Eden Prairie News - Forum topic - Comments

Vamma or VPP, I expected

Gino G — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:10:44 -0500

Vamma or VPP, I expected more from you than the juvenile name calling that we're subjected to by three putt. Let me ask you a question. Your moniker says edenprairiefactchecker but your regurgitated articles consist of copying and pasting left wing propaganda. Then, when another viewpoint is posted, you call people names. This is a blog for viewpoints but if it doesn't fit your politics, you resort to juvenile tactics. Is this the new voice of the left? Sounds like the same old, same old.

Rocky Mountain News:

edenpprairiefactchecker — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:52:01 -0500

Rocky Mountain News: Protests on Mild Side

"After three days of anti-abortion, anti-war, anti-laws, anti-capitalism and, well, anti-just-about- anything-else-you-could-think-of displays, thousands will gather today to celebrate something they aren't against: music.

In one of the biggest events anticipated outside of the Pepsi Center this week, around 10,000 protesters — and music lovers — will convene at the Denver Coliseum this morning for a free concert by the hard rock/rap band Rage Against the Machine.

That's considerably fewer than wanted to attend the concert organized by the anti-war group Tent State University: Another 15,000 had applied but were denied tickets in the raffle allotment.

Van Campbell, 28, of Lakewood, was the first to camp out at the Coliseum for today's concert. About 4:30 today, he said he'd been in line since 10:30 Tuesday night.

Rage Against the Machine members are expected to stress peaceful protest and nonviolence, but some are concerned that a planned march from the coliseum to the Pepsi Center after the concert won't be a mellow one.

Speaking during protester training sessions about the walk, to be led by Iraq Veterans Against the War, Tent State organizer Amanda Troeder, 25, warned: "It's going to be very emotional. It's going to be very violent."

Her comments were echoed by others in the group.

Violence held at bay

Such comments mark a week in which such rhetoric has often been overblown. With the exception of 106 arrests Monday night when protesters and police clashed near Civic Center, demonstrations have remained largely under control.

Tuesday was no different. Although protesters sometimes found themselves facing the bull horns of groups with opposing ideologies, little, if any, violence was reported.

The day's protests began with residents of Golden waking to a gigantic sign on the side of North Table Mountain. Yellow and white letters made from more than 2,000 queen-size sheets and looming 530 feet tall and 666 feet wide spelled out "Destroys uNborn Children," the words aligned vertically to highlight the letters "DNC."

It reportedly took 50 abortion protesters to put them there. They hiked up the mesa at 1 a.m., posting the sign by 8:30 a.m. — and apparently got overheated doing it. Deputies sent to the scene gave food and water to those in distress.

The American Right to Life Action claimed responsibility for the message, noting that it was trying to set a record for protest signs, as measured by the Guinness Book of World Records.

Meanwhile, members of another anti-abortion group found themselves booked in a different way.

After Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry and 12 other anti-abortion activists blocked a security gate near the Pepsi Center, they were led away in handcuffs. As he was marched to a nearby sheriff's van, Terry shouted: "Don't vote for Obama!"

Group threatens lawsuit

Elsewhere, Re-create 68, the group responsible in part for the protest clash with police Monday night, announced it may file a lawsuit against the city, in response to the arrests.

"The arrests were illegal and violated people's right to free speech," said spokesman Glenn Spagnuolo.

Special courts set up for DNC-related arrests were bustling all night processing those arrests, with bleary-eyed judges finishing up the last cases long after sunrise.

"We had to work out a few bugs, but we got the job done," said Denver County Court Administrator Matt McConville. Two judges working from 8 p.m. Monday to 8 a.m. Tuesday handled the bursting docket of protester cases.

Late Tuesday night into this morning, Re-create 68 held a Liberation Soiree at the Dazzle club to raise funds to help cover costs of bringing speakers to Denver.

At the Freedom Cage near Pepsi Center, about 20 Tent State protesters were sleeping on air mattresses or sleeping bags early today."

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/aug/26/all-all-days-protests-...

National Review: "No Way, No

edenpprairiefactchecker — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:46:53 -0500

National Review: "No Way, No How, No McCain"

1. It was a top-notch speech — politically shrewd, effectively delivered. Very, very effectively delivered, in fact.

2. The introductory video laid great, great stress on the fact that she is a woman. I’ve never quite understood this. You have to do a Betty Friedan act, even now? I don’t think of her as a woman (and I mean no offense, I swear): I think of her as Hillary Rodham Clinton — leader of the Democratic Left.

3. As she took the stage, Bill Clinton looked at her as adoringly as a person can. He even mouthed “I love you,” several times. Was this real — heartfelt? Who knows?

4. It seemed to me that, after Hillary entered, people were semi-afraid to stop applauding — sort of like in Stalin’s day. (Very, very awkward, this business of when to stop applauding a godhead.)

5. She called herself a “proud mother,” a “proud Democrat,” etc. — longish list. She did not say “proud wife.” I thought that might have followed “proud mother.” Anyway . . .

6. I just hate the phrase “advocate for” — hate it. It seems like, two seconds ago, we didn’t have it. Now it is a veritable weed. (I should note that, in “advocate for,” I’m talking about the verb — the verb “advocate,” not the noun.)

