The Prince Remix: "Invade a Country Like It's 1999"

I know at this point, no one is going to read yet another article about something horrible Bush has done and say: "Okay, the first 314 were fine. But number 315 is the last straw. I'm voting for Kerry."

But it's important to me that people know the depth of how truly deceptive the Bush administration was in painting the war in Iraq as some sort of response to 9/11.

Judge the accuracy of this yourself, but Bush's former ghost writer says Bush was talking about invading Iraq in 1999. Or ask yourself, why was the administration have planning meetings about a war with Iraq only two months after 9/11?
(both links from TPM)

And 52% of Americans still thinks Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. I think the administration's way of planting false beliefs into the minds of a majority of the public is the great untold story of the past four years.

Absolutely Amazingly Insightfulrality Election Analysis

With all the daily polls, pundit chatter, ad campaigns and media converage, the main reason I think John Kerry will win is the same reason I thought six months ago: how many people do you think voted for Gore will vote for Bush?

And how many people who voted for Bush will vote for Kerry?

Even anecdotally, think of the dozens of newspapers that endorsed Bush in 2000 who are either endorsing Kerry or no one.

Gore won the popular vote. He lost Florida through a combination of voter disenfranchisement and human error (i.e. the poorly-design butterfly ballot).

And you think Kerry might lose?

How can he not win?

I know most Kerry supporters think Kerry will win, and most Bush supporters think Bush will win. Here's my prediction anyway: Kerry 50.5%, Bush 48.5. Kerry 287 Bush 251. Post your own prediction is you want.

Also, curses are stupid. Go Skins.

Virginia, 3 Days To Go: Kerry Too Close To Bush For Gop's Comfort

That's the headline of the latest SurveyUSA Poll from Virginia. I wonder about parts of their methodology: 1% undecideds? That's a few percentage points lower than most polls.

Regardless, there's been lots of positive news coverage about the tight race in Virginia. Kerry's odds aren't great, but they are good enough for me to bet a friend dinner that Kerry would win Virginia.

The Fridge

A few things. One, do not doubt The Fridge. Ever. The Fridge is beyond all doubt. Before The Fridge, we did not have a fridge. We have a cooler, a pack of ice, and a couple of Bud Lights named Dufner and Vanderlinden.

Two, The Fridge is always full. The Fridge is never broken. If you do not like how The Fridge is working, do not complain or wonder if you should look for a new fridge. The Fridge is not broken. You are broken. Even when you cannot see the light inside the fridge, it is there.

(Maryland beat FSU today. First time in 14 meetings. Highest-ranked team they have beaten in years.)

Almost Beyond Belief

I pledge allegiance...to the Bush?

Well, there goes the parody I was writing in response to the loyalty oaths.

The Bush Campaign: America's #1 Comedy Writing Team.

Halloween

Anyone dressing up in a flight suit and a cod piece?

Best Argument I've Heard for a Strong Youth Vote

(from a letter to Salon.com)

I will concede without too much doubt, that dukes is right, the youth vote is going to play big in this election. Besides, when have you ever seen Puffy jump into a fight that he knew he couldn't absolutely win? It's a nice way for the Puffster to do a "civic," "nonpartisan" service and put those old gun charges to rest for real.

South Park's take on Puffy's "Vote or Die" campaign Wednesday night was hilarious.

Why I Shouldn't Have Kids

I'd make them wear this for Halloween.

The Pancake City Promise

If Kerry wins, and we don't have a 2000-style dispute or recount, I'm bringing the goons in and running the political advisers out of Pancake City for a week. No posts mentioning Bush, Kerry, Iraq, WMDs, polls, political commercials, or anything even tangentially related to politics, including The Daily Show, fake news articles, parables, surveys, and links to web sites.

Just a little gloating and lots of champagne. And probalby an mp3 of a cricket chirping, because it seems like months since I've written something that's funny and not related to politics. (I know I'm setting myself for a comment like "You don't need the 'and not related to politics' part!")

FIFTY EXTRA MINUTES!

Ghaaaaaa...

The end of the Nerd Trifecta is coming Dec. 14. I have already wet myself.

Get In The Vote

Unless Kerry wins by a sizable margin, I don't see how we're going to avoid another scenario like 2000. The GOP is working their butts off to suppress minority voters and to lay the groundwork to challenge the legitimacy of a Kerry administration.

The shameful thing about the 2000 election is that it brought to light the serious flaws we have in our process, flaws that were masked due to large margins of victories in past presidential elections. We lost a lot of credibility in the world community as advocates of democracy due to our own inability to hold an uncontested election. But it was a price we had to pay to become aware of the flaws in our antiquated process and the need for reform.

But we're not there yet. And that's the shameful thing: we were made aware of an urgent problem, given 4 years to fix it, and barely got halfway there. How the hell are we going to hold fair elections in Iraq in January if we're still fighting about our election in December?

Note: Here's the same post if this were a conservative blog:

Unless Bush wins by a sizable margin, I don't see how we're going to avoid another scenario like 2000. The DNC is working their butts off to falsely register voters and to man the polls with teams of lawyers so they can challenge the legitimacy of a Bush administration.

What? Eminem Doesn't Like Bush?

Eminem just released a video for his new song, Mosh, that bashes the President heavily. I think his virulent sentiments is going to generate a strong backlash from his fans, who...

Oh, wait a minute. Eminem doesn't play country music for a bunch of rednecks? My bad.

I don't know if it will make a difference, but both the animation and message of his new video is awesome.

Bush has pissed off such a wide range of people, from conservative publications like the Financial Times to usually apolitical hop-hop artists, that I wonder who's left. I half-expect to see Big Bird offering kids to fly their grandparents to the polls and Snuffy next to him (her?) holding a phone in his trunk as he calls up undecided voters in Ohio. Oscar has a "Re-defeat Bush" sticker on his garbage can, and if there's going to be a recount, there's only one man to do it.

COUNT: "One vote, two vote, three votes for Kerry!"

Gore Will Get Crushed

Before blogging software came into being, I had a web site for several weeks late in 2000. I found my archives on an old 1.44 mb disk and thought I would share my Nov. 1 entry with you:

As much as I want Gore to win, reality is staring me in the face. He's going to lose by a landslide tomorrow.

My sad conclusion is based on two things:

1) The Weekly Reader, a periodical for kids and teens, runs a mock election where kids vote on who they want to be the next President. They've picked the correct winner in almost every election in the past 50 years. The results just came out today, and they do not look good for Gore:

• Bush 65.8 percent -- all states (except Delaware) and Washington D.C.
• Gore 32.6 percent -- Delaware

2) A well-respected poll aggregate site, Real Clear Politics, have released their final analysis on the expected electoral college totals for Bush and Gore. Based on their expertise and insight, they have Bush winning 446 electoral votes, and Gore winning 92. Just to cite one of their sobering conclusions:

• The real debate is not who is going to win the election, but whether Bush will win 308 electoral votes or 474 electoral votes. The media's fantasy of Bush winning the popular vote and losing the electoral college is not going happen. The worst case scenario for a Bush victory will be a 2-3 point win in the popular vote and 10-20% more than the necessary 270 EC votes.

