September 11, 2008
THURSDAY'S MINI-REPORT.... Today's edition of quick hits:
* Obama and McCain put aside politics for a little while today, and visited Ground Zero together.
* Sarah Palin doesn't want to talk to CNN.
* She may, however, start doing real interviews next week.
* Remember those no-bid contracts in Iraq for six Western oil companies? The plan has been withdrawn.
* Olbermann, in a "Special Comment," slammed Republican exploitation of 9/11 last night.
* The "Gang of 10" on an energy compromise is poised to become the "Gang of 20."
* McCain aides love the revolving door.
* National Review's The Corner knew, at least initially, that the "lipstick on a pig" nonsense was a stupid, pointless story. And then, the Cornerites managed to convince themselves otherwise, writing 31 separate posts on the subject in less than 24 hours. Amazing.
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
—Steve Benen 5:30 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (43)
This is the week after the convention, the best week any Presidential candidate will ever have. The best McCain can ever do is a statistically insignificant 1-2% lead. George Bush was ahead by more than 10% after both of his conventions. He won by -.5% and 2.8% respectively. It isn't quite over, but it's very unlikely John McCain can win this. If that 10% lead he had in that one poll had been the norm instead of an outlier, he'd have had a chance. But it was, and he doesn't.
Please no more hand-wringing and no more teeth gnashing.
Posted by: Soullite on September 11, 2008 at 5:43 PM | PERMALINK
Sen. Wide Stance gave oral arguments — take it from there — to the Minnesota Court of Appeals yesterday about why his guilty plea should be tossed.
Will his case remain in the crapper? And yes, I’ve got much more like that at my blog.
Posted by: SocraticGadfly on September 11, 2008 at 5:44 PM | PERMALINK
Of course, John McCain was justified in strong-arming the Washington Post into to taking down the interview with a whistleblower who claimed he and others were strong-armed by McCain to conceal his wife's drug use.
Posted by: Joe Lieberman on September 11, 2008 at 5:45 PM | PERMALINK
Soullite... Obama didn't have a 10-point lead himself the day after the DNC. I suggest you put away the Kumbaya sheet music for a while. Plenty of A-list bloggers and MSM pundits are wondering what's going to light a fire under Obama and when.
Posted by: SocraticGadfly on September 11, 2008 at 5:47 PM | PERMALINK
"ABC NEWS EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY"
This is what's known as putting lipstick on a mushroom cloud.
Posted by: SecularAnimist on September 11, 2008 at 5:47 PM | PERMALINK
Since Caribou Barbie is going to have the codes to the nukes, Matt Damon wants to know if she thinks Dinosaurs lived on earth 4000 years ago.
Here is the answer:
We are now packaging Caribou Barbie with a Dino-like Brontosaurus that includes a western saddle and a riding whip.
Posted by: Mattel ChewToy Co. on September 11, 2008 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK
Asking America to open the nuclear Pandora's box over Southwestern Asia sounds like a brilliant strategy to win the hearts and minds of middle America and Indepedent.
Palin the puppet dancing which ever way her Defense Contractor masters tell her.
Posted by: grinning cat on September 11, 2008 at 5:54 PM | PERMALINK
I thought campaigning was off today in respect to 9/11 ? Why is Palin's interview being leaked/broadcast today then? ABC news should be ashamed of itself.
Posted by: coral on September 11, 2008 at 5:57 PM | PERMALINK
Soullite... Obama didn't have a 10-point lead himself the day after the DNC. -SocraticGadfly
Yeah, it's like there was some crazy big news story that day, but for the life of me, I can't remember what it was. Oh well.
Why let something like that stand in the way of crushing someone's optimism?
Posted by: doubtful on September 11, 2008 at 5:57 PM | PERMALINK
Yes, war with Russia - Make Alaska appear even closer than it already is.
Do you think intrade with start taking bets on whether Juneau is in the first strike?
Posted by: bcinaz on September 11, 2008 at 5:58 PM | PERMALINK
Doubtful, any Veep announcement by Schmuck Talk would have stolen some oxygen.
But, even without that, Obama might not have gotten as much of a bounce.
Posted by: SocraticGadfly on September 11, 2008 at 6:00 PM | PERMALINK
Yes - war with Russia. WooHoo! Well she is Commander in Chief of the AKNG. And War with Russia would make that a pretty important position, given the geography and all.
I wonder if Intrade will open up odds on whether Juneau will be amoung the first strike cities?
