http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=843
Freedom Rider: Right Wing Obama Love
Presidential Politics 2008 - Obama
Wednesday, 22 October 2008
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
Barack Obama's charms seem to work even on the least promising prospects. "Right wingers who openly follow the doctrine of America's right to empire and conquest are now endorsing Obama." William Buckley's son, Christopher, has been won over by Obama, causing Buckley to be excommunicated from the Church of the Hard Right. Christopher Hitchens, the former radical who has learned to love the war on terror, has found a warm place in his heart for Michelle's husband. It must be those things Obama says so alluringly, like, I'm going to have a foreign policy like Ronald Reagan's.
"Obama has said that he will have a foreign policy like Ronald Reagan's."
There are no omens of victory for John McCain. While Barack Obama can concentrate on campaigning in swing states like Missouri, John McCain is forced to work the crowds in red states which should be firmly in his column at this late stage in the campaign. Not one poll shows McCain victories in enough of the right states for him to be elected.
Everyone loves a winner. Perhaps that is why so many conservatives are jumping on the Obama bandwagon. McCain is a goner and they know it. Yet there is something else at work here. Barack Obama has exceeded expectations in soothing the concerns of the racist, imperialist mindset. Right wingers who openly follow the doctrine of America's right to empire and conquest are now endorsing Obama.
Christopher Buckley, son of the late William Buckley, broke ranks with his fellow conservatives and endorsed Barack Obama, declaring that he will vote for a Democrat for the first time in his life. Unlike others in the openly racist right wing, Buckley can see the forest for the trees. He doesn't care if the president has the middle name Hussein. Obama has made it clear that he will maintain white America's right to moral exception by continuing its war machine and allowing the criminals who destroyed the financial system to keep their set at the table.
"Buckley is certain that Obama will not make waves."
Buckley has no doubts about Obama. "But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren't going to get us out of this pit we've dug for ourselves." So certain is Buckley that Obama will not make waves, that he bid good-bye to his friends and resigned from the National Review, the conservative publication founded by his father.
Another Christopher, Christopher Hitchens, has likewise seen the path to victory pointing in Obama's direction. Hitchens used to call himself a leftist, a Trotskyite in fact. Hitchens realized that he would be a much hotter commodity if he eschewed his political positions and became a professional white man. He now spends his time writing endlessly hateful screeds defending America's war of terror and looking for new reasons to kill brown skinned people who pray towards Mecca.
Hitchens spent the early part of the campaign year showing open disdain for Obama, his former pastor and for Michelle Obama's senior thesis. He foamed at the mouth at every utterance of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, calling his words ". . . wicked and stupid and false . . ."
The McCain campaign death march and Obama's consistent promise to change very little have swayed Hitchens to switch sides again. He opines that ". . . the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one." In other words, they will keeping killing Iraqis and Afghans, giving Hitchens confidence that his endorsement will not be in vain.
"Hitchens now spends his time writing endlessly hateful screeds defending America's war of terror."
These endorsements are partly a result of the critically ill Republican brand, but Obama must get much of the credit for the eleventh hour conversions. He has said that he will have a foreign policy like Ronald Reagan's. He makes it clear he will address black people directly only when chastisement is on the agenda. If anyone has doubts, the sight of Obama campaign commercials featuring one or two black faces, Obama's included, seal the deal for the two Christophers and their friends.
What will Progressives for Obama have to say about the conservative pitching and wooing for their candidate? If past history is any indication, they and other progressives will say nothing at all. They made a decision to collude with the Obama agenda that progressives ought to oppose. The praises of Buckley and Hitchens will have no effect on them any more than the pledges to keep troops in Iraq or to escalate the war in Afghanistan.
Obama will make history in more ways than one. He won't just be the first black president. He will be the first president in modern history who convinced millions of people not to believe the words that came out of his own mouth. "Change" is the campaign slogan, but his policy agenda tells us we will see anything but that. Hitchens and Buckley are certainly convinced that there won't be any changes that aren't to their liking.
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.Com. Ms. Kimberley maintains an edifying and frequently updated blog at freedomrider.blogspot.com. More of her work is also available at her Black Agenda Report archive page.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Colin Powell Warns Of Coming Crisis
http://www.prisonplanet.com/colin-powell-warns-of-coming-crisis-we-dont-even-know-about-right-now.htmlColin Powell Warns Of Coming Crisis “We Don’t Even Know About Right Now”
Echoes Biden comments that Obama will be tested in early days of his term
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Tuesday, Oct 21, 2008
Colin Powell has made bizarre comments that echo the recent declaration by Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden that there will be an “international crisis” early into Barack Obama’s presidency that will test the new president by forcing him to make unpopular decisions.
Speaking on meet the press two days ago, Powell officially endorsed Obama and also made the following statement:
“The problems will always be there and there’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.
So I think what the President has to start to do is to start using the power of the oval office and the power of his personality to convince the American people and convince the world that America is solid, that America is going to move forward, we are going to fix our economic problems, we’re going to meet out overseas obligations.”
Watch Powell make the comment at 2.35 into the following video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LDBOPcHpeo&eurl=http://www.prisonplanet.com/colin-powell-warns-of-coming-crisis-we-dont-even-know-about-right-now.html
Is Colin Powell referring to a theoretical crisis that could occur at any time? If so why does he choose a specific date, within the first two days after the inauguration? Also why does he refer to general problems that the new president will have to deal with in a separate context? We are already in an economic crisis, everyone knows that, so what new crisis is Powell talking about?
Whatever you read into Powell’s comments, they sound somewhat bizarre, particularly as they come on the back of Joe Biden’s “guarantee” of a “generated crisis” to “test the mettle” of the new leader within six months of the new presidential term:
What does Biden mean by “generated crisis”? It is an undeniably strange term to use.
His reference to John F. Kennedy indicates that Biden may have been referring some kind of geopolitical crisis in the vain of the Cuban missile crisis of April 1961. The confrontation between the United States, the Soviet Union, and Cuba at the height of the Cold War came within the first four months of JFK’s presidency.
Obama’s running mate made the comments at a fundraising event in Seattle two days ago, on the same day Powell also spoke of a coming crisis.
We shouldn’t be surprised at Powell’s comments however, given that the former Secretary of State seemingly has a knack for predicting events before they take place.
Previous to the beginning of the Iraq war in February 2003, an audio tape containing a voice described as that of Osama Bin Laden was touted as proof positive of Al Qaeda links with Saddam Hussein.
Hours before the tape was discovered and aired by TV channel Al Jazeera, Powell announced in the US Senate that a “Bin Laden tape is coming proving Iraq’s links with Al-Qaeda.”
This led some to raise the question how does Colin Powell know what Al Jazeera are going to broadcast before they do?
In an amazing and timely coincidence, the tape came barely a week after Powell’s attempts to link Al Qaeda and Saddam in his botched presentation of lies and exaggerations before the UN Security Council.
Biden’s chilling remarks at fundraiser
Robalini's Note: One additional quote from Biden at the event can be found below, and it is telling:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/biden-to-suppor.html
"I probably shouldn't have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here."
http://wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/bidn-o22.shtml
World Socialist Web Site
Biden’s chilling remarks at fundraiser
What “incredibly tough” foreign policy actions is Obama preparing?
By Patrick Martin
22 October 2008
In remarks made over the weekend in Seattle, Democratic vice presidential candidate Joseph Biden warned that Barack Obama, if elected president, would be compelled to take deeply unpopular actions in both domestic and foreign policy within months of taking office.
In closed-door gatherings with two audiences of Democratic Party insiders and fundraisers, Biden forecast a major international crisis in the first six months of an Obama administration.
He compared Obama to John F. Kennedy, the last senator to be elected president. "It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy," Biden said. "The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Watch. We're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."
Biden mentioned the Middle East, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea and Russia as potential points of conflict, but did not spell out the exact nature of such a crisis, observing, "I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate." He made it clear that Obama would respond forcefully: "They're going to want to test him. And they're going to find out this guy's got steel in his spine."
The most politically significant portion of Biden's remarks came when he admitted that the decisions of an Obama-Biden administration were likely to be deeply unpopular, and he called on the Democratic Party regulars to stand behind the new president even when public opinion turned against him.
"He's going to need help," Biden said. "He's going to need you—not financially to help him—we're going to need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not going to be apparent initially, it's not going to be apparent that we're right."
He continued, "There are going to be a lot of you who want to go, ‘Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision.' Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."
Here is the voice of a longtime representative of the financial aristocracy, voicing his contempt for public opinion—"if decisions are popular, they're probably not sound"—and warning his wealthy audience that the new Obama-Biden administration will have to defy public opinion to carry out its policies. Biden's language suggests that the ferocity of the new administration's response will shock not only public opinion, but even its own supporters.
In that context, one must point out Biden's suggestions that nuclear weapons might play a role in one or more of the potential crises. A nuclear-armed Korean Peninsula could lead to "Japan as a nuclear power," he said, which could push China into expanding its nuclear weaponry. The Pakistan-Afghanistan border is "crawling with Al Qaeda" and "Pakistan is already bristling with nuclear weapons, all of which can hit Israel." Biden also noted Iran's alleged drive to build a nuclear weapon.
Foreign policy journals and pundits linked to the Democratic Party have undoubtedly been discussing many such doomsday scenarios, and Biden's language suggests that the use of the US nuclear arsenal, the world's largest, is under consideration by those who are formulating the foreign and military policy of an Obama-Biden administration.
Biden himself has been one of the most hawkish on foreign policy among leading congressional Democrats, backing the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq and advocating a US-led military intervention in Darfur. During the Democratic presidential primary campaign, he was the most vociferous of all the candidates in denouncing antiwar protest groups seeking a cutoff of funds for the war in Iraq.
Biden's expectation of widespread popular hostility to an Obama administration applies not only to foreign and military policy, but to domestic policy. He told the Seattle audience, "I promise you, you all are going to be sitting here a year from now going, ‘Oh my God, why are they there in the polls, why is the polling so down, why is this thing so tough?' We're going have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years."
The Democratic candidate did not spell out the exact nature of these "incredibly tough decisions," other than to refer to the financial and economic crisis and two wars being bequeathed by the Bush administration to its successor.
In the wake of these blunt and ominous comments, there have been disingenuous attempts to explain them away from both parties.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain seized on the suggestion that foreign enemies might seek to test an inexperienced President Obama, citing his own military and foreign policy expertise going back more than 50 years. Right-wing pundits went further, suggesting, as one put it, that "Biden is forecasting inaction by Obama in the face of testing by a dictator."
This interpretation is preposterous, especially given Biden's own record as a fervent supporter of US military intervention. Obama's selection of the Delaware senator as his running mate was itself an effort to reassure the political establishment of his commitment to defend the interests of American imperialism by military force.
The Obama campaign sought to shrug off Biden's remarks as a mere historical generalization, triggered by the Obama-Kennedy analogy, not a prediction of impending crisis. A campaign spokesman said Biden was referring to Kennedy's confrontation with Soviet President Nikita Khrushchev in summit talks in Vienna, a few months after he took office—although these talks took place after a US military provocation—the invasion of Cuba by US-trained exiles who were defeated at the Bay of Pigs.
An Obama administration would not be an "innocent abroad," picked on by dictators out to "test the mettle" of a US president. American imperialism continues from administration to administration, Democratic or Republican. If elected, Obama will take office heading the world's largest military machine, engaged in violent provocations in dozens of countries, any of which could flare up unexpectedly, especially under the impact of the deepening world economic crisis.
Obama won the Democratic presidential nomination by presenting himself as the more consistent antiwar candidate, and the Democratic ticket in public pledges to end the war in Iraq and adopt a less militaristic stance. But behind closed doors, before select audiences of the financial and political elite, Biden has given a glimpse of the real perspective of the Democratic wing of American imperialism.
Bankers Use Crisis to Strengthen Oligarchy
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=846
Bankers Use Crisis to Strengthen Oligarchy
Wednesday, 22 October 2008
The Bush regime is throwing billions in public money at big banks so they can devour little banks. The result will be more institutions that are "too big to fail" - and dangers to all of society.
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
"A small cabal of mega-bankers will have been empowered to act as "untouchables" - too big to fail."
The Democrats and their standard-bearer are co-enablers of the biggest single heist ever perpetrated on the United States public - second only to the 60-year-long military industrial shakedown that is a permanent feature of the American criminal landscape. Bailout Two - the "injection" of what will become trillions of public dollars into the nation's largest banks - is purposely designed to allow the bigger financial pirates to eat up the smaller ones, thus creating an even more condensed oligarchy of institutions that will be judged "too big to fail." Consequently, these banks' power to extort further infusions of the people's finite reservoir of wealth in the future, will become permanent.
According to published reports, part of the Bush regime's plan "is to drive consolidation" of the banking industry. Henry Paulson, whose title is Treasury Secretary but who is in fact acting as an agent for his former firm, Goldman Sachs, and other vectors of capitalist chaos, has been permitted to divert every available ounce of public wealth to creation of financial monopoly. It is a huge step in the erection of a fascist - let me repeat the word, because I do not use it lightly - a permanent fascist infrastructure of rule by the most rapacious, non-productive sector of capitalism.
"We can now see the outlines of a raw dictatorship of leaner and meaner, more aggressively ruthless Lords of Capital."
The Bush regime is determined to make these structural changes irreversible. They are betting that, even if the Democrats find the courage to demand a public presence in the banks that leach on the public purse, a small cabal of mega-bankers will have been empowered to act as "untouchables" - too big to fail, or even to effectively threaten. Even as late stage capitalism convulses in the throes of its own, now insurmountable contradictions, its grip on the American state apparatus and economy tightens. We can now see the outlines of a raw dictatorship of leaner and meaner, more aggressively ruthless Lords of Capital - a class personified by the bullying, blustering Henry Paulson.
This configuration of banks, subsidized with public dollars and directed by corporate strategists sometimes posing as public servants, will not hesitate to manipulate crises to its own benefit - and to wield its power to create chaos at will, as a weapon. This looming structural threat - in combination with the firmly embedded military-industrial extortionists - poses as grave a danger to society as the concentrated power of organized slaveholders, 150 years ago. Indeed, it is an even greater threat, since there is no significant organized opposition. Certainly, not from the Democratic Party and their congressional leader, Nancy Pelosi. The Democrats opened the door to trillions in gifts to Big Capital, while asking only $150 to $300 billion in economic assistance for the people. They have always settled - on the public's behalf - for a pitiful small slice of the people's own pie. In a crisis, the Democrats show their true calling. They are doormen for the rich.
For Black Agenda Radio, I'm Glen Ford.
BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com
Bankers Use Crisis to Strengthen Oligarchy
Wednesday, 22 October 2008
The Bush regime is throwing billions in public money at big banks so they can devour little banks. The result will be more institutions that are "too big to fail" - and dangers to all of society.