I don't know what to say. I'm completely demoralized and crushed. I'm not even too sure I'm going to get up tomorrow to vote.

Finally...

The Kerry campaign is putting a little money in Virginia. The Washington Post has the story.

They're donating $50,000, which is absolutely nothing, but that's all I really wanted them to do. Why? Because it's enough to generate this Washington Post article, and the article lets people know the race is close, pumps up the morale of volunteers, and maybe even brings in some last-minute donations and volunteers. That's a lot for $50,000.

If you want to do something, there are lots of publicity events you can participate in that will take an hour or less of your time. Let me know if you want to do something.

From an E-vite My Sister Sent Me:

Michele and her boyfriend Evan are having an election day party. The theme: Forty Ounces To Freedom. They're providing all the guests with a 40, making fake labels for the bottles, and will drown out whatever chants of "Four More Years" from their neighbors with "Fo Mo Forties!"

I know some of you are having get-togethers on election night. And you don't have 40s. What's stopping you? Turn the TV onto FOX News and take a swig every time Brit Hume looks like he is about to cry.

GRQ Update

I spent several minutes searching the Internet today for easy ways to make money, and found nothing. Would a more exhaustive search turn up something? Perhaps. But I'm not looking for a "Get Rich By Spending Hours Hunting for Information Buried on the Web" scheme. I want by riches quick, the way I deserve my riches.

In fact, as far as I can tell, the only way to get rich quick is through online gambling. So that's where I'll start for the first few weeks.

I like online gambling because it's fun, easy, and requires little knowledge. All you need is luck, and as a professional dog walker living with two roommates and scraping to get by every month, I have plenty of it.

I started off my professional gambling career with a few small bets on the first World Series game and a bet on the Chicago-Tampa Bay football game tomorrow.

I bet $10 that the Red Sox would score the first three runs (they did) and $2 on an 8:1 bet that they would win by exactly 4 runs (they didn't). I also bet $10 that Chicago and Tampa would score less than 32 points combined. My reasoning is that both of these teams played the Redskins and are now shitty by association.

My goal is to win $100-$200 a month betting on sports I barely watch and know little about. Again, my aim is not merely just to make money. It is to make money with the absolute minimum of effort, skill, and knowledge. When I do something, I do it right. And by right, I mean doing everything wrong.

Quick Quiz

Real headlines or fake:

Cheney Says U.S. More Likely To Be Attacked If Kerry Is Elected

Cheney Says Soviets Might Be Around if Kerry Had Led

Cheney Says We'd All Be Eating Bratwurst and Backerbsen If Kerry Had Been President

Cheney Says....

Make your own!

Best Ad in the Campaign?

If you are worried about the future of our country, and you are able to give $5 or $10 without it being a hardship, I can think of no better use for the money than to get this ad on the air. (I gave $10).

Get Quick Rich Schemes

Get Quick Rich schemes are an evil combination of greed and laziness. In spite of my exemplary laziness, I've stayed away from them not because of the likely possibility I'll lose much more money than I started with, but because I'm content with driving a dented car, wearing faded slacks, and a TV that doesn't get clear reception of Channel 4 when there is too much electromagnetic interference around, such as people wearing socks.

But the austere lifestyle has slowly shifted from frugal to restrictive, and I'd like to go into a restaurant and not worry about ordering a Coke over a water because of the extra $1.59. Scratch that. I'm fine with water. I'd just like to be able to eat at a restaurant without thinking: "I just spent my share of the cable bill."

The solution is obvious for any enterprising individual: either get a second job, hunt for freelance work, or find a full-time job that pays better than dog walking.

Then there's my solution: Get Rich Quick schemes.

Online betting. Ponzi schemes. Ebay selling. I'm going to try it all.

My gut tells me this is one of the worst ideas in my life. My brain is telling me that too, and I'm sure my family and my friends, all reasonable people, will concur.

But hey. It's my right to live my life as stupidly as possible. And, considering my incredible laziness, there really is no other option. If you think I'm going to spend 15 minutes on a job application when I can spend 30 minutes browsing the web for free offers, you're crazy.

Plus, if I fail, it will at least be entertaining to read about.

Local Man Definitely Moving To Canada This Time If Bush Wins

Madison, WI-- Dwayne Jones announced to his roommates yesterday that if President Bush gets reelected, he is "definitely move to Canada" this time.

"I'm outta here, man" said Jones. "If the dude is still in the White House on Nov. 3^rd, start looking for a new roommate."

Jones, who previously said he would move to Canada after the 2000 election, the invasion of Iraq, and the first Presidential debate, claims his strengthened resolve will carry him through.

"I'm fucking serious this time," said Jones. "I called my friend in Vancouver yesterday and he said it would be totally cool if I came up to chill. And my sister has a suitcase she almost never uses that I could borrow."

In spite of Jones' enthusiasm, some of his roommates remain skeptical about Jones' plans.

"He's always saying he's going to leave for Canada," said Andrew Griffin. "He can't even leave the Xbox. And he keeps turning up the heat to 75 degrees when I'm not looking. How's he going to survive in Canada?"

If Jones has heard any of this criticism, he has not let it sway him. During a commercial break for Half-Baked on Comedy Central, Jones visited the Greyhound website, bookmarked the site, and made a note to check the price on a one-way fare once the movie was over.

Betting

Does anyone know a web site that is taking win/lose bets on the election? Essentially, I'm looking for a bookie. Most of the web sites I've seen sell futures, which I have next to no understanding of and thus don't want to get involved with. I'm ready to put $500 on Kerry, and I'd put more if I knew Osama wasn't stuck in a freezer in the White House kitchen.

Crime of the Month is More Like It

Several weeks ago, I've unearthed a scandal in the pet sitting company I work for. I called the Metro section of The Washington Post and, after being bounced around to a few people, spoke with Mike Allen, an investigative reporter who was in the middle of a story on Iraq's missing WMDs. He dropped that story for this one.

The article will appear tomorrow, either on the front page or printed in the speech balloons of the next two weeks of Garfield, but here is the gist.

Every month, the company owner sends a email to all the employees and asks them to nominate a dog for Dog of the Month. The dog with the most votes wins and gets his or her picture posted on the company's web site.

Or, I should say, in a real democracy the dog with the most votes would win. In the sick world of Pooch Pals, Inc. whatever dog curries the Emperor's favor gets appointed.

The process is a complete sham. The decision makers are not the people but an oligarchy consisting of the owner and her family members that make up the desk staff.

Take this month's dog, Scout, for example. To the average person visiting the web site, Scout is an adorable white-haired terrier with wide eyes and an inquisitive look. He is four years old, playful, and likes to chew on old socks.

What that person doesn't know is that the owners paid off the judges and Scout is on 'roids. He has four first-place ribbons and a third-place ribbon from dog shows in the past six months, all while doped up on poppers and running high on psychacetlatimine and hormone boosters. The dog pees green and puts a dent in the ground when he poops.

Naïve that I am, I challenged Scout's appointment before realizing the machinations that went on behind the surface. I sent my manager an email diplomatically suggesting that all future Dogs of the Month be tested for steroids. She responded questioning my fitness for employment. Message received. Either drink the Kool-Aid or head for the door.

