< meta name="DC.Date.Valid.End" content="20050827">

Catastrophic Success

As if there weren't enough political opinionating out there, I, too, now sing the body bloglectric. Let me FEED you![XML]

Location: United States

Sunday, October 31, 2004

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

Regarding Egg on my face

As I said in response to Bill Whittle's post of chagrin although many of us really thought Osama was dead, it is at least encouraging that he was reduced to sending his message via VHS to Al-Jazeera rather than via Boeing 777 to the Sears Tower.

It was pointed out to me by the beautiful chocolate-haired goddess who deigns to share her life with mine (aka, my sainted wife), he could be delaying an attack until Tuesday to disrupt voting in a hotly contested swing state.

My response to her was (even though I couldn't come up with the word precarious at the time) that that is a tremendously precarious plan since he MUST choose a state in which the vote count is close enough that a few (or even many) ruined polling places or destroyed ballots could swing the whole state AND that state MUST have enough Electoral Votes to push one candidate over the magical 270 mark and therefore the ENTIRE election MUST be close enough that one state (AND that state being the one he chose) can make that difference. According to the LGF story highlighted in the below entry, Osama whines in the hidden 12 minutes of his recent Oscar-contender that Bush has drastically damaged his ability to wage large-scale assaults. It sounds like he doesn't have the ability to hit more than one state. If he does try to hit more than one state, it only increases the complexity of the problems, not reduces it. Besides, I think that Osama is (sadly) much smarter than that.

In Spain, Al-Qaida-allied terrorists blew up a train station three days before the election. That gave the media enough time to report the story and speculate on the "root causes" and not enough time for the then-current government to rally support and explain to the electorate why resolve is called for and why succumbing to the terrorists is appeasement and will not work. In the US, we get a VHS. That's it. Thank God. PapaScott, in a fit of Gallows Humor, bemoans the lack of respect Osama shows the American electorate by using the broadcast media to do his dirty work. I agree, but, I'm sure, we're both happy that Osama misunderestimated the American people again.

Please join me on Tuesday in wishing Osama a merry Fuck You on Tuesday. Vote. Vote for Bush. Send these terrorists a message that we will not, can not be intimidated by some asshole with a Camcorder and too much time on his bloodied hands.

He wasn't kidding

John Kerry wasn't kidding when he said, "I've met foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy they look at you and say, 'You've got to win this, you've got to beat this guy, we need a new policy,' things like that."

According to this article on Little Green Footballs, a new, more accurate translation of Bin Laden's tape by MEMRI TV makes clear that Bin Laden offers a truce to those US States who vote for Kerry on Tuesday, and promises to wage war on those which go for Bush. With Kerry's recent endorsements from Yasser Arafat, Kim Jong Il, former terrorist friendly Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and France, why should any American vote for him?

The Big Dance (or Invasion of the Sports Metaphor)

The anticipation courses through my body like electricity. I get breathless and panicky thinking about the different possible outcomes. As unexpected events surfaced, I thrill or despair depending on the swing of the pendulum toward or away from my favor. There are two things that elicit this effect in me.

The Chicago Bears (Papa Bear, oh why hast thou forsaken us?) and National Politics.

Sports and politics are quite similar, but I will give sports the win for Best-Looking Cheerleaders (Susan Estrich and Bill Kristol? yecch!). Like football (my sports poison of choice), I knew who I was rooting for before the season started. My team's pre-season wasn't even worth watching since we all knew who our veteran starters would be. Like (sigh) Brett Favre, they had proven their worth and dedication in past years and earned their starting positions. Our opponents though, they had a riotous pre-season loaded with a Quarterback Controversy that would rival anything the Bears dealt with during the Wannstedt/Jauron eras. Could those New york Dems actually start a pro War on Terror QB - er candidate? Would they throw a veteran behind the center or let the rookie have a shot? It was a wild ride for sure. It almost felt like the playoffs as I rooted for both the arch-rival and the patsy while they determined who would play my team. It felt choosing between the Packers or the Lions to win on my team's bye week to determine whether we would compete against our more than competent arch-rival or the division easy-win. Do we hope for the Pack to win so we can prove our mettle, or root for the Lions so that victory is ours to lose?

