The oxymoron to nowhere

I almost fell out of my chair. The New York Times had a boilerplate editorial about competitive bidding, but when I checked it turned out they were writing about "earmark reform". Okay, and I'm in favor of putting cannibals on a diet, too.

"The for-profit sector does not get all the earmarks," they chirp, only comprising "about half the $2.7 billion in 1,102 earmarks tucked so far into the $636 billion Pentagon spending proposal for next year."

The beltway band and their followers in the press have lost sight of the problem. (Insert standard props for Sen. John McCain here.)

Your fed in the clouds

I just stumbled across the U.S. General Service Administration's Cloud Computing Initiative, complete with an applications website. It's nice to see our government entering the 21st Century.

Cloud what? The concept of 'Cloud Computing' has been around for awhile, but it's been general, fuzzy and/or, well, (sorry) cloudy.

Boring definition #1: “a model for enabling convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction". (National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) -- the definition seems to be version 15)

This will probably save a lot of money in the long run. Though... I wonder about some of the "Social Media Applications". If you visit a lot of government sites like I do, you've probably noticed they usually have blogs. Boring, and they repeat what you'll find in the "Press Releases" pages of the website. Somebody's being paid to do that. (Funny, I didn't see any comments on the Homeland Security blog.) Also, government Facebook or MySpace pages remind me of adults trying to be "hep" (heh) by aping Teen Talk.

This is another project pushed by Chief Information Officer Vivek Kundra, picked by Infoworld as one of the best Chief Technical Officers of 2008. One of his first projects after being appointed by President Barack Obama was data.gov a work-in-progress that puts raw government data on the web. Warning: it can be a gargantuan Time Trap if you start browsing through it.

Obama is definitely internet savvy -- I'm still on his email list after signing up during the campaign; I still get pleas for support (and money) for his initiative-of-the-day. (John McCain never got past just having a website with suggested 'talking points' for his supporters.)

The Whitehouse YouTube Channel (Joined January 20, 2009) has cranked out 454 videos as this is being written. It's one of 15 listed on the U.S. Government Channel. The agencies don't draw viewers like a piano-playing cat would (the FDIC?), but there's an audience out there.

I just think it's cool to have all of this stuff at my fingertips, even out on Saipan in the middle of the ocean.

A video on one of NOAA's sites:

That dog don't hunt

Sure, a lot of Republicans are looking for the last boat off of the Titanic, but why on earth would Vice President Dick Cheney endorse John McCain at the last minute? Does anyone think there's an undecided voter who's going to think 'well, if Dick says it's okay...'?

This seems like another Cheney hunting accident with McCain as the victim. Sure, he's still got his fans. So does George Bush: two people stood up for him in USSP last night. Those people have already made up their minds.

McCain is desperately trying to stay away from these associations. Oh, and according to Taegan Goddard, Barack Obama helpfully responded with "I'd like to congratulate Senator McCain on this endorsement because he really earned it."



Surprise, surprise, surprise -- Gomer Pyle

Channeling history

It's easy to get caught up in the politics, positions and attacks of this Presidential election. Lately I've found myself skipping over to Ben Smith's blog for his little stories.

He goes for the splashy big picture, but I visit daily for the impressionistic snippets he collects. My current favorite:

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

Powerful stuff, whoever you favor. Truthfully, I would have said not in my lifetime until this year. Strangely, I forget. Often. (Without even mentioning that a guy named Barack Hussein Obama could get so far in this murky, malevolent and paranoid post-911 milieu.)

My previous favorite, probably apocryphal, was about some redneck stereotype watching a game whose wife called out from the door 'Who are we voting for?' and answered 'We're voting for the n***er'.

Oh, and points for John McCain (Are you trying to cost us this election?):




Irrelevant, but I got an email from John McCain! It turns out I won 50,000 pounds in their campaign's London lottery!

The new reality

My experiment with reality television is over.

I am proud that I have never watched a "reality" show for more than a few minutes... until the political debates.

It was fun: we got My BFF, followed by dancing Presidential candidates in Debate the Second. "Who's going to be the President?" got respectable ratings, but they have to refine the product.

I'm thinking sarcastic twits giving feedback throughout the performances. "That was pathetic. If you don't believe it why should I?" Ralph Nader and Bob Barr would have volunteered.

Forget the squiggles (worms to Aussies, I hear), let's have text-messaged votes.

It may seem that I don't take these beauty contests seriously. I don't. In, well, reality, why should I take anyone who hasn't made up their mind seriously? There's too much information if anything, and about distinct positions if you just filter out the polls and pundits.