Once the article comes out, I am sure my termination will be swift. My employment prospects are unknown, but that's secondary. When a great injustice has been committed, there is only one course of action: to speak out.

And to kidnap the dog and hide him in a detox program. Our prayers are with you, Scout!

How To Make Adobe Acrobat Reader Load Faster

1. Install Adobe Reader 6.0 and notice where it is installed.
2. Navigate to that folder in Explorer, locate the plug_ins subfolder and rename this folder to plug_ins_disabled.
3. Create a new plug_ins folder.
4. Move the files EWH32.api, printme.api and search.api from plug_ins_disabled to plug_ins

(link)

An Article Worth Writing a Book About

Good news, everyone. The other side really is stupid.

For the past few years, I've vacillated between having a compassionate view of the people I disagree politically with and hating their guts. The hating is easy. It's one of many reasons I try to temper it by running through an internal dialogue like this: "Yes, I passionately think people who support Bush are wrong. But those people think just as passionately that I am wrong. So that's not a fair criterion. Maybe we are both being reasonable, but just operating from different assumptions that are difficult to prove or disprove."

It turns out all my self-talk and efforts to give my ideological opposites the benefit of the doubt was pointless. Because, you see, they really are stupid.

I know now! There's a study to prove it! The Program of International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) just released another excellent study, this one analyzing the difference between what a presidential candidate's supporters think he supports vs. what he actually supports.

The PDF of the study is worth reading, but if you are short on time, check out the summary and this graph reprinted on Kevin Drum's blog.

Psychology teachers must have loved the last four years. It's the perfect complement to basic issues in the field of psychology, like why people continue to hold onto beliefs even after the evidence for the belief has been disproved. It's also frightening how almost a majority of Americans are willing to substitute reason for faith.

Do you know what's sad?

I can't believe I just realized this.

It's all a joke.

It's all a fucking in-joke.

George W. Bush or Dan Quayle

1. I stand by all the misstatements that I've made.
2. [about getting into The National Guard] There was no influence used. I didn't have to use any influence because before I applied, there were openings, when I applied, there were openings, and after I applied, there were openings. Those are the facts. And if you're interested in the facts, there they are.
3. Vietnam is a jungle. You had jungle warfare. Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, you have sand. [There is no need to worry about a protracted war because] from a historical basis, Middle East conflicts do not last a long time.
4. [Presidential Candidate's] tax-and-spend policies will create a recession in America.
5. It's a good Supreme Court. They're lawyers... they're judges... they're appointed for life.
6. If we do not succeed, then we run the risk of failure.
7. We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur.
8. I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy - but that could change.
9. [talking about homosexuality] My viewpoint is that it's more of a choice than a biological situation... I think it is a wrong choice. It is a wrong; it is a wrong choice. I do believe in most cases it certainly is a choice.
10. [on the concept of a manned mission to Mars.] [It's] time for the human race to enter the solar system.
11. I want to show you an optimistic sign that things are beginning to turn around.
12. "Do you have blacks, too?"
13. If you listen to the news, read the news, you'd think we were still in a recession. Well, we're not in a recession. We've had growth; people need to know that. They need to be more upbeat, more positive….
14. America is great, because America is free.
15. My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we will never, never surrender to what is right.
16. We're all capable of mistakes, but I do not care to enlighten you on the mistakes we may or may not have made.
17. Hawaii is a unique state. It is a small state. It is a state that is by itself. It is a -- it is different than the other 49 states. Well, all states are different, but it's got a particularly unique situation.
18. I love to bring people into the oval office...and say, this is where I office.
    

Compare and Contrast

1. Edward Zabala, the employee of the restaurant who took the [---'s] money, said he paid $39.30.

Zabala said the bill should have been $42.95 but he charged [---] less because he was "caught up in the moment."

"I was nervous," Zabala told CNN.

[---] did not leave tip for the to-go order, but Zabala said one was not expected.

2. "There. I paid for my ice tea and I even left you a penny."

[---]at Bob's Big Boy in Claymont, DE. The waitress who served [---] said he had given the cashier $1.00 for a 99 cent iced tea, said this, and then laughed. On a stop to a Delaware restaurant, in Feb. 1992, [---] bought a coffee at Dempsey's Diner and left no tip whatsoever. On that occasion, he had just come from a $500 a plate fundraiser at the Hotel Du Pont.

And an easy bonus

Our trick, Rush -- not a trick, our challenge -- our challenge is to make the American people comfortable with the leadership George Bush will offer in the next four years.

(source for Bush quotes)
(source for Quayle quotes)

Answers in comments.

[whack whack whack]

That's the sound of me whacking my forehead on my desk.

Sometimes I want to switch to the Republican party merely because they don't run around like chickens with their heads cut off every time their candidate drops a point or two in a poll.

Democrats have this amazing ability to focus on negative news and ignore positive news. This is a conversation I had two weeks ago, and have a version of almost every day:

ME: Kerry is in pretty good shape for a challenger.
FRIEND: I don't know. It doesn't look like he's doing well. He's tied in Maryland.
ME: What are you talking about? He's up by 15.

[whack whack whack]

Or take the two conversations I had today with my Mom and my roommate, both of whom said "I heard Kerry dropped a lot in the polls," didn't remember any details about what they heard, and have never, ever once said to me, "I heard Kerry is going better in the polls."

The poll they were talking about is the Gallup Poll, which has Bush up 8 among likely voters and up 3 among registered voters. My meesage for everyone is, if you are going to freak out, at least have a good reason for freaking out. Learn about the difference between likely voters and registered voters. Take a look at a list of recent polls, all of which have been showing a statistical tie for the past few weeks except for one certain poll. Get a sense of perspective by remembering that, four years ago today, Gallup had Gore behind Bush among likely voters by 13 points.

The only time polls come close to predicting the actual result of a race is a few days before election day when undecided voters choose a candidate and the many unknowns that polls are based on become more stable. Until then, take a break from worrying. It's not going to improve anything.

Zarqawi Movement Vows al-Qaida Allegiance

Just saw that headline on Yahoo. Do you know what's sad about this story? After the WMDs weren't found, and most of the Iraqi-al Qaeda links were proven false, there were a bunch of really stupid people searching for a rationalization for why we were there. And do you know what the new claim was? Zarqawi has ties to al-Qaida, and Zarqawi has ties to Saddam Hussein, so that means Saddam Hussein has ties to al-Qaida and thank God Bush is president because freedom is on the march and it's not stopping because it has a blister on its toe!

But maybe I'm not being fair. Maybe Zarqawi vowed allegiance to al-Qaida months ago, broke up over a spat, experimented with some other terrorist groups, found himself thinking about Qaidy-Wady, and then re-vowed his allegiance to al-Qaida.

Or maybe they were secret lovers all this time, but too embarrased to share their passion with the world...until now! Or maybe President Bush isn't a president but a seer and is so used to looking into the future that he gets different points in time mixed up.

"But we've always said there were ties between Zarqawi and al-Qaida, which underscores once again why Iraq is the central front in the war on terror," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said in Washington.

I'm scared to read 1984 again because I think I'm going to cry.

Hodgepodge

* This Tuesday, George Carlin is appearing at the Arlington Olsson's. Tickets are being passed out at 8:00 a.m.

