E!!

Obama visits the White House while the echoes of McCain’s can’t-say-that (or That either) (and definitely not THAT!) protestulations and admonishments still ring in our heads. 

This makes it hard to understand why The Maverick has been so quiet on the snarkfest re: Palin.

Says a new blog pal:  Your silence, sir, is deafening!

Lisa Schiffren has a great post on The Corner.  She posits that McCain deliberately held back in the campaign.  Here’s part of it:

…some McCain aides had felt for a while that their candidate had had a deep reluctance to impede the election of the nation’s first African American president. That he had, perhaps, pulled punches and failed to strike as hard as necessary to win this thing, for that greater good. [This] was infuriating, since more depended on the election than changing the race dynamic — which, it must be said, has been changed for some time, and did not require this particular symbol to validate it. To be sure, McCain must have known that his campaign was losing — and did not want to swing blindly. And maybe he didn’t like being called “erratic,” “desperate”, and a “racist” every time the inconvenient facts of Barack Obama’s short past came up for discussion.

But all Republicans who watched their candidate these past few months, must have been struck, as I have been, by the sense that he was holding back. I wondered, too often, how it could be that no one at the campaign could frame and muster the arguments that were clear to all conservative writers here and at the other publications and blogs that share our view. When the arguments were made, they were too little, too late, and garbled enough to drain their force. The campaign had it’s (very serious) flaws, but it seems that the reluctance to aim and shoot cleanly, was due to the candidate’s internal conflict here.

I’m not sure what I think about this.  But I also often wondered why, with so many brilliant minds and writers at his disposal, McCain did not do a better job of articulating his message in speeches, interviews, debates and ads. 

How is it possible that McCain’s campaign could not manage to patch together a persuasive narrative?  Lisa’s post may explain at least some part of it.

ARLINGTON, VA – Today at 2:00 p.m. EDT, the McCain-Palin presidential campaign will hold a press conference call with Senior Advisors Brian Jones, Ed O’Callaghan and Deputy Campaign Manager Christian Ferry to discuss Election Day voting irregularities.

Since I couldn’t make this call, I’m just waiting to hear what was said from my peeps over at Voter Fraud Squad (or anyone else who dialed in).

Tomorrow afternoon – when the polls have not yet closed and the exit polls are all we have to talk about - let’s not forget that the 2004 exit polls had everyone predicting an easy Kerry win. 

Exit polling is not scientific.  Someone stands outside the poll place and asks voters, “Will you tell me who you voted for?”  People can answer or take a pass.

Historically, exit polls do tend to skew Democratic.  I’ve heard various theories as to why:  some say it’s the bias of the exit pollers; some say conservatives/Republicans tend to be more private so don’t share personal information as easily.

A Vegas voter posted this on Bob Beers’ blog yesterday:

Disgusted with Dems Says:
October 31st, 2008 at 3:01 pm

I went to one of the early voting locations today and when I refused the Copening propaganda her supporters thrust at me in the parking lot, I was called a “b*tch” as I walked away. How dare they treat voters with such disrespect.

In this next case, emailed in by my one of my readers, a partisan person was sanctioned:

I voted this morning at the Lake Meade/Tenaya location.   Probably the most excitement was a guy from the Obama campaign that had on a yellow T-shirt that said “voting questions – ask me” or something like that.  He was sitting along the line of people waiting to vote. 

I didn’t think anything of it, until I noticed that all the poll workers had on blue/white/red shirts.  About that time, the guy was escorted out of the area.  He took off the shirt and then was milling around with the ‘poll observers’.   I was ready to grab my cell phone for a picture if anything exciting happened, but nothing did. 

I waited about an hour to vote.  My hubby was on Channel 3 – they were interviewing people about the early voting process – was it easy, what did we think, etc.

There is not supposed to be any partisan canvassing at the polls.  Also, in re: to situation 1 above, here is what item 3 of the Nevada Voters’ Bill of Rights, as outlined in NRS 293.2546, says about voting:

3. Each voter has the right to vote without being intimidated, threatened or coerced.

That first voter should have complained to the poll workers so they could have asked those Copening people to take their handouts and nasty remarks elsewhere.