As it turns out, those Dems put up a decent competitor. More like the Minnesota Vikings. A team with a lot of potential and with a long history of moderate success. A few stellar moments, but otherwise, a reliable mediocrity. Kerry's a candidate that can be relied on to put up a good effort and on any given Sunday has just as good a chance of winning as losing.

Like any good football season, there have been plenty of bright spots on either side that allow for some good discussions. Most of the Democratic bright spots were really just Republican low spots, but if you can't take advantage of an opponent's failure, you don't belong on the field. You've got to pick up those fumbles in order to win. On the other hand, you also have to score points of your own. You can't rely on your opponent to lose in order for you to win.

However, now we are really in the playoffs. This is where the big plays that can break the game wide open are made. The Dems Left Coast Offense has sent attack after attack from the air (the CBS News/60 minutes/New York Times convergence on the 380 tons of HMX - or is it 3 tons? - and the forged Bush Memos, the lies of Fahrenheit 9/11 that turn into Democratic talking points and the repeated assaults of MoveOn.org and George Soros' allies). The Republicans have played smashmouth (i.e., old-school Chicago-style) football. They have stuck with the gameplan and have just rammed the ball up the middle over and over and over. They have broken through the line often for big gains (the RNC Convention for one, the Swift Boat Vets for another), but most gains have been small and even holding the line of scrimmage is a gain when you look at the opposition's defense. By staying on-message and just relentlessly driving home the point that Bush understands the War on Terror and has the will and desire to take the battle to the enemy until he has no more will or ability to fight. Kerry, meanwhile, seems to completely disbelieve that there is such a thing as a War on Terror, believing instead that it is a law enforcement issue; at any rate, he refuses to accept that Al-Qaida is not the alpha and the omega of the War on Terror. The Bush team's consistent, constant and cogent arguments have left their opponents breathless and desperately defensive. Through repetitive running of the ball and control of the clock, the Bush team have set the tone and framed the discussion of this campaign. Not only has Kerry been forced to respond to Bush's message, he has been unable to even form a coherent message of his own to deliver. Even when Bush is on defense, Kerry is scrambling to get any kind of message out, throwing bomb after bomb only to see it swatted down, intercepted or stopped at the point of the catch.

The big game though, is Tuesday. All of the posturing and positioning in these last few days really don't make much of a difference though. All three undecideds aside, most Americans know who they are going to punch their ballots for on Tuesday, and in fact, have known it since March. Bush fans are not likely to converty Kerry fans, and Kerry fans (you few, you happy few) will certainly not be swaying Bush voters. By the same token, we Bears fans will almost never convince our misguided brethren to the North that the Packers, despite their success, really aren't worthy of it. Obviously the only REAL football is BEARS Football!

I hope that the final score is determined on Tuesday and that the game doesn't go into overtime again. No one likes when the SuperBowl goes into overtime. In fact, the winning team's fans always wants to see a blowout. I want a repeat of Superbowl XX (Bears 46, New England 10). I'll be rooting for my team, have fun rooting for yours.

Go Bush!!!

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Snarky Photo Post - Feeling childish

Let's ask John Edwards about how big he thinks his chances of winning the election are!

He says, "This Big!"

Really John? How much of chance do you REALLY have to win?

He says, "Oooh, about this much."

Yeah. I think so too.


The Daily
brings us the joyously funny link above. The film is taken from Satellite Video Feeds. I know Edwards' feed is part of a Harry Shearer comedy/art piece, but I hadn't seen the Bush feed until this morning here.

The big joke, of course, is that Bush is a man's man and Edwards is a little too Hollywood for the White House, and that's probably unfair to Edwards. I always wondered how he got his hair so damn perfect though. Apparently, it's by rolling up his sleeves and getting to work!

And stay to the end for the special approval message by President George Bush!

That's a Relief!!

SelectSmart.com has a quiz that polls your feelings on a range of issues and tries to match you up with your best candidate. If only I could get Mr. Theoretical to run. He sounds like a smart and (obviously) good-looking fellow. My results follow. I took it twice. After seeing a few questions I didn't remember answering in the review of my results, I felt I should take it again. However, I don't know that I answered the questions I did respond to exactly the same way since you must weight the importance of your answer as well as responding. Click the link to take it.