* This Thursday, David Rees, creator of "Great Your War On" will be signing his new book. Politics & Prose, 5015 Connecticut Ave. NW. Free. 202-364-1919.

* Berkeley Breathed's Opus has been on a roll these past few weeks. Another funny one today.

* Gary Busey meets George Bush (link from Metafilter). Well done.

* Jon Stewart's appearance on Crossfire. It's the angriest and most frustrated that I have ever seen him. It's sad, because he's still under the impression that CNN is a news channel, and he sees the show as a symbol of everything that is wrong with the news media. From the questions Carlson and Begalia ask him, it's obvious that they somehow miss the point of The Daily Show. The heart of his show isn't a satire on politicians. It's a satire on the media.

* I was having dinner last night with a group of gay friends. Kerry's mention of Mary Cheney's sexuality during the debates came up. We joked at how absolutely offended we were that a person would dare mention that an out lesbian was...a lesbian! And on the TeeVee, of all places! This blog quotes a writer for Salon who wrote a commentary on the issue that I would have made if I didn't write like monkey shit.

* This is for the certain person who pointed out multiple times that I should have the links open in a new window. 1) You are absolutely right. 2) I AM LAZY! All of your descriptions of how to do this involve work on my part. This is a deal breaker.

* Update: Ralph just showed me a simple way to have links open in a new window. It's not robot-easy, but it may just be easy enough.

1984

If George Orwell would have named his book 2004, he would have been a psychic in addition to a visionary.

Read this and try not to get scared.

If you want to do something, visit the Kerry campaign web page and enter your zip code in the "Take Action" box on the right. A list of events in your area will pop up.

The November Surprise

I've been working for the past few days on a web site to promote the presidential race in Virginia and make it easier for people to find volunteer opportunities.

The site is still rough around the edges, but it's up: The November Surpise.

A HUGE thanks to Evan who saved me many hours reformatting a template I couldn't understand. He has a lot of cutting-edge Flash applications on his site, so I recommend visiting his site if you are into that.

BWHAA HAA HAA

You'll never guess who's putting this flyer up in certain swing states. Details here.

Jon Stewart on Bush in the Debate

"He wasn't the angry Bush of the second debate or the retarded Bush from the first," Stewart said. (link)

Mo Rocca

His online chat about his new book on Presidential pets is very funny. Although I think he wrote all of the questions himself.

Mt. Rainier, Md.: Mo, I love horses. Does Bush have horses on his ranch, and does he know how to ride them? Did any other presidents love riding horses?

Mo Rocca: Bush accidentally ran over his horse with his SUV.

One more thing...

Tom Shales's post-debate commentaries have been entertaining and interesting to read, and this one is no exception.

... Part II

I thought I wasn't going to write anymore about the debates. With the lack of novelty of the debates and some projects that are constantly swirling around in my head, the motivation just wasn't there.

But in one of the fastest responses I have seen, Lynne Cheney has already commented on Kerry's answer to the question, "Is homosexuality a choice?"

You can read her response here. In essense, she says this part of Kerry's answer, "If you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as" is a cheap, political trick.

Thank God she isn't my Mom.

If my Mom chose to defend a man who, when asked is homosexuality a choice, said "I don't know" over a man who said "No, it isn't, and you should know better," I'd have a big problem with her.

"I don't know" isn't a response. "I don't know" means either "It is a choice, but I won't want to seem like an extremist" or "It is how you are born, but I don't want to piss off the bigots in my base."

Maybe twenty years ago "I don't know" was an acceptable response, but it doesn't cut it today. I'd love to hear what her daughter has to say about this.

Debate Wars

Michele, my sister, the one who visits my web page (in other words, the good sister) sent me this very funny link.

...

All I have to say about the debate tonight is that George Bush likes the No Child Left Behind Act.

Really, really, really likes the No Child Left Behind Act.

If the No Child Left Behind Act were a woman, George would stroke her hair, soft as rose-petals, and whipser into her ear, "Baby, you're the only one for me."

Dick and Rummy would visit less often. They would come over to shoot some hoops, Cheney in a loose-fitting muscle T with the head hole stretched out, Rummy with the ball and a blue scrunchie around his forehead.

Dick would ask, "You meet that guy who moved in yesterday, Minimum Wayge? He's seems kind of creepy" and George would flutter his eyelids and say, "Yeah, she's beautiful."

Rummy would roll his eyes. "What's wrong with you, G? You used to be part of the crew. Cold chilling and all that. Now all you do with talk about is her. If you like her so much, why don't you marry her?"

But Rummy's words were lost from the beginning because they fell upon the ears of a deaf man. A man in love.

For the last time, kids: DON'T DO DRUGS

I'm being facetious with the title, but nevertheless, this video contrasting President Bush from 10 years ago to him today is amazing. I'm uncertain about the conclusion made, but something is going on here. (from The Washington Monthly's blog)

The November Surprise

I've told so many people why Kerry is in good shape to win Virginia that I think I forgot one of the obvious places to make the case, here.

The most recent poll, Oct. 6, has Kerry down by only 3%. The poll was done by Zogby International, the polling firm that nailed the popular vote in the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections.

Also, and this isn't a guarantee, but in past incumbent elections undecided voters go to the challenger by a 2 to 1 margin. The one exception in the past 24 years is Reagan v. Mondale in 1984, where Reagon got 1/2 of undecided voters. Curse you, Reaaaaaaaaagan! So if history is a guide, Kerry should pick up an extra 1-2% just from the breakdwon of the 6% undecided voters in Virginia.

Furthermore, and I don't know if this is an issue for the Zogby polls, but polls in general tend to undercount newly registered voters. Or not count them at all. Read the methodology for The Washington Post's daily tracking poll. If I am reading it right, it doesn't count anyone who didn't vote in the 2000 election unless they have just reached voting age. And just almost every state that's even close, including Virginia, has had record registration numbers.

That's one reason why a strong Get Out The Vote operation--registering people, identifying Democrats, following up to make sure they vote on election day--can shift a campaign 2-3% towards one candidate. There's a significant number of people out there that, even in elections like this, will only vote if they were pushed. And that's why most polling organizations don't count them. I was talking to someone at dinner at night who said she wasn't sure if she was going to vote because she was registered in Oakton (about 45. min away from her current place). Place an absentee ballot in that person's hand and that's an extra vote. (Note to self: replace multiple packs of Tic-Tacs with spare absentee ballots.)

Look at the campaigning in Virginia. Or lack of it. In one way, we've been blessed that the two candidates didn't call Virginia a battleground state. I'm mad enough without having my Futurama reruns interrupted by Swift Boat ads. But that also means that, if anything is going to make a difference, it's going to be the grassroots effort.

And here's the idealistic part. Wouldn't it be great if we could overwhelm the scattershot Bush volunteers with a flood of people? Wouldn't it be great if Bush and Karl Rove lost the election because while they rigged the election in Florida and Ohio, they forgot to practice voter fraud in Virginia?

I think volunteering in Virginia is worth it just to make Bush shit himself. Losing New York isn't going to make Bush shit himself. But losing Virginia--oh, my friends. The river will be running that night.