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
"A small cabal of mega-bankers will have been empowered to act as "untouchables" - too big to fail."
The Democrats and their standard-bearer are co-enablers of the biggest single heist ever perpetrated on the United States public - second only to the 60-year-long military industrial shakedown that is a permanent feature of the American criminal landscape. Bailout Two - the "injection" of what will become trillions of public dollars into the nation's largest banks - is purposely designed to allow the bigger financial pirates to eat up the smaller ones, thus creating an even more condensed oligarchy of institutions that will be judged "too big to fail." Consequently, these banks' power to extort further infusions of the people's finite reservoir of wealth in the future, will become permanent.
According to published reports, part of the Bush regime's plan "is to drive consolidation" of the banking industry. Henry Paulson, whose title is Treasury Secretary but who is in fact acting as an agent for his former firm, Goldman Sachs, and other vectors of capitalist chaos, has been permitted to divert every available ounce of public wealth to creation of financial monopoly. It is a huge step in the erection of a fascist - let me repeat the word, because I do not use it lightly - a permanent fascist infrastructure of rule by the most rapacious, non-productive sector of capitalism.
"We can now see the outlines of a raw dictatorship of leaner and meaner, more aggressively ruthless Lords of Capital."
The Bush regime is determined to make these structural changes irreversible. They are betting that, even if the Democrats find the courage to demand a public presence in the banks that leach on the public purse, a small cabal of mega-bankers will have been empowered to act as "untouchables" - too big to fail, or even to effectively threaten. Even as late stage capitalism convulses in the throes of its own, now insurmountable contradictions, its grip on the American state apparatus and economy tightens. We can now see the outlines of a raw dictatorship of leaner and meaner, more aggressively ruthless Lords of Capital - a class personified by the bullying, blustering Henry Paulson.
This configuration of banks, subsidized with public dollars and directed by corporate strategists sometimes posing as public servants, will not hesitate to manipulate crises to its own benefit - and to wield its power to create chaos at will, as a weapon. This looming structural threat - in combination with the firmly embedded military-industrial extortionists - poses as grave a danger to society as the concentrated power of organized slaveholders, 150 years ago. Indeed, it is an even greater threat, since there is no significant organized opposition. Certainly, not from the Democratic Party and their congressional leader, Nancy Pelosi. The Democrats opened the door to trillions in gifts to Big Capital, while asking only $150 to $300 billion in economic assistance for the people. They have always settled - on the public's behalf - for a pitiful small slice of the people's own pie. In a crisis, the Democrats show their true calling. They are doormen for the rich.
For Black Agenda Radio, I'm Glen Ford.
BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com
'Chinese Democracy' Makes Radio Debut
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1597641/20081022/guns_n_roses.jhtml
Oct 22 2008
Guns N' Roses' 'Chinese Democracy' Makes Radio Debut
Title track from forthcoming album marks group's first radio single in nine years.
By Chris Harris
It's a historic day for Axl Rose: Guns N' Roses fans are finally getting their first official taste of Chinese Democracy.
According to a spokesperson for the band's label, Interscope/Geffen, the title track from GN'R's oft-delayed, 17-years-in-the-making follow-up to 1991's Use Your Illusion albums, "Chinese Democracy," was made available for download to U.S. radio outlets first thing Wednesday morning (October 22), and already, stations like New York's Q104.3 are spinning the tune — which is almost five minutes long — and have posted it on their Web sites.
The track is a riff-heavy rocker that begins with eerie, soaring guitars and Rose's trademark squeal before launching into an infectious chorus. At first, Rose's voice sounds markedly deeper (think "Mr. Brownstone") than it does on some of GNR's most famous songs, but returns to its high-pitched greatness sporadically throughout the tune. The song ends with a quick explosion, which slowly trails off into silence.
"The release of Chinese Democracy marks a historic moment in rock n' roll," co-managers Irving Azoff and Andy Gould said in a statement. "We're launching with a monumental campaign developed by Gary Arnold and the Best Buy team that matches the groundbreaking sound of the album itself. Guns N' Roses fans have every reason to celebrate, for this is only the beginning."
While several of the album's tracks — including "Chinese Democracy" — have leaked online over the years, this marks the first official and authorized release of new music from Guns in more than nine years; the band's last single, 1999's "Oh My God," was featured on the soundtrack to Arnold Schwarzenegger's film "End of Days."
After years of missed deadlines, inexplicable delays and a handful of false starts, Chinese Democracy has finally been given a concrete release date of November 23. The album will be sold exclusively through Best Buy's retail locations and online through the chain's Web site. The disc will feature 14 tracks, including "Scraped," "Shackler's Revenge" (which appears on the new "Rock Band 2" video game), "Street of Dreams," "If the World" (which accompanies the closing credits of Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe's "Body of Lies") and "This I Love."
While Guns N' Roses have yet to reveal what touring plans — if any — they're planning around the record's release, rumors suggest the band might launch a U.S. tour early next year.
The imminent release of Chinese Democracy means the long wait for fans will soon be over. But it also means a free can of Dr Pepper for every U.S. citizen.
Last March, the beverage company announced it would give away free cans of the soft drink should Guns issue their LP before the close of 2008. Last week, a spokesperson for Dr Pepper told MTV News that, while additional details will be forthcoming, the company's plan to distribute free cans of its product will involve some sort of an online coupon system. "People will go on Dr Pepper's Web site and we will send them a coupon for a free one," the spokesperson confirmed. "It's going to be real easy."
Oct 22 2008
Guns N' Roses' 'Chinese Democracy' Makes Radio Debut
Title track from forthcoming album marks group's first radio single in nine years.
By Chris Harris
It's a historic day for Axl Rose: Guns N' Roses fans are finally getting their first official taste of Chinese Democracy.
According to a spokesperson for the band's label, Interscope/Geffen, the title track from GN'R's oft-delayed, 17-years-in-the-making follow-up to 1991's Use Your Illusion albums, "Chinese Democracy," was made available for download to U.S. radio outlets first thing Wednesday morning (October 22), and already, stations like New York's Q104.3 are spinning the tune — which is almost five minutes long — and have posted it on their Web sites.
The track is a riff-heavy rocker that begins with eerie, soaring guitars and Rose's trademark squeal before launching into an infectious chorus. At first, Rose's voice sounds markedly deeper (think "Mr. Brownstone") than it does on some of GNR's most famous songs, but returns to its high-pitched greatness sporadically throughout the tune. The song ends with a quick explosion, which slowly trails off into silence.
"The release of Chinese Democracy marks a historic moment in rock n' roll," co-managers Irving Azoff and Andy Gould said in a statement. "We're launching with a monumental campaign developed by Gary Arnold and the Best Buy team that matches the groundbreaking sound of the album itself. Guns N' Roses fans have every reason to celebrate, for this is only the beginning."
While several of the album's tracks — including "Chinese Democracy" — have leaked online over the years, this marks the first official and authorized release of new music from Guns in more than nine years; the band's last single, 1999's "Oh My God," was featured on the soundtrack to Arnold Schwarzenegger's film "End of Days."
After years of missed deadlines, inexplicable delays and a handful of false starts, Chinese Democracy has finally been given a concrete release date of November 23. The album will be sold exclusively through Best Buy's retail locations and online through the chain's Web site. The disc will feature 14 tracks, including "Scraped," "Shackler's Revenge" (which appears on the new "Rock Band 2" video game), "Street of Dreams," "If the World" (which accompanies the closing credits of Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe's "Body of Lies") and "This I Love."
While Guns N' Roses have yet to reveal what touring plans — if any — they're planning around the record's release, rumors suggest the band might launch a U.S. tour early next year.
The imminent release of Chinese Democracy means the long wait for fans will soon be over. But it also means a free can of Dr Pepper for every U.S. citizen.
Last March, the beverage company announced it would give away free cans of the soft drink should Guns issue their LP before the close of 2008. Last week, a spokesperson for Dr Pepper told MTV News that, while additional details will be forthcoming, the company's plan to distribute free cans of its product will involve some sort of an online coupon system. "People will go on Dr Pepper's Web site and we will send them a coupon for a free one," the spokesperson confirmed. "It's going to be real easy."
Human heads sent to Mexico police
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7682465.stm
Human heads sent to Mexico police
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
The severed heads of four men have been delivered by a courier service to a police station in northern Mexico, according to the local authorities.
The heads, all of men believed aged between 25-35, arrived last week in an icebox marked as containing vaccines.
Police thought the package was meant for a local hospital - they only opened it on Monday, revealing the four heads.
Police are investigating if the heads belong to any of the 10 local people who were kidnapped last week by gunmen.
The gruesome delivery was made in the town of Ascension, not far from Ciudad Juarez, close to the US border.
Ciudad Juarez has a reputation as one of Mexico's most violent cities, with more than a quarter of the country's 3,800 drugs-related murders reported to have taken place there since the start of the year.
The authorities have discounted reports that one of the heads may have been of a police commander who was kidnapped on 18 May this year.
Human heads sent to Mexico police
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
The severed heads of four men have been delivered by a courier service to a police station in northern Mexico, according to the local authorities.
The heads, all of men believed aged between 25-35, arrived last week in an icebox marked as containing vaccines.
Police thought the package was meant for a local hospital - they only opened it on Monday, revealing the four heads.
Police are investigating if the heads belong to any of the 10 local people who were kidnapped last week by gunmen.
The gruesome delivery was made in the town of Ascension, not far from Ciudad Juarez, close to the US border.
Ciudad Juarez has a reputation as one of Mexico's most violent cities, with more than a quarter of the country's 3,800 drugs-related murders reported to have taken place there since the start of the year.
The authorities have discounted reports that one of the heads may have been of a police commander who was kidnapped on 18 May this year.
San Francisco weighs decriminalizing prostitution
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93V4U0O0
San Francisco weighs decriminalizing prostitution
Oct 21, 2008
By EVELYN NIEVES
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - In this live-and-let-live town, where medical marijuana clubs do business next to grocery stores and an annual fair celebrates sadomasochism, prostitutes could soon walk the streets without fear of arrest.
San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K—a measure that forbids local authorities from investigating, arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.
The ballot question technically would not legalize prostitution since state law still prohibits it, but the measure would eliminate the power of local law enforcement officials to go after prostitutes.
Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.
"It will allow workers to organize for our rights and for our safety," said Patricia West, 22, who said she has been selling sex for about a year by placing ads on the Internet. She moved to San Francisco in May from Texas to work on Proposition K.
Even in tolerant San Francisco—where the sadomasochism fair draws thousands of tourists and a pornographic video company is housed in a former armory—the measure faces an uphill battle, with much of the political establishment opposing it.
Some form of prostitution is already legal in two states. Brothels are allowed in rural counties in Nevada. And Rhode Island permits the sale of sex behind closed doors between consulting adults, but it prohibits street prostitution and brothels.
In 2004, almost two-thirds of voters in nearby Berkeley rejected decriminalization. But proponents of Proposition K say their proposal has a better shot in San Francisco, which they believe is more sexually liberal than the city across the bay.
After all, the world's oldest profession has long been established here. During the Gold Rush, the neighborhood closest to the piers was a seedy pleasure center of sex, gambling and drinking known as the Barbary Coast.
These days, on certain corners, prostitutes sell their bodies day and night, ducking into doorways and alleys when police pass by. One recent afternoon in the Mission District, six prostitutes were plying their trade on a single block.
Police made 1,583 prostitution arrests in 2007 and expect to make a similar number this year. But the district attorney's office says most defendants are fined, placed in diversion programs or both. Fewer than 5 percent get prosecuted for solicitation, which is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.
Proposition K has been endorsed by the local Democratic Party. But the mayor, district attorney, police department and much of the business community oppose the idea, contending it would increase street prostitution, allow pimps the run of neighborhoods and hamper the fight against sex trafficking, which would remain illegal because it involves forcing people into the sex trade.
The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against the measure, saying it could make the city a magnet for prostitution.
If the proposal passes, "we wouldn't be able to investigate prostitution, and it's going to be pretty difficult for us to locate these folks who are victims of trafficking otherwise," said Capt. Al Pardini, head of the police department's vice unit. "It's pretty rare that we get a call that says: 'I'm a victim of human trafficking' or 'I suspect human trafficking in my neighborhood.'"
The proposition would also prohibit police from accepting federal or state funds for sex trafficking investigations that involve racial profiling. Such investigations often arise from raids on brothels that advertise as Asian massage parlors.
"We feel that repressive policies don't help trafficking victims, and that human rights-based approaches, including decriminalization, are actually more effective," said Carol Leigh, co-founder of the Bay Area Sex Workers Advocacy Network and a longtime advocate for prostitutes' rights.
But San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris said the ballot question mistakenly assumes prostitution is a victimless crime.
"The crime of prostitution does not exist by itself," Harris said. "Along with it come pimps, johns and other crimes that really impact the safety of neighborhoods."
If the measure passes, supporters say, prostitutes would not feel the need for pimps as protection. But opponents insist it would embolden pimps who trap drug addicts into prostitution by plying them with drugs.
"The proponents usually paint a fairly rosy picture of two consenting adults and a monetary exchange at the end," Pardini said. "They don't factor in the people that are being exploited and people that are being controlled, the ones manipulated both physically and chemically."
San Francisco weighs decriminalizing prostitution
Oct 21, 2008
By EVELYN NIEVES
Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - In this live-and-let-live town, where medical marijuana clubs do business next to grocery stores and an annual fair celebrates sadomasochism, prostitutes could soon walk the streets without fear of arrest.
San Francisco would become the first major U.S. city to decriminalize prostitution if voters next month approve Proposition K—a measure that forbids local authorities from investigating, arresting or prosecuting anyone for selling sex.
The ballot question technically would not legalize prostitution since state law still prohibits it, but the measure would eliminate the power of local law enforcement officials to go after prostitutes.
Proponents say the measure will free up $11 million the police spend each year arresting prostitutes and allow them to form collectives.
"It will allow workers to organize for our rights and for our safety," said Patricia West, 22, who said she has been selling sex for about a year by placing ads on the Internet. She moved to San Francisco in May from Texas to work on Proposition K.
Even in tolerant San Francisco—where the sadomasochism fair draws thousands of tourists and a pornographic video company is housed in a former armory—the measure faces an uphill battle, with much of the political establishment opposing it.
Some form of prostitution is already legal in two states. Brothels are allowed in rural counties in Nevada. And Rhode Island permits the sale of sex behind closed doors between consulting adults, but it prohibits street prostitution and brothels.
In 2004, almost two-thirds of voters in nearby Berkeley rejected decriminalization. But proponents of Proposition K say their proposal has a better shot in San Francisco, which they believe is more sexually liberal than the city across the bay.
After all, the world's oldest profession has long been established here. During the Gold Rush, the neighborhood closest to the piers was a seedy pleasure center of sex, gambling and drinking known as the Barbary Coast.