Posted by: bcinaz on September 11, 2008 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINK
Didn't Ms. Palin state in her acceptance speech that she was a "hockey mom and that the only difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull is lipstick?" If that is so, whatever in the world could she have been calling herself?
Posted by: Bob-0 on September 11, 2008 at 6:10 PM | PERMALINK
I watched MSNBC's re-play of 9/11, as I usually do every year. Why? Because I want to be reminded of what that felt like. The fear, nightmarish fear, and how it was used against us. I also want to recall every 9/11 that bin Laden is still out there, yet thousands have died and more maimed physically and mentally, all because Bush exploited us.
It's still fresh for me, but I don't feel sick anymore when I think about it. We lost a business directly because of 9/11. We were in travel. We laid off many, many employees who were also my friends.
We were all victims. And then we were victimized.
Posted by: MissMudd on September 11, 2008 at 6:18 PM | PERMALINK
I miss Kevin Drum.
Posted by: Sad on September 11, 2008 at 6:21 PM | PERMALINK
Kevin's over at Mother Jones. He's not dead or anything.
War with Russia. Swell.
Let’s see…Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, and FUCKING RUSSIA?
Honestly, this very well could be the End Times.
Posted by: MsJoanne on September 11, 2008 at 6:29 PM | PERMALINK
Do you think the barrage of attacks yesterday - lipstick, pedophiles, wolves - had something to do with the fact that today the candidates would have to "put aside politics"? So yesterday, Obama was pinned down responding to the stupid attacks, and today - he couldn't counterattack, since he had to be above politics. So they get two days' mileage out of one day's sliming. By tomorrow the attacks will be old news, ie a response no longer possible, while the slime will have been etched into the electorate's consciousness.
Meanwhile they scheduled the Gibson-Palin thing for today, so they get still more one-sided coverage (since everyone but some meaningless bloggers will politely overlook the inevitable gaffes).
Their timing, yet again, is brilliant.
It's become trite to say it, but I'll say it again anyway: if the Republicans were even half as good at governing as they are at politics, we wouldn't be in this mess.
Posted by: Basilisc on September 11, 2008 at 6:31 PM | PERMALINK
Can't the Klondike Kandidate use Bush's earphone he
used during the debates for the upcoming interviews?
I'm pretty sure Bush isn't using it anymore.
Posted by: Paul Avery on September 11, 2008 at 6:52 PM | PERMALINK
Lat's see: 1998 & Willie Horton, 2000 & "I invented the Internet", 2004 & Swiftboats, and last, but not least, LIPSTICK. Who won each election? Do I see a trend here?
Posted by: EL on September 11, 2008 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK
So Palin said that we won the Cold War without a shot fired. Yet she seems to be disappointed with that, she wants a Hot War over a small democratic country.
Note that she said "democratic". That is what makes invading Iraq A-OK.
Posted by: tomj on September 11, 2008 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK
How long before a wingnut criticizes Michelle Obama for not attending the Ground Zero territories (even though she was getting her kids off to school)?
From what I read of the Gibson interview, not a lot of follow-up questions. So it's one of those faux-tough deals Russert used to specialize in, where they ask a Repug a pointed question, get a BS answer and move along.
After Palin said she was qualified to be veep, why didn't Gibson ask her about recently saying that she didn't even know what the veep's duties were, and that she hadn't thought enough about the surge in Iraq to have an opinion?
Posted by: sullijan on September 11, 2008 at 6:55 PM | PERMALINK
Sorry, I meant Ground Zero ceremonies. I must have Russia on my mind...
Posted by: sullijan on September 11, 2008 at 6:58 PM | PERMALINK
She may, however, start doing real interviews next week.
If she gets as many free passes as McCain she doesn't have to get anything right anyway.
Healthy alternatives to wringing and gnashing; donate, make calls, write letters & argue with troglodytes. *Hints from your local Hand-foot-mouth Disease Control Center.
That's Just What I Said
Posted by: Dale on September 11, 2008 at 7:01 PM | PERMALINK
funny she hasn't thought about the Iraq war even though her son, track, is headed there. He'll probably get the Prince William treatment and be returned because of the danger to his fellow soldiers. That way, she gets the kudos for sending her son, but, regretably, he cannot serve to protect others. Nice!
peace,
st john
Posted by: st john on September 11, 2008 at 7:02 PM | PERMALINK
* Sarah Palin doesn't want to talk to CNN. -- Steve Benen
Of course not; why should she? Her friends and her family will provide enough whipped cream to make her tasty while, if she actually spoke herself, she might have said something out of line. And CNN, good little lapdogs, are rolling over and going along with it, instead of cancelling the whole program. Good dog, good dog.