[First Results: I think these may be more accurate because the questions I didn't answer are oddly phrased]
1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Bush, President George W. - Republican (87%)
3. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (58%)
4. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT - Democrat (56%)
5. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (51%)
6. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (47%)
7. Gephardt, Rep. Dick, MO - Democrat (47%)
8. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (40%)
9. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH - Democrat (35%)
10. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (30%)
11. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (19%)
12. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (18%)
13. Cobb, David - Green Party (14%)
14. Nader, Ralph - Independent (14%)
15. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR - Democrat (12%)
16. Brown, Walt - Socialist Party (10%)
17. Hagelin, Dr. John - Natural Law (9%)
18. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol, IL - Democrat (3%)

[Second Result: Less agreement with Bush this time, but a negligible difference. Although Carl Mosely-Braun (odd name syntax aside) is moving up... Kerry moved down and Lieberman moved up. I said during the primaries, if the democrats selected Joe Lieberman, I would have a tough choice this November. As it is, they didn't and I don't. The Democrats can not nominate a centrist when everyone has to run to the left to have any chance of making it through the primaries. More extremists vote in the primaries (of both parties) than centrists. This is why the Democrats have such a hard time reaching Middle America.]
Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Bush, President George W. - Republican (80%)
3. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (57%)
4. Lieberman, Senator Joe, CT - Democrat (56%)
5. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (54%)
6. Edwards, Senator John, NC - Democrat (47%)
7. Gephardt, Rep. Dick, MO - Democrat (45%)
8. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (43%)
9. Kucinich, Rep. Dennis, OH - Democrat (36%)
10. Dean, Gov. Howard, VT - Democrat (33%)
11. Sharpton, Reverend Al - Democrat (24%)
12. Cobb, David - Green Party (17%)
13. Nader, Ralph - Independent (17%)
14. Clark, Retired General Wesley K., AR - Democrat (16%)
15. LaRouche, Lyndon H. Jr. - Democrat (14%)
16. Hagelin, Dr. John - Natural Law (9%)
17. Brown, Walt - Socialist Party (8%)
18. Moseley-Braun, Former Senator Carol, IL - Democrat (7%)


Drudge reports that ABC has passed a tape to the CIA and FBI for verification of authenticity before broadcasting it. The hour-long video they received in Pakistan reportedly shows an American-born man in a face-concealing headdress warning the US of an impending attack that would dwarf the attacks of September 11th. Apparently we brought it on ourselves by ... I don't know ... breathing, maybe?

That's cool with me. I much prefer that ABC vet its story sources before broadcasting them and breathlessly causing a panic, unlike, say, CBS for example. However, what struck me was this:
Sharing information like this with the government carries risks for a news organization, said media analyst Andrew Tyndall.

"If...as a result of sending this tape to the government, the CIA tipped off the Pakistani internal intelligence service, and they rounded this guy up, (ABC's) news-gathering ability would be compromised because you'd be perceived by the people on the streets of Karachi as being a front organization for the CIA."

I'm glad there are wiser heads at ABC (certain Political News Director memos notwithstanding).

I guess I can understand where Tyndall is coming from. Journalists' coin is trust. They need the trust of their sources and the trust of their consumers (viewers, readers, listeners, etc.) in order to do their job. If their sources believe that they are liable to be arrested if they say X to this journalist, they'll simply stop giving all the juicy data to that journalist. That is a fine and workable model in the world of corporate whistleblowers. It is in the best interest of the whistleblower for the journalist not to reveal him as the source so as to avoid retributory tactics from his employer, and it benefits the journalist because other whistleblowers are more likely to trust that journalist not to betray him.

However, when it comes to people who have sworn to kill me, my family and everything I hold dear, I have a very difficult time accepting that argument as a reason not to report such information to the very people who are trying to prevent that from happening (i.e., our government or the freedom-loving governments of Britain, Australia or anybody else with James Bond-like espionage capabilities). The fact that your face is reporting the 6:00 news is not going to engender love and affection for you in the Hamas splodydope's heart. You're gonna blow up too!
There is no benefit to a news agency in NOT providing such a strong indicator of a potential attack to those who are best capable of preventing it from happening. I can't find any moral relativity to balance journalism ethics with the loss of life in such an attack if by your failure to provide the government information, you actually facilitate it. As far as I'm concerned, and I think many courts would agree, you are guilty of being an Accessory to Murder. No ideal of Objectivity compares to protect your countrymen in a time of war.

