Nosey Online

I really have been lacking lately in posting my thoughts. Work has sucked me in like no other, but I should still be able to post in the later part of my days. So I will still be around.

My big announcement is that as of last night, Christine and I are engaged to be married. So as you can see, I've been a little busy lately. And thanks to those who have expressed happiness that I have returned to irregular posting.

We can do better. I promise.

From CNN:

Polls: Kerry won debate

Bush post-convention lead 'erased'

(CNN) -- A majority of Americans believe Sen. John Kerry won the first presidential debate of the 2004 campaign, putting him in a virtual tie with President Bush, according to polls released Saturday by Newsweek and the Los Angeles Times.

Newsweek reported that Thursday's debate in Miami, Florida, had "erased the lead" that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have held over Kerry and running mate Sen. John Edwards since the Republican National Convention in New York.

Newsweek's post-convention poll had Bush leading among registered voters 54 percent to 43 percent. Its post-debate poll had 47 percent choosing Kerry-Edwards, and 45 percent for Bush-Cheney. Two percent said they would vote for Ralph Nader and his running mate, Peter Camejo.

You know, the fact that there are 2% of people out there willing to vote for Nader proves something. Either 2% of people out there are really disenfranchised or they really are Republicans willing to vote third party.

With all the attention thrown towards the horse race, it's easy to forget that the Supremos are gearing up for another tour of duty. And they're going to rule on some important stuff.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court begins a new term on Monday that will decide important cases on federal sentencing rules, the death penalty for juveniles and the medical use of marijuana.

The high court will also rule on disputes including the segregation of prisoners by race, how long the government may detain certain immigrants awaiting deportation...

and the most important case, if you're living in Ohio...

...and bans on out-of-state wine sales.

(The markup on wine prices in Ohio is just plain nuts)

Let's take a look. We're in the 21st century and we're still debating whether or not it's cool to execute kids??? No brainer. And pot for glaucoma and cancer patients? Come on. I've always thought the tobacco lobby had something to do with that one.

Two of the other cases I don't have much to say about right now. But for the love of God, Ohioans shouldn't have to pay an exorbitant amount of money for the liquid that Jesus created out of water. You'd think the Christians would be all over that one.

Heh.

Who's feeding Bush the funny gas? Seems like a guys sitting in the dentist's chair.

Yikes, wasn't ready for that one was he? Seems like his answer is more of the same...i.e. blaming someone else.

UPDATE: He just blamed litigation for the flus shot shortage. Christ, get some new excuses.

Slap my wrist with a big fat ruler. I've been largely absent these past weeks. As you can all tell, things have been pretty hectic for us lately. Thanks to everyone for the kind words. I will start posting regularly again soon. I promise. In the mean time, check out the baloney Atrios points out to us about Kerry mentioning Cheney's lesbian daughter in the last debate.

[Fox & Friends E.D.] Hill: You know what? That's like if you talk to an alcoholic's family and you say, boy, that kid of yours sure is a wino, but you know, you're really dealing with it well and I'm sure that he has no choice about being a wino. I mean really that's what it is. I'm sorry. Senator Kerry, there's nothing you can say here. It is what it is.

And, that's why our media thinks this is a big deal, and why Lynne Cheney thinks it's a big deal, because they think that pointing out that someone is a "lesbian" is the same as pointing out that they're a "wino."

Absolutely. It's such a non-issue, it makes me want to vomit. Edwards points it out, he gets a "thank you." Kerry does the same and Lynne rides in on her broomstick to condemn the next President as being "not a very nice man." Give me a break.

They definitely are freaking out now. Bush should be in a way better position. Come on righties, can't you read the writing on the wall?

For those of you who haven't seen it, check out this video clip of the President thanking a group for their efforts in Iraq. (Via Kos)

You know how after the last debate, all the Bush spinners said that while Kerry won on style but lacked on substance? Do you honestly think that style doesn't matter? If you were a hiring manager for a company, would you select someone who spoke like this? I don't think so either.

Read Suskind.

There is one story about Bush's particular brand of certainty I am able to piece together and tell for the record.

In the Oval Office in December 2002, the president met with a few ranking senators and members of the House, both Republicans and Democrats. In those days, there were high hopes that the United States-sponsored ''road map'' for the Israelis and Palestinians would be a pathway to peace, and the discussion that wintry day was, in part, about countries providing peacekeeping forces in the region. The problem, everyone agreed, was that a number of European countries, like France and Germany, had armies that were not trusted by either the Israelis or Palestinians. One congressman -- the Hungarian-born Tom Lantos, a Democrat from California and the only Holocaust survivor in Congress -- mentioned that the Scandinavian countries were viewed more positively. Lantos went on to describe for the president how the Swedish Army might be an ideal candidate to anchor a small peacekeeping force on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Sweden has a well-trained force of about 25,000. The president looked at him appraisingly, several people in the room recall.

''I don't know why you're talking about Sweden,'' Bush said. ''They're the neutral one. They don't have an army.''

Lantos paused, a little shocked, and offered a gentlemanly reply: ''Mr. President, you may have thought that I said Switzerland. They're the ones that are historically neutral, without an army.'' Then Lantos mentioned, in a gracious aside, that the Swiss do have a tough national guard to protect the country in the event of invasion.

Bush held to his view. ''No, no, it's Sweden that has no army.''

The room went silent, until someone changed the subject.

Ugh.

You know, there are some people who could explain this away. These people love to make excuses for Bush. They say that this brand of certainty and steadfastness more than make up for the President's lack of worldly knowledge.

The record-setting voter turnout this time around will tell the tale.

There’s a nice little piece in the WaPo about Karl Rove and his Grand Strategy. More then anything, the article actually shows how the GOP has embraced 9/11 as a political gain. This quote from an unnamed Bush campaign worker says it all.

The main critique of the Rove strategy, from inside and outside his party, is that the White House governed in a divisive way, when Bush could have used his popularity after the terrorist attacks to reach out to swing voters and even to African Americans.

Republicans would not discuss the issue on the record because they said they hope Bush will win, and Rove's power makes them hesitant to cross him. "It befuddles me," said one Republican official working with the campaign. "If they had never had 9/11, you could understand being where we are, because you could say [Bush] never got out from under the cloud of the disputed election. But they had an opportunity no president gets."

Pretty straight forward, eh? At first blush, Rove’s idea of using the War on Terra™ made some Repubs a little nauseous. But after the first salvo of political ads featuring the President’s call to arms, it was apparent to Party loyalists that using 9/11 for political gain no longer had that bad aftertaste.

By the accounts of some White House insiders, Rove did not push Bush to invade Iraq, although he said before the midterm elections of 2002 that Republicans should not be afraid to use the war on terrorism as their calling card, because voters instinctively trusted Democrats less on national-security issues.

"Rove wasn't going to let the liberal Democrats and their co-conspirators in the media take the war on terror away," the Rove friend said. "This is as legitimate an issue as the Cold War. When everybody was saying, 'Oh, you can't exploit it politically, you can't exploit it politically,' Karl went and ran those first ads that exploited it politically. And, by the way, those ads fundamentally began the campaign and created a basis for Bush to win in spite of what was going on in Iraq."

So Bush/Cheney ’04 was born and raised with 9/11 as a security blanket. They have nothing else. If the Kool-Aid drinkers would just wake up and realize this, Bush wouldn’t stand a chance.