These days, on certain corners, prostitutes sell their bodies day and night, ducking into doorways and alleys when police pass by. One recent afternoon in the Mission District, six prostitutes were plying their trade on a single block.
Police made 1,583 prostitution arrests in 2007 and expect to make a similar number this year. But the district attorney's office says most defendants are fined, placed in diversion programs or both. Fewer than 5 percent get prosecuted for solicitation, which is a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.
Proposition K has been endorsed by the local Democratic Party. But the mayor, district attorney, police department and much of the business community oppose the idea, contending it would increase street prostitution, allow pimps the run of neighborhoods and hamper the fight against sex trafficking, which would remain illegal because it involves forcing people into the sex trade.
The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against the measure, saying it could make the city a magnet for prostitution.
If the proposal passes, "we wouldn't be able to investigate prostitution, and it's going to be pretty difficult for us to locate these folks who are victims of trafficking otherwise," said Capt. Al Pardini, head of the police department's vice unit. "It's pretty rare that we get a call that says: 'I'm a victim of human trafficking' or 'I suspect human trafficking in my neighborhood.'"
The proposition would also prohibit police from accepting federal or state funds for sex trafficking investigations that involve racial profiling. Such investigations often arise from raids on brothels that advertise as Asian massage parlors.
"We feel that repressive policies don't help trafficking victims, and that human rights-based approaches, including decriminalization, are actually more effective," said Carol Leigh, co-founder of the Bay Area Sex Workers Advocacy Network and a longtime advocate for prostitutes' rights.
But San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris said the ballot question mistakenly assumes prostitution is a victimless crime.
"The crime of prostitution does not exist by itself," Harris said. "Along with it come pimps, johns and other crimes that really impact the safety of neighborhoods."
If the measure passes, supporters say, prostitutes would not feel the need for pimps as protection. But opponents insist it would embolden pimps who trap drug addicts into prostitution by plying them with drugs.
"The proponents usually paint a fairly rosy picture of two consenting adults and a monetary exchange at the end," Pardini said. "They don't factor in the people that are being exploited and people that are being controlled, the ones manipulated both physically and chemically."
Mongols motorcycle gang arrested in federal sweep
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hrHOy4sPvBKCo0W7ItrIx-pmaE4gD93V5G3G0
Mongols motorcycle gang arrested in federal sweep
By THOMAS WATKINS
10-21-8
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Dozens of burly, tattoo-covered members of the Mongol motorcycle gang were arrested Tuesday by federal agents in six states following a three-year investigation in which undercover agents infiltrated the group.
More than 60 members of the Southern California-based Mongol Motorcycle Club were arrested under a federal racketeering indictment that included charges of murder, attempted murder, assault, as well as gun and drug violations, said Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives spokesman Mike Hoffman.
During some arrests, sharpshooters stood guard on surrounding rooftops as motorcycles were lined up and confiscated.
"It's going to be a large hit to their organization. We are arresting many of their top members," Hoffman said.
U.S. Attorney Thomas O'Brien said he believed it to be the highest number of arrests of a motorcycle gang in the nation's history.
His staff planned to ask a judge for an injunction to seize the Mongols' trademarked name, a first for federal authorities. If the order is approved, no member would be able to wear a jacket or ride a bike bearing the gang's name.
"It would allow law enforcement to seize the leather jackets right off their back," O'Brien said.
Federal and local agents had 110 federal arrest warrants and 160 search warrants that were being served across Southern California and in Nevada, Oregon, Colorado, Washington and Ohio. The sweep, dubbed Operation Black Rain, was to continue throughout the day Tuesday, agents said.
Among those arrested were the gang's former national president, Ruben Cavazos.
Hoffman said the Mongols had been recruiting members of Los Angeles street gangs to assist in their operations.
The Mongols are primarily Latino and formed because the Hells Angels refused to allow Hispanic members.
Four ATF agents infiltrated the gang and were accepted as full members, a difficult process that requires winning the trust of the gang's top leaders over a period of months, Hoffman said.
The agents were required to live away from their families in homes set up to make it look like they lived a Mongols lifestyle, Hoffman said. Four undercover women ATF agents also were involved in the operation, pretending to be biker girlfriends and attending parties with the agents; women are not allowed to become full members of the gang.
"If you go to a party all the time and you don't ever bring a girl around, it's kind of weird," Hoffman said. "Someone might get suspicious."
To be accepted in the gang, the ATF agents had to run errands and were subject to a background check by private detectives.
Outside Cavazos' home in West Covina, about 18 miles east of Los Angeles, a red, custom-modified Harley-Davidson motorbike sat outside. No occupants were home but several police and ATF agents were seen going through items in the house.
Cavazos wrote a memoir titled "Honor Few, Fear None: The Life and Times of a Mongol," published by HarperCollins in June. HarperCollins publicist Sarah Burningham in New York City said she only handles book-related issues for Cavazos, but would forward an e-mail from The Associated Press requesting comment.
Another former Mongols national president, Roger Pinney, alleged in an interview with The Associated Press that Cavazos was the problem, not the club in general.
"They were just on the verge of cleaning up their act," said Pinney, who is no longer a member and is serving probation from his role in an infamous brawl at Laughlin, Nev., in 2002 in which three people died. "It's not a club-run deal. It's individuals who are the ones who decide to commit crimes."
Pinney said he warned other club members that Cavazos was trouble.
"He was throwing all the good members out and bringing gang members in," Pinney said. "He was trying to be a drug lord or something."
Pinney doesn't believe the raid will force the Mongols off the road. "The Mongols aren't going away, and neither are the Hells Angels," he said.
Associated Press writers Solvej Schou and Greg Risling, AP photographer Ric Francis and AP videographer John Mone contributed to this report. AP writer Ken Ritter in Las Vegas also contributed.
Mongols motorcycle gang arrested in federal sweep
By THOMAS WATKINS
10-21-8
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Dozens of burly, tattoo-covered members of the Mongol motorcycle gang were arrested Tuesday by federal agents in six states following a three-year investigation in which undercover agents infiltrated the group.
More than 60 members of the Southern California-based Mongol Motorcycle Club were arrested under a federal racketeering indictment that included charges of murder, attempted murder, assault, as well as gun and drug violations, said Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives spokesman Mike Hoffman.
During some arrests, sharpshooters stood guard on surrounding rooftops as motorcycles were lined up and confiscated.
"It's going to be a large hit to their organization. We are arresting many of their top members," Hoffman said.
U.S. Attorney Thomas O'Brien said he believed it to be the highest number of arrests of a motorcycle gang in the nation's history.
His staff planned to ask a judge for an injunction to seize the Mongols' trademarked name, a first for federal authorities. If the order is approved, no member would be able to wear a jacket or ride a bike bearing the gang's name.
"It would allow law enforcement to seize the leather jackets right off their back," O'Brien said.
Federal and local agents had 110 federal arrest warrants and 160 search warrants that were being served across Southern California and in Nevada, Oregon, Colorado, Washington and Ohio. The sweep, dubbed Operation Black Rain, was to continue throughout the day Tuesday, agents said.
Among those arrested were the gang's former national president, Ruben Cavazos.
Hoffman said the Mongols had been recruiting members of Los Angeles street gangs to assist in their operations.
The Mongols are primarily Latino and formed because the Hells Angels refused to allow Hispanic members.
Four ATF agents infiltrated the gang and were accepted as full members, a difficult process that requires winning the trust of the gang's top leaders over a period of months, Hoffman said.
The agents were required to live away from their families in homes set up to make it look like they lived a Mongols lifestyle, Hoffman said. Four undercover women ATF agents also were involved in the operation, pretending to be biker girlfriends and attending parties with the agents; women are not allowed to become full members of the gang.
"If you go to a party all the time and you don't ever bring a girl around, it's kind of weird," Hoffman said. "Someone might get suspicious."
To be accepted in the gang, the ATF agents had to run errands and were subject to a background check by private detectives.
Outside Cavazos' home in West Covina, about 18 miles east of Los Angeles, a red, custom-modified Harley-Davidson motorbike sat outside. No occupants were home but several police and ATF agents were seen going through items in the house.
Cavazos wrote a memoir titled "Honor Few, Fear None: The Life and Times of a Mongol," published by HarperCollins in June. HarperCollins publicist Sarah Burningham in New York City said she only handles book-related issues for Cavazos, but would forward an e-mail from The Associated Press requesting comment.
Another former Mongols national president, Roger Pinney, alleged in an interview with The Associated Press that Cavazos was the problem, not the club in general.
"They were just on the verge of cleaning up their act," said Pinney, who is no longer a member and is serving probation from his role in an infamous brawl at Laughlin, Nev., in 2002 in which three people died. "It's not a club-run deal. It's individuals who are the ones who decide to commit crimes."
Pinney said he warned other club members that Cavazos was trouble.
"He was throwing all the good members out and bringing gang members in," Pinney said. "He was trying to be a drug lord or something."
Pinney doesn't believe the raid will force the Mongols off the road. "The Mongols aren't going away, and neither are the Hells Angels," he said.
Associated Press writers Solvej Schou and Greg Risling, AP photographer Ric Francis and AP videographer John Mone contributed to this report. AP writer Ken Ritter in Las Vegas also contributed.
New Ad List
New Ad List from Rense.com, PrisonPlanet.com and others...
http://www.44power.com
http://www.buykp.org
http://www.childreninternational.com
http://www.cleanserx.com
http://www.dietblogtalk.com
http://www.ecoloblue.com
http://www.efoodsdirect.com
http://www.freevideo2008.com
http://www.goldworthfinancial.com
http://www.healthyheartht.info
http://www.jimmyjohns.com
http://www.lombardipublishing.com
http://www.midasresources.com
http://www.miracleslimwrap.com
http://www.mysteryfabric.com
http://www.patriotfood.com
http://www.scripturesforamerica.org
http://www.sensational.com
http://www.silver-investor.com
http://www.skechers.com
http://www.survivalistseeds.com
http://www.tomsofmaine.com
http://www.truthaboutabs.com
http://www.44power.com
http://www.buykp.org
http://www.childreninternational.com
http://www.cleanserx.com
http://www.dietblogtalk.com
http://www.ecoloblue.com
http://www.efoodsdirect.com
http://www.freevideo2008.com
http://www.goldworthfinancial.com
http://www.healthyheartht.info
http://www.jimmyjohns.com
http://www.lombardipublishing.com
http://www.midasresources.com
http://www.miracleslimwrap.com
http://www.mysteryfabric.com
http://www.patriotfood.com
http://www.scripturesforamerica.org
http://www.sensational.com
http://www.silver-investor.com
http://www.skechers.com
http://www.survivalistseeds.com
http://www.tomsofmaine.com
http://www.truthaboutabs.com
The Theft of 2008
The Theft of 2008A Warning from Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
StealBackYourVote.org
Voter suppression is real. It’s a crime. And it’s happening to YOU.But there’s something that you can do to prevent it. That’s what this guide is about.
For many years, Greg Palast and I have been writing about and investigating voter suppression. We found this: Leading up to the November election, elite commandos of bare-knuckle politics are wielding new federal legislation to systematically disenfranchise millions of voters – enough, in another close race, to determine the presidency in November.
The idea that there is something inadvertent about this or coincidental is a fantasy. This is a deliberate strategy to keep minorities from voting, senior citizens from voting, young people from voting in an effort to suppress the vote and maintain their hold on power.”
Our concern is not partisan. We need every American to vote: Democrats and Republicans.
It’s our job, each of us, to inform the voters that they have a right to vote, and that there are people who are going to try to deprive them of that right. But we can protect our right to vote. Start with page 23: ‘7 Easy Steps to Steal Back Your Vote.’
You can do all the campaigning you want in a battleground state like Ohio or New Mexico, but if your voters aren’t counted, you’re going to lose the Presidency – and our democracy.
Download this guide. Download the film, “Steal Back Your Vote." Pass on this link. And get the word out! There’s still time to steal back your vote.
Video Specials:Willie Nelson
http://www.youtube.com/v/SvdSd0-iTO0
Rev. Jesse Jackson
http://www.youtube.com/v/bY0s7wmSLig
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
http://www.youtube.com/v/IAr4PKwo5Kg
How About A Bailout For America’s Family Farms?
http://www.prisonplanet.com/nelson-how-about-a-bailout-for-americas-family-farms.htmlNelson: How About A Bailout For America’s Family Farms?
Country music icon says just $1 billion out of $700 billion could get real economy back on track
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Country music icon Willie Nelson has a message for Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke in the wake of the recent $700 billion dollar plus Wall Street bailout - how about a bailout for the desperate and struggling family farmers of America that are nearing extinction?
“I have written a letter as president of Farm Aid to whoever controls that money that we would like to have $1 billion dollars from that 700….$1 billion dollars is I think all we’ll need to turn the economy around if we start out taking care of our family farmers,” Nelson told The Alex Jones Show.
“We could put 10 million farmers back on the land, making a living out there raising food and fuel….and that $1 billion dollars I think would go a long way to changing our negative attitudes that we have and the confidence in ourselves and in our country right now,” said Nelson, adding that all foreclosures on farms should be halted immediately.
“I think that if we invested that $1 billion with our family farmers, we would begin to turn it around,” stressed the country music star, later joking that $100 billion would be an even better amount.
Nelson has been a multi-decade activist and vocal proponent for Farm Aid, and recently performed alongside Neil Young at the highly successful 2008 Farm Aid concert which was held at the Comcast Center in Mansfield, MA, having helped organize the first Farm Aid concert in 1985.
Farm Aid is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to keep family farmers on their land and support locally sourced, humanely-raised and organic food in the face of a gargantuan attempt on behalf of big agribusiness to squeeze the family farmer out of existence.
The letter that Nelson and fellow Farm Aid directors John Mellencamp, Neil Young and Dave Matthews sent to Congress points out, “When farms thrive, Main Street businesses and local communities thrive. Far from Wall Street, family farmers are creating real wealth, producing real value, growing from seeds and sunlight a product that nourishes us both physically and economically. Supporting diverse decentralized family farming will do far more for the stability and vitality of our country than a handful of global agribusiness corporations could ever do.”
“The proposed $700 billion bailout asks taxpayers to foot the bill without giving them the opportunity to share in any gains. A $1 billion investment in family farm agriculture would enrich us all, because we are all shareholders of the family farm. The return on investment in the family farm includes thriving local economies, nutritious food for better health, a safer and more secure food supply, a cleaner environment and more renewable energy.”
Nelson pointed out that when 8-10 million family farmers were on the land in America at the end of the second world war the economy was strong because, “Agriculture is the bottom rung on the economic ladder,” adding that the farmers became a target because they were a political problem.