* Remember those no-bid contracts in Iraq for six Western oil companies? The plan has been withdrawn. -- Steve Benen
I was hoping you'd catch that tidbit, because its ramifications are fascinating from many angles.
For one thing... They'd dragged their feet about it for years, accepted it just in June and now the cake is dough again. If you read the whole article, they just sent the letters to the companies, without any prior warning but with the message "the party's been cancelled". And that's the second time they've "stood up" (the first time was on the issue of "US, get the hell out of here", which, officially, is supposed to be "a good thing", except it ain't what we wanted.
And then there's the issue of what it means in real terms. The plan had been, that those contracts would assure us of uninterrupted supply, should OPEC get obstreperous. And what happens? The moment OPEC (with only Saudi Arabia objecting) announces lowered production (to keep the prices up, no doubt), those no-bidders get the bum rush, so that they cannot make up for that loss. Add to that that Iraq has just signed an oil contract with China and it's obvious that they're really standing up to us.
Which might, possibly, mean that we'd not be as happy to leave as Bush has been saying. Except that... Here's Gates, on the same day (possibly before he knew of the "go fly a kite" letters to the no-bidders?), saying "we're in the end game" and negotiating a sale of some fighting jets...
It really is a riveting story.
Posted by: exlibra on September 11, 2008 at 7:06 PM | PERMALINK
"The "Gang of 10" on an energy compromise is poised to become the "Gang of 20."
So what? Until it's a Gang of 60, Republicans will filibuster any attempts at developing renewable energy. Their policy is clear: Drill here, Drill now, and Drill only.
Posted by: fostert on September 11, 2008 at 7:10 PM | PERMALINK
Maybe someone should nose around a little about why Sarah Palin's commissioner of the Alaska Department of Health & Social Services abruptly resigned without notice last spring.
...just wondering what's under that rock.
Posted by: ghillie on September 11, 2008 at 7:15 PM | PERMALINK
I am sick of every show talking about the same things. This lipstick on a pig thing......everyone had to talk about how it was just diverting us from the facts..and that is all they talked about. Tweety, then Keith and even Rachel....enough. DON'T FALL FOR THIS CRAP.
The only way to keep to the facts is to only cover the facts.
Posted by: mishanti on September 11, 2008 at 7:19 PM | PERMALINK
Spending 3 million dollars (as an earmark) on bear DNA in Montana is out of control and evil. So says John.
But, but it's okay to spend 3.2 million dollars on seal DNA + another 500k on the mating habits of crabs as an earmark in Alaska.
Define evil for me again.
I have ONE line of questioning that I think would illuminate us all about Sarah P. and that is:
Can you define fossil fuel for me? Just how old do you think oil is under the North Slope of AK?
Let me get this straight, the devil put fossils in the ground? So drilling for evil, I mean oil is contrary to your stated beliefs about what a fossil is.
Just defining fossil fuel vs oil should give us all a clearer picture of just how bizarre SP really is. Come on guys...ask it.
Posted by: Tom Nicholson on September 11, 2008 at 7:20 PM | PERMALINK
So we won the Cold War without a shot being fired. I must have been dodging mooseburgers down in the Mekong Delta.
Posted by: Dennis - SGMM on September 11, 2008 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK
Her thoughts (or lack thereof) on the Bush Doctrine are of note:
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5782924
Posted by: matt on September 11, 2008 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK
Tom Nicholson - It is quite obvious from your comment that you've never had the pleasure of eating seal DNA. It is quite excellent and much superior to bear DNA, which is very tough and stringy. Any DNA connoisseur would tell you the same thing.
And if you ever get the opportunity to see crabs mate, take it. I'm telling you, it's far superior to what us clumsy humans do. $500k is definitely worth the price of admission, believe you me.
Posted by: Doctor Biobrain on September 11, 2008 at 7:43 PM | PERMALINK
Heh, Tom Nicholson (@7:20 PM), I like the way you think. Here's a few more. Half-life (carbon dating). Light year and/or Doppler red-shift (astronomy). Not sure which is correct, but penetrance (or penetration) for genetics, and I don't mean the sexual kind. Maybe the first law of thermodymanics?
This is fun. I'm sure we could go on all day.
