIttle Guy

Obama asks:

The question I have for them is Why would that kind of work (community organizer) be ridiculous? Who are they fighting for? What are they advocating for?

McCain answers:

I fight for Americans. I fight for you. I fight for Bill and Sue Nebe from Farmington Hills, Michigan, who lost their real estate investments in the bad housing market.

THIS is who he fights for? They lost their real estate investments? That doesn't even compute to the average American. The bad housing market has pushed people out of their homes, and the best example he can come up with is someone who lost real-estate investments? And, oh wait, appears to be in the real estate business?

Yeah, McCain gets it! He understands the little person, the common man who makes less than $5 million a year and invests in real estate!

I'm feeling the love, I really am.

Roomba Competition?

From Cuteoverload, a fun place to spend a few minutes if you're stressed out by all this political stuff.

I'm pretty sure this is a bunny. Or maybe a cat...

Used Food

This made me laugh today (another from Failblog.org) because we once had a store in town that sold slightly-expired food stuffs and damaged goods. Dented cans, week-old bread, that sort of stuff.

We used to call it the "Used Food Store".

All we Deserve to Know

The teleprompter did NOT break during Palin's speech last night, as was reported by a few right-wing bloggers, touting her extraordinary memory and grace under pressure. She's a smooth speaker, I'll give her that, but she wasn't "winging it", like the 'pubs would have you believe.

Geesh.

Of course, the McCain campaign announced today that she won't be doing any interviews or any unscripted events at all -- she'll just read speeches that are written for her by the campaign over the next few weeks; once she gets back into the campaign at all after going to "school", I guess. Wow, they must have a lot of respect and confidence in her abilities, eh?

We'll be carefully told everything we need to know about her, in a carefully choreographed manner. Apparently, being able to give a speech is qualification enough, and we don't "need" to know what her positions are or what she knows.

According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads.
[from TIME.com - go watch the video]

I don't know about you, but that attitude scares me. Shouldn't we expect transparency and substance from our politicians? I know I do.

Daily Show Rocks

Double standard? You decide...

Turning off CNN

Sorry for the ranting in the previous couple of posts about politics. I made the mistake of turning on CNN for the last few days to catch the highlights of the conventions.

It all just pisses me off so much that I'm instituting a self-imposed news moratorium. I get nauseated watching the RNC, frustrated watching the DNC, and end up yelling at the lies and fakery of political ads. I feel sorry for any canvassers or telephone polls that call here, it isn't pretty. I don't think I've ever been this angry about politics -- I just can't imagine another four years like the last eight. I just can't.

So, while I may watch the news and such, I'll try not to actually post much here. You all can do your own reading and watching and fact checking.

It's all just Truthiness

Truthout.org goes through the lies in the speeches last night at the RNC convention.

If I hear the "I opposed the bridge-to-nowhere" one more time, I'm going to scream. No, she didn't. And when it was finally killed, Alaska kept all the money for 'other projects'. Didn't save a penny there. And as for the new talking point about "command experience" -- nope. She has never issued any orders to the Alaska National Guard - she can't. While she has limited control over their deployment for in-state emergencies, those decisions are handled by the State Department (although with her approval in some cases). Once the ANG is sent overseas, the governor has absolutely no authority. Period. So all this "she's the CiC of the Guard is spin. Just stop it.

Where was the uplifting message of their vision? Where was the outline of their plans? Where was one moment of illumination of what kind of leaders these people will be? All I heard was petty snarking. Jon Stewart was right: the GOP may love America, but they hate half the people living in it. And now, the stage is set so nicely for any criticism of Palin to be "sexist" -- because they simply cannot imagine that there might be some other reason to dislike her. Oh, no, can't make any comments about her job performance, that would be picking on a poor, defenseless woman. I can't imagine how you can argue she's fit to be VP at the same time you say she needs protecting from those big, bad democrats who are going to chew her up and spit her out over policy issues and decisionmaking.

It's funny, though, since it's remarkably easy to find them arguing that other women (Hillary, for example) need to just suck it up and handle it and not cry sexism, if they want to be in politics. Are these people unaware that there are machines nowadays that can actually (gasp!) record their comments? Do they not think that the double-standard they are applying is going to be noticed? Gah.

It frightens me that there are people out there who hear this, and believe every word without checking anything on their own. Gotta fact check, people! On both sides.

Low Crawling

So, as I noted earlier in the 'new carpet' post, we have decided that the carpeted living room and dining a room are off-limits to Uulaq when we're gone. For the moment, we've just put two of the kitchen chairs across the entry to the living room and are keeping the dining room door closed.

It works beautifully for Uulaq.

However, I walked out this morning to see Berit happily chewing a bone in the living room. Oh, says I, how did you get in there?

Well, she proceeded to show me -- low crawling under the kitchen chair, while wagging maniacally. She was SO PROUD of herself. (It's a really blurry picture, she moves pretty fast!)