“Let’s put out the fire now, we’ll figure out who started it later and that’s pretty much what we have to do, we have to stop the fire and stop the bleeding, and I think the best way to do that is still from the ground up, go back to our family farmer, he’s the one that started taking care of us in the beginning so let’s let him do it again,” Nelson concluded.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Block the Vote
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/23638322/block_the_vote
Block the Vote
Will the GOP's campaign to deter new voters and discard Democratic ballots determine the next president?
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. & GREG PALAST
Posted Oct 30, 2008
These days, the old west rail hub of Las Vegas, New Mexico, is little more than a dusty economic dead zone amid a boneyard of bare mesas. In national elections, the town overwhelmingly votes Democratic: More than 80 percent of all residents are Hispanic, and one in four lives below the poverty line. On February 5th, the day of the Super Tuesday caucus, a school-bus driver named Paul Maez arrived at his local polling station to cast his ballot. To his surprise, Maez found that his name had vanished from the list of registered voters, thanks to a statewide effort to deter fraudulent voting. For Maez, the shock was especially acute: He is the supervisor of elections in Las Vegas.
Maez was not alone in being denied his right to vote. On Super Tuesday, one in nine Democrats who tried to cast ballots in New Mexico found their names missing from the registration lists. The numbers were even higher in precincts like Las Vegas, where nearly 20 percent of the county's voters were absent from the rolls. With their status in limbo, the voters were forced to cast "provisional" ballots, which can be reviewed and discarded by election officials without explanation. On Super Tuesday, more than half of all provisional ballots cast were thrown out statewide.
This November, what happened to Maez will happen to hundreds of thousands of voters across the country. In state after state, Republican operatives — the party's elite commandos of bare-knuckle politics — are wielding new federal legislation to systematically disenfranchise Democrats. If this year's race is as close as the past two elections, the GOP's nationwide campaign could be large enough to determine the presidency in November. "I don't think the Democrats get it," says John Boyd, a voting-rights attorney in Albuquerque who has taken on the Republican Party for impeding access to the ballot. "All these new rules and games are turning voting into an obstacle course that could flip the vote to the GOP in half a dozen states."
Suppressing the vote has long been a cornerstone of the GOP's electoral strategy. Shortly before the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Paul Weyrich — a principal architect of today's Republican Party — scolded evangelicals who believed in democracy. "Many of our Christians have what I call the 'goo goo' syndrome — good government," said Weyrich, who co-founded Moral Majority with Jerry Falwell. "They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. . . . As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
Today, Weyrich's vision has become a national reality. Since 2003, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, at least 2.7 million new voters have had their applications to register rejected. In addition, at least 1.6 million votes were never counted in the 2004 election — and the commission's own data suggests that the real number could be twice as high. To purge registration rolls and discard ballots, partisan election officials used a wide range of pretexts, from "unreadability" to changes in a voter's signature. And this year, thanks to new provisions of the Help America Vote Act, the number of discounted votes could surge even higher.
Passed in 2002, HAVA was hailed by leaders in both parties as a reform designed to avoid a repeat of the 2000 debacle in Florida that threw the presidential election to the U.S. Supreme Court. The measure set standards for voting systems, created an independent commission to oversee elections, and ordered states to provide provisional ballots to voters whose eligibility is challenged at the polls.
But from the start, HAVA was corrupted by the involvement of Republican superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, who worked to cram the bill with favors for his clients. (Both Abramoff and a primary author of HAVA, former Rep. Bob Ney, were imprisoned for their role in the conspiracy.) In practice, many of the "reforms" created by HAVA have actually made it harder for citizens to cast a ballot and have their vote counted. In case after case, Republican election officials at the local and state level have used the rules to give GOP candidates an edge on Election Day by creating new barriers to registration, purging legitimate names from voter rolls, challenging voters at the polls and discarding valid ballots.
To justify this battery of new voting impediments, Republicans cite an alleged upsurge in voting fraud. Indeed, the U.S.-attorney scandal that resulted in the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales began when the White House fired federal prosecutors who resisted political pressure to drum up nonexistent cases of voting fraud against Democrats. "They wanted some splashy pre-election indictments that would scare these alleged hordes of illegal voters away," says David Iglesias, a U.S. attorney for New Mexico who was fired in December 2006. "We took over 100 complaints and investigated for almost two years — but I didn't find one prosecutable case of voter fraud in the entire state of New Mexico."
There's a reason Iglesias couldn't find any evidence of fraud: Individual voters almost never try to cast illegal ballots. The Bush administration's main point person on "ballot protection" has been Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department attorney who has advised states on how to use HAVA to erect more barriers to voting. Appointed to the Federal Election Commission by Bush, von Spakovsky has suggested that voter rolls may be stuffed with 5 million illegal aliens. In fact, studies have repeatedly shown that voter fraud is extremely rare. According to a recent analysis by Lorraine Minnite, an expert on voting crime at Barnard College, federal courts found only 24 voters guilty of fraud from 2002 to 2005, out of hundreds of millions of votes cast. "The claim of widespread voter fraud," Minnite says, "is itself a fraud."
Allegations of voter fraud are only the latest rationale the GOP has used to disenfranchise voters — especially blacks, Hispanics and others who traditionally support Democrats. "The Republicans have a long history of erecting barriers to discourage Americans from voting," says Donna Brazile, chair of the Voting Rights Institute for the Democratic National Committee. "Now they're trying to spook Americans with the ghost of voter fraud. It's very effective — but it's ironic that the only way they maintain power is by using fear to deprive Americans of their constitutional right to vote." The recently enacted barriers thrown up to deter voters include:
1. Obstructing Voter-Registration Drives
Since 2004, the Bush administration and more than a dozen states have taken steps to impede voter registration. Among the worst offenders is Florida, where the Republican-dominated legislature created hefty fines — up to $5,000 per violation — for groups that fail to meet deadlines for turning in voter-application forms. Facing potentially huge penalties for trivial administrative errors, the League of Women Voters abandoned its voter-registration drives in Florida. A court order eventually forced the legislature to reduce the maximum penalty to $1,000. But even so, said former League president Dianne Wheatley-Giliotti, the reduced fines "create an unfair tax on democracy." The state has also failed to uphold a federal law requiring that low-income voters be offered an opportunity to register when they apply for food stamps or other public assistance. As a result, the annual number of such registrations has plummeted from more than 120,000 in the Clinton years to barely 10,000 today.
2. Demanding "Perfect Matches"
Under the Help America Vote Act, some states now reject first-time registrants whose data does not correspond to information in other government databases. Spurred by HAVA, almost every state must now attempt to make some kind of match — and four states, including the swing states of Iowa and Florida, require what is known as a "perfect match." Under this rigid framework, new registrants can lose the right to vote if the information on their voter-registration forms — Social Security number, street address and precisely spelled name, right down to a hyphen — fails to exactly match data listed in other government records.
There are many legitimate reasons, of course, why a voter's information might vary. Indeed, a recent study by the Brennan Center for Justice found that as many as 20 percent of discrepancies between voter records and driver's licenses in New York City are simply typing mistakes made by government clerks when they transcribe data. But under the new rules, those mistakes are costing citizens the right to vote. In California, a Republican secretary of state blocked 43 percent of all new voters in Los Angeles from registering in early 2006 — many because of the state's failure to produce a tight match. In Florida, GOP officials created "match" rules that rejected more than 15,000 new registrants in 2006 and 2007 — nearly three-fourths of them Hispanic and black voters. Given the big registration drives this year, the number could be five times higher by November.
3. Purging Legitimate Voters From the Rolls
The Help America Vote Act doesn't just disenfranchise new registrants; it also targets veteran voters. In the past, bipartisan county election boards maintained voter records. But HAVA requires that records be centralized, computerized and maintained by secretaries of state — partisan officials — who are empowered to purge the rolls of any voter they deem ineligible. Ironically, the new rules imitate the centralized system in Florida — the same corrupt operation that inspired passage of HAVA in the first place. Prior to the 2000 election, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris and her predecessor, both Republicans, tried to purge 57,000 voters, most of them African-Americans, because their names resembled those of persons convicted of a crime. The state eventually acknowledged that the purges were improper — two years after the election.
Rather than end Florida-style purges, however, HAVA has nationalized them. Maez, the elections supervisor in New Mexico, says he was the victim of faulty list management by a private contractor hired by the state. Hector Balderas, the state auditor, was also purged from the voter list. The nation's youngest elected Hispanic official, Balderas hails from Mora County, one of the poorest in the state, which had the highest rate of voters forced to cast provisional ballots. "As a strategic consideration," he notes, "there are those that benefit from chaos" at the ballot box.
All told, states reported scrubbing at least 10 million voters from their rolls on questionable grounds between 2004 and 2006. Colorado holds the record: Donetta Davidson, the Republican secretary of state, and her GOP successor oversaw the elimination of nearly one of every six of their state's voters. Bush has since appointed Davidson to the Election Assistance Commission, the federal agency created by HAVA, which provides guidance to the states on "list maintenance" methods.
4. Requiring Unnecessary Voter ID's
Even if voters run the gauntlet of the new registration laws, they can still be blocked at the polling station. In an incident last May, an election official in Indiana denied ballots to 10 nuns seeking to vote in the Democratic primary because their driver's licenses or passports had expired. Even though Indiana has never recorded a single case of voter-ID fraud, it is one of two dozen states that have enacted stringent new voter-ID statutes.
On its face, the requirement to show a government-issued ID doesn't seem unreasonable. "I want to cash a check to pay for my groceries, I've got to show a little bit of ID," Karl Rove told the Republican National Lawyers Association in 2006. But many Americans lack easy access to official identification. According to a recent study for the Election Law Journal, young people, senior citizens and minorities — groups that traditionally vote Democratic — often have no driver's licenses or state ID cards. According to the study, one in 10 likely white voters do not possess the necessary identification. For African-Americans, the number lacking such ID is twice as high.
5. Rejecting "Spoiled" Ballots
Even intrepid voters who manage to cast a ballot may still find their vote discounted. In 2004, election officials discarded at least 1 million votes nationwide after classifying them as "spoiled" because blank spaces, stray marks or tears made them indecipherable to voting machines. The losses hit hardest among minorities in low-income precincts, who are often forced to vote on antiquated machines. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, in its investigation of the 2000 returns from Florida, found that African-Americans were nearly 10 times more likely than whites to have their ballots rejected, a ratio that holds nationwide.
Proponents of HAVA claimed the law would correct the spoilage problem by promoting computerized balloting. Yet touch-screen systems have proved highly unreliable — especially in minority and low-income precincts. A statistical analysis of New Mexico ballots by a voting-rights group called VotersUnite found that Hispanics who voted by computer in 2004 were nearly five times more likely to have their votes unrecorded than those who used paper ballots. In a close election, such small discrepancies can make a big difference: In 2004, the number of spoiled ballots in New Mexico — 19,000 — was three times George Bush's margin of victory.
6. Challenging "Provisional" Ballots
In 2004, an estimated 3 million voters who showed up at the polls were refused regular ballots because their registration was challenged on a technicality. Instead, these voters were handed "provisional" ballots, a fail-safe measure mandated by HAVA to enable officials to review disputed votes. But for many officials, resolving disputes means tossing ballots in the trash. In 2004, a third of all provisional ballots — as many as 1 million votes — were simply thrown away at the discretion of election officials.
Many voters are given provisional ballots under an insidious tactic known as "vote caging," which uses targeted mailings to disenfranchise black voters whose addresses have changed. In 2004, despite a federal consent order forbidding Republicans from engaging in the practice, the GOP sent out tens of thousands of letters to "confirm" the addresses of voters in minority precincts. If a letter was returned for any reason — because the voter was away at school or serving in the military — the GOP challenged the voter for giving a false address. One caging operation was exposed when an RNC official mistakenly sent the list to a parody site called GeorgeWBush.org — instead of to the official campaign site GeorgeWBush.com.
In the century following the Civil War, millions of black Americans in the Deep South lost their constitutional right to vote, thanks to literacy tests, poll taxes and other Jim Crow restrictions imposed by white officials. Add up all the modern-day barriers to voting erected since the 2004 election — the new registrations thrown out, the existing registrations scrubbed, the spoiled ballots, the provisional ballots that were never counted — and what you have is millions of voters, more than enough to swing the presidential election, quietly being detached from the electorate by subterfuge.
"Jim Crow was laid to rest, but his cousins were not," says Donna Brazile. "We got rid of poll taxes and literacy tests but now have a second generation of schemes to deny our citizens their franchise." Come November, the most crucial demographic may prove to be Americans who have been denied the right to vote. If Democrats are to win the 2008 election, they must not simply beat John McCain at the polls — they must beat him by a margin that exceeds the level of GOP vote tampering.
Contributing editor Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is one of the nation's leading voting-rights advocates. His article "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?" [RS 1002] sparked widespread scrutiny of vote tampering. Greg Palast, who broke the story on Florida's illegal voter purges in the 2000 election, is the author of "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy." For more information, visit No Voter Left Behind and Steal Back Your Vote.
Block the Vote
Will the GOP's campaign to deter new voters and discard Democratic ballots determine the next president?
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. & GREG PALAST
Posted Oct 30, 2008
These days, the old west rail hub of Las Vegas, New Mexico, is little more than a dusty economic dead zone amid a boneyard of bare mesas. In national elections, the town overwhelmingly votes Democratic: More than 80 percent of all residents are Hispanic, and one in four lives below the poverty line. On February 5th, the day of the Super Tuesday caucus, a school-bus driver named Paul Maez arrived at his local polling station to cast his ballot. To his surprise, Maez found that his name had vanished from the list of registered voters, thanks to a statewide effort to deter fraudulent voting. For Maez, the shock was especially acute: He is the supervisor of elections in Las Vegas.
Maez was not alone in being denied his right to vote. On Super Tuesday, one in nine Democrats who tried to cast ballots in New Mexico found their names missing from the registration lists. The numbers were even higher in precincts like Las Vegas, where nearly 20 percent of the county's voters were absent from the rolls. With their status in limbo, the voters were forced to cast "provisional" ballots, which can be reviewed and discarded by election officials without explanation. On Super Tuesday, more than half of all provisional ballots cast were thrown out statewide.
This November, what happened to Maez will happen to hundreds of thousands of voters across the country. In state after state, Republican operatives — the party's elite commandos of bare-knuckle politics — are wielding new federal legislation to systematically disenfranchise Democrats. If this year's race is as close as the past two elections, the GOP's nationwide campaign could be large enough to determine the presidency in November. "I don't think the Democrats get it," says John Boyd, a voting-rights attorney in Albuquerque who has taken on the Republican Party for impeding access to the ballot. "All these new rules and games are turning voting into an obstacle course that could flip the vote to the GOP in half a dozen states."