7. This insistence on the centrality of politics is distressing — and not very democratic. You know, everything hinges on this election, everything hinges on politics: our future, our children, our destiny, our health, our every breath. Nonsense. It’s not supposed to be like that in a liberal democracy. We are governed by a constitution — by laws, not men. And mature people know that most of the important things in life are private, not public.

8. Again, soldiers are portrayed as victims, or fragile children. That is a full-blown theme of this convention.

9. She mentioned those two recent deaths — of the Arkansas Democratic-party leader and the congresswoman — and linked them to an anti-Bush point, or riff. I thought that was gross. Almost obscene.

10. “Green-collar” jobs — oh, geez. That’s a new one to me. Maybe I haven’t noticed.

11. “Promoting unionization” — now there’s a good, honest Democratic phrase. (And one reason I’m not a Democrat.)

12. We’re “giving windfall profits to the oil companies.” I can’t tell you — can’t tell you — how much I hate that kind of populism. “Cheap demagoguery,” Reagan used to call it (or “sheer demagoguery”).

13. She talked through applause, not wanting to lose her momentum — very, very shrewd. If you let the audience’s applause control you and your speech, you’re screwed.

14. Again, this was a top-notch political speech. If I were a Hillary fan, or a liberal Democrat — same thing, I guess — I would have loved it.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODVhYjZiYWQ2M2Y4NTllYTBmNWRlMGE...

Gino Italian Name If Gino is

edenpprairiefactchecker — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:37:53 -0500

Gino Italian Name

If Gino is your name most likely you are a boy. Regardless of your ethnicity, your name is of ITALIAN/GREEK derrivation, and undoubtedly you will at some time in your life be asked, or referred to as Italian. Gino comes from Eugeneo. It is a boy's name, and statiscally from 1997 to 2004 no girl has ever been named GINO. (Source USA)

http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Gino.html

The name Gino is the quintessential Mafia moniker, i.e. Gino "Bambino" Crettino

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Gino+Bambino+&go=Go

According to the Uncyclopedia "In Malta, Sicily, and Italy, the Mafia is referred to as "Mothers" (which is where the term "mafia" came from)... except by the Mafia themselves, who refer to themselves as "brothers". In the USA, it is referred to as "La Cosa Pick My Nosa" by the FBI. In Japan, it is called Mario, the closest thing they could spell to it.

It currently consists of various families, namely Bandito, Bush ( OUR OWN PRESIDENT BY THAT NAME), Gambino, Ramone and Skywalker. They also have a sister organization comprised of Youngstown penguins. Its activities are to secure independence of Antarctica and to star in CGI movies. "

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Mafia

"This page (LEADS TO A BIO ON GWB) has been screened by FOX News™ for authenticity and impartiality, and has been given terror-proof protection for her pleasure. While this may be difficult to imagine, there persists a segment of the population who haven't fully embraced the qualities of the greatest President in world history. Click on the following link for a first-hand look at the alternative conspiracy-laden view: The Biography of President George W. Bush as written by heathens. Please also note that no other alternative views exist. "

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Bush

TWINS: Bush

edenpprairiefactchecker — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:15:59 -0500

TWINS: Bush McCain

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NLX-YwTWQk

"Political Novelites Global

edenpprairiefactchecker — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:30:46 -0500

"Political Novelites Global Warming Extremists?"

The National Review is a journalistic warehouse for the name-calling antics of the GOP. As if we hadn't experienced it already from Bigfoot, who's footloose facts are actually fiction, Peter the Great, who is the Great deceiver and Gino, the Italian mimic, (this is an example only); but here's an actual sample of how the far right impugns their opponents with rhetorical derision:

"The selection of Joe Biden, the oldest functioning white liberal senator with a foreign policy background who is Catholic with hair-plugs in the Democratic party, must have come as quite a shock to many people, but none so much as Kathleen Sebelius.

Remember her? You won’t for long. The governor of Kansas, who, until last weekend’s text message, thought she was but one shoe-click away from being transported from the political tundra of Kansas to the humidified compost of Washington, D.C., has her TV moment in Denver tonight.

She will talk about energy or women or energetic women. She’ll also mention change. She may also come down hard on the side of the economy, which she favors, and the environment, which she thinks should be green — a dream of many Kansans. Then she’ll vanish. Next stop: the capital of Kansas and the relative obscurity of a Midwestern governorship in a country that has only two Democratic precincts that count: East Coast and West Coast.

She could’ve been a contender. Conventional wisdom has it that she was passed over because Clinton tribal leaders would have rioted if somebody other than their woman got the vice-presidential nomination.

But there are at least a half-dozen other reasons why Sebelius is addressing the convention tonight instead of tomorrow night, when Joe Biden steps into the limelight (and, given his playful way with words, possibly into his own mouth).

She’s another political novelty.

The Democrats are nominating an African-American guy most people had never heard of when spring training began. That’s different. But nominating a woman most Americans have never heard of is double jeopardy. Outside Kansas, “Kathleen Sebelius” is a household name only to people whose houses are condos inside a beltway. The single note of familiarity: she shares that lacquered gray-helmet hair-do made famous, if not popular, by John Kerry.