You know...

...with all the whining I've been doing about getting people to volunteer, it would help if I told my DC, MD, and VA peeps what they could do to get involved.

There's a Yahoo group called Virginia Votes where people post upcoming volunteer events, talk strategy, and so on. Even if you're unsure you want to volunteer, go ahead and join and lurk for a few days. It can't hurt, and you'll, um, get a free Slurpee. If anyone tells you otherwise, just tell them who sent you: Tibor Papapippipoopapalooza.

The group has a web page that also serves as a hub for several organizations in the area. Upcoming events are listed on this page. They have listing for debate parties if you're looking to watch it with a crowd.

And let me know if you join the group, even if you're not up for doing something yet. It means a lot to me to hear about people taking a small step towards getting involved.

Something That I Would Love John Kerry To Say During The Debate Tonight, Although If He Actually Said It, It Probably Would Be a Very Bad Idea

"Mr. President, there's another L word. It's called liar. And I'd rather be a liberal than a liar."

(runner up) "George, Mr. Rogers told something to thousands of kids that you never picked up. So let me repeat it to you once more. It's time to leave the Land of Make Believe."

Congratulations!

You're now part of a Pancake City focus group.

I'm trying to get start a mass email to encourage people to get involved in the campaign these next two weeks. I know it's a long shot, but if it works, it could make a difference.

Please let me what you think.

A Call To Arms

My friends,

What are you waiting for, Bush the III?

I mean, come on. Are you waiting for him to go ballistic and declare a War Against Spelling? Do you need him to invade Kyrgyzstan with the help of 10 troops from Sri Lanka and a pair of coconuts?

Is it not enough that he's pissed on the Constitution? Are you not going to help elect Kerry until Smirky runs out of TP and changes the Bill of Rights to the Bill of Wipes?

Jesus fucking Christ. Do you know how screwed up this country is? This email just got automatically forwarded to John Ashcroft because I wrote Jesus fucking Christ. That's f---ed up.

What the hell are you waiting for?

Don't want to spend half a weekend once every four years to make some phone calls or knock on a few doors?

Don't want to spend $10 and two hours putting up a few yard signs and passing out bumper stickers to cars parked at traffic?

Don't want to spend an hour driving elderly people to the voting booths on election day?

Don’t want to spend half an hour emailing three disinterested friends in swing states and convincing them to vote for Kerry?

Don't want to spend five minutes signing up on the Kerry volunteer site?

We're so close to winning. All of the swing states are separated by a point or two. Virginia, which hasn't voted Democratic in 40 years, is down to a 3-point gap for Kerry.

We need everyone to spend a few hours--just a few hours--working to get Kerry elected.

You don't have to sacrifice your entire weekend. Just half a day, one day. Or an hour here, half an hour there.

I know what you're thinking. "Somebody else will do it." Really? Did somebody else do it in 2000? Do you think that if 100 more people in Florida helped get 1,000 more votes that we would be in this mess?

We can win this. We just need people like you to do a few hours of work. Come on, say it with me: "I'm going to do something. I'm going to do something right now. And I'm going to do something because working for four hours is a lot better than four more years of this."

What can you do? There are dozens of things, some small, some big, all of them important. Here are a few of them:

1) Sign up with the Kerry campaign at http://volunteer.johnkerry.com/ Let them know the reserves are here.

2) Sign up with a grassroots site, like http://actforvictory.org/

3) Visit www.TheNovemberSurprise.com/ideas.html. It has a list of dozens of ways to make a difference.

You're going to be amazed at how good it will feel to volunteer just for a few hours. We all have a lot of energy, but most of it has been going towards being angry and feeling frustrated. It's a whole another world when you put that energy towards doing something good.

Just four hours. It's all it takes. And you can put in your first minute now by forwarding this email to your friends.

Nov 2. is going to be a great day.

Presidential Debate Poll

I'm a hit whore, okay?

Here is a poll for this Wednesday's third Presidential debate between President Bush and Sen. Kerry. If I were a search engine spider looking for an online poll about the third presidential debate that people could vote on , I sure would consider this one, which is free of popular, inflammatory words like Bush bashing or Kerry sucks.

Who won the third Presidential debate?
	Bush by a lot
	Bush by a little
	Tied
	Kerry by a little
	Kerry by a lot

Big Changes

I don't know what happened to me, but I got possessed a few days ago. I had an epiphany that Kerry could win Virginia, and ever since then it has been all I could think about.

I went to my first campaign rally today, organized by a grassroots organization. I'll probably go into the details later, but the main point is that all of the anger and frustration I had towards the Bush administration melted away after handing about bumper stickers for a few minutes and driving around Northern Virginia in a parade of Kerry campaign-decorated cars and having strangers wave, honk back, and give you the thumbs up. It felt good. It felt really good. It was like the flip side of feeling angry all this time. The act of doing something, even something small like attend that rally, made me feel so much better and hopeful than I've felt in months.

The "big changes" are that I'm not sure how much time I'm going to have for the usual blog material. I'm working on getting other people to do small but significant things to scare the shit out of the Republican party by taking Virginia from them.

I'll write more about this later, but here's an email I just sent to ACT that touches on this:

Hello,

I'm involved in a grassroots movement to draw in volunteers from MD and DC to VA, and recruit more volunteers in Virginia to place it in the hands of a Democrat for the first time since 1964.

My belief that Kerry have a decent chance of winning Virginia isn't mere wishful thinking. It's based on the latest Zogby poll that has him down by 3%, an underground grassroots effort that has been going on for the past three months underneath the radar of the media, and several characteristics of presidential incumbent elections that favor the challenger in close races.

Wouldn't it be great to strike fear in the hearts of Republicans who thought one of their states they thought was in the bag was now up for grabs? And that the reason was not a formal effort by the Kerry campaign, or a slew of commercials, or a bombardment of media attention, but because enough citizens rose from their couches to stand and say, "This is not their democracy. This is my democracy. And I'm going to help take it back."

Here is where ACT comes in. You know how you list West Virginia, with its 5 electoral votes, and where the last Zogby poll has Kerry behind 6%, as one of the swing states on your web site? Why not add Virginia, with its 13 electoral votes, and where Kerry has risen from 8% down to 3% in the last few months (also from latest Zogby poll)?

Secondly, could you provide a contact where we could coordinate publicity efforts? I registered a domain name,
www.TheNovemberSurprise.com, and am working feverishly to get it up in the next few days. I'm working with other local grassroots organizations, as well as local and national bloggers to push the media perception from "Republican stronghold" to "swing state."

At the very least, we can give the Bush campaign a scare and force them to devote resources into a state area they felt they could ignore. And if we could get the media to pick up on this last minute surprise, a Republican state shifting towards Kerry could play into a "Surging Kerry" story and have a significant impact on media coverage of the race as a whole.

Thank you for reading. I hope you have the time to respond.

Bush Likes To Scowl?

I stumbled upon this commentary by Tucker Carlson about the 2000 Republican Presidential candidate debates. Guess how Bush acted four years ago? It makes it easier to understand why he's held far fewer press conferences than any modern-era President.