Suppressing the vote has long been a cornerstone of the GOP's electoral strategy. Shortly before the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Paul Weyrich — a principal architect of today's Republican Party — scolded evangelicals who believed in democracy. "Many of our Christians have what I call the 'goo goo' syndrome — good government," said Weyrich, who co-founded Moral Majority with Jerry Falwell. "They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. . . . As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
Today, Weyrich's vision has become a national reality. Since 2003, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, at least 2.7 million new voters have had their applications to register rejected. In addition, at least 1.6 million votes were never counted in the 2004 election — and the commission's own data suggests that the real number could be twice as high. To purge registration rolls and discard ballots, partisan election officials used a wide range of pretexts, from "unreadability" to changes in a voter's signature. And this year, thanks to new provisions of the Help America Vote Act, the number of discounted votes could surge even higher.
Passed in 2002, HAVA was hailed by leaders in both parties as a reform designed to avoid a repeat of the 2000 debacle in Florida that threw the presidential election to the U.S. Supreme Court. The measure set standards for voting systems, created an independent commission to oversee elections, and ordered states to provide provisional ballots to voters whose eligibility is challenged at the polls.
But from the start, HAVA was corrupted by the involvement of Republican superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, who worked to cram the bill with favors for his clients. (Both Abramoff and a primary author of HAVA, former Rep. Bob Ney, were imprisoned for their role in the conspiracy.) In practice, many of the "reforms" created by HAVA have actually made it harder for citizens to cast a ballot and have their vote counted. In case after case, Republican election officials at the local and state level have used the rules to give GOP candidates an edge on Election Day by creating new barriers to registration, purging legitimate names from voter rolls, challenging voters at the polls and discarding valid ballots.
To justify this battery of new voting impediments, Republicans cite an alleged upsurge in voting fraud. Indeed, the U.S.-attorney scandal that resulted in the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales began when the White House fired federal prosecutors who resisted political pressure to drum up nonexistent cases of voting fraud against Democrats. "They wanted some splashy pre-election indictments that would scare these alleged hordes of illegal voters away," says David Iglesias, a U.S. attorney for New Mexico who was fired in December 2006. "We took over 100 complaints and investigated for almost two years — but I didn't find one prosecutable case of voter fraud in the entire state of New Mexico."
There's a reason Iglesias couldn't find any evidence of fraud: Individual voters almost never try to cast illegal ballots. The Bush administration's main point person on "ballot protection" has been Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department attorney who has advised states on how to use HAVA to erect more barriers to voting. Appointed to the Federal Election Commission by Bush, von Spakovsky has suggested that voter rolls may be stuffed with 5 million illegal aliens. In fact, studies have repeatedly shown that voter fraud is extremely rare. According to a recent analysis by Lorraine Minnite, an expert on voting crime at Barnard College, federal courts found only 24 voters guilty of fraud from 2002 to 2005, out of hundreds of millions of votes cast. "The claim of widespread voter fraud," Minnite says, "is itself a fraud."
Allegations of voter fraud are only the latest rationale the GOP has used to disenfranchise voters — especially blacks, Hispanics and others who traditionally support Democrats. "The Republicans have a long history of erecting barriers to discourage Americans from voting," says Donna Brazile, chair of the Voting Rights Institute for the Democratic National Committee. "Now they're trying to spook Americans with the ghost of voter fraud. It's very effective — but it's ironic that the only way they maintain power is by using fear to deprive Americans of their constitutional right to vote." The recently enacted barriers thrown up to deter voters include:
1. Obstructing Voter-Registration Drives
Since 2004, the Bush administration and more than a dozen states have taken steps to impede voter registration. Among the worst offenders is Florida, where the Republican-dominated legislature created hefty fines — up to $5,000 per violation — for groups that fail to meet deadlines for turning in voter-application forms. Facing potentially huge penalties for trivial administrative errors, the League of Women Voters abandoned its voter-registration drives in Florida. A court order eventually forced the legislature to reduce the maximum penalty to $1,000. But even so, said former League president Dianne Wheatley-Giliotti, the reduced fines "create an unfair tax on democracy." The state has also failed to uphold a federal law requiring that low-income voters be offered an opportunity to register when they apply for food stamps or other public assistance. As a result, the annual number of such registrations has plummeted from more than 120,000 in the Clinton years to barely 10,000 today.
2. Demanding "Perfect Matches"
Under the Help America Vote Act, some states now reject first-time registrants whose data does not correspond to information in other government databases. Spurred by HAVA, almost every state must now attempt to make some kind of match — and four states, including the swing states of Iowa and Florida, require what is known as a "perfect match." Under this rigid framework, new registrants can lose the right to vote if the information on their voter-registration forms — Social Security number, street address and precisely spelled name, right down to a hyphen — fails to exactly match data listed in other government records.
There are many legitimate reasons, of course, why a voter's information might vary. Indeed, a recent study by the Brennan Center for Justice found that as many as 20 percent of discrepancies between voter records and driver's licenses in New York City are simply typing mistakes made by government clerks when they transcribe data. But under the new rules, those mistakes are costing citizens the right to vote. In California, a Republican secretary of state blocked 43 percent of all new voters in Los Angeles from registering in early 2006 — many because of the state's failure to produce a tight match. In Florida, GOP officials created "match" rules that rejected more than 15,000 new registrants in 2006 and 2007 — nearly three-fourths of them Hispanic and black voters. Given the big registration drives this year, the number could be five times higher by November.
3. Purging Legitimate Voters From the Rolls
The Help America Vote Act doesn't just disenfranchise new registrants; it also targets veteran voters. In the past, bipartisan county election boards maintained voter records. But HAVA requires that records be centralized, computerized and maintained by secretaries of state — partisan officials — who are empowered to purge the rolls of any voter they deem ineligible. Ironically, the new rules imitate the centralized system in Florida — the same corrupt operation that inspired passage of HAVA in the first place. Prior to the 2000 election, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris and her predecessor, both Republicans, tried to purge 57,000 voters, most of them African-Americans, because their names resembled those of persons convicted of a crime. The state eventually acknowledged that the purges were improper — two years after the election.
Rather than end Florida-style purges, however, HAVA has nationalized them. Maez, the elections supervisor in New Mexico, says he was the victim of faulty list management by a private contractor hired by the state. Hector Balderas, the state auditor, was also purged from the voter list. The nation's youngest elected Hispanic official, Balderas hails from Mora County, one of the poorest in the state, which had the highest rate of voters forced to cast provisional ballots. "As a strategic consideration," he notes, "there are those that benefit from chaos" at the ballot box.
All told, states reported scrubbing at least 10 million voters from their rolls on questionable grounds between 2004 and 2006. Colorado holds the record: Donetta Davidson, the Republican secretary of state, and her GOP successor oversaw the elimination of nearly one of every six of their state's voters. Bush has since appointed Davidson to the Election Assistance Commission, the federal agency created by HAVA, which provides guidance to the states on "list maintenance" methods.
4. Requiring Unnecessary Voter ID's
Even if voters run the gauntlet of the new registration laws, they can still be blocked at the polling station. In an incident last May, an election official in Indiana denied ballots to 10 nuns seeking to vote in the Democratic primary because their driver's licenses or passports had expired. Even though Indiana has never recorded a single case of voter-ID fraud, it is one of two dozen states that have enacted stringent new voter-ID statutes.
On its face, the requirement to show a government-issued ID doesn't seem unreasonable. "I want to cash a check to pay for my groceries, I've got to show a little bit of ID," Karl Rove told the Republican National Lawyers Association in 2006. But many Americans lack easy access to official identification. According to a recent study for the Election Law Journal, young people, senior citizens and minorities — groups that traditionally vote Democratic — often have no driver's licenses or state ID cards. According to the study, one in 10 likely white voters do not possess the necessary identification. For African-Americans, the number lacking such ID is twice as high.
5. Rejecting "Spoiled" Ballots
Even intrepid voters who manage to cast a ballot may still find their vote discounted. In 2004, election officials discarded at least 1 million votes nationwide after classifying them as "spoiled" because blank spaces, stray marks or tears made them indecipherable to voting machines. The losses hit hardest among minorities in low-income precincts, who are often forced to vote on antiquated machines. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, in its investigation of the 2000 returns from Florida, found that African-Americans were nearly 10 times more likely than whites to have their ballots rejected, a ratio that holds nationwide.
Proponents of HAVA claimed the law would correct the spoilage problem by promoting computerized balloting. Yet touch-screen systems have proved highly unreliable — especially in minority and low-income precincts. A statistical analysis of New Mexico ballots by a voting-rights group called VotersUnite found that Hispanics who voted by computer in 2004 were nearly five times more likely to have their votes unrecorded than those who used paper ballots. In a close election, such small discrepancies can make a big difference: In 2004, the number of spoiled ballots in New Mexico — 19,000 — was three times George Bush's margin of victory.
6. Challenging "Provisional" Ballots
In 2004, an estimated 3 million voters who showed up at the polls were refused regular ballots because their registration was challenged on a technicality. Instead, these voters were handed "provisional" ballots, a fail-safe measure mandated by HAVA to enable officials to review disputed votes. But for many officials, resolving disputes means tossing ballots in the trash. In 2004, a third of all provisional ballots — as many as 1 million votes — were simply thrown away at the discretion of election officials.
Many voters are given provisional ballots under an insidious tactic known as "vote caging," which uses targeted mailings to disenfranchise black voters whose addresses have changed. In 2004, despite a federal consent order forbidding Republicans from engaging in the practice, the GOP sent out tens of thousands of letters to "confirm" the addresses of voters in minority precincts. If a letter was returned for any reason — because the voter was away at school or serving in the military — the GOP challenged the voter for giving a false address. One caging operation was exposed when an RNC official mistakenly sent the list to a parody site called GeorgeWBush.org — instead of to the official campaign site GeorgeWBush.com.
In the century following the Civil War, millions of black Americans in the Deep South lost their constitutional right to vote, thanks to literacy tests, poll taxes and other Jim Crow restrictions imposed by white officials. Add up all the modern-day barriers to voting erected since the 2004 election — the new registrations thrown out, the existing registrations scrubbed, the spoiled ballots, the provisional ballots that were never counted — and what you have is millions of voters, more than enough to swing the presidential election, quietly being detached from the electorate by subterfuge.
"Jim Crow was laid to rest, but his cousins were not," says Donna Brazile. "We got rid of poll taxes and literacy tests but now have a second generation of schemes to deny our citizens their franchise." Come November, the most crucial demographic may prove to be Americans who have been denied the right to vote. If Democrats are to win the 2008 election, they must not simply beat John McCain at the polls — they must beat him by a margin that exceeds the level of GOP vote tampering.
Contributing editor Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is one of the nation's leading voting-rights advocates. His article "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?" [RS 1002] sparked widespread scrutiny of vote tampering. Greg Palast, who broke the story on Florida's illegal voter purges in the 2000 election, is the author of "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy." For more information, visit No Voter Left Behind and Steal Back Your Vote.
A funny thing happened on the way to Washington
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a46682a-9c73-11dd-a42e-000077b07658.html
Will a funny thing happen on the way to Washington?
By Edward Luce
October 17 2008
At what was the first – and probably last – humorous occasion of this dyspeptic campaign, John McCain and Barack Obama gave comic speeches on Thursday at the annual dinner in memory of Al Smith, the great Catholic-American.
Both revealed a side they have kept well concealed in recent months. “Contrary to popular opinion, I was not born in a manger,” said Mr Obama. “I just call him ‘That One’”, said Mr McCain of his opponent. “He doesn’t mind at all: He even has a pet name for me: George Bush.”
In the best humorous tradition, the funniest line was the one that cut closest to the bone. “We all know that Senator Obama is ready for any contingency – even the possibility of a sudden and dramatic market rebound,” said Mr McCain. “I’m told that at the first sign of recovery he will suspend his campaign and fly immediately to Washington to address this crisis.”
With barely two weeks left before polling day, the media, the Democratic party and the rest of the world (the safest Democratic state of the lot) have virtually called a halt to the election. Barack Obama will be the winner. His momentum is now unstoppable. And for that he has the financial meltdown to thank.
All of which is probably true. To judge by some, although by no means all, of the recent polls, Mr Obama may even pull off a 1980-style Ronald Reagan landslide. Parts of America, such as North Carolina and Virginia, which last elected a Democrat when Mr Obama was in diapers, show him in the lead by ground-shifting margins.
Then there is the money. No candidate has ever raised anything like Mr Obama’s tally, which could exceed $600m (£350m, €450m) if the recent escalation in donations is any guide. By my estimate, Mr Obama’s remaining war chest could fund at least two back-to-back British general elections. Mr McCain, meanwhile, might be able to finance a creditable shot at the New Jersey governorship.
Nor, in spite of the acuity of Mr McCain’s punchline, would a dramatic stock market recovery be likely to dent Mr Obama’s fortunes. It would come too late to restore the American public’s badly shaken confidence in their financial system and in the free-trade economy that Mr McCain so gallantly defends.
Besides, no resurgence in the Dow Jones could reflate a property market that has been the chief source of household spending since the Bush administration took office. Mr Obama can rest easy: Joe Public – and even Joe Plumber – will be feeling the pain for many months to come.
Yet conventional wisdom is often wrong. For a start, as any property analyst can attest, it tends to be self-affirming. The media has leapt on recent polls that show Mr Obama with double-digit margins. But until Friday, when the conservative Drudge Report led on the much narrower two-point lead that Gallup gave Mr Obama, those polls that have not hinted at a landslide have been downplayed. And there have been quite a few.
The RealClear Politics website’s average of polls, which gives Mr Obama a lead of 6.8 per cent over Mr McCain, offers a better guide to the situation. It compares to John Kerry’s lead just a few weeks before he lost the 2004 election to Mr Bush. It is also slightly lower than Mr Obama’s lead over Hillary Clinton shortly before she bested him – and the media – in the New Hampshire primary at the start of the year.
Even were Mr Obama’s average lead to hold up on election day, which would produce the largest Democratic victory since 1964, the one-way bet might still look rash in hindsight. InTrade, the most cited online political betting site, gives Mr Obama an 84 per cent probability of victory – as safe a bet as there is. Can that really be accurate? Or do those who punt on elections read the same newspapers as everybody else?
Then there is the so-called Bradley effect, which is named after a black gubernatorial candidate for California in 1982 who was predicted in the exit polls to win by a double-digit margin only to lose it by 50,000 votes. The Bradley effect describes a problem with polling methodology rather than racism as such, since many respondents were clearly embarrassed to admit they had not voted for the black guy.
Political scientists have found little evidence for the Bradley effect over the past 15 years. America is becoming less racist and therefore less self-conscious about appearing to be racist. But there have not been many opportunities to test it either. Most black politicians in the US represent heavily urban and preponderantly African-American districts and cities. None has ever been nominated for the presidency.