The similarity ends there. Ideologically, she’s far more liberal than Kerry and, in many respects, more liberal than even Obama.

She’s another environmental extremist.

Henry Payne has already reported Sebelius’s nutty embrace of the environmental movement in blocking the expansion of a badly needed power plant in western Kansas, far from any meaningful vote tallies. She did this on health grounds, by the way, arguing that power plants emit carbon dioxide and babies have to breathe that stuff. (Because if they didn’t, they’d die.) She advocated instead a reliance on “renewable” energy sources. Plain-English translation: When it comes to energy sources, Sebelius tilts toward windmills. But in blocking the construction of that power plant, she also blocked construction of the power lines that would have given the windmills some use other than conking birds, of which Kansas has many, on their little beaky noggins."

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjUzMDFmNjc1ZThkYjAxYWE1ZDkzZmZlZDN...

Elevating the bogus and the

edenpprairiefactchecker — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:04:59 -0500

Elevating the bogus and the petty

If we must discuss plagiarism, let's talk exorcism too
Republicans and the press love revisiting Joe Biden's past, but everybody -- including the possible GOP vice-presidential candidates -- has one.

Aug. 25, 2008 | Steeped in the culture of the Senate, Joe Biden can be gracious or pugnacious as circumstances require -- and in the months ahead he can be expected to display both qualities. Certainly he understood that upon accepting Barack Obama's offer to join the Democratic ticket, he would endure a barrage of skepticism and contempt along with the congratulations. But the Delaware Democrat doesn't need anyone to defend him.

Over the past few days, however, the reaction to Biden's selection by the national press corps and Republicans set parameters of fairness for John McCain's vice-presidential choice. Discussion of Biden's real achievements and policy perspectives got short shrift while journalists repeatedly revisited his verbal stumbles and minor scandals.

If we must we pretend that the Republican ads tweaking Obama and Biden represent a serious argument, then we should apply the same standards to the Republicans. If we must constantly revisit the plagiarism flap that drove Biden from the presidential race more than 20 years ago, or the occasional stupidities he has uttered over the years, then we should likewise examine every error and embarrassment that have plagued Republican vice-presidential nominees over the past two decades.

Enjoy this story?

Thanks for your support.
Consider the pattern set by Ron Fournier, the Washington bureau chief of the Associated Press, who reportedly considered a job offer from the McCain campaign two years ago. He responded to the Biden announcement with an "analysis" suggesting that this choice had exposed Obama's lack of confidence, especially in matters of national security and foreign policy, and raised fresh questions about the youthful Democrat's lack of experience -- echoing the snark of McCain's own ads.

Of course, Obama realized that such responses were inevitable from the Republican side if he chose someone with Biden's qualifications -- and he had sufficient self-confidence to do it anyway. But in fairness, let's turn the Fournier-McCain argument around and see how the Republican shortlist measures up. If experience in military and foreign affairs represents the sine qua non of a presidential candidate, then how do Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindal and Mitt Romney measure up? Obviously there is nothing relevant in the résumé of Pawlenty, the second-term governor of Minnesota, or Jindal, his counterpart in Louisiana. Romney is older but equally bereft of such credentials, unless he receives special credit for the year he spent as a missionary in France (when he escaped the Vietnam draft).

Their collective void of international competence takes on greater significance in assessing the potential running mate of a man who is not quite an actuarial certainty to finish four years in the White House, about to mark his 72nd birthday and having survived four bouts of melanoma. What Biden once said about "on-the-job training" for Obama would emphatically apply to at least three of the politicians believed most likely to be tapped by McCain.

At least Tom Ridge and Joe Lieberman -- two other possible choices for vice president -- can claim substantive experience in the field of national security. The Connecticut senator wrote the legislation creating the Department of Homeland Security, and the former Pennsylvania governor was confirmed as that department's first secretary after serving in a similar White House position. But when they lay claim to those qualifications, they must also be held accountable for the dismal performance of that department, which has been rife with bureaucratic waste and crony contract deals from the beginning (and the complete lack of oversight by Lieberman's Senate committee).

As for gaffes and miscues, no politician escapes them entirely. So if Biden still has to answer for purloining the words of a British Labor Party hopeful in 1987, then perhaps Lieberman should be asked to explain why he sucked up to Louis Farrakhan in 2000. If Biden's dumb remark about Indian-American grocers must be reprinted over and over again, then maybe Pawlenty's broadcast joke about his wife's reluctance to have sex -- uttered in her presence last spring -- will be aired repeatedly, too. If Biden's conflict with Catholic bishops over reproductive rights is an issue, then surely Jindal's eerie claim to have exorcised demons and cancer from the body of a female friend deserves a thorough investigation.

None of those tales is worthy of enormous attention, especially during an election that could change America so profoundly. But each is just as revealing of character and fitness as anything we have heard about Biden over the past few days. It is safe to say that had he ever professed his enthusiasm for the works of Farrakhan, or publicly whined about his wife's sexual withholding, or recounted a supernatural adventure, the national press corps, cable television, talk radio and the Republican propaganda machine would be churning the stories at top volume.