Oh, Great

Now even the troops are demoralizing the troops. Sure, they're happy with the first half-dozen reasons they were given to go to war, but reason Number #7 comes along and all of the sudden they're Mr. and Mrs. Hoity-Toity Why Are We Here Wah Wah Wah. F'ing flip-floppers. (link)

Best quote:

Asked if he was concerned that the Marines would be punished for speaking out, Autin responded: "We don't give a crap. What are they going to do, send us to Iraq?"

On a side note, if you want to find out why The Washington Post rocks, read the first article I linked (reason Number #7). If that same article appeared in another newspaper, it would have been watered-down and weakened out of an editor's fear of appearing biased. When a newspaper can back its assertions with facts, it should never shy away from expressing those assertions in the strongest terms.

Dred Scott = Roe v. Wade?

I would have never, ever figured this out on my own. Here's the scary explanation behind President Bush's reference to Dred Scott in the 2nd debate. And one of many examples showing the point.

It makes me wonder what other ostentatiously-stupid phrases or verbal gaffes he's said that are actually crafty political code to the extremist part of his base.

"need some wood?" = "sometimes you gotta slap the kids around"

"hard work" = "beating up women who had a abortion"

"is my time up yet?" = "Kerry supports assisted suicide"

[responding to a question on national security]
"Well, we'll talk about the tax cut for middle class here in a minute" = "The earpiece tells all"

"I hear there's rumors on the Internets" = "They must never find out about the secret Internet"

"I'm human" = "I need another power cell"

All Your Votes Are Belong To Us

These stump speeches for Bush and Kerry are both very funny.

Funny Debate Comments from Wonkette

I laughed several times. (link works for all Internets)

Last Question of the Debate

GRABEL: President Bush, during the last four years, you have made thousands of decisions that have affected millions of lives. Please give three instances in which you came to realize you had made a wrong decision, and what you did to correct it. Thank you.

I applauded when this woman asked the question, the last one of the debate, because I knew Bush couldn't answer it. It's the central problem of his administration: an inability to see one's mistakes due to ideological blindness. You can't fix a problem you don't admit to having.

If you haven't seen the debate, guess how many wrong decisions he cited? Here's a hint: it's less than 3!

How's This For a Headline?

President Bush Owns So Many Businesses That He Can't Even Keep Track of Them

Okay, The Washington Post calls it "Plenty of Flaws Among the Facts". With subtitle "Candidates Made Questionable Claims", which is an excellent description, as long as no one else reads the article and has the ability to count.

Go ahead and read it. I found the ratio 2:1 in number of misstatements that Bush made compared to Kerry, and I'm being generous to Bush.

I understand the pressures to avoid the appearance of bias, and how a strongly worded headline may make feel partisans feel good but turn off some people who would otherwise be receptive to the message. But wouldn't it be nice if, just once, there was a headline that said, "President Bush Makes Twice As Many Misstatements as Sen. Kerry in Debate, and That's Just the Shit We Found in Two Hours"

(if you're wondering what I am referencing)

KERRY: You can't stop all outsourcing, Charlie. I've never promised that. I'm not going to, because that would be pandering. You can't.

But what you can do is create a fair playing field, and that's what I'm talking about.

But let me just address what the president just said.

Ladies and gentlemen, that's just not true what he said. The Wall Street Journal said 96 percent of small businesses are not affected at all by my plan.

And you know why he gets that count? The president got $84 from a timber company that owns, and he's counted as a small business. Dick Cheney's counted as a small business. That's how they do things. That's just not right.

BUSH: I own a timber company?

(LAUGHTER)

That's news to me.

(LAUGHTER)

Need some wood?

(LAUGHTER)


KERRY: You're a part-owner in a timber compnay, you dumb ass. And you sure aren't getting any wood by looking at Laura.

HELLO I AM THE PRESIDENT

AND I DON'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THE MODULATION OF MY VOICE.

THAT MEANS I'M A POWERFUL LEADER. ALSO, I DIDN'T SMIRK THE ENTIRE DEBATE. THAT MEANS I WIN.

Instead of all of these different formats and pages of guidelines for the debates, we should just strap electric wires to the testicles of the two candidates and send a shock every time one of them tells a lie or makes a grossly misleading statement, as determined by a panel of researchers afterwards.

Of course, if this system were in place tonight, these researchers would be responsible for killing the President, and for giving Kerry a painful yet slightly erotic tingle, but we all have to make sacrifices in the war on terror.

I try to look at the debates in the eyes of one of these mythical undecided voters the media keeps talking about, and in that sense I can't imagine this debate will sway anyone making a decision based on voting for a clear victor. They both did well enough to take that level of superficial analysis out of play. In fact, I think Bush put on one of the best performances he could have, considering he was up against his own petulance, the pressure of needing to do a significantly better job than last time, and a record so abysmal it can only be defended through misrepresenting his own actions and words as well as those of his opponent.

The reason Bush didn't "win" is because Kerry did at least as well. I think there are two components to debates: who is the better tactical debater, and who connects well with the audience. Sometimes these are related, sometimes not. I think Kerry did much better than Bush in the tactical category and either matched him or came close to matching him with connecting to the audience, which was the one dangerous area for him.

One of Kerry's smartest moves was to tie many of his answers by giving examples that related to Missouri. It's surprising to see how the man supposed to connect better with people mention the state once or twice, in general terms, and the "cold fish" be the one to take the time to showing he understands how these issues affect the voters of Missouri. And that's the wild card here. While I don't think this debate changes much on a national scale, it may have helped Kerry in Missouri specifically because he personalized the topics to the state.

In a way, the end of this debate matches the end of the Vice-Presidential one. Two fairly even performances where partisans from both sides can argue that their candidate is the winner, but where one side has a potential advantage in that their candidate didn't tell a string of lies and misstatements that a moderately interested voter can't find out for himself in tomorrow's paper.

I don't know if the Bush-Cheney campaign got any fallout for Cheney saying he never met Edwards or said he never tried to connect Iraq to 9/11, so I can't say if Bush will lose any points for telling some outrageous whoppers. But I will say this right now: any half-decent fact-checking article will show that Bush lied and misrepresented things much more than Kerry. If I'm wrong, I'll print this post up, eat it, poop it out, and then put my poop on a birthday cake and sign to myself, "Happy Birthday, Poophead!"

Now, if I can drop the detached analyst voice for a moment and tell what I thought as a partisan. I thought Kerry rocked. There were a few times during the debate that Kerry said something to Bush that made me yell, "Bitch, you just got slapped!" My Mom, who I was watching the debate with and had her attention split between it and her email, would then say, "What happened? Who got slapped?" I wanted to avoid explaining the whole thing so I would just say, "The bitch, Mom. The bitch. I'll explain later."

There were also many times he responded in a way that balanced eloquence with intelligence that reinforced my belief that this man is going to make a great President.

I realize that the belief that Kerry will be a great President is one even many of the people who will vote for him do not hold. And I forget the pithy phrase for blind belief not based in reality ("drinking from the same punchbowl?"), but that could be going on here. Especially with statements like "he will be a great President."

But the more I read about his past, what he's done with his life, the issues he's believes in, and the way he thinks and works with people, the more I have shifted from lukewarmly supporting him to liking them to my current view that he has what it takes to be one of the best that we've had in decades.