On Thursday, Mr McCain also wrapped this Democratic spectre in humour. “I come here tonight knowing that I’m the underdog,” he said. “But if you know where to look, there are signs of hope. Even in this room full of proud Manhattan Democrats I can’t shake that feeling that some people here are pulling for me. I’m delighted to see you here tonight, Hillary.”
The writer is the FT’s Washington bureau chief
Will a funny thing happen on the way to Washington?
By Edward Luce
October 17 2008
At what was the first – and probably last – humorous occasion of this dyspeptic campaign, John McCain and Barack Obama gave comic speeches on Thursday at the annual dinner in memory of Al Smith, the great Catholic-American.
Both revealed a side they have kept well concealed in recent months. “Contrary to popular opinion, I was not born in a manger,” said Mr Obama. “I just call him ‘That One’”, said Mr McCain of his opponent. “He doesn’t mind at all: He even has a pet name for me: George Bush.”
In the best humorous tradition, the funniest line was the one that cut closest to the bone. “We all know that Senator Obama is ready for any contingency – even the possibility of a sudden and dramatic market rebound,” said Mr McCain. “I’m told that at the first sign of recovery he will suspend his campaign and fly immediately to Washington to address this crisis.”
With barely two weeks left before polling day, the media, the Democratic party and the rest of the world (the safest Democratic state of the lot) have virtually called a halt to the election. Barack Obama will be the winner. His momentum is now unstoppable. And for that he has the financial meltdown to thank.
All of which is probably true. To judge by some, although by no means all, of the recent polls, Mr Obama may even pull off a 1980-style Ronald Reagan landslide. Parts of America, such as North Carolina and Virginia, which last elected a Democrat when Mr Obama was in diapers, show him in the lead by ground-shifting margins.
Then there is the money. No candidate has ever raised anything like Mr Obama’s tally, which could exceed $600m (£350m, €450m) if the recent escalation in donations is any guide. By my estimate, Mr Obama’s remaining war chest could fund at least two back-to-back British general elections. Mr McCain, meanwhile, might be able to finance a creditable shot at the New Jersey governorship.
Nor, in spite of the acuity of Mr McCain’s punchline, would a dramatic stock market recovery be likely to dent Mr Obama’s fortunes. It would come too late to restore the American public’s badly shaken confidence in their financial system and in the free-trade economy that Mr McCain so gallantly defends.
Besides, no resurgence in the Dow Jones could reflate a property market that has been the chief source of household spending since the Bush administration took office. Mr Obama can rest easy: Joe Public – and even Joe Plumber – will be feeling the pain for many months to come.
Yet conventional wisdom is often wrong. For a start, as any property analyst can attest, it tends to be self-affirming. The media has leapt on recent polls that show Mr Obama with double-digit margins. But until Friday, when the conservative Drudge Report led on the much narrower two-point lead that Gallup gave Mr Obama, those polls that have not hinted at a landslide have been downplayed. And there have been quite a few.
The RealClear Politics website’s average of polls, which gives Mr Obama a lead of 6.8 per cent over Mr McCain, offers a better guide to the situation. It compares to John Kerry’s lead just a few weeks before he lost the 2004 election to Mr Bush. It is also slightly lower than Mr Obama’s lead over Hillary Clinton shortly before she bested him – and the media – in the New Hampshire primary at the start of the year.
Even were Mr Obama’s average lead to hold up on election day, which would produce the largest Democratic victory since 1964, the one-way bet might still look rash in hindsight. InTrade, the most cited online political betting site, gives Mr Obama an 84 per cent probability of victory – as safe a bet as there is. Can that really be accurate? Or do those who punt on elections read the same newspapers as everybody else?
Then there is the so-called Bradley effect, which is named after a black gubernatorial candidate for California in 1982 who was predicted in the exit polls to win by a double-digit margin only to lose it by 50,000 votes. The Bradley effect describes a problem with polling methodology rather than racism as such, since many respondents were clearly embarrassed to admit they had not voted for the black guy.
Political scientists have found little evidence for the Bradley effect over the past 15 years. America is becoming less racist and therefore less self-conscious about appearing to be racist. But there have not been many opportunities to test it either. Most black politicians in the US represent heavily urban and preponderantly African-American districts and cities. None has ever been nominated for the presidency.
On Thursday, Mr McCain also wrapped this Democratic spectre in humour. “I come here tonight knowing that I’m the underdog,” he said. “But if you know where to look, there are signs of hope. Even in this room full of proud Manhattan Democrats I can’t shake that feeling that some people here are pulling for me. I’m delighted to see you here tonight, Hillary.”
The writer is the FT’s Washington bureau chief
Sarah Palin appears on 'Saturday Night Live'
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/TV/10/18/palin.snl/
Sarah Palin appears on 'Saturday Night Live'
Story Highlights
Sarah Palin appears on "Saturday Night Live" with former cast member Tina Fey
Sketch also featured "30 Rock" actor Alec Baldwin
Fey has played Palin several times on the show
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin appeared on NBC's "Saturday Night Live," along with Palin lookalike Tina Fey.
The show's opening sketch featured a mock press conference with Fey reprising her role as the Alaska governor.
The piece then cut to a shot of Palin watching Fey's performance on a television monitor with Lorne Michaels, the show's executive producer.
"I just didn't think it was a realistic depiction of the way my press conferences would have gone," she said.
"Why couldn't we have done the '30 Rock' sketch that I wrote?" she asked, referring to the NBC comedy which stars Fey.
"Honestly, not enough people know that show," Michaels responds.
The opening sketch also featured a surprise visit by Alec Baldwin, Fey's "30 Rock" co-star, who mistook Palin for Fey, and tried to convince Michaels not to let Fey appear on the show with the governor. He snapped his fingers, trying to remember the nickname some had given Palin.
"Caribou Barbie," Palin reminded him.
Baldwin, still oblivious that he was talking to the governor, continued: "You want her, our Tina, to go out there and stand there with that horrible woman," he asked. "What do you have to say for yourself?"
Michaels points out he was standing next to the real Palin.
"Forgive me, I must say this," Baldwin backtracked. "You are way hotter in person. I mean seriously. I mean, I can't believe they let her play you."
Palin laughed and responded that Baldwin's brother, Stephen, was her favorite. Stephen Baldwin, also an actor, is a Christian conservative with his own ministry.
Palin then took the podium and told the reporters she was not going to take any of their questions.
She then uttered the signature line that opens the show every weekend: "Live from New York, it's Saturday Night."
Later in the show, Palin appeared on SNL's "Weekend Update" with cast members Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers.
"I've been thinking it over and I'm not going to do the piece we rehearsed," Palin told Meyers. "My gut is telling me it might be a bad idea for the campaign."
Poehler said she would do the part and launched into a rap about being Sarah Palin. Among her backup dancers was cast member Jason Sukeikis who impersonated Palin's husband, Todd.
Palin grooved along to the music, even raising her hands when Poehler sang "All the mavericks in the house, put your hands up! All the plumbers in the house, put your pants up!"
The plumber reference was meant to invoke the now-famous Joe "the Plumber" Wurzelbacher, who Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain has held up as a small business owner who will see his taxes rise if his Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama, wins the election.
In both skits, Palin delivered her lines with a straight face but mostly played the comic foil to the show's cast of mischief-makers.
On Thursday, multiple sources told CNN that Palin planned to appear on the hit show.
"Saturday Night Live" has featured three opening skits in which former cast member and Palin lookalike Tina Fey portrays the Alaska governor.
Fey first appeared as Palin for the show's season premiere last month in a sketch with SNL cast member Amy Poehler, who played Sen. Hillary Clinton.
Fey reprised her role as Palin two weeks later, again alongside Poehler, who played CBS's Katie Couric in a parody of Palin's interview with the CBS anchor earlier that week.
Earlier this week, Palin told reporters that she'd love to appear on the show with Fey, The Associated Press reported.
"I love her, she's a hoot and she's so talented," Palin said, according to the AP.
"It would be fun to meet her, imitate her and keep on giving her new material."
CNN's Peter Hamby and Ed Hornick contributed to this report.
Saturday Night Live • Tina Fey • Sarah Palin
Colin Powell endorses Obama
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/19/colin.powell/index.html
Colin Powell endorses Obama
Story Highlights
NEW: Obama praises Powell at rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina
Ex-Secretary of State Colin Powell voting for Barack Obama
Powell makes announcement on "Meet the Press" Sunday
John McCain says announcement does not come as a surprise
(CNN) -- Former Secretary of State Colin Powell announced Sunday that he will be voting for Sen. Barack Obama, citing the Democrat's "ability to inspire" and the "inclusive nature of his campaign."
"I think he is a transformational figure, he is a new generation coming onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Sen. Barack Obama," Powell said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Powell said he was concerned about what he characterized as a recent negative turn of Republican candidate Sen. John McCain's campaign, such as the campaign's attempts to tie Obama to former 1960s radical Bill Ayers.
"I think that's inappropriate. I understand what politics is about -- I know how you can go after one another, and that's good. But I think this goes too far, and I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It's not what the American people are looking for," he said.
Powell, a retired U.S. general and a Republican, was once seen as a possible presidential candidate himself.
Powell said he has some concerns about the direction of the Republican Party, adding that it has "moved more to the right than I would like to see it." Read a transcript of Powell's remarks
In regard to the financial crisis, which Powell called the candidates' "final exam," Powell said McCain appeared unsteady in dealing with it, while Obama had excelled in handling the situation.
"Obama displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge," Powell said.
"He has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president," he said.
Obama praised Powell at a campaign event in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Sunday, calling him "a great soldier, a great statesman, and a great American."
"I have been honored to have the benefit of his wisdom and counsel from time to time over the last few years, but today, I am beyond honored and deeply humbled to have the support of General Colin Powell," Obama said.
Obama called Powell earlier Sunday and thanked him for his endorsement, communications director Robert Gibbs said.
In their 10-minute conversation, Obama said he looked forward to taking advantage of Powell's advice in the next two weeks and hopefully over the next four years, Gibbs said.
During the campaign, Powell has met with both candidates and said he has a lot of respect for McCain. He said Sunday that he thinks both candidates are qualified to be president.
"It isn't easy for me to disappoint Sen. McCain in the way that I have this morning, and I regret that," Powell said.
Speaking on Fox News Sunday, McCain said he respects and admires Powell, and the announcement "doesn't come as a surprise."
"I'm also very pleased to have the endorsement of four former secretaries of state -- Secretaries [Henry] Kissinger, [James] Baker, [Lawrence] Eagleburger, and [Alexander] Haig -- and I'm proud to have the endorsement of well over 200 retired Army generals and admirals," McCain said.
Powell served as Secretary of State under President Bush from 2001 to 2005.
The possibility of a Powell endorsement has been rumored for several months.
On August 13, Powell's office denied a report on Fox News by commentator Bill Kristol that Powell had decided to publicly back Obama at the Democratic National Convention.
Powell himself brushed off queries on any potential presidential nod but told ABC News in August that he would not be going to Denver, Colorado, for the convention.
Back in February, Powell told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that he was weighing an endorsement of a Democratic or independent candidate.
Powell has offered praise for Obama, calling him an "exciting person on the political stage."
"He has energized a lot of people in America," said Powell. "He has energized a lot of people around the world. And so I think he is worth listening to and seeing what he stands for."
The former general, who has largely steered clear of politics since leaving the Bush administration, noted that the next president will need to work to restore America's standing in the world.
Powell gave the keynote address at the Republican National Convention in support of George W. Bush in 2000.
Powell said Sunday that he has no plans to campaign for Obama.
Colin Powell • Barack Obama • John McCain • Democratic National Committee
Colin Powell endorses Obama
Story Highlights
NEW: Obama praises Powell at rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina
Ex-Secretary of State Colin Powell voting for Barack Obama
Powell makes announcement on "Meet the Press" Sunday
John McCain says announcement does not come as a surprise
(CNN) -- Former Secretary of State Colin Powell announced Sunday that he will be voting for Sen. Barack Obama, citing the Democrat's "ability to inspire" and the "inclusive nature of his campaign."
"I think he is a transformational figure, he is a new generation coming onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Sen. Barack Obama," Powell said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Powell said he was concerned about what he characterized as a recent negative turn of Republican candidate Sen. John McCain's campaign, such as the campaign's attempts to tie Obama to former 1960s radical Bill Ayers.
"I think that's inappropriate. I understand what politics is about -- I know how you can go after one another, and that's good. But I think this goes too far, and I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It's not what the American people are looking for," he said.
Powell, a retired U.S. general and a Republican, was once seen as a possible presidential candidate himself.
Powell said he has some concerns about the direction of the Republican Party, adding that it has "moved more to the right than I would like to see it." Read a transcript of Powell's remarks
In regard to the financial crisis, which Powell called the candidates' "final exam," Powell said McCain appeared unsteady in dealing with it, while Obama had excelled in handling the situation.
"Obama displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge," Powell said.
"He has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president," he said.
Obama praised Powell at a campaign event in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Sunday, calling him "a great soldier, a great statesman, and a great American."
"I have been honored to have the benefit of his wisdom and counsel from time to time over the last few years, but today, I am beyond honored and deeply humbled to have the support of General Colin Powell," Obama said.
Obama called Powell earlier Sunday and thanked him for his endorsement, communications director Robert Gibbs said.
In their 10-minute conversation, Obama said he looked forward to taking advantage of Powell's advice in the next two weeks and hopefully over the next four years, Gibbs said.
During the campaign, Powell has met with both candidates and said he has a lot of respect for McCain. He said Sunday that he thinks both candidates are qualified to be president.
"It isn't easy for me to disappoint Sen. McCain in the way that I have this morning, and I regret that," Powell said.
Speaking on Fox News Sunday, McCain said he respects and admires Powell, and the announcement "doesn't come as a surprise."
"I'm also very pleased to have the endorsement of four former secretaries of state -- Secretaries [Henry] Kissinger, [James] Baker, [Lawrence] Eagleburger, and [Alexander] Haig -- and I'm proud to have the endorsement of well over 200 retired Army generals and admirals," McCain said.
Powell served as Secretary of State under President Bush from 2001 to 2005.
The possibility of a Powell endorsement has been rumored for several months.
On August 13, Powell's office denied a report on Fox News by commentator Bill Kristol that Powell had decided to publicly back Obama at the Democratic National Convention.
Powell himself brushed off queries on any potential presidential nod but told ABC News in August that he would not be going to Denver, Colorado, for the convention.
Back in February, Powell told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that he was weighing an endorsement of a Democratic or independent candidate.
Powell has offered praise for Obama, calling him an "exciting person on the political stage."
"He has energized a lot of people in America," said Powell. "He has energized a lot of people around the world. And so I think he is worth listening to and seeing what he stands for."
The former general, who has largely steered clear of politics since leaving the Bush administration, noted that the next president will need to work to restore America's standing in the world.