Elevating the bogus and the petty to cosmic importance is now a tradition in American election coverage, and based on the record so far there is no reason to expect improvement in this campaign. Insofar as the press is bound to dwell on trivia, then let us hope it devotes a fair share of attention to the marginal offenses of that lucky McCain running mate, whoever he (or she) may be."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/08/25/biden/

Women or Men: Who leads

edenpprairiefactchecker — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:53:36 -0500

Women or Men: Who leads better?

Men or Women: Who's the Better Leader?
A Paradox in Public Attitudes

"Americans believe women have the right stuff to be political leaders. When it comes to honesty, intelligence and a handful of other character traits they value highly in leaders, the public rates women superior to men, according to a new nationwide Pew Research Center Social and Demographic Trends survey.

Nevertheless, a mere 6% of respondents in this survey of 2,250 adults say that, overall, women make better political leaders than men. About one-in-five (21%) say men make the better leaders, while the vast majority -- 69% -- say men and women make equally good leaders.

The paradox embedded in these survey findings is part of a wider paradox in modern society on the subject of gender and leadership. In an era when women have made sweeping strides in educational attainment and workforce participation, relatively few have made the journey all the way to the highest levels of political or corporate leadership.

Why not? In the survey, the public cites gender discrimination, resistance to change, and a self-serving "old boys club" as reasons for the relative scarcity of women at the top. In somewhat smaller numbers, respondents also say that women's family responsibilities and their shortage of experience hold them back from the upper ranks of politics and business.

What the public does not say is that women inherently lack what it takes to be leaders. To the contrary, on seven of eight leadership traits measured in this survey, the public rates women either better than or equal to men.

For example, half of all adults say women are more honest than men, while just one-in-five say men are more honest (the rest say they don't know or volunteer the opinion that there's no difference between the sexes on this trait). And honesty, according to respondents, is the most important to leadership of any of the traits measured in the survey.

The next most important leadership trait, in the public's view, is intelligence. Here again, women outperform men: 38% of respondents say women are smarter than men, while just 14% say men are smarter, and the remainder say there's no difference between the sexes.

Men and women tie on two of the next three traits on the public's ranking of leadership qualities measured in this survey -- hard work and ambition. Men prevail over women on decisiveness (their lone "victory" in the battery of eight traits), with 44% of respondents saying that men are more decisive and 33% saying women are.

Finally, women have big leads over men on the last three traits on the public's rankings of the eight items measured: being compassionate (80% say women; 5% say men); being outgoing (47% say women; 28% say men) and being creative (62% say women; 11% say men).

For anyone keeping score, that's women over men by five to one, with two ties, on eight traits, each of which at least two-thirds of the public says is very important or absolutely essential to leadership. Notably, nearly all of these gender evaluations are shared by men as well as women, though the margins are more heavily pro-woman among female respondents than among male respondents.

The survey also asked respondents to assess whether men or women in public office are better at handling a range of policy matters and job performance challenges. On the policy front, women are widely judged to be better than men at dealing with social issues such as health care and education, while men have a big edge over women in the public's perception of the way they deal with crime, public safety, defense and national security.

As for job performance skills, women get higher marks than men in all of the measures tested: standing up for one's principles in the face of political pressure; being able to work out compromises; keeping government honest; and representing the interests of "people like you."

Overall, however, women emerge from this survey a bit like a sports team that racks up better statistics but still loses the game -- witness the tiny 6% sliver of the public that says women generally make better political leaders than men.

To be sure, the fact that such a large majority of respondents (69%) say that women and men make equally good political leaders is itself a measure of the profound changes in women's role in society that have taken place over the past several decades.

Women make up 57% of all college students, about half of all law and medical school students, and more than four- in-ten students who earn masters degrees in business. They make up 46% of the total private sector workforce and 38% of all managers.

However, it's still lonely for women at the very highest rungs of the corporate and political ladder. Women are just 2% of the CEOs of the nation's Fortune 500 companies. In the political realm, they make up just 17% of all members of the U.S. House of Representatives; 16% of all U.S. senators; 16% of all governors; and 24% of all state legislators. Internationally, the U.S.ranks in the middle range -- 85th in the world -- in its share of women in the lower house of its national legislative body.

Asked what accounts for this slow movement toward gender parity in top political positions, about half (51%) of all survey respondents say a major reason is that Americans simply aren't ready to elect a woman to high office; more than four-in-ten (43%) say a major reason is that women who are active in politics are held back by men, and 38% say a major reason is that women are discriminated against in all realms of society, and politics is no exception. These are the three most prevalent choices among seven possible explanations presented in the survey.

Next in the pecking order of explanations is the time pressure that comes with trying to balance work and family; 27% of the public cites this as a major reason there aren't more women leaders in politics. Some 26% say that a big reason is that women don't have the experience required for higher office. The least common explanations - chosen as a major reason by just 16% and 14% of respondents, respectively - are that women don't make as good leaders as men and that women aren't tough enough for politics.