Over the past few weeks, the dissenting views of conservatives Peggy Noonan, Kathleen Parker, David Brooks, and Christopher Buckley et al have stirred up quite a storm.  All have disavowed Palin, McCain, or both, to some degree or another.  Liberals are gleeful that the conservative movement is “falling apart” and many heretofore like-minded and friendly conservatives are thoroughly irritated with one another.

For the record, unlike Jonah Goldberg (with whom I usually agree), I have no problem with these debates, whenever they may occur.  People are free to vent their emotions, push their agendas, explain their motivations, and air their grievances anytime they like.  I do think we should keep cool heads and let pragmatism rule when possible, but those who find they cannot are free to do what punditry permits.  Should they later feel some regret, they can retract and re-state as needed.

I do agree with Jonah on this point, though: 

We’ll all know what we need to know after the election and if McCain and the GOP come out the losers we’ll have a luxurious amount of time to argue amongst ourselves about which way forward and which wrong turns we may or may not have taken. If David Brooks wants to be oncologist in chief of the GOP and tell us where the cancers are, he’ll be free to do so. If some of my colleagues want to crack the whip on the ideological slackers in our midst, they’ll have plenty of elbow room. 

But it’s worth pointing out that if McCain loses and the Democrats surge in the Congress, we’ll also have some greater reminders of what we agree on to help us keep our disagreements in perspective.

With just 8 days left until the polls close for the 2008 presidential election, the Las Vegas Review Journal is reporting that nearly 190,000 voters had turned out through Saturday in early voting in Nevada’s largest county (Clark).  Of the 186,849 voters to show up at the polls, 103,719 were Democrats and 52,850 were Republicans.  Of mail ballots received so far, there have been about 14,000 Republicans ballots vs. 12,500 Democrat ballots.  Combining both mail ballots and early voting, Dems represented 54 percent of all Clark County voters while Republicans represented 31 percent.

What remains to be seen is how the rest of Nevada’s counties - many of which lean Republican – turn out.  Washoe County, which contains Reno-Sparks, is particularly of interest.  According to the Washoe County website, 51,209 voters have turned out to the polls as of yesterday.  26,214 of those were Democrats, compared to 16,838 Republicans.  The final count will likely be a lot closer, though.  A late September Reno Gazette Journal piece said that total Washoe County registration stood at 87,971 registered Republicans and 84,705 registered Democrats, with a backlog of about 5,000 registration applications still awaiting processing at that point.  If we assume that most of that backlog were Democrats, Washoe may be ”a wash” because the numbers will be nearly even.

For the break down of voter rolls of Nevada’s 15 remaining counties, see the Sec. of State’s website.  The sum up is this:  when the numbers from Clark and Washoe counties are set aside, the rest of Nevada leans Republican.  September stats showed Republican registrations at 75,402 vs. Democrat registrations at 49,687 in these counties.  The GOP to Dem ratio used to be a lot bigger in northern Nevada, but the large influx of liberal leaning California residents has chipped away at it over the last decade.

According to this RJ piece last week, Nevada Democrats increased their total voter registration edge over Republicans to 111,559 this year – huge in comparison to the edge of about 4,100 voters a year ago.  The RJ says the total of all registered voters in Nevada stands at nearly 1.5 million, including 625,333 Democrats and 513,774 Republicans.  For Democrats, that’s 43 percent of the voters; and for Republicans it’s about 36 percent.

Note:  The numbers of active voters on the Sec. of State’s webpage are a lot lower than the RJ is reporting so I called Matt Griffin, our state Elections Deputy, to verify.  I’m waiting on a call back and will report.*  The SOS website says that as of September 2008 there are 498,143 registered Democrats; 417,477 registered Republicans; 168,606 Non-partisans; 44,481 Independents; 6,388 Libertarians; 3,699 Others; 3,282 Greens; and 200 Natural Laws (what the heck is a “Natural Law” voter?)

Assuming these numbers are correct, those identifying with parties other than the Big Two total 226,656 with the Independent/Non-partisan voters totaling 213,087.  That being the case, it looks like it’s the Independent/Non-partisan votes that will make the difference in Nevada.

I know a lot of in-state folks have called Nevada for Obama already.  This little blogger ain’t so sure.  Nevada’s independent voters tend to lean conservative and residents of all political stripes favor low taxes, small government and generally being left alone. 