Pre-Debate Analysis

I love calling the crap I write analysis. It makes me feel big and important. I'm going to rename my blog and tell people I work as an analyst:

PERSON: "What do you do?"
ME: "I'm an analyst."
PERSON: "Oh! What think thank do you work for?"
ME: "Um...the Center for Strategery and Important International Relationships Foundation Board Center (dot com)."
PERSON: "How did you do that?"
ME: "Do what?"
PERSON: "Speak in parentheses."
ME: "It's one of our strategeries."

So, the big debate is tonight. Grab a beer, a bowl of popcorn, and pray that no one from a Bush rally sneaks in and poses as an undecided voter.

"UNDECIDED" VOTER: "President Bush. A President needs to face the public regularly and give frank answer to tough questions. In that spirit, I ask you this: Why does God love you so much? Also, do you think the terrorists will win and God will smite us if Kerry is elected, or do you just think the terrorist will win?"

Actually, there will be no self-identified undecided voters in the audience. It is made up of "soft supporters," people selected by the Gallup who are leaning towards a candidate but say they may switch sides. Which is good, because the percentage of people that identified themselves as undecided in the last Gallup poll is 0, and an audience of undecided voters would have to be made up of trolls, pixies, elves, and talking unicorns.

UNICORN: "Mr. President, I--"
PRESIDENT BUSH: "I know you! You're the unicorn that gives me advice in my dreams."
UNICORN: "Uh, yeah…"
KARL ROVE: [hissing from back stage] Sir! That's me with a strap-on dildo on my head. You fell asleep at the briefing last week. There was no other way.

To go on a tangent for a bit, ………..visit Pancake City tonight for the most important Presidential debate poll on the web!

(My traffic doubled the night after the first debate from people looking to vote in online polls.)

Although I'm not going to actually have a poll……………I do hope people visit to vote on the performances of President Bush and Kerry, both of whom said many key words in their responses, responses that were broadcasted by major news organizations, which followed the debate with important online polls.

Back to my expert analysis of tonight's debate. (This is a good moment to thank my boss Ralph, the executive director at CSIIR-FBC, for giving me the time to share my analysis with you.)

Obviously, both sides try to manage expectations so they can influence the post-debate coverage. But President Bush is at the end of one of the worst weeks in his Presidency.

And he has never been in a situation where the pressure was on him to perform well. The expectation he set for himself (and got the media to accept) in the 2000 debates was, "Golly gee, I hope I don't get crushed by this slick Washington insider, whose nickname, I've heard, is Double-Down Demosthenes."

So there's this conflict between low and high expectations. In one way, the expectations for Bush have never been lower. He's going to do better because he can't do any worse. It's almost impossible.

What's he going to do, demand to answer a question and then pause for 15 seconds instead of five? Repeat phrases 18 times instead of 17? Bush repeated "hard work" so often in the last debate he sounded like he had Tourette's.

So the post-debate analysis "the President did better this time" is a given. But because reality finally gathered a few of his friends and bum rushed the bouncer, he has a lot of political damage to cover. The expectations for him are also high because of necessity. His campaign expects him to do well because they need him to do well. But because many of Kerry's rhetorical blows are based on what the Bush administration calls the R word, it puts him in the difficult position of mounting a defense that requires denying even a base acknowledgement of facts.

In other words, reality bites, and if the audience asks decent questions and Kerry attacks well again, it will be probably be too much for Bush to overcome.

Reason #23 Why The British Rock

The producers of a British children's television show in the 70s made a hilarious, innuendo-filled video using the puppets and characters in the show. Background info and link to the clip at Boing Boing.

What Was He Thinking?

During the Vice-Presidential debate, Dick Cheney directed people to factcheck.com (he meant factcheck.org) in response to Edward's criticism of Cheney's former employer Halliburton: "If you go, for example, to FactCheck.com, an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton."

God, this is Jason. I don't ask for much. In fact, I don't ask for anything. I think the whole flowing white robe and booming voice thing is kind of silly, and if I'm going to believe in a God, I want him to have a few tats. But if you do exist, and you have some extra time on your hands, please send people to factcheck.org to read their article on the debate, just like Cheney requested. I know you don't like to get directly involved in human affairs, but if you look at him as a pasty devil without the horns, it's really not that hard.

A Few More Debate Comments

Just making fun of my recent uncreative titles...

I got a question posted in a Washington Post chat about the debate, and, as it is the highlight of one of the many dreary days that make up my existence, I share it with you to bask in the warm glow of your admiration and newfound respect.

Arlington, Va.: Maybe I'm idealistic, but you haven't addressed what I think is the most important question: who told the truth more often?

Let me get my bias right out: I'm a Kerry suporter. But I challenge anyone to read The Washington Post's "debate referee" article and claim Edwards made anywhere near as many misleading comments or "deliberate misstatements of facts" as Cheney did.

Pancake City rocks!

Robert G. Kaiser: Thanks for the posting. It doesn't take a PhD to count up the examples in that article; your analysis of it is accurate. Also accurate is your analysis to the rockingness of Pancake City.

(obviously, the Pancake City references weren't part of the original question. And the chat is worth checking out--lots of interesting comments.)

A Few More Comments

I'm glad the Bush-Cheney campaign has stopped saying that John Kerry voted for higher taxes over 350 times and switched to a more reasonable 98 times.

I think the anchors on CNN are a bunch of morons, but they actually made one insightful comment. They mentioned that when Cheney said "F--- You" to Sen. Leahy last June on the Senate floor, it was because Sen. Leahy criticized Cheney's connections to Haliburton. Haliburton makes Hulk Cheney angry. Cheney no like talk about Haliburton. You could see it the first few times Edwards mentioned it in the debate. Cheney would perk up and scowl or begin to twitch.

This is too funny.

Most of the instant online polls have Edwards winning in a landslide. I think instant polls are worthless and often have no relation to fact. So I put zero stock in them. But they are a decent barometer of the passion and post-spin effort of each side, and in that respect these polls bode well for the Democrats.

Debate Comments

I'd like to jot my thoughts down before they are skewed by the slew of analysis and instant polls that is sure to follow.

I'm more or less a political nut, and even I found the debate boring. The stakes were much lower, and it was more or less a rehash of previous arguments against each other. I wasn't expecting a "You're no Jack Kennedy" moment. In fact, given the gravitas this series of debates has taken, I think such a line would sound inappropriate and be ineffective. But the night did more to reinforce the themes for each party (e.g. "John Kerry isn't a capable leader"; "George Bush isn't honest with the public") than establish any new ground.

As a performance, I think Dick Cheney did better than John Edwards, particularly in the first 1/6 of the debate where I thought he was crushing Edwards. The debate reminded me of the first one between Kerry and Bush, except it was Cheney landing the jobs and putting a new spin on old arguments, and Edwards looking inexperienced and repeating the same stock phrases.

What happened is that Cheney would give a two-minute answer, lie or misrepresent the facts five or six times in his answer, and then the question would be passed off to Edwards, who had 90 seconds to respond, challenged zero to one of Cheney's statements, and repeated the same phrases Kerry said in the debate. Edwards came off in the beginning as not having confidence in his own words. Cheney looked knowledgable and better prepared.