Other key findings from the survey:

Negative Gender Stereotypes: In addition to asking about the eight leadership traits, the survey asked about four traits that are often viewed in a negative light. By a lopsided margin, respondents say that women (85%), not men (5%), are the more emotional sex, and by a two-to-one margin they say women (52%) rather than men (26%) are more manipulative. On the other side of the ledger, some 70% of respondents say men are the more arrogant sex. And 46% of respondents say men are the more stubborn gender, compared with 32% who say that about women.

Gender Solidarity: In this survey, women see themselves in a more favorable light than men see women. Likewise, men see themselves in a better light than women see men. However, for men, gender solidarity goes only so far. Overall, they give their gender the better ratings on just five of the 12 traits (decisiveness; hard work; ambition; not being emotional; not being manipulative) and they give themselves inferior ratings on seven (honesty; intelligence; compassion; creativity; being outgoing; being stubborn; being arrogant). By contrast, while women say they are more emotional and more manipulative than men, they give themselves higher marks than men on the 10 other traits measured.

Gender and Race: Of all demographic groups, black women are distinctive in the degree to which they say women are superior to men in their evaluations of character traits. Nearly eight-in-ten (78%) black women (compared with 51% of white women and 50% of all adults) say women are more honest than men. About two-thirds (65%) of black women (compared with 37% of white women and 38% of all adults) say women are smarter than men. And about half (49%) of black women (compared with 33% of white women and 28% of all adults) say women are more hardworking than men.

Twice as Hard; Half as Far: The feminist rallying cry that women have to work twice as hard to get half as far as men in their careers finds some statistical support from this survey, as least with regard to leadership evaluations. Survey respondents who rate men better than women on key character traits have a sharply increased likelihood of saying that men make better political leaders than women. But respondents who rate women better than men on these same traits have only a slightly increased likelihood of saying women make better leaders than men.

It's a Man's World: By a ratio of nearly two-to-one, Americans say that, all things considered, men rather than women have a better life in this country. Women believe this in greater numbers than men do, and younger and middle-aged adults believe it in greater numbers than older adults do. The view that men have the better life than women is not as strong now as it was 15 years ago, when the public said by a ratio of about three-to-one that men had the better life. However, still farther back in time, attitudes were much different. In 1972, during the early days of the modern gender revolution, slightly more adults said women had the better life than said that about men.

Generational Differences Among Women: Older women are more inclined than younger women to see the need for more social change to ensure that women have equal rights; seven-in-ten women ages 50 and over say more change is needed, a view shared by just 53% of women ages 18-29. At the same time, younger and middle-aged women are more inclined than older women to say that men rather than women have the better life in this country.

Discrimination and Equal Rights: A majority of adults (57%) say the nation needs to continue to make changes to give women equal rights with men. A similar majority (54%) says discrimination against women is either a serious or somewhat serious problem in society. However, a bigger majority (63%) says that discrimination against blacks is a serious or somewhat serious problem.

Admiration for Hillary Clinton: The survey asked no questions about Sen. Hillary Clinton or the 2008 presidential campaign. However, in answer to an open-ended question, Clinton and Sen.Barack Obama were each named by 13% of respondents as the political figure in the U.S. that they admire most. President Bush was the third most frequently mentioned figure, named by 7% of respondents. Women are more than twice as likely as men to name Clinton as the figure they admire most; and Hispanics are much more likely than blacks and somewhat more likely than whites to name her as the figure they admire most."

Read full report at Pew Social Trends Link at this URL:

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/932/men-or-women-whos-the-better-leader

Plot unfolds to assassinate

edenpprairiefactchecker — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:42:16 -0500

Plot unfolds to assassinate Obama on national TV, a 4th arrest, more details

"More details emerging from Denver as we write this in the predawn hours on the now suspected plot to assassinate Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama with a high-powered rifle on national television during his outdoor acceptance speech at Invesco Field Thursday night.

Authorities have reported a fourth arrest in the unfolding plot that The Ticket first wrote about here a few hours ago at the end of Monday night's Democratic National Convention events at the Pepsi Center.

We knew then that authorities in suburban Aurora had stopped a pickup truck for swerving between lanes early Sunday morning in what they thought was a routine drunk driving incident.

But in the rented vehicle of Tharin Gartrell, a 28-year-old convicted felon (see photo), they found two high-powered scoped rifles, ammunition, sighting scopes, radios, a cellphone, a bulletproof vest, wigs, drugs and fake IDs.

According to Brian Masss of Denver's KCNC Channel 4, under questioning Gartrell implicated two other men -- Nathan Johnson, who is 32, and Shawn Adolph, who is 33 -- and Johnson's girlfriend, Natasha Gromack. Johnson also reportedly confirmed the plot to FBI and Secret Service interrogators. (See video below.)

One of the men, Adolph, reportedly wore a ring with the Nazi swastika. He was injured when he jumped out of a hotel window fleeing Secret Service agents. All are now in custody on drug and weapons charges.

The U.S. Atty. Troy Eid declined to elaborate on Monday but said there is no credible threat to the party's convention or to the freshman Illinois senator, who was campaigning in Kansas City Monday and traveling to Montana today.

But the television station reports that under questioning the men admitted there was indeed a plot to kill Obama during his speech before some 70,000 supporters and a nationwide television audience.