The more Obama talks about government programs, the less likely he is to please the Silver State’s electorate.  Las Vegas also has hundreds of small businesses whose owners (and nervous employees) may well have been swayed by McCain’s Joe-the-Plumber-esque pitch this past week.  And let’s not forget:  we are very much a war-hawk/pro-military state, with Nellis AFB just a few miles east of Vegas.

Election Fact:  Since 1912, Nevada has voted for the winner of every presidential election, except 1976, when the state chose Republican Gerald Ford rather than Democrat Jimmy Carter. 

*Elections Deputy Matt Griffin called me back re: the discrepancy on voter registration rolls.  He said the RJ is likely basing their numbers on registered but-not-yet-validated voters, whereas the Sec. of State’s website is citing verified, eligible voters.

Charles Krauthammer explains why he’s voting for McCain.

My favorite parts:

I stand athwart the rush of conservative ship-jumpers of every stripe — neo (Ken Adelman), moderate (Colin Powell), genetic/ironic (Christopher Buckley) and socialist/atheist (Christopher Hitchens) — yelling “Stop!” I shall have no part of this motley crew. I will go down with the McCain ship. I’d rather lose an election than lose my bearings.

And:

I’ll have no truck with the phony case ginned up to rationalize voting for the most liberal and inexperienced presidential nominee in living memory. The “erratic” temperament issue, for example. As if McCain’s risky and unsuccessful but in no way irrational attempt to tactically maneuver his way through the economic tsunami that came crashing down a month ago renders unfit for office a man who demonstrated the most admirable equanimity and courage in the face of unimaginable pressures as a prisoner of war, and who later steadily navigated innumerable challenges and setbacks, not the least of which was the collapse of his campaign just a year ago.

McCain the “erratic” is a cheap Obama talking point. The 40-year record testifies to McCain the stalwart.

And

McCain’s critics are offended that he raised the issue of William Ayers. What’s astonishing is that Obama was himself not offended by William Ayers.

And

The case for McCain is straightforward. The financial crisis has made us forget, or just blindly deny, how dangerous the world out there is. We have a generations-long struggle with Islamic jihadism. An apocalyptic, soon-to-be-nuclear Iran. A nuclear-armed Pakistan in danger of fragmentation. A rising Russia pushing the limits of revanchism. Plus the sure-to-come Falklands-like surprise popping out of nowhere.

Who do you want answering that phone at 3 a.m.?

Note:  Look closely at ALL the faces.  LOL

Source:  This photo was forwarded to me via email.  I have no idea who originally photoshopped and sent it.  If that person wanders by E!!, drop me a note and I’ll be glad to give you credit.

As reported by the Reno Gazette-Journal. 

Here’s the Sun editorial.  And here’s the RJ piece.

When you have a little time to spare, treat yourself to the video from the Al Smith Dinner, a Catholic charitable event at which Sen.s McCain and Obama spoke.  (Link goes to a Kuo & Joe blog post at Culture11 which contains 4 clips from the dinner.) 

I agree with David Kuo:

“Watch these videos. They are extraordinary, truly extraordinary. We are ridiculously blessed to live in a country where two men who are fiercely opposed to one another are nevertheless able to set it aside for a night and laugh. It isn’t quite a miracle, but it is certainly a marvel. And if you have had to see countless political ads and three presidential debates, you owe it to yourself to watch these videos.”

McCain’s cracks about the Clintons are priceless (and hilarious), and Obama’s speech was funny from begining to end.  Bravo to the very gifted writers who put both presentations together.

This morning, Culture11’s James Poulous called Yuval Levin “one of the sharpest tools in the conservative shed” and provided a link to this piece on why John McCain is a better choice than Obama.

I cheerfully admit to being biased toward all things Levin - you can see what I mean over at The New Atlantis - but the piece is well worth reading even for non-admirers.

As Jay Nordlinger would say, some pointlets:

Joe the Plumber, forget owning your own business:  you are now teed up for your own hit reality show.

Obama is now “Senator Government.”  Brit Hume said he thought it was a slip.  If so, what a great slip.  If not, brilliant.

Schieffer asked a couple of pretty good, hardball questions tonight.  And stayed quiet when he should have.  He was way better than the other two moderators, I thought.

Loved McCain’s “I am not George Bush” bit.  About time.  But too little too late?  Why has the McCain team been so poor at communicating?  Ironically:  they share that failure with the Bush administration.