Tupperware TV

Not only does Barack Obama seem to have better personal trainers, he's also figured a way to actually make the debates useful: Bring Your Own Ballot parties.

I've signed up for email notifications of his daily Talking Points (John McCain's website didn't give me that option) and one clever idea is Debate Parties. Combine that with early voting and you capture some of those 'real excited but gee I'm kind of busy on election day' voters. Don't sweat about it now, it will be overanalyzed for months after the election.

Gaming the system

There are those 18 ads in video game, of course, targeted at Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, Montana, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and Colorado. It's all over the internet, especially tech-savvy sites.

That's probably the point, as one columnist astutely pointed out (I'd give him a shout, but I can't find his column again in all of the noise). A billboard in a racing game goes flying by; you're really not going to see it unless you want to.

The buzz is probably more important, and it still gets at the 18-34 year-olds he's trying to reach with the emphasis on registration and early voting. A smart move/ a lot of them are missed by other advertising and they're supposedly likely to favor him. Still, there's some rage at invading what are, after all, escapist worlds. He's more likely to pull it off than anyone trying it in future election cycles.


Extra inning

I can't be the only one laughing about ACORN News' pushing back the start of the World Series for Obama's half-hour show: "Sorry, John, but this is business."

Pizza pie charts

Food for thought: Domino's Pizza has its own poll when you order online. Has this gone too far? Are pollsters our new shamen?

With a few quibbles, it's close to most of the polls I've seen. Pollster.com had a little fun with this.

Who gets the all-important Philly Cheese Steak vote? Barack Obama and John McCain: "You got three weeks."

Obama the Arab

Here's an amazing video of the woman who John McCain corrected when she called Barack Obama an Arab.

Gayle Quinnel hasn't changed her mind.



Dementia and senility have been suggested since she's 75, and some pretty nasty names used in discussions.

That's an easy answer, but there seems to be more going on, like the sound of a mind slamming shut. McCain corrected her but that made no difference. She saw it "in the library" and in a pamphlet.

That's the dark side of our wiki-world: to some people all information is equal. We get to choose our facts.

From The Uptake: "This is an interview with her done by a live streaming cell phone. Interviewers include Noah Kunin, Senior Political Correspondent from The UpTake, Adam Aigner of NBC News and Dana Bash of CNN."

They have a transcript

Oh, maybe just whistle

Barack Obama and John McCain may be whistling in the dark when it comes to Iraq, and it's likely both candidates know it.

"Key aides" of each have been vetted (The veterinarian has checked their wind and teeth) and kept in the loop since summer. (President George Bush officially created a Transition Coordinating Council October 9.) They've probably heard much of what's in a draft National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. According to McClatchy Newspapers:

A nearly completed high-level U.S. intelligence analysis warns that unresolved ethnic and sectarian tensions in Iraq could unleash a new wave of violence, potentially reversing the major security and political gains achieved over the last year.

I'd bet on both candidates ignoring it, unless McCain decides on yet another 'hail Mary' pass to revive his campaign. He has (or had) an edge on foreign affairs, but he's invested a lot in being right about the surge. For Obama, it would seriously threaten his 16 month deadline.

The article also provides less-than-optimistic statements from Gen. David Petraeus, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the Defense Department.

The next President's to-do list isn't getting any shorter.

Media withdrawing

It's no surprise that government officials will filter the information they release, but at the same time most news organizations are doing their own pullout.

According to the Washington Post:

U.S. military officials say they "embedded" journalists 219 times in September 2007. Last month, the number shrank to 39. Of the dozen U.S. newspapers and newspaper chains that maintained full-time bureaus in Baghdad in the early years of the war, only four are still permanently staffed by foreign correspondents. CBS and NBC no longer keep a correspondent in Baghdad year-round.

Cynically, we could say that's because bombings sell advertising, while reconstruction and infighting over power won't make the front page. There's an election going on. It's also true that newspapers in particular are hurting, with several going out of business.

Whatever the reason, we're getting less information out of Iraq at a critical time.

The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy, if you could put it that way, would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in the any country. -- Rupert Murdoch, 2003

He will either go down in history as a very great president or he'll crash and burn. I'm optimistic it will be the former by a ratio of two to one. -- Rupert Murdoch, 2003

Did the gambler break even?

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) claims Sen. John McCain has failed to report gambling winnings. Their complaint to the Senate Ethics Committee is hardly surprising: they're a very partisan organization.