More details are expected to emerge later today when Eid holds a news conference at 4 p.m. Denver time."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/08/obama-assassina.html

Not to be found in the Star

Gino G — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:18:33 -0500

Not to be found in the Star Tribune:

MBNA paid Biden son at critical time for bill.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080825/ap_on_el_pr/biden_mbna

BIDEN McCAIN MUCH IN

edenpprairiefactchecker — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:11:05 -0500

BIDEN McCAIN MUCH IN COMMON

Biden, McCain Have a Friendship
-- and More -- in Common

SEDONA, Ariz. -- A longtime senator with a harrowing personal narrative who boasts a lengthy foreign policy résumé and is known for speaking his mind.

Arizona Sen. John McCain? The description could just as easily apply to Delaware Sen. Joe Biden.

Associated Press
In picking Sen. Biden as his running mate Saturday, Sen. Obama got a partner with striking similarities to his Republican opponent.

In their roughly 57 combined years in the U.S. Senate, Sens. McCain and Biden have forged intersecting paths. Each has earned a reputation for a quick tongue and dedicated himself to foreign policy, especially the war in Iraq and Eastern European affairs, including the joint endeavor known as the McCain-Biden Kosovo Resolution.

What's more, Sens. Biden and McCain have acknowledged each other as a friend. This weekend they continued to speak fondly of each other in between attacks.

"I've known John for 35 years; he served our country with extraordinary courage," Sen. Biden said during his introduction rally in Springfield, Ill., Saturday. "I know he wants to do right by America."

"Joe and I have been friends for many, many years, and we know each other very well," Sen. McCain told CBS News.

To be sure, the two men are very different senators with vastly different records. Sen. Biden is a favorite among union organizations such as the AFL-CIO, and Sen. McCain is beloved by antipork-barrel spending groups. Neither is known for the other's strength in those arenas.

The similarities between the white-haired politicians -- Sen. Biden is 65 years old and Sen. McCain turns 72 Friday -- begin with extremely painful moments as young fathers. Sen. Biden's wife and daughter were killed in a car accident shortly after he won his Senate race in 1972. During that time, Sen. McCain was nearing the end of his nearly six years as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, where he was routinely tortured.

Each senator has a son in the military. Jimmy McCain returned from Iraq earlier this year. Beau Biden, the attorney general of Delaware, is a member of the Delaware Army National Guard and is scheduled to deploy in the fall.

Both men are outspoken on the war in Iraq. Although Sen. Obama has adamantly opposed the war from the start, Sen. Biden voted to begin the conflict, as did Sen. McCain.

Sens. McCain and Biden both criticized former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's strategy, and both called for an increase in the level of troops. "I've been calling for more troops for over two years, along with John McCain," Sen. Biden said on NBC's "Meet the Press" in November 2005.

By the end of 2006, Sen. Biden was against a proposed increase in the troop levels, and the senators now differ considerably on the proper way to end the war. Sen. Biden is focused on political solutions, and Sen. McCain has insisted upon withdrawal based on ground conditions.

Each is a foreign policy heavyweight in the Senate and has shown a special interest in Eastern European affairs. In 2005, the pair worked together on behalf of Kyrgyzstan and Moldova, and in 1999 co-wrote the McCain-Biden Kosovo Resolution that would have authorized President Bill Clinton to use "all necessary force" to resolve the conflict in that country.

BIDEN'S BIO

Age: 65; born Nov. 20, 1942 in Scranton, Pa.
Experience: U.S. senator, 1972-present; New Castle County Council, 1970-72; sought presidential nomination, 1988, 2008.
Education: Bachelor's degree in history and political science, University of Delaware, 1965; law degree, Syracuse University, 1968.
Family: Married Neilia Hunter in 1966; three children, Beau, Hunter, and Naomi. His wife and daughter Naomi died in a car crash in 1972. Married Jill Jacobs in 1977; one daughter, Ashley. Beau Biden is now Delaware's attorney general.
• Graphic: Obama's VP Pick | Biden QuotesMore recently, Sens. Biden and McCain had harsh reactions to the conflict between Russia and Georgia. Sen. McCain went further, calling for the inclusion of Georgia into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Sen. Biden called for $1 billion in aid.

"I see them as people who are ideologically not worlds apart," says Ivo Banac, a history professor at Yale University who specializes in southeastern Europe.

They also have a penchant for speaking their minds. Sen. McCain built a reputation for "straight talk" in his 2000 primary campaign and continued his tell-it-like-it-is attitude through this year's campaign.

Sen. Biden is also prone to outbursts. In May, he cursed at President George W. Bush's suggestion that "some people," which many took as a reference to the Democrats, sought to appease terrorists. "This is b-, this is malarkey, this is outrageous," he said. He later backtracked. During a cable-TV interview he apologized, but added: "The essence of what I was saying is absolutely accurate."

What Democrats will have to deal with in the coming weeks is the amount of video and other fodder floating around showing Sen. Biden praising Sen. McCain.

But friendship has little place in the battleground of the stump. Sen. Biden found his inner attack dog Saturday. After acknowledging his friendship with Sen. McCain, he threw a swift punch. "You can't change America when you know your first four years as president will look exactly like the last eight years of George Bush's presidency," Sen. Biden said, reading from the text on the podium."