I just want to give big credit to ABC for getting this to the authorities in such a timely fashion. As it is being reported, they only received it in New York Monday afternoon and the FBI and CIA had it by yesterday at the latest. I hope their actions save so many thousands of lives. I salute you ABC, and a grateful nation thanks you.

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Dear Tony

I saw this cool site in a blog ad. There should be one for Prime Minister Howard of Australia too, but I haven't found one yet. However, with his recent easy victory, I don't think he quite needs the show of support that Mr. Blair needs. I decided to go ahead and write him a note, especially after watching Saturday Night Live, which had a sketch of a rather beleagured (and surprisingly subservient) Tony Blair shilling for Dubya. He has publicly stated that he has been feeling a little beaten up by his own citizens due to a bunch of mean-spirited letters. I think no good deed should go unpunished, and so I sent him a letter of my own:

I am proud to be aligned with such a stalwart ally, and I dearly hope that Mr. Blair realizes that quite a large number of Americans do not buy into the "coerced and bribed" baloney. We know that when it was time to take a stand for civilization, at a time when there was no room for equivocation, when the forces that value life must decide to fight for it, Mr. Blair (and Mr. Howard of Australia must be included as well) heeded the call for liberty. Our safety can only be guaranteed when those who would destroy lose their life, their ability to destroy us, their desire to do so, or all three. That will happen when freedom spreads from the borders of our nations to encompass all the world. Thank you Mr. Blair, from a grateful American.

Paul R. Bixby, Jr.
Rolling Meadows, Illinois, USA

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

OpinionJournal - The Real World

OpinionJournal - The Real World

Kofi Annan, secretary-general of the United Nations, finds it "inconceivable" that Russia, France or China might have been influenced in Security Council debates by Saddam Hussein's Oil for Food business and bribes. "These are very serious and important governments," Mr. Annan told Britain's ITV News Sunday. "You are not dealing with banana republics."

The only response I have to this is "You keep using that word... I don't think it means what you think it means." < /Mandy Patinkin's awesome Spaniard accent>

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Debate Round III

7:58 p.m. I think Bush is going to deliver as well on substance as he has in the last two debates. However, being a podium debate, I think Kerry is probably going to appear to tie again entirely on style.
I am shamelessly stealing this format from Peter David and his blog at PeterDavid.net.

8:00 p.m., bare stage, the Fox pundits are predicting either for Bush or identical to my guess. Charlie Old-Guy from CBS is rattling on with Jim Lehrer's speech. He isn't quite as threatening about it. Graciously allows the audience to applaud to welcome them out.

8:03 p.m. Both men are wearing red ties. Someone should have gotten the memo that Bush ALWAYS wears a red tie for these things.

8:04 p.m. Poor Kerry always loses his first 30 seconds on the obligatory welcome speech. Bush better watch that smirk. And he really should reply to this uninspected 95% of imported crates business. Time till first appeal to authority by Kerry - 1:15.

8:06 Bush: The path to safety for the United States is the spread of liberty around the world. There's the "nuisance" quote. Kerry had to know that was gonna be brought up tonight. I wonder if he has a response. ... hmmm... not really.

8:08 Is the war on terrorism a law enforcement operation or military operation? W rightly points out that it is more than law enforcement. "It requires a comprehensive plan." Bush is looking more vibrant and fired up than I expected.

8:12 Bush: "A plan is not a litany of complaints." Well said. Kerry: "We're going to help Americans buy into [the Congressional Health Care program]" Every time this man opens his mouth, I hear, "Hi, I'm from the government, I'm here to help."

8:15 Cheney pointed this out and Bush did in Debate II. A large percentage of the people who earn over $200,000 per year are small business owners, who file as individuals and would therefore be hardest hit. This discourages hiring in those businesses that have provided the vast majority of the 1.6 million jobs created since last August.

8:16 Bush only mentioned it briefly.