Still it's hard to argue with executive director Melanie Sloan's point: "Given Sen. McCain’s long history of gambling, the fact that he never included gambling income on his financial disclosure forms suggests he is either the unluckiest gambler ever or, more likely, he failed to report the income."

I read the New York Times article they mention, but checking on income didn't occur to me. (That may partly be due to my philosophical objection to taxing winnings when you can't write off losses.)

More of the background noise you hear from any campaign, I assumed, and probably more disturbing to his evangelical base than anyone else. Besides, the story's not likely to get much traction in Rupert Murdoch's media empire. No big deal, it will get sorted out.

Crap shoot

Losing it at the craps table is a different matter and has nothing to do with gambling. Gosh darn it, that just isn't Presidential.

I'd have to agree with Jeff Dearth, the guy who was allegedly there: "I’d happily gamble with Senator McCain again, but I definitely wouldn’t gamble on him."

That got me worried and, like McCain I guess, I hate to leave the table when I'm on a roll. I wasn't disappointed.

On the Cover of the Rolling Stone

My next stop was Make-Believe Maverick a Rolling Stone article that left me appalled and agape. It's a must-read for anyone interested in the campaign, in my opinion.

I've read bits and pieces of what the article discusses, but it paints a picture of McCain that is downright scary. I'm allowing for the writer's evident dislike of the Senator.

McCain supporters need to get their talking points lined up. Everyone else? Well, read it for yourself. I don't expect it to have much impact on the campaign in any case because of the source. Rolling Stone readers are hardly McCain's base.

Obama challenges McCain on Ayers

Maybe we'll finally get an interesting debate.

Barack Obama has flung down the gauntlet on his alleged friendship with sixties radical Bill Ayers, challenging John McCain to make claims to his face. From ABC News:

"I am surprised that, you know, we've been seeing some pretty over-the-top attacks coming out of the McCain campaign over the last several days, that he wasn't willing to say it to my face. But I guess we've got one last debate. So presumably, if he ends up feeling that he needs to, he will raise it during the debate."

Of course that would set up his argument that the attacks are "the centerpiece of the discussion in the closing weeks of a campaign where we are facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and we're in the middle of two wars."

He's backing McCain into a corner.

Oh, and it's hard to accuse when you won't look at your opponent or even shake his hand (Courtesy JedReport)




UPDATE

Joe Biden repeats the party line on Ayers: “In my neighborhood, when you’ve got something to say to a guy, you look him in the eye and you say it to him.”

McCain launches Ayers ad

I didn't blink. I winked

Here's a scoop: John McCain's new campaign ad, starring Sarah Palin. OK, it's a Betty Boop cartoon (Watch for the winks and lipstick). "You're an elephant, you're an ass" indeed.

Say it ain't so, John

Barack Obama wants this Charles Keating video filed under "Look what you made me do." Fair enough, in my book. Evidently it's been in the can, waiting for John McCain or his proxy to play the character card.

Sarah Palin led with McCain's chin, using a New York Times article on Bill Ayers to back this line "This is not a man who sees America as you and I do." McCain is following with "Who is the real Barack Obama?"

Well, negative sells to some voters, but McCain's Savings and Loan skeleton parallels the current sub-prime fiasco pretty closely. David Plouffe sent this link to me--and a few million others on Obama's list-- tipping us that it's going to be playing on keatingeconomics.com Monday.



Loose-lipped McCain operatives have admitted he's trying to divert attention from the economy (A surprising lack of discipline, but that's another subject.) The McCain advertising money does indeed seem to be going into negative ads, according to Talking Points Memo. TPM claims virtually 100% of his ad spending is for attacks, while Obama's is less than half. Of course, since Obama has more resources, "The remaining million per week" cited by TPM is the same amount spent by McCain.

Vote early, vote often

Pundits are still playing American Idol-style games with the Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates while the election is very likely being decided under their noses. In the trenches, Barack Obama and John McCain are getting early voters out and sending their lawyers in to fight over the rules.

From 20-30 percent of ballots were cast by election day four years ago. It's expected to be higher this year. Of the swing states that are expected to determine the outcome 53% of ballots cast in Nevada, 47% in Colorado, 51% in New Mexico and 36% in Florida were early ballots last time.

Ohio is taking its first shot at "no fault" (my term) absentee balloting, and Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner can expect to be in a legal firestorm for months. She's being challenged for denying some Republican registrations and for allowing some Democratic registrations.

Researchers say it may be a wash anyway, because early voters tend to be the most committed to their candidate. According to the Washington Post:

The early-voting trend does not benefit one party over the other, experts say, because each is targeting infrequent voters. On the Democratic side, that means urban, often minority voters and students. On the Republican side, it is older voters and those in more rural areas who favor absentee ballots.