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB121954185485266719.html?mod=speci...

BIDEN "a very fine

edenpprairiefactchecker — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:02:44 -0500

BIDEN "a very fine statesman" and "a true, true patriot."

DENVER — Sen. Joseph Biden received praise from an unlikely source Monday as the White House said the Delaware Democrat has “done tremendous work over a long period.”

White House spokesman Tony Fratto was asked to respond to comments made by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who reportedly said that Biden, the newly named Democratic vice presidential candidate, is "a very fine statesman" and "a true, true patriot."

"It's a great honor for anyone who has that opportunity to run in a national election like that, to aspire to represent the country; and so a very personal thing for him and his family," Fratto said. "Obviously, we're — we would be happy for him."

But Fratto added that while Biden has been supportive of Rice's State Department, he thinks "Secretary Rice has made clear who she intends to vote for, and that will be Sen. McCain and whomever he chooses to join him on the ticket."

The White House has made great efforts to stay out of the 2008 presidential contest, with press aides generally declining to answer questions about it.

Fratto's response to questions about Rice's comments comes on the first day of the Democratic convention in Denver.

President Bush is scheduled to address the Republican convention on Monday of next week in Minneapolis-St. Paul."

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/white-house-has-kind-words-for-biden-20...

Pol Pop Culture

edenpprairiefactchecker — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:03:28 -0500

Pol Pop Culture Smackdown

"Issues are important. But let's face it: presidential candidates affect a lot more than political discourse. They also end up shaping, and even changing, the popular culture.

Take John Kerry's 2004 candidacy, which made "swiftboat" a verb. Michael Dukakis caused us to realize, profoundly, how stupid helmets can look; George Bush did the same for flight suits. And who can ever forget Bill Clinton, wearing shades and playing "Heartbreak Hotel" on his sax on Arsenio Hall's show in 1992?

All of this is what makes the current presidential contest so interesting.

Try to think of two people more unlike each other than John McCain and Barack Obama. Can't do it, can you?

No, much like Rhett Butler and Ashley Wilkes, or Simon and Garfunkel, these two men seem to define themselves through difference.

We've had some taste of that chasm between them, during the seemingly endless primary season. Over and over, we heard the refrain:

McCain is old, Obama young. (Right. 71 and 46, respectively. We know.)

McCain is WASPy, Obama of mixed ancestry. (Got it.)

One has a wife that says a lot, the other a wife who says practically nothing. (Check — that's Michelle and Cindy all right.)

But those readily apparent differences didn't even begin to scratch the surface of the true culture gap between these candidates.

So we'll ask a simple question. Which of these candidates, Obama or McCain, is going to shape American culture the most, over the next few months? And in what areas?

For better or worse, what presidential candidates do, say, and snack on matters.

So here's a breakdown of the nitty-gritty details of some of those key preferences of these two potential presidents, in some of the off-the-beaten-path categories that say so much about a person.

Who would rather watch "24," who "Sportscenter"? Who dials up Dylan on his iPod, and who prefers Neil Diamond? Which Hemingway novel do both candidates claim to adore?

Read on to find out and then form your own opinions. It might even make the rest of the campaign season go faster!

Category 1: Attire

Obama: Usually works a well-dressed, preppy look: businessman meets natty academic. A slim-cut, steel-gray or dark-blue suit with a pale blue power tie is a favorite combination. Can be seen relaxing in polo shirts and chinos, or workout clothes on the basketball court.

McCain: The look is snappy but traditional. He favors dark suits with medium-blue Oxford shirts set off by red or burgundy ties. For casual events, he may be seen in a low-key sweater Ñ often navy blue, usually crew neck Ñ or a bomber jacket, which hints at his hero-pilot past.

Category 2: On the tube

Obama: Favorite show is "Sportscenter" on ESPN; he watches it at night to relax.

McCain: Loves "24," and also "Seinfeld" reruns.

Category 3: Spouse's style

Obama: Michelle Robinson Obama, a graduate of Harvard Law School, mom of the two Obama kids and vice president of community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Medical Center. Her personal style runs toward graphic print dresses and smart sheaths; she wore a deep lilac one with Jackie Kennedy overtones on a Newsweek cover. Tends to be frank and outspoken, no matter the setting.

McCain: Cindy Hensley McCain, John's second wife and the mom of four of the seven McCain kids. You'll spot her in well-made tailored suits — a recent Newsweek cover featured her in a snazzy petal-pink one with gold buttons — and a trademark "USMC" pin made of sparky rhinestones, to show support of her son, Jimmy, who's in the Marines. Notoriously reserved on the campaign trail, and with the press.

Category : Kid count

Obama: Two girls, Malia, 10, and Sasha, 7. They live with their parents on Chicago's South Side and attend private school.

McCain: Seven, including three from his first marriage to Carol Shepp. They include: Doug, a pilot with American Airlines; Andrew, vice president at Cindy's family business in Arizona; Sidney, who lives in Toronto; Meghan, 23, a recent graduate of Columbia University; Jack, 22, at the Naval Academy in Annapolis; Jimmy, 20, a private in the Marine Corps; and Bridget, 16, who was born in Bangladesh and adopted by the McCains.