8:17 Damn. Bush "We want to help." Can't trust any of these guys. I have yet to see a job retraining program from the Federal Government to help those whose jobs have been outsourced.

8:20 Kerry references the Sopranos, this man should cease trying to be hip. Period. Kerry changes the subject of the question to point out that Bush talking about fiscal spending is the pot calling the kettle black. Right after he digs on him for changing the subject of the question. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

8:22 Kerry refuses to promise to stop outsourcing. Good thing to. That's not a promise he could hope to keep. But he is going to "level the playing field."

8:23 Bush: "Whooo" after a long Kerry answer. It falls quite flat when the audience can't refuses to respond. Bush correctly says the Child Tax Credit was raised TO $1000 not BY $1000 like he did in Debate II. "My opponent says he will spend the government's money. I say that is YOUR money." Hear HEAR!!!

8:25 Bush jumps in after Kerry's answer. It is unclear if he even had the right of response and his joke again falls flat.

8:26 Bush dodges the question of whether homosexuality is a choice. Bush clarifies that the reason for the FMA is to prevent the judges from interfering and to engage the citizenry (and he actually said "citizenry") since the state legislatures have to get involved.

8:28 Kerry invokes God and Dick Cheney's daughter in ten seconds of each other. Not Bush. Interesting. Kerry blurs past saying that he supports partnership rights, but that he supports marriage's traditional definition.

8:30 WOW! A question on abortion and stem-cell research in one?? Kerry quotes the Bible, "Faith without works is dead." Then says he can't allow his faith to enter into his legislative duties.

8:31 Bush "promote[s] a culture of life." He is playing as the moderate in this case. I'm waiting for him to say rare and safe. I think Bush scores points with this in the middle. He says he wants to provide as many alternatives to abortion as possible. He doesn't respond with Kerry's veiled challenge to state whether he would work to revoke Roe v. Wade.

8:35 Bush says "Errah" instead of "Error," just like Terrah instead of Terror.

8:36 Kerry draws the class card. Claims Bush gave the healthcare companies a windfall of $136 billion. Yes, let's all be afraid of the scary rich man... oh wait, which one is that?

8:37 Bush paints a picture of himself taking action to get Medicare reform while Kerry couldn't act.

8:39 Kerry appeals to authority again about his healthcare plan, but this time to two network news divisions. Not the best choice I think. Now Kerry is talking about a new Federal Healthcare. "You don't have to buy into our plan, but you'd be stupid not to." Government entrance into any field stifles competition. It does not increase it. He is leaning to the left.

8:42 Bush is making a strong case against state health care. He states that the best decisions about your health are made by you and your doctor. "Once healthcare becomes a line item in a government budget, government control sets in."

8:44 Bush gets to talk about his Ownership Society. Kerry tells America that it is disastrous for young people to keep their own money. They HAVE to pay into the government so that we can continue our programs. The valid question he asks is "Where does the transitional money come from to fund current and imminent social security checks."

8:47 Kerry is asked "Alan Greenspan says Social Security MUST be fixed to remain solvent. You say you won't change a thing. So you're gonna leave it broke?" Kerry plays the class card again. He also again shows that he doesn't understand that a surplus of money in the government budget means that you have taken too much from the people.

8:49 I hadn't heard him say it before now, but I'm sure he did. In case you don't know, Kerry "has a plan."

8:50 Bush rightly points out that the top 20% percent of taxpayers pay 80% of the taxes. I wish he'd said that the highest 1% pays 50% of the taxes. He also points out that anyone who paid taxes last year got tax relief.

8:53 Bush makes an intriguing case for a "Worker's Card." "As long as there is not an American willing to do the job ..." Interesting in theory, but as Bill Whittle says "Does the map match the coastline." He does state that he doesn't support amnesty, which is encouraging, and he gives the right reason, "We don't want to reward illegal behavior."

8:56 Kerry just lost the small business vote if he ever had it. He promised to raise the minimum wage to $7.00. He claims that 9.2 million women would make $3000 more a year. The problem is that if you raise the minimum wage plan, businesses can't keep 3 people on the payroll anymore because its too expensive; someone's gotta get fired. You will actually cause an increase in unemployment. But he gets those 9.2 million women's votes when he says "President Bush is preventing you from getting that money."

