That Kool Aid you've been drinking is spiked with psychotropic drugs.

Oh, boy, what a bunch of pussies and whiners your people are if you thought that was vicious.

The Dow too a 345 point nosedive today on the Palin Speech

Class post hoc fallacy: B follows A, so A must have caused B.

And you claim to be the smart ones.

Obviously, there are many things Obama has to do to win. I was only addressing one aspect of it, which is the strategic approach.

From a logistical standpoint, Obama is light years ahead of McCain at this point. His ground-level organization is superior, especially considering the difficulty McCain has had in energizing the Republican social conservative base; it may vote for him, although its numbers have shrunken, but will it be as activist as it was for Bush? What's even more evident is that the Obama campaign's grasp of new technology has left the GOP in the dust. Even top Republican political operatives concede that point. Again, these alone may not be decisive, but combined with disciplined message control puts Obama in an advantageous position.

My worry isn't about the Obama campaign; I've been a keen political observer (as a journalist and previously an activist) for some 40 years. Axelrod is one sharp cookie; this has been the shrewdest Democratic campaign I've seen, including Clinton's in '92 (which was pretty damn good, too). My concern is that one of Obama's best weapons, the liberal blogosphere, isn't as savvy and is prone to being distracted by the easy targets which the Republicans so willingly offer (like Palin). It's easy to understand; the Rove machine has produced a strain of paranoia among liberals, the belief that it can pull rabbits out of the hat. This isn't unjustified, but may not be as applicable this election as in previous ones -- especially against an adversary as formidable (and well-funded) as the Clinton-Axelrod team.

The blogosphere will have an impact on the mainstream media narrative (remember: Drudge rules our world, or least did significantly when he was about the only one around. The influence of Kos, Atrios, Digby and other liberal bloggers is rivaling that -- if not individually, then as a collective). If the blogs get enmeshed in the politics of distraction, as I delineated previously, then the MSM may follow along. If the Obama campaign and the liberal blogosphere refuse to dance to the GOP tune, playing by its rules on its turf, then the media will be less inclined to follow.

Defensive-offensive (and I apologize for the mislabelling earlier; as a Civil War buff, I should know better) is working. Rapid response, and then shift the onus back to the Republicans by relentless pounding the theme that for all the bells and whistles, McCain is still not offering anything proactive which will address the real concerns of Americans. Obama and his supporters, on the ground and the web, are going to have to do the pushing. (Even the relatively-friendly Keith Olbermann doesn't entirely get it. In previewing McCain's speech tonight, Chuck Todd was talking about how McCain was going to bandy about words like "reform" and "change." I wonder what would have been the response from Todd, who is better than most analysts IMHO, if Olbermann had followed up by asking whether McCain needs to offer any insight into what needs to be changed and how, in concrete terms, it would be manifested in his policies if elected. As long as the MSM keeps allowing McCain to keep the notion of "change" in the abstract, unlike Obama's more-specific agenda, then McCain can get away with the false image of being a "reformer" on vital issues such as the economy, foreign policy and energy.)

This is why Palin doesn't matter, and the GOP smears don't matter. As long as Obama continues to shift the burden back to the Republicans and demanding answers to what type of change McCain has in mind, and how that will help Americans face the personal issues they confront daily, he commands the narrative -- so long as the liberal blogosphere itself commits itself to pushing that theme and not being trapped into engaging in Republican flim-flammery and obfuscation.

Top AP headline on Yahoo News:

McCain vows to end partisan rancor in Washington

Yeah, about as soon as he puts a muzzle on the pitbull with lipstick.

Yes, Sarah Palin sat in a church where this message was given. Two weeks ago. The karma in all this is just amazing:

Brickner also described terrorist attacks on Israelis as God's "judgment of unbelief" of Jews who haven't embraced Christianity.

"Judgment is very real and we see it played out on the pages of the newspapers and on the television. It's very real. When [Brickner's son] was in Jerusalem he was there to witness some of that judgment, some of that conflict, when a Palestinian from East Jerusalem took a bulldozer and went plowing through a score of cars, killing numbers of people. Judgment — you can't miss it."

Palin was in church that day, Kroon said, though he cautioned against attributing Brickner's views to her.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/anti-jewish-ter.html

http://snipurl.com/3n3qx

Sarah Palin: women :: Clarence Thomas : African Americans

(sorry for the multiple postings, was away much of the day)

The Dow too a 345 point nosedive today on the Palin Speech

Class post hoc fallacy

You're right. Really, the DJIA nosedived on all that wonderful news about the Bush economy. Dubya's policies are working as predicted: ruining the country.

You might like to ask Palin about how she'd go about cleaning up after Deficit Dubya's massive fiscal irresponsibilities. (Hint: upcoming debate question!)

Oh, I forgot. You pubs don't do issues.

. . . . without the sting. Hey, you back in the real world?? Funny how you always seem to pop up like the proverbial bad penny. Hey, BTB, I used to own a Hudson Hornet. A brilliant car, though when I owned it, it was a bit old, but funky. Anywho, now that you're back . . .

TJ1111 writes 'the' truism of the day (heed these words, copy them, paste them, and repeat them over & over to the voluntarily ignorant out there): "I don't have a name for that type of person readily at hand (he's talking about Sarah), but characteristics include employing juvenile sarcasm and mocking in making arguments, using tortured logic and giant leaps of faith, perceiving conspiracies as the basis of all problems, making sweeping generalizations with little or no evidence to support them, and above all, playing to the galley in trying to cast the members of the council or commission as bad or stupid."

In other words: vindictive, mean-spirited, petty, inflexible, and woefully self-centered. Oh, did I mention self-serving? And crooked? Dang, everything that Americans (I mean the real deals -- not the flag-wavers) despise.

Sarah Palin, you've been nailed.

And it doesn't get any better than this:

http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/about-sarah-palin-a-letter-from-anne-kilkenny/741/