On economics and taxes, why didn’t McCain mention his new thing this week:  cutting the capital gains tax to 7.5% from 15% plus a bigger capital loss write-off – ?  They are pro-growth policies and important.

Obama gave ONE example of something specific he would cut, and I can’t even remember what it was now.  McCain listed at least half a dozen things.  Brownie points there for having thought about it.

Loved it when McCain bashed the very bashable ethanol subsidies.  He did well on energy, I thought.  Liked the detail on nuclear energy and reprocessing plants.  Liked that he called Obama out on “we’ll look at it” comment re: drilling (which in polspeak means we’ll do absolutely nothing).

McCain FINALLY hit Obama on all the false/negative ads on his health care plan.  A $5,000 tax credit is more than anyone’s getting now, and the benefits tax would be nominal in comparison.

Why did Obama keep smiling and laughing when McCain was hitting him hardest?  It seemed odd.  A serious, indignant look would have been more effective.  And normal. 

McCain listed a few of Biden’s wrong judgments on foreign policy including the “cockamamie” idea of splitting Iraq into three parts; good.

McCain brought up ACORN, and that was good.  But he should have given more specifics.  ACORN has been investigated, and has had employees indicted and incarcerated, for the same kind of voter fraud they are perpetrating this year, yet Obama’s camp still gave them big bucks, and still defends them.  There are other ACORN ties as well, and I bet most voters don’t know about them.

I wish McCain were better at narrative.  There are connections that could be made, a story that could be told, of who Obama is and where he came from and where he will surely lead us.  It’s clear to most of us who have been reading and doing our homework, but the average American probably does not have a cohesive picture of the whole thing.  (I’ll try to find that flow chart thingie I saw the other day.)

Sum up:  McCain did much better than in the other debates because he had some fire and said things we hadn’t heard umpteen times and went after Obama more on legit points; and Obama did a little worse than previously because he reverted to talking points when flustered and because of the weird laughing thing. 

I think McCain won by a little, but not sure it’s enough.

Here’s some good, scathing political satire from Treacher.  (Satire:  it’s the breakfast of champions.)

Ref:  Apocalypse Now

“Do you smell that? It’s napalm, son. Nothing else on the world smells like that. I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

Y’know, once we had a hail bomb….12 hours….and when it was all over I walked up. We didn’t find one of them, not one stinking dink body.

The smell, y’know that gasoline smell, that whole hell.

Smells like…….. Victory.

Some day this war’s gonna end.”

- Lieutenant Colonel Kilgore.

Here’s some more unbiased journalism from the national press:

(The premis is a joke. Didn’t anyone see Obama’s eyes darken and veins swell during the debate? At one point I thought he was going to pop his jaw out of joint while waiting for McCain to finish. And what he lacks in temper-mental-ness, Michelle MORE than makes up for.)

(Plus: I kind of like McCain’s grumpy old man routine when he’s had his fill of the crap on The Hill. The man’s got some fire; so what?)

Hat Tip:  All American Blogger

These bumper stickers are kind of fun.  Pick one up for just $2.99 plus mailing costs.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain boards his campaign plane to depart Philadelphia, Sunday, Sept. 21, 2008. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

With all due respect to the AP photographer (who probably couldn’t get any closer) and CNSNews (who needed a photo to go with their story), this tiny shot of McCain seems a little silly…

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from blogging and receiving tons of email, we all have our “pet” electoral issues and hot buttons – and they vary widely from person to person.  For me, it’s national security first; the economy (and tax policy) second; and energy policy (a closely related) third.

On the subject of the economy, Jack Kemp has a good op-ed on the presidential candidates and their proposed tax plans (thanks to Mike Davis at the NV RLC for bringing it to my attention).  I strongly encourage voters to read the whole thing, but here are some key points (summarized in my own words):

Barack Obama says he supports a tax cut in the form of a $500 refundable income tax credit for all workers (except those in the top 5 percent of income earners, who will pay more taxes) “unless the economy remains weak.”  So…Obama does recognize that tax increases on the rich have a negative effect on the overall economy.  (But why does he think that matters only in “weak” economic times?)

Obama’s tax credit does not reduce marginal tax rates, so it won’t benefit the general economy because it provides no long term (additional) incentives for work, savings, investment or business expansion.  (People will get their $500 refund check, spend it, and that will be That.)