The wild card may be Hillary Clinton and Obama getting so many new registrations. For instance, in Georgia 39% of early ballots so far are by Afro-Americans, who make up 29% of the population. College students in Columbus, Ohio treated same-day voting like a cult-movie opening, pitching tents to be the first in line. There are reports of thousands of students being bused to registration locations.

Crime watchers

And then there are the felons. The NAACP has gone to court to register some prisoners. According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

The state Department of Corrections halted (Reverend Kenneth) Glasgow's registration drive after two days because of complaints from the chairman of the Alabama Republican Party that registering inmates without adequate monitoring could lead to voter fraud. Fewer than 80 inmates filled out registration forms. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund has filed suit challenging the prison commissioner's decision to stop the registration drive...

Only two states — Maine and Vermont — place no limits on voting due to a criminal conviction; even prison inmates can cast a ballot. Kentucky and Virginia are the only two states that permanently bar felons from voting, although the governors of those states can restore voting rights to individuals.

Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear streamlined the process in March, and has since restored the rights of more than 740 released convicts. Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine promised to fast-track applications for voter restoration that his office received by Aug. 1, adding three people to his staff to process applications before Monday's registration deadline.

This is a touchy, and very serious issue. Both Beshear and Kaine are being accused of playing politics when they rush registrations. The "non-serious felonies" (I wouldn't make that up) that don't take away your right to vote in Alabama would be misdemeanors in many other states.

Both sides are guilty of slipping into a mindset that the end justifies the means, foreclosing rational discussion of the subject. The scurrilous, slanderous and snide implication is that all felons are Democrats, and there are about four million who have lost the right to vote.

There's a grain of truth that further muddies the waters. Thirteen percent of black men have lost that right. It's obvious what their vote would be, particularly in this election.

Blacks represent "about 40 percent of the people who've gotten their rights lost and restored," according to civil rights attorney Reggie Mitchell. "With an African-American running, and such a critical mass, this could have a tremendous impact."

Which leads us back to "registering inmates without adequate monitoring could lead to voter fraud." Was that said with a straight face? Adequate monitoring? Of inmates?

Probably my favorite line, until I ran across this line from Auglaize County Elections Board Director Carolyn Campbell: "A lot said by voting now, they can stop listening to everything on TV."

Today's fun fact: President George Bush still owes the Greenberg-Traurig law firm $314,000 for work on the 2000 Florida recount.
Today's question: Does John Scalia still work for the firm?
Today's quote: Get over it! (Justice Antonin Scalia)

Nature cover

Barack Obama and John McCain in the hunt. Spotted at All Things Obama 2008

Is it that time already?

Senators Dianne Feinstein, Bob Bennett, Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi driving in the 'first nail' of the Presidential Inaugural Platform. Insert joke about coffin and the current administration here.

Best line on the ceremony goes to the Washington Times: "Other preparations include the repaving of Pennsylvania Avenue to rid it of potholes." Woa, I knew the Highway Trust Fund was broke, but...

Define bipartisan

I've been amused-- black humor I'll admit-- by the way the Robber Baron Bailout is being marketed.

A Republican administration proposes a no-oversight blank check.

House Republicans insist on their alternate plan.

We're told that a bipartisan bill should include both.

Now why would Democrats suspect they're being played?

Strangely, unlike a few days ago John McCain doesn't think he needs to be present, according to spokesman Mark Salter: "Because he can effectively do what he needs to do by phone."

It really was that boring.

I'm interested in this day-to-day nonsense, and still almost gave up on the debate several times. From my perspective, both sides got what they wanted and the viewers got very little. I don't like drawn chess games either.

Honestly, putting the spin aside, I saw very little difference in their foreign policy except on Iraq. Both sides are trying to put semantic lipstick on what are really minor differences. McCain got points on experience, Barack Obama some on lost opportunities.

Give Obama an edge on the economy, he sounded Presidential with proposals he connected to the middle-class. McCain came off more like a Senator running for re-election, though he scored on earmarks and Obama's proposed spending.

McCain's dislike of Obama came through; he wouldn't even look at his opponent. Still, I wouldn't make any big deal out of Obama using 'John' 25 times while McCain never used 'Barack'. Animosity aside, you know he'd be hammered by the pundits for trying to paint Obama as 'the other'. He was in a no-win situation.

Condescending?