Powell gave the keynote address at the Republican National Convention in support of George W. Bush in 2000.
Powell said Sunday that he has no plans to campaign for Obama.
Colin Powell • Barack Obama • John McCain • Democratic National Committee
Obama Raises More Than $150 Million
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/20/us/politics/20donate.html
October 20, 2008
Obama Raises More Than $150 Million in September
By MICHAEL LUO
Senator Barack Obama’s campaign announced on Sunday that it had raised more than $150 million in September, a record-shattering amount underscoring again the unprecedented amounts of money he has attracted.
Mr. Obama’s contributions in September more than doubled the $66 million he had collected in August, which had already far exceeded what previous presidential campaigns had raised in a single month.
In a videotaped message included in an e-mail to supporters, David Plouffe, the Obama campaign manager, said that Mr. Obama had added 632,000 new donors in September, bringing the campaign’s total to 3.1 million. The average contribution, Mr. Plouffe said, was $86.
Mr. Plouffe said the money has enabled the campaign to expand to traditional Republican strongholds, noting it had begun to pour resources into West Virginia. He also sought to portray the campaign’s fund-raising success as evidence of Mr. Obama’s grassroots support.
“The two groups that have given us the most contributions are retirees and students, which shows how Barack’s call for change has spanned the generations,” Mr. Plouffe said. “Nurses, teachers, small business owners. It really is the fabric of America that has built this campaign.”
The full details of how the Obama campaign raised its money in September will not be available until Monday, when it files its official report with the Federal Election Commission. But a separate filing by the campaign’s joint fund-raising committee with the Democratic National Committee, the Obama Victory Fund, underscores that Mr. Obama has also been powered by major donors as well.
Mr. Obama’s joint fund-raising committee, which can take in checks of more than $30,000 that is divvied up between the campaign and the D.N.C., collected $69 million in September. The fund funneled $32 million in September to the Obama campaign’s coffers and $26.5 million to the D.N.C.
The D.N.C., which can spend money on Mr. Obama’s behalf under certain restrictions, announced this morning it collected nearly $50 million in September and had $27.4 million in cash on hand at the end of the month.
The Republican National Committee announced earlier this month it had raised $66 million in September, which had exceeded fundraisers’ expectations, and finished the month with about $77 million in the bank.
Mr. Obama’s fund-raising success comes in the wake of his decision to back away from an earlier pledge to accept public financing for the general election if his opponent did as well, a move the McCain campaign has sought to use against him.
McCain finance officials and other campaign-finance experts had anticipated that the R.N.C.’s stockpile of cash and strong fund-raising, along with the $84 million Mr. McCain received in public financing, would be enough to at least stay within range of the Obama fund-raising juggernaut. The R.N.C. finished August with $76 million in the bank, along with another $18 million transferred to it by the McCain campaign. But the Obama campaign has been outspending the McCain campaign by 4 to 1 on television, according to Campaign Media Analysis Group, which analyzes ad spending. The R.N.C. is limited to spending about $19 million in coordination with the McCain campaign but can spend unlimited amounts independently. Even with the R.N.C.’s independent expenditures factored in, the Obama campaign is still outspending Mr. McCain by 3 ½ to 1, according to CMAG.
Coupled with his appeals over the Internet, Mr. Obama has maintained an aggressive high-dollar fund-raising schedule. Just last week, 10 hours after he left the stage of the final presidential debate, he arrived at a morning fund-raiser at the Metropolitan Club in New York in which more than 120 people paid $30,800 each to hear him speak.
More than 600 people wrote checks of $25,000 or more to the Obama Victory Fund in September, including the actresses Melanie Griffith and Rita Wilson; Orlando Magic basketball star Dwight Howard; Andrea Jung, the chief executive of Avon; Gregory Brown, the president of the telecommunications giant Motorola; and Charles E. Phillips Jr., the president of the software company Oracle.
Mr. Obama has now raised more than $600 million since his campaign began, easily another record. Putting that figure in perspective, in 2004, Democratic and Republican presidential candidates together raised a record $684 million by the time of their conventions. (Both Senator John F. Kerry and President Bush later opted for public financing for the general election). That was nearly double the $350 million the candidates raised in 2000.
Before the Obama campaign, the record for the single biggest monthly fund-raising month was held by Senator John F. Kerry, when he collected $44 million in March 2004 after clinching the Democratic nomination. Mr. Obama exceeded that total last February, when he raised $55 million while competing against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
October 20, 2008
Obama Raises More Than $150 Million in September
By MICHAEL LUO
Senator Barack Obama’s campaign announced on Sunday that it had raised more than $150 million in September, a record-shattering amount underscoring again the unprecedented amounts of money he has attracted.
Mr. Obama’s contributions in September more than doubled the $66 million he had collected in August, which had already far exceeded what previous presidential campaigns had raised in a single month.
In a videotaped message included in an e-mail to supporters, David Plouffe, the Obama campaign manager, said that Mr. Obama had added 632,000 new donors in September, bringing the campaign’s total to 3.1 million. The average contribution, Mr. Plouffe said, was $86.
Mr. Plouffe said the money has enabled the campaign to expand to traditional Republican strongholds, noting it had begun to pour resources into West Virginia. He also sought to portray the campaign’s fund-raising success as evidence of Mr. Obama’s grassroots support.
“The two groups that have given us the most contributions are retirees and students, which shows how Barack’s call for change has spanned the generations,” Mr. Plouffe said. “Nurses, teachers, small business owners. It really is the fabric of America that has built this campaign.”
The full details of how the Obama campaign raised its money in September will not be available until Monday, when it files its official report with the Federal Election Commission. But a separate filing by the campaign’s joint fund-raising committee with the Democratic National Committee, the Obama Victory Fund, underscores that Mr. Obama has also been powered by major donors as well.
Mr. Obama’s joint fund-raising committee, which can take in checks of more than $30,000 that is divvied up between the campaign and the D.N.C., collected $69 million in September. The fund funneled $32 million in September to the Obama campaign’s coffers and $26.5 million to the D.N.C.
The D.N.C., which can spend money on Mr. Obama’s behalf under certain restrictions, announced this morning it collected nearly $50 million in September and had $27.4 million in cash on hand at the end of the month.
The Republican National Committee announced earlier this month it had raised $66 million in September, which had exceeded fundraisers’ expectations, and finished the month with about $77 million in the bank.
Mr. Obama’s fund-raising success comes in the wake of his decision to back away from an earlier pledge to accept public financing for the general election if his opponent did as well, a move the McCain campaign has sought to use against him.
McCain finance officials and other campaign-finance experts had anticipated that the R.N.C.’s stockpile of cash and strong fund-raising, along with the $84 million Mr. McCain received in public financing, would be enough to at least stay within range of the Obama fund-raising juggernaut. The R.N.C. finished August with $76 million in the bank, along with another $18 million transferred to it by the McCain campaign. But the Obama campaign has been outspending the McCain campaign by 4 to 1 on television, according to Campaign Media Analysis Group, which analyzes ad spending. The R.N.C. is limited to spending about $19 million in coordination with the McCain campaign but can spend unlimited amounts independently. Even with the R.N.C.’s independent expenditures factored in, the Obama campaign is still outspending Mr. McCain by 3 ½ to 1, according to CMAG.
Coupled with his appeals over the Internet, Mr. Obama has maintained an aggressive high-dollar fund-raising schedule. Just last week, 10 hours after he left the stage of the final presidential debate, he arrived at a morning fund-raiser at the Metropolitan Club in New York in which more than 120 people paid $30,800 each to hear him speak.
More than 600 people wrote checks of $25,000 or more to the Obama Victory Fund in September, including the actresses Melanie Griffith and Rita Wilson; Orlando Magic basketball star Dwight Howard; Andrea Jung, the chief executive of Avon; Gregory Brown, the president of the telecommunications giant Motorola; and Charles E. Phillips Jr., the president of the software company Oracle.
Mr. Obama has now raised more than $600 million since his campaign began, easily another record. Putting that figure in perspective, in 2004, Democratic and Republican presidential candidates together raised a record $684 million by the time of their conventions. (Both Senator John F. Kerry and President Bush later opted for public financing for the general election). That was nearly double the $350 million the candidates raised in 2000.
Before the Obama campaign, the record for the single biggest monthly fund-raising month was held by Senator John F. Kerry, when he collected $44 million in March 2004 after clinching the Democratic nomination. Mr. Obama exceeded that total last February, when he raised $55 million while competing against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Barack Obama vows to 'change the world'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/3219308/Barack-Obama-vows-to-change-the-world.html
Barack Obama vows to 'change the world'
Barack Obama has vowed that he will "change the world" even as he urged his supporters to guard against complacency.
By Toby Harnden in Londonderry, New Hampshire
18 Oct 2008
The supremely confident demeanour and exalted rhetoric of the Democratic nominee at a New Hampshire event betrayed that he is a man convinced he is poised to make history.
While his Republican opponent John McCain, trailing in the polls, is pursuing a strategy of eking out a victory in traditional swing states, Mr Obama is transferring resources to conservative strongholds like Georgia, West Virginia and even Kentucky in pursuit of a landslide victory.
Speaking in an apple orchard against the picture-perfect New England backdrop of an red, green and yellow autumn foliage on a stage adorned with pumpkins and hay bales, Mr Obama reminded voters of the dangers of hubris.
Polls indicated that the young Illinois senator was cruising towards a crushing victory over Hillary Clinton in the state's Democratic primary. His rallies were two or three times the size of hers. The media had declared him the victor, a conclusion shared by Obama aides.
On election day, however, Mrs Clinton won. "We are 19 days away from changing this country. Nineteen days away. But for those who are getting a little cocky, I've got two words for you: New Hampshire," said Mr Obama.
"I learned right here, with the help of my great friend and supporter Hillary Clinton, that you cannot let up, you can't pay too much attention to polls. We've got to keep making our case for change. We've got to keep fighting for every single vote. We've got to keep running through the finish line."
At a glitzy fundraising event in Manhattan at which Bruce Springsteen and Billy Joel performed Mr Obama warned high-roller supporters: "Don't underestimate the capacity of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Don't underestimate our ability to screw it up."
But much of Mr Obama's speech in Londonderry - punctuated by cries of "We all love you Obama", "I love you" and "We will work with you" - was devoted to the kind of quasi-religious sentiments and motivational-coach style exhortations, the kind of pride that set him up for a big fall in January.
"I want you to believe," said the candidate, clad in an open-necked shirt and barn jacket. "Not so much believe just in me but believe in yourselves. Believe in the future. Believe in the future we can build together. I'm confident together we can't fail."
There was a carnival atmosphere among the crowd of some 4,000, who almost drowned Mr Obama out as he reached his crescendo and said: "I promise you. We won't just win New Hampshire. We will win this election and, you and I together, we're going to change the country and change the world."
Mr Obama was described as "preternaturally confident" in a gushing endorsement by the Washington Post on Friday.
His supreme self-belief has also been the target of late-night comedians. "With just 19 days left until the election, Barack Obama warned supporters today to guard against overconfidence," Tina Fey of Saturday Night Live reported.
"Then he boarded Air Force One, blasted 'We Are The Champions' and shouted 'I'm King of the World'."
Both Democrats and Republicans in New Hampshire appear convinced that Mr Obama will win.
"We feel we're on the brink of a whole new life in this country," said Betsy Whitman, 69.
"Sure, he'll win," said Marlene Hulme, 70, at the Londonderry event. "Our expectations were high today and he knocked it out of the park."
A lone McCain supporter at the rally said she too was convinced that the Republican nominee was finished. "McCain has lost," said Deborah Barnhart, 48, who runs a landscaping business.
"He's lost because the Messiah has spoken and we're going to change the world. That's all people want to hear after eight years of Bush. Obama thinks he's won. Everyone here thinks he's won."
Barack Obama vows to 'change the world'
Barack Obama has vowed that he will "change the world" even as he urged his supporters to guard against complacency.
By Toby Harnden in Londonderry, New Hampshire
18 Oct 2008
The supremely confident demeanour and exalted rhetoric of the Democratic nominee at a New Hampshire event betrayed that he is a man convinced he is poised to make history.
While his Republican opponent John McCain, trailing in the polls, is pursuing a strategy of eking out a victory in traditional swing states, Mr Obama is transferring resources to conservative strongholds like Georgia, West Virginia and even Kentucky in pursuit of a landslide victory.
Speaking in an apple orchard against the picture-perfect New England backdrop of an red, green and yellow autumn foliage on a stage adorned with pumpkins and hay bales, Mr Obama reminded voters of the dangers of hubris.
Polls indicated that the young Illinois senator was cruising towards a crushing victory over Hillary Clinton in the state's Democratic primary. His rallies were two or three times the size of hers. The media had declared him the victor, a conclusion shared by Obama aides.
On election day, however, Mrs Clinton won. "We are 19 days away from changing this country. Nineteen days away. But for those who are getting a little cocky, I've got two words for you: New Hampshire," said Mr Obama.
"I learned right here, with the help of my great friend and supporter Hillary Clinton, that you cannot let up, you can't pay too much attention to polls. We've got to keep making our case for change. We've got to keep fighting for every single vote. We've got to keep running through the finish line."
At a glitzy fundraising event in Manhattan at which Bruce Springsteen and Billy Joel performed Mr Obama warned high-roller supporters: "Don't underestimate the capacity of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Don't underestimate our ability to screw it up."
But much of Mr Obama's speech in Londonderry - punctuated by cries of "We all love you Obama", "I love you" and "We will work with you" - was devoted to the kind of quasi-religious sentiments and motivational-coach style exhortations, the kind of pride that set him up for a big fall in January.
"I want you to believe," said the candidate, clad in an open-necked shirt and barn jacket. "Not so much believe just in me but believe in yourselves. Believe in the future. Believe in the future we can build together. I'm confident together we can't fail."
There was a carnival atmosphere among the crowd of some 4,000, who almost drowned Mr Obama out as he reached his crescendo and said: "I promise you. We won't just win New Hampshire. We will win this election and, you and I together, we're going to change the country and change the world."
Mr Obama was described as "preternaturally confident" in a gushing endorsement by the Washington Post on Friday.
His supreme self-belief has also been the target of late-night comedians. "With just 19 days left until the election, Barack Obama warned supporters today to guard against overconfidence," Tina Fey of Saturday Night Live reported.
"Then he boarded Air Force One, blasted 'We Are The Champions' and shouted 'I'm King of the World'."
Both Democrats and Republicans in New Hampshire appear convinced that Mr Obama will win.
"We feel we're on the brink of a whole new life in this country," said Betsy Whitman, 69.
"Sure, he'll win," said Marlene Hulme, 70, at the Londonderry event. "Our expectations were high today and he knocked it out of the park."