Posted by: Michael W on September 11, 2008 at 7:50 PM | PERMALINK
Someone should ask the avowedly creationist Palin where fossil fuels come from.
Posted by: on September 11, 2008 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK
"ABC NEWS EXCLUSIVE: GOV. SARAH PALIN WARNS WAR MAY BE NECESSARY IF RUSSIA INVADES ANOTHER COUNTRY"
This is what's known as putting lipstick on a mushroom cloud.
HAHAHAHA
I just saw this on a news site and for the first time my jaw actually dropped. I thought it used to be funny when I heard the McCain camp referred to as the "Jaw Drop Express". Now I take it as absolute truth. WOW.
I like this little quote:
"Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin left open the option Thursday of waging war with Russia if it were to invade neighboring Georgia and the former Soviet republic were a NATO ally."
Well Georgia is not a NATO ally, so it's a moot point. I would probably shower appointed goverment representatives of the Minerals Management Service with cocaine and hookers if I were the CEO of a multinational energy corporation. I may even buy myself an Aston Martin Vanquish and get my own cocaine and hookers to ride around Texas with impunity. But I'm not, so it's a moot point.
Keep living in fantasy land GOP.
Posted by: Mick on September 11, 2008 at 8:09 PM | PERMALINK
i clicked on the supplied link for the story about the no-bid contracts and hit a nytimes sign-in firewall -- here's a link to get there directly.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/world/middleeast/11iraq.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Posted by: karen marie on September 11, 2008 at 8:22 PM | PERMALINK
Very good Olbermann monologue. I love the phrase "sociological pornography."
Posted by: Rabi on September 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM | PERMALINK
olberman was wrong. An American who knows how to capture Bin Laden and is keeping it a secret isn't an opportunist, or a charlatan, he's a TRAITOR. We are at war, we hang traitors. No wait, McCain was an officer. We shoot officers who are traitors.
If john walker lindh is serving 20 years for hanging out with the Taliban, then certainly someone who knows how to get Bin Laden but demands to profit personally from that knowledge should do just as much, right? What's the going reward for Bin Laden's head? Let's just give it to McCain and get this over with. Like fifty million, right? Cheap at twice the price.
Posted by: northzax on September 11, 2008 at 10:46 PM | PERMALINK
northzax:
that is what I was saying last night. If the FBI/SS came to my door looking for a terrorist and I knew where he was and didn't tell, what do you think would happen to me? Traitor McCain is walking free and saying he knows how to capture/kill the #1 enemy of the U.S., purportedly.
I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john
Posted by: st john on September 11, 2008 at 10:57 PM | PERMALINK
Open thread:
Last week, we (on the lefty blogs) were all a-twitter about the Obama/O'Reilly interview (part 1). Links to the clip abounded. On the basis of that, I promised all my "Dem hens" to forward all the subsequent clips (having forwarded the URL to that one), since they're as squeamish as I am about watching any more of O'Reilly than absolutely necessary. I was sure that, should my own memory fail me (pretty much a certainty), the trusty "lefty blogs" would prod it. Not so; barnyard animals and cosmetics have taken over, to the exclusion of everything else.
All 4 episodes (part 2, Sept8; part 3, Sept 9; part 4, Sept 10. In addition to the part 1, Sept 4) are now available on YouTube (and, if *I* could find the, so can you) and they make for good watching. There are some weak spots in Obama's performance but, in general, he held his ground and wasn't at all shy about interrupting O'Reilly (now, let me finish; let me make my point), or even rising his voice, to override Billy's inanities.
But the overall "take away" I had was that the two seemed to like one another. Obama would mention "things we discussed" (obviously, off-screen). And he'd shut Bill's moth, preemptively, by saying "people you and I are fighting for". The most amazing thing was that O'Reilly would actually shut up, when Obama requested he did...
Posted by: exlibra on September 12, 2008 at 12:03 AM | PERMALINK
Lipstick & Pig. Sara Palin is not the pig: she's the lipstick. McCain's campaign is the pig.
Posted by: Mayson Lancaster on September 12, 2008 at 1:25 AM | PERMALINK
I really think the events of 9/11 are not being used to the same level they were in 2004's presidential campaign. On my Word Face-Off blog, I compared the Google-popularity of "9/11," "Flight 93," etc. and there is a marked difference between 2004 and 2008.
Posted by: fdeblauwe on September 12, 2008 at 4:51 AM | PERMALINK