On the other hand, McCain wants to double the personal exemption for dependents from $3,500 to $7,000 for families regardless of income.  (For middle-class workers in the 25% tax bracket, the $3,500 exemption increase would reduce their tax liability by $875 for each child.  Families with three children are thus looking at $2,600+ in tax savings.)

And McCain proposes marginal tax rate reductions – which is great news in country that pays the second highest corporate tax rates in the entire industrialized world.  McCain wants to reduce the federal corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent – a boon for middle class workers in the form of new jobs, better pay, and a stronger dollar.

And all this will most likely raise rather than reduce tax revenues.  (Why?  Kemp cites a 2007 study by the Treasury Department which showed that Ireland — with a 12.5% corporate tax rate — raises just shy of 50 percent more revenue on a comparative basis than the U.S. does with a 35 percent rate!)

McCain would also keep the top capital gains tax rate and dividend tax at 15% which is needed in the stock world (stocks are now held by more than 2/3rds of all Americans).  McCain further wants to phase out the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) which burdens 25 million middle-class families with another $2,700 in taxes each year (on average).

Obama, by contrast, has proposed to raise marginal tax rates for almost every federal tax — the individual income tax, the capital gains tax, the dividends tax, the payroll tax, the death tax, etc. and he would increase corporate taxes where and when he could.

McCain’s plan is a good start, but I agree with Kemp:  we need to promote additional middle-class tax cuts through fundamental reform of our “confusing, contradictory and confiscatory tax code.”

Kemp outlines a proposal by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis. to allow workers to choose a flatter tax system (which is also worth reading about, at the end of his op-ed). 

Every now and then an E!! reader-commenter deserves front-and-center for noting some aspect of a story I overlooked…or for seeing it in a new way.  Here’s Mike Davis quoting and commenting on a LV Sun story about the four Nevada Ron Paul delegates who ended up voting for McCain:

“Carl Bunce claims Gestapo tactics were used to coerce him into voting for McCain, but I found Lisa Mascaro’s article in yesterday’s Sun to be particularly revealing:

“Dyer said he and Bunce, who ran recently failed in congressional primary elections, want to run for office again. So they had motivation to play nice.

“When the roll call vote came, Bunce and Dyer forfeited their seats so two McCain supporters could fill the slots.

“Not all of Paul’s supporters are pleased. Wayne Terhune, the Sparks dentist who had helped lead the fight, said ‘they should have at least abstained’

“As party Chairwoman Sue Lowden announced Nevada’s 34 unanimous votes for McCain, Bunce and Dyer were at a concert a few blocks away.

“They were listening to Rage Against the Machine, the 1990s rock band that once offered a soundtrack for a generation of politically disaffected young fans.”

After all of the nonsense over the last 4 months to get these guys there, and when the vote finally goes down, two of the four delegates weren’t even in the building.

That’s frigging sad.”

(Mike Davis is the state chair of the Nevada Republican Liberty Caucus, a grassroots org for libertarian-leaning members of the NV Republican Party who are committed to advancing the Republican majority by recruiting and electing candidates dedicated to constitutional government, economic opportunity, and individual liberty.)

And now for a serious look at this year’s campaign season (turn speakers on; page load time is worth the wait).

Best Fred Thompson line:

To deal with these challenges the Democrats present a history-making nominee for president.  History-making in that he is the most liberal, most inexperienced nominee to ever run for President.

Best Joe Lieberman line:

Senator Obama is a gifted and eloquent young man who can do great things for our country in the years ahead. But eloquence is no substitute for a record — not in these tough times.

(My thanks to Rich Lowry for posting them verbatim on the Corner so I could cut and paste; I knew he would.)

All the news outlets were reporting it as I walked out the door at 7:30 a.m.  Personally, I like the pick and think this is good news for the GOP.  Here are some pros:

She’s a principled fiscal conservative who beat an incumbent by promising to cut government waste in Alaska – and did it.  She slashed pork spending, cancelled hundreds of millions of dollars of unnecessary construction projects, and sold the gubernatorial private jet on eBay (for $2.7M).

She’s for responsible drilling.  I heard a clip from a speech she gave on “the small sliver of coastal terrain” that is ANWR and how/why drilling could/should be done there and elsewhere.  It was good. 

She’s a social conservative and pro-life (but not rabid about it) which will energize the GOP base.  She’s happily married and has five children, the most recent born in April (a Down Syndrome baby she gladly and willingly chose to have).