A lone McCain supporter at the rally said she too was convinced that the Republican nominee was finished. "McCain has lost," said Deborah Barnhart, 48, who runs a landscaping business.
"He's lost because the Messiah has spoken and we're going to change the world. That's all people want to hear after eight years of Bush. Obama thinks he's won. Everyone here thinks he's won."
Biggest Dinosaurs Grew Huge by Not Chewing
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/10/081009-dinosaur-big.html
Biggest Dinosaurs Grew Huge by Not Chewing Their Food
Kate Ravilious
for National Geographic News
October 9, 2008
Dinosaurs known as sauropods—the largest land animals that ever lived—grew huge and were an evolutionary success in part because they didn't bother to chew their food, new research suggests.
Sauropods weighed up to 88 tons (80 metric tons)—ten times more than an African elephant—and measured as high as 23 feet (7 meters).
The group of dinosaurs, which included the brachiosaurus and diplodocus, loomed over the animal kingdom for more than 140 million years until the late Cretaceous period, 65 million years ago. (See a brachiosaurus herd.)
Scientists think the animals evolved to be so large to discourage big predators, like Tyrannosaurus rex, from eating them. But how they maintained such massive body sizes has remained mysterious.
The herbivores, or plant-eaters, had hardly any teeth and are thought to have swallowed their food whole—an entire bush in one gulp, for example. They browsed large areas, barely moving and consuming vast quantities in short periods of time.
So they needed long necks to reach food high in trees and a huge gut to process and break down their unchewed meals, said Martin Sander, a palaeontologist at the University of Bonn in Germany and co-author of the study, published tomorrow in the journal Science.
"You can only have this long neck if you don't chew your food, otherwise your head would be full of teeth and too heavy to support," he said.
Paul Upchurch, an expert on sauropods from University College London, said that "most palaeontologists agree that feeding is the key to understanding sauropod gigantism."
Survival Strategies
To outgrow their predators, sauropods didn't just need lots of food. They also needed to develop fast, so they could attain their full size before being eaten, experts said.
Sauropod bones show that they did indeed grow swiftly. A 22-pound (10-kilogram) hatchling could become a 220,000-pound (100,000-kilogram) grown-up in about 20 to 30 years—quick by dinosaur time.
"This tells us that they must have been warm-blooded and had a high metabolic rate compared to cold-blooded creatures," said the University of Bonn's Sander.
Like all dinosaurs, sauropods laid nestfuls of eggs. By producing so many young at a time, "a population could recover quickly, even after a big catastrophe," Sander said.
Large modern mammals, such as elephants, give birth to far fewer offspring, raising their chances of extinction should a disaster occur.
So why don't we see gigantic elephants and crocodiles roaming around today?
Experts think that reptiles, such as crocodiles, still maintain the egg-laying advantage, but their cold blood prevents them from growing fast enough to reach a great size.
Mammals have warm blood, but can't grow as big as sauropods due to their slow reproductive strategy and the need to chew their food.
Biggest Dinosaurs Grew Huge by Not Chewing Their Food
Kate Ravilious
for National Geographic News
October 9, 2008
Dinosaurs known as sauropods—the largest land animals that ever lived—grew huge and were an evolutionary success in part because they didn't bother to chew their food, new research suggests.
Sauropods weighed up to 88 tons (80 metric tons)—ten times more than an African elephant—and measured as high as 23 feet (7 meters).
The group of dinosaurs, which included the brachiosaurus and diplodocus, loomed over the animal kingdom for more than 140 million years until the late Cretaceous period, 65 million years ago. (See a brachiosaurus herd.)
Scientists think the animals evolved to be so large to discourage big predators, like Tyrannosaurus rex, from eating them. But how they maintained such massive body sizes has remained mysterious.
The herbivores, or plant-eaters, had hardly any teeth and are thought to have swallowed their food whole—an entire bush in one gulp, for example. They browsed large areas, barely moving and consuming vast quantities in short periods of time.
So they needed long necks to reach food high in trees and a huge gut to process and break down their unchewed meals, said Martin Sander, a palaeontologist at the University of Bonn in Germany and co-author of the study, published tomorrow in the journal Science.
"You can only have this long neck if you don't chew your food, otherwise your head would be full of teeth and too heavy to support," he said.
Paul Upchurch, an expert on sauropods from University College London, said that "most palaeontologists agree that feeding is the key to understanding sauropod gigantism."
Survival Strategies
To outgrow their predators, sauropods didn't just need lots of food. They also needed to develop fast, so they could attain their full size before being eaten, experts said.
Sauropod bones show that they did indeed grow swiftly. A 22-pound (10-kilogram) hatchling could become a 220,000-pound (100,000-kilogram) grown-up in about 20 to 30 years—quick by dinosaur time.
"This tells us that they must have been warm-blooded and had a high metabolic rate compared to cold-blooded creatures," said the University of Bonn's Sander.
Like all dinosaurs, sauropods laid nestfuls of eggs. By producing so many young at a time, "a population could recover quickly, even after a big catastrophe," Sander said.
Large modern mammals, such as elephants, give birth to far fewer offspring, raising their chances of extinction should a disaster occur.
So why don't we see gigantic elephants and crocodiles roaming around today?
Experts think that reptiles, such as crocodiles, still maintain the egg-laying advantage, but their cold blood prevents them from growing fast enough to reach a great size.
Mammals have warm blood, but can't grow as big as sauropods due to their slow reproductive strategy and the need to chew their food.
GM-Chrysler push for quick deal
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2008-10-19-gm-chrysler_N.htm
GM-Chrysler push for quick deal
By Sharon Silke Carty and Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY
10-19-8
DETROIT — Negotiators hope to finalize a merger agreement between General Motors (GM) and Chrysler before the presidential election and are lobbying for government financial assistance to help clinch the deal, says a source who has been briefed on the talks.
They are pointing to the impact on the U.S. economy if either company were to fail, compared with the viability of a merged colossus that would control 36% of the U.S. auto market. Those are the chief selling points in asking for government help, says the source, who did not want to be identified because talks are not public.
Cerberus Capital Management, which controls Chrysler, has been pushing to make GMAC, GM's financing arm, a significant part of the deal. Cerberus already owns more than 50% of GMAC but wants it all. The source says that's been a sticking point because GM has said it won't give up its stake.
Talks are expected to continue this week, underscoring the pace at which a fundamental reshaping of the auto industry is taking place.
Ford Motor is seeking to sell all or part of its stake in Japan's Mazda to a group of Japanese companies. The report appeared in the Japanese press last week and was confirmed by two people who have been briefed on the proposal but said they could not comment on the record.
Industry consolidation is being driven by fears of a prolonged recession that has already resulted in plant closings and production cuts. The automakers need cash, and lots of it, to weather the downturn.
Chrysler workers would be vulnerable if the GM deal goes through. GM wants to use Chrysler's $11.7 billion in cash to shut down most of Chrysler's operations while keeping its brands, the source says. GM has been shrinking, too, most recently by trying to sell its Hummer SUV line.
Yet after years of withering, a combined GM and Chrysler could command government attention if the world's largest automaker hits even rockier times. "If they do come together, they really do become too big to fail," says David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research.
Congress recently approved a $25 billion loan program for Detroit's Big 3 aimed at helping fund development of more fuel-efficient vehicles. It's unclear just what form government assistance might take in a GM-Chrysler deal.
Carty reported from Detroit, Woodyard from Los Angeles
GM-Chrysler push for quick deal
By Sharon Silke Carty and Chris Woodyard, USA TODAY
10-19-8
DETROIT — Negotiators hope to finalize a merger agreement between General Motors (GM) and Chrysler before the presidential election and are lobbying for government financial assistance to help clinch the deal, says a source who has been briefed on the talks.
They are pointing to the impact on the U.S. economy if either company were to fail, compared with the viability of a merged colossus that would control 36% of the U.S. auto market. Those are the chief selling points in asking for government help, says the source, who did not want to be identified because talks are not public.
Cerberus Capital Management, which controls Chrysler, has been pushing to make GMAC, GM's financing arm, a significant part of the deal. Cerberus already owns more than 50% of GMAC but wants it all. The source says that's been a sticking point because GM has said it won't give up its stake.
Talks are expected to continue this week, underscoring the pace at which a fundamental reshaping of the auto industry is taking place.
Ford Motor is seeking to sell all or part of its stake in Japan's Mazda to a group of Japanese companies. The report appeared in the Japanese press last week and was confirmed by two people who have been briefed on the proposal but said they could not comment on the record.
Industry consolidation is being driven by fears of a prolonged recession that has already resulted in plant closings and production cuts. The automakers need cash, and lots of it, to weather the downturn.
Chrysler workers would be vulnerable if the GM deal goes through. GM wants to use Chrysler's $11.7 billion in cash to shut down most of Chrysler's operations while keeping its brands, the source says. GM has been shrinking, too, most recently by trying to sell its Hummer SUV line.
Yet after years of withering, a combined GM and Chrysler could command government attention if the world's largest automaker hits even rockier times. "If they do come together, they really do become too big to fail," says David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research.
Congress recently approved a $25 billion loan program for Detroit's Big 3 aimed at helping fund development of more fuel-efficient vehicles. It's unclear just what form government assistance might take in a GM-Chrysler deal.
Carty reported from Detroit, Woodyard from Los Angeles
Playboy's Saints Row 2 Review
http://playboy.com/arts-entertainment/reviews/games/saints-row-2/saints-row-2.html
GAME Saints Row 2
Publisher THQ
Developer Volition
Genre Action/Adventure
Platform PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PC
Price $59.99
ESRB Rating “M” for Mature
October 15, 2008
By Marc Saltzman
This follow-up to 2006 hit Saints Row is an over-the-top gangbanger paradise that drops you on the mean streets of Stilwater where you wreak all kinds of havoc on foot and behind the wheel. Unlike Grand Theft Auto you don’t need to unlock all of the boroughs in Saints Row 2; everything is accessible right from the get-go. While en route to take down the heads of three rival gangs, race your pimped-out ride through bustling streets and take down enemies and other obstacles in your way. Rob this truck, destroy that drug farm, hop on Jet Skis and ride through sewers under the city. It’s all in a day’s work.
A more significant distinction between Saints Row 2 and GTA lies in the degree of player customization, from your character’s voice and gang appearance (we recommend ninjas or 1970s pimps and hos), to fighting style, graffiti tags, taunts and vehicle types. Seriously, there are some major cosmetic and game-play options you can toy with, ensuring no two games play out the exact same way. Despite controls that take some getting used to (try the cruise control option), and production values not on par with Grand Theft Auto IV, players can tackle nearly 50 increasingly wacky missions and even indulge in co-op or head-to-head multiplayer modes for added replayability. On its surface Saints Row 2 might appear to be a rip-off of that “other” urban sandbox game, but once you play through a couple of missions you’ll see the differences that give THQ’s badass sequel its own legs.
GAME Saints Row 2
Publisher THQ
Developer Volition
Genre Action/Adventure
Platform PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PC
Price $59.99
ESRB Rating “M” for Mature
October 15, 2008
By Marc Saltzman
This follow-up to 2006 hit Saints Row is an over-the-top gangbanger paradise that drops you on the mean streets of Stilwater where you wreak all kinds of havoc on foot and behind the wheel. Unlike Grand Theft Auto you don’t need to unlock all of the boroughs in Saints Row 2; everything is accessible right from the get-go. While en route to take down the heads of three rival gangs, race your pimped-out ride through bustling streets and take down enemies and other obstacles in your way. Rob this truck, destroy that drug farm, hop on Jet Skis and ride through sewers under the city. It’s all in a day’s work.
A more significant distinction between Saints Row 2 and GTA lies in the degree of player customization, from your character’s voice and gang appearance (we recommend ninjas or 1970s pimps and hos), to fighting style, graffiti tags, taunts and vehicle types. Seriously, there are some major cosmetic and game-play options you can toy with, ensuring no two games play out the exact same way. Despite controls that take some getting used to (try the cruise control option), and production values not on par with Grand Theft Auto IV, players can tackle nearly 50 increasingly wacky missions and even indulge in co-op or head-to-head multiplayer modes for added replayability. On its surface Saints Row 2 might appear to be a rip-off of that “other” urban sandbox game, but once you play through a couple of missions you’ll see the differences that give THQ’s badass sequel its own legs.
World record sandwich? Iranians eat the evidence
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4964144.ece
October 17, 2008
World record sandwich? Iranians eat the evidence
More than 1,000 chefs toiled to build the massive ostrich-meat sandwich
Philippe Naughton
The organisers of a Tehran food festival were licking their wounds today after spending two days building the world's longest sandwich - only to see it devoured by the crowd before anyone had a chance to measure it.
More than 1,000 volunteers worked from early this morning to make the 1,500-metre sandwich, using a whole tonne of ostrich meat and hundreds of loaves.
The meat was supplied by local ostrich farmers eager to promote their produce as a tasty and healthy alternative to traditional Iranian offerings. The festival had also hoped to book a place in the Guinness Book of World Records by beating the previous mark of 1,378 metres set in Italy in May.
In the event, however, the waiting got too much for thousands of spectators waiting in Tehran's Mellat park - or there is an untapped demand for ostrich in the Iranian market. The crowd started attacking the sandwich before any of the three Guinness representatives present had the chance to confirm its length.
A Reuters reporter said that the sandwich, all 1,500 metres of it, was polished off in just a few minutes.
A festival organiser said that video footage and photographs of the sandwich would be sent to Guinness officials to show that it had measured up. “We still think the sandwich will be recorded in the Guinness book because of all the evidence and footage that we will send them,” Parvin Shariati said.
October 17, 2008
World record sandwich? Iranians eat the evidence
More than 1,000 chefs toiled to build the massive ostrich-meat sandwich
Philippe Naughton
The organisers of a Tehran food festival were licking their wounds today after spending two days building the world's longest sandwich - only to see it devoured by the crowd before anyone had a chance to measure it.
More than 1,000 volunteers worked from early this morning to make the 1,500-metre sandwich, using a whole tonne of ostrich meat and hundreds of loaves.
The meat was supplied by local ostrich farmers eager to promote their produce as a tasty and healthy alternative to traditional Iranian offerings. The festival had also hoped to book a place in the Guinness Book of World Records by beating the previous mark of 1,378 metres set in Italy in May.
In the event, however, the waiting got too much for thousands of spectators waiting in Tehran's Mellat park - or there is an untapped demand for ostrich in the Iranian market. The crowd started attacking the sandwich before any of the three Guinness representatives present had the chance to confirm its length.
A Reuters reporter said that the sandwich, all 1,500 metres of it, was polished off in just a few minutes.
A festival organiser said that video footage and photographs of the sandwich would be sent to Guinness officials to show that it had measured up. “We still think the sandwich will be recorded in the Guinness book because of all the evidence and footage that we will send them,” Parvin Shariati said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