Yep, to me he was. I don't think 'you don't understand' ever won a debate. Still, calling the faux flap about Spain "horseshit" was refreshing and appropriate.

Chris Wallace, the Fox ferret, tried to draw Joe Biden out with a snarky leading question about how he could avoid being condescending to Sarah Palin in next week's Vice Presidential debate. Biden gleefully replied that he wasn't going to be like McCain.

Sarah Smile

Biden was all over the airwaves. Where was Palin? Evidently, at an Irish bar in Philadelphia.

You can observe a lot just by watching. Yogi Berra

Hank and Ben's fail safe

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke as the butt of an internet joke.

Visit FAIL Blog. 'Nuff said.


Non sequiter (Serves them right, though)

An item with no connection to the above: Search for Brad Pitt on the internet and you have a one-in-five chance of hitting a malware site. Other danger names for your gossip needs: Beyonce, Justin Timberlake, Heidi Montag, Mariah Carey, Jessica Alba, Lindsay Lohan, Cameron Diaz, George Clooney, and Angelina Jolie.

It used to be Paris Hilton. I guess she's too much of a heavyweight since John McCain made her political.

Follow the money

While burnishing her foreign policy credentials by traveling to Vienna Ohio, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin proposed putting the government's checkbook online.

A bold move, Governor. Will that be something like USASpending.gov? You know, "Google for Government", the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 sponsored by Senators Tom Coburn, Barack Obama, Tom Carper and... John McCain. Or maybe S.3077, the Strengthening Transparency and Accountability in Federal Spending Act of 2008, sponsored by Barack Obama with co-sponsors Thomas Carper, Thomas Coburn and... John McCain.

To be fair, I didn't know the site has been up-and-running since December either. Then again, I'm not looking to preside over the U.S. Senate come January. It's definitely not a wedge issue between the candidates.

What's it to you?

Naturally, now that I know it's there, curiosity led me to looking up the Northern Marianas.

It's obviously a work in progress: there's no 2007 data on food stamps, for instance. If the 2005 and 2006 figures are any indication, 2007 should eventually show about $127 million. (It appears about $4.5 million in California assistance was mistakenly listed under the CNMI, but that's probably due to growing pains of a new database.) Chunks of disaster and FAA money seem to account for much of the jump in 2004.

Still, $878 million from fiscal years 2000-2008 is a goodly chunk of change. I've been playing with the site for almost two hours, and I'm still trying to figure out the different ways it can be used.

Bush whacked

President George Bush seems to be trying a Texas two-step to get John McCain elected. Nationalizing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, massive borrowing to prop up other failing banks; that should get us through to the November election. More stop-gaps until January and it's someone else's problem.

Look at today's financial meltdown. Lots of attacks, but where's the beef?

McCain and Barack Obama to the rescue? Why am I cynical?:

Merrill-Lynch: McCain $394,300; Obama $229,100
Bank of America: McCain $177,500, Obama $263,500
Lehman Brothers: $117,500, Obama $370,500
AIG: McCain $103,000, Obama $82,600

Sure, they're two Senators out of 100, but they've been burnishing their Presidential credentials instead of dealing with the problem.

Blame Bush for lax regulation, with the help of both parties. Both candidates say they're going to fix that. Meanwhile, I'd suggest looking at their economic policies as a whole. This issue looks like a wash.

They say in the stock market…buy stock in a business that’s so good that an idiot can run it because sooner or later one will. -- Warren Buffet

A pig in a poke

It's common knowledge that John McCain really wanted his good buddy (and prompter) Joe Lieberman as a running mate-- but it would be too much for the Republican base. Still, I can fantasize about the (imagined) outrage defending the Senator from Israel if Barack Obama made the same 'lipstick on a pig' remark that so 'outraged' Sarah Palin supporters.

In any case, Politico.com has a nice video summing up this tempest-in-a-teapot:

The Britney trap

It looks like John McCain is hooked on getting rock star treatment again.

The aging fighter pilot used to obsess about Barack Obama's celebrity treatment. 'Kids these days are superficial,' he'd petulantly tell the hundreds folding-chaired into his town halls, coming off more like a jealous faded beauty in smeared make-up than a Presidential candidate.

What a difference a week makes. With Sarah Palin drawing the numbers he couldn't, he keeps postponing the date when they'll go their separate ways on the campaign trail.

He's no longer playing second fiddle to Obama, but there's a real possibility that he'll be in the third chair-- with Obama and Palin drawing more people. What a dilemma for his handlers.

McCain (did I tell you again he was a POW?) has already folded the 'more foreign experience' hand, what's next?