But after the first 15 min. or so, Edwards collected himself and began responding to Cheney's attacks with good rebuttals and attacks on his own. He did a few smart things in the debate. One, and some people may poke fun at Edwards for doing this, he referred a few times to how Kerry did in the debate last week.

Maybe I'm deluding myself with a rationalization, but I think this was a good move. Cheney is a better debater and probably more intellectually sharp than Edwards. He's like the evil John Kerry. The best Edwards could hope for is a tie, which I think he did well enough to have the media call it as such, that is, until 17 minutes from now when the absolutely accurate instant polls come out.

But in case people view Cheney as having put on a more convincing performance, Edwards rightly reminded people that the real question isn't which of them is the better debater, or would make the better Vice-President. It's, "Does John Kerry have what it takes to become the next President of the United States?" and the last debate reflected very favorably towards Kerry in regards to this question. It's kind of like mentioning 9/11 every minute, except for a positive effect rather than a negative one.

Bush's approval ratings are around 50%. On some level, I have to hope that even dumb people realize that the reason he is attacking Kerry so ferociously is because he can't run on his own record. The main thing stopping undecided voters who aren't satisfied with Bush from switching to Kerry is the question, "Can Kerry do the job?" and reminding that Kerry answered that question in part in the first debate is a good strategy.

The second smart think Edwards did was hammer home the issue of being honest with the American people and the Bush administration's failure to acknowledge the current situation in Iraq. While I think it's detrimental to the long-term interests of any politician to claim he or she will tell the truth, it's great in the short run because there is a real disconnect between what has been happening in Iraq for the last year and what the President has been telling us.

Furthermore, Cheney lied his ass off during the debate. Much more so than Edwards. I'm too cynical to think that your average undecided voter picked up on it during the debate, but perhaps if the media does a decent job fact-checking and the Democrats in publicizing Cheney's misleading or false statements, the coverage will lend support to the idea that the Bush Administration has a problem with telling the truth.

I'm not hopeful this will be the case. What Cheney said was mild compared to previous and amazingly recent claims of ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda, and 9/11 and Iraq, and he's received little backlash for those statements, so I don't think this time will be much different.

On a side note, I'd like to toot my own horn for pointing out in a previous post why the Kerry campaign has taken to repeatedly saying there is no operational relationship between al-Qaeda and Iraq, as John Edwards did during the debate.

To sum up, I think Cheney's natural speaking abilities and ability to lie in a believable way gave him an edge, but John Edwards for the most part held his own and definitely did much better than Lieberman in the 2000 VP debate. The best news for the Kerry campaign is that Bush is back on stage this Friday (although Bush typically excels at town hall meetings, similar to how they were Clinton's best arena).

The Debate That Will Decide the World

It must be fun to work as a journalist and report your own thoughts as the news.

Reporters Underpaid, Not Appreciated By Editors

PUGSY THE AVERAGE JOE: "Wow, that's really unfair. I think reporters should…hey, wait a minute."

For example, did you know that tonight's Vice-Presidential debate is more important than usual? That a strong showing by Cheney could stem the blood flowing from President Bush's hand, which Kerry bit off after the debate last week (story on FOX News)? That for every five points Edwards scores, he gets to tickle Cheney once, and only one tickle is enough to destroy Cheney's image as a glum, serious communicator?

It's all true because I read it. You see, a few days ago, the Associated Press sponsored a 537-person poll which asked, "How would you describe the effect the Vice-Presidential debate will have on who you vote for in the elections? No effect, a little effect, some effect, a lot of effect?" Out of the responses, 52% said a lot or some effect, an 27% increase from the responses to the same question last year. Thus, after the poll results were released, many political analysts began running stories saying how this is one of the most important VP debates in recent history.

Ha! Just kidding. The media didn't run any stupid polls, or talk to people like Pugsy to see what they "think" about tonight's debate. Can you blame them? I mean, come on. His name is Pugsy. Who the hell wants to talk to someone named Pugsy?

I'd give you my pre-debate analysis, but there hasn't been any articles examining the two candidates' strengths and weaknesses, so I don't know what to think.

Funny New Blog

Two of my funniest friends, Amy and Lori, have started a new blog, Trash Talkin' Rodeo. I think it's their first step towards moving in together. You should check their blog out a few times during the next week. I wish more of my funny friends would start blogs (hello, Chad) or not start funny blogs and then abandon them like a baby in a dumpster.

Tonight's Vice-Presidential Debate

The Old Man from Scooby Doo vs. Fred.

Perhaps it's a sign...

...that I'm too partisan when a dog I walk wandered into a yard with a Bush/Cheney '04 sign, and I chanted, under my breath, "Poop, poop, poop, poop..."
Unfortunately, he didn't poop. Even after I shook him.

(For the record, yes, I would have picked up his poop, and no, I didn't shake him. I jumped next to him and yelled, "Rar! I'm a big bear! Now poop!" But that is an emotional shake, not a physical shake.)

Debate Thread

So, what did you think? Post your comments. My thoughts:

I saw the debate in a gay bar, with a completely partisan crowd. It was loud, I had to readjust constantly to see the television screen between the heads of people, and was repeatedly grateful for the closed captions (obviously done in real-time, which is amazing). So there was a lot distorting my view of the situation, both literally and figuratively. Having said that, I am sure it will shock all of you to find out that I think overall Kerry did better than Bush.

The pre-debate meme was that Kerry had the most work to do. As the meme goes, he's behind in the polls, President Bush has painted him as an unviable alternative, and people aren't convinced he has the stature to be President (I don't agree with some of the premises behind the meme, but that's the gist of it).

The corollary that got less attention but I think became evident midway during the debate is that Kerry also had the most to gain. Everyone knows Bush is presidential. As he would say, "I'm the President. I preside. That's what I do."

But people have had far less time to know Kerry, and what they do know about him is as likely to come from the Bush campaign or a Swift Boat Veterans-type group than his own campaign. This was his chance to strengthen parts of his image and redefine other parts to a public that, once you consider political nerds only make up 2.3% of the population (it's a fact), may be hearing him at length for the first time.

That's why I think he did better than Bush--because he had more to gain, and did so with a generally good performance. By speaking directly (for him), and being forceful but not overly aggressive, I think Kerry took a giant step forward into getting undecided voters to look at him as having the temperament to be the next President of the United States.

On individual questions, there were some that Kerry won, and others that Bush did. But that's almost irrelevant. Perhaps I'm being too cynical, but do you know what I think people will remember from this debate a few weeks from now?

Thirty seconds. I think people are going to assemble their own debate highlight commercial in their heads, reinforced by whatever clips get a lot of media attention, and play that commercial in their heads when they are deciding who to vote for. And my instinct, which I hope is based in more than wishful thinking, says that many of the snippets in that commercial will reflect favorably on John Kerry.

(Quickly, on another note: the post-debate spin, and which side is more effective in getting the media to buy it, is more important than the debate themselves. Republicans are still the masters at media manipulations, but I'm hopeful because Democrats have finally recognized the importance of the post-debate game and are at least going to do a better job at shaping it than they were in past elections. In other words, thank God for The Daily Show.)