9:00 OOoh. Bush is confronted on Roe v. Wade, and he turns it into a question about appointing judges. Kerry says he will not appoint a judge that will take away constitutional rights. Which amendment guarantees the right to abort an unborn child? Bush says Kerry has a litmus test for appointing judges. Still doesn't answer the question. Somehow this became a question about education and jobs... ???

9:04 He again claims that he is going to increase the size of the active military by two divisions and in the same breath complains about how the military is understaffed already. Paper divisions don't hunt terrorists. Kerry really is looking into the camera a lot more tonight. Bush bounces between the camera and the moderator. Kerry again claims that Bush ceased to make Osama bin Laden the ultimate priority in this campaign and therefore threw away the war on terror. It just illustrates how little he understands about the scope of the war, and what is needed to win it.

9:08 Kerry responds to the Global Test by saying that there isn't a global test, but there is a truth test. Bush brings up Kerry's no vote to the first Gulf War (which should have been brought up in the last debate) when we had a UN mandate and clear causus belli. Well done, but it felt a little out of place, but more appropriate than anywhere else.

9:09 Bush answers about gun control. He places the blame for gun crimes on the criminals. That bastard! ;) Bush says he has increased the prosecutions for gun crimes. Kerry implies the you can buy an AK-47 now that the assault weapon ban is lifted. A) That's not true. B) He implies that if we have a ban on a weapon, that is gonna prevent a CRIMINAL from having that gun. BULLSHIT. When you ban weapons, you only ban law-abiding citizens from owning weapons. The criminals will have them whether they are legal or no. Many of them are repeat criminals who are banned from owning guns anyway!

9:12 Kerry says that Affirmative Action is necessary. Makes an OK case for it too. He opposes quotas. He prefers to mend it, not end it. Cute. Bush's response starts off "me-too" and doesn't really discuss the philosophy of AA. He discusses business and education again. Although, he points out that minority owned businesses are up and that more minorities own a home than ever before and so progress is being made. Still avoids AA, really...

9:15 Bush is asked about his faith and admits that his faith impacts his policy a lot. "Armies of compassion?" Bush almost slams the podium, but made every effort to do so?? Weird. Kerry: "I'm more pious than thou." "We have a lot more loving of our neighbor to do." Well... she is kinda cute...

9:20 He managed to claim to be bipartisan without engaging in his habitual namedropping (with the exception of John McCain (twice)).

9:23 Final question is a good one. What have you learned from your two daughters (and by extension the strong women around them). Bush actually gets the audience to laugh often. Its clear that he loves his wife VERY much. Really, they are kinda cute together. Kerry's joke doesn't start off well, but he gets some good laughs at the end. He mentions his mom who recently died (and my strong condolences go to him). He is also a good man who greatly appreciates the women around him. I both agree with him, and commend him

9:26 Closing statements: Senator, there is no R at the end of idea. His closing argument comes to: We can be better than we are (commendable), we can all have (government-sponsored) health care (bad plan), and really, I'm not a wimp. Bush tells a story about optimism that happens to mention that he is the one in the White House. We've been through hell, but Americans have come out better for it. Oh yeah, I have some government programs too. And some Armies of Compassion. And we'll kick the ass of the enemy and leave liberty in our wake (will the Armies of Compassion being the one kicking ass?). He ends with an actual ask for your votes.

I think that since everyone came in thinking Bush was gonna tank the Domestic Issues debate, he only had to not have a turrets outbreak to tie. In fact, he was in control. He knew what he was talking about. He looked relaxed and energetic. He was able to give a lot of data without tripping over most of it. Kerry came out looking like a liberal and like the IRS man knocking on your door. I will call this one a Bush victory on both style and substance. I don't think he put the race away, but I think he at least stopped Kerry's advance. Kerry was on the defensive almost the whole night.

Anyway, its time to get some work done and listen to the pundits (one of whom is pissed at Kerry's outing of Dick Cheney's daughter - he thinks its dirty pool aimed at weaking Bush/Cheney among the ultra-right-wing). The Fox pundits are calling it easily for Bush... we'll see how this plays out in the polls.

I'll be checking the Electoral Vote Predictor first thing tomorrow.