Any attacks on her lack of experience – she’s been governor for only two years – can be turned around:  she has more senior executive experience than Obama, or Biden (or McCain, for that matter).  Plus, she’s the #2  and not running for POTUS.  Yet.

She’s plain spoken “regular folks” so should connect well with the middle class.  And she’s got a fairly compelling personal story and family life:  athlete, beauty queen, hunter, former professional fisher person (LOL), married her high school sweetheart, son about to deploy to Iraq.

On a more personal note, I like that she’s a Hockey Mom.  (My brother played hockey for years, so we spent many winter weekends hanging around in Michigan and Canadian hockey arenas.)  Not that it has anything to do with politics.  Then again, someone who enjoys a fast-moving, hard-hitting, sometimes down-and-dirty sport like hockey must have a tough streak, right?

I’ll do some Cons later after I think more about it.

From Chuck Muth via email:

6:01 a.m. (Pacific)

Politico is reporting that Pawlenty says it’s Not him.

A few on The Corner are saying that this morning Alaska Governor Sarah Palin left Anchorage and landed on Dayton, OH.

And:  Romney will be in Dayton today.  (?!)

Whatever the case, McCain’s team has done a great job keeping this one under wraps (no leaks:  amazing!)

A short time ago, word was spreading that Pawlenty was cancelling speeches and appearances left and right.  And now it just broke that Pawlenty will be on “Meet the Press” with Brokaw this weekend.

If Pawlenty’s the pick, I’m “0 for 2″ with political predictions.  Actually, 0-3 since McCain/Romney can’t win if Romney ain’t on the tick-ie.

(darn!)(LOL)

Well this is interesting.  The Reno Gazette-Journal is reporting that an RNC panel has rejected both the “dueling delegations” from Nevada and has recommended that a  “compromise group” be seated.  This is the first I’ve heard of it.  Let me see what I can find out.

 Update: I still don’t have anything solid to go on, but it’s hard to believe the Nevada GOP would go for a compromise delegation…since that was already offered and turned down by the Paul supporters way back at the state convention last August. (dumb, Dumb, DUMB)

From today’s Nevada News & Views:

LETHAL WEAPON NO MORE

Harry Reid declared the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository dead…just before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave a “green light” to move forward with the final stage of the licensing process and dismissing a challenge to it by the state of Nevada.

Then Obama began running ads attacking John McCain on his pro-Yucca Mountain stance, figuring it would do electoral harm to the GOP nominee’s chances in Nevada…just before a new poll came out showing that less than one in four voters saying the Yucca Mountain issue would have a major influence on their votes.  And 38 percent of them said the issue wouldn’t effect their vote one way or the other whatsoever.

It’s starting to look like the proverbial “third rail” of Nevada politics isn’t quite so lethal any longer.

Tip o’ the hat to Jay Nordlinger for referencing this piece at Slate.com entitled:  “If Obama Loses” and subtitled “Racism is the only reason McCain might beat him.”

We’ve heard it before; we’re sure to hear it again.  If McCain wins, racism is the only explanation and the Decline of America is confirmed.

What a nasty Lie.

If the black nominee this year were a Republican, we wouldn’t be hearing a peep about Racism-As-Reason.  The liberal media would blithely loathe the Republican nominee, notwithstanding his blackness.  As Nordlinger points out:

The nominee would be just another Republican who needed to be defeated, like Lynn Swann, Michael Steele, or Ken Blackwell.  When Doug Wilder ran for governor of Virginia, everyone said, for months, “He would be the first black governor since Reconstruction.” It was also asserted, constantly, that the election was a test of Virginians’ racial maturity.

But earlier, the Republicans had a black nominee in my home state, Michigan – his name was Bill Lucas. No one said he would be the first black governor since Reconstruction. No one talked about the racial maturity of Michigan voters. Lucas was just another conservative politician who needed to be defeated.

And he was, by a garden-variety white liberal (Jim Blanchard).

I am sick of watching re-runs of the Whitey Hates The Black Man mini-series.  I am sick of accusations of Racism in America every time some person of color does not get what they want when they want it.  And I am sick to death of the over-simplification of issues and pseudo-polarization of our population via all Identity Politics.

If Obama loses this fall, it will be because he didn’t convince enough Americans that his governing skills and policies were better than McCain’s.  Period.