Category 5: Music tastes

Obama: Recently referred to Bruce Springsteen and Bob Dylan Ñ both of whom support him for president Ñ as "icons." On his own iPod, the candidate has said that he has lots of Dylan, but also jazz by John Coltrane, Miles Davis and Charlie Parker; and rap by Jay-Z. "I think I have the entire 'Blood on the Tracks' album on there," he told Rolling Stone magazine, and cited "Maggie's Farm" as a favorite song. His top Rolling Stones tune is "Gimme Shelter."

McCain: His 10 favorite songs are "Dancing Queen" and "Take a Chance on Me" by ABBA; "Blue Bayou," by Roy Orbison; "If We Make It To December" by Merle Haggard; "As Time Goes By" by Dooley Wilson; "Good Vibrations" by the Beach Boys; "What A Wonderful World" by Louis Armstrong; "I've Got You Under My Skin" by Frank Sinatra; "Sweet Caroline" by Neil Diamond; and "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes" by the Platters. And yes, he owns an iPod.

Category 6: Food

Obama: Likes bacon, according to wife Michelle; also loves to snack on almonds, pistachios, Planters Trail Mix, Dentyne Ice gum, and MET-Rx chocolate roasted peanut protein bars.

McCain: Baby back ribs.

Category 7: Movies

Obama: Cites "Casablanca," the "Godfather" movies, "Lawrence of Arabia" and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" as his favorite flicks.

McCain: Says "Viva Zapata," "Letters from Iwo Jima" and "Some Like It Hot" are his picks. However, a Chicago Tribune reporter following him around noted that he talks most often on the campaign trail about "Weekend at Bernie's."

Category 8: Sports and fitness

Obama: Plays basketball with his aides and friends.

McCain: Likes hiking and fishing.

Category 9: Religion

Obama: Christian; formerly a member of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, but withdrew from the church in May following a controversy over a pastor's remarks.

McCain: Raised Episcopalian; currently attends the North Phoenix Baptist Church in Phoenix.

Category 10: Education

Obama: Earned a B.A. from Columbia University in 1983. Graduated from Harvard Law School in 1991. Was the first African-American student to serve as the president of Harvard Law Review.

McCain: Graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy. In 22 years as a naval aviator, was awarded the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.

Category 11: Famous friends

Obama: Oprah. Also, Warren Buffett. And some of the Kennedys, including Caroline and Ted.

McCain: Arnold Schwarzenegger. Also, Carly Fiorina, the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard.

Category 12: Cool gesture

Obama: The Obama fist-bump, which he and Michelle (now famously) did before national TV cameras at a speaking event, and which soon became their trademark gesture. "It's now my signature bump," Michelle Obama told "The View" last month. "But let me tell you Ñ I'm not that hip. I got this from the [campaign's] young staff. That's the new high-five."

McCain: His low-level hand waves have become a trademark gesture. But not by choice Ñ McCain can't raise his arms above shoulder height, an after-effect of the five years of torture he underwent while a prisoner of war in the infamous "Hanoi Hilton" prison in Vietnam. That means he can't wave properly — or even comb his hair.

Category 13: Good line

Obama: "He's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?" — On what voters might potentially think about him, at a Florida fundraiser in June

McCain: "I ask you, what should America be looking for in our next president? Certainly, someone who is very, very, very old." — On "Saturday Night Live" in May

Category 14: Bookshelf

Obama: "Song of Solomon" by Toni Morrison; Shakespeare's Tragedies; also cites Hemingway's "For Whom the Bell Tolls."

McCain: "For Whom the Bell Tolls," by Ernest Hemingway.

Category 15: Offbeat fact you didn't know

Obama: In high school in Hawaii, he played basketball on the school team and was known for a jump shot so flashy it earned him the nickname "Obamber."

McCain: He wears a black metal bracelet engraved with the name Matthew Stanley, in memory of a 22-year-old Army specialist who was killed in Baghdad last year."

http://www.buffalonews.com/185/story/400432.html

Georgia War Bigger News than

edenpprairiefactchecker — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:56:25 -0500

Georgia War Bigger News than Campaign 2008

"The fighting between Russia and Georgia was the biggest story in the U.S. media last week, marking the first week in nine months when the presidential race did not generate the most coverage, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism.

The conflict in the Caucasus, which raised the specter of a re-ignited Cold War, accounted for 26% of all the overall coverage last week, according to PEJ's weekly News Coverage Index for the week of Aug. 11-17. The campaign, at 21%, generated its lowest level of weekly coverage since last December -- before the first caucus or primary vote was cast.

The crisis in Georgia also quickly became a major campaign issue. Stories about the conflict primarily involving the candidates' views were the No. 1 election storyline, accounting for 14% of the campaign coverage studied by PEJ.

For the ninth time in 10 weeks, moreover, Obama generated more coverage than his rival, even during a week when he was vacationing. The Democrat registered as a significant or dominant factor in 63% of the campaign stories studied, compared with 50% for McCain.

But it was a week that offered a reminder that more does not necessarily mean better. Last week McCain reaped some positive coverage for his aggressive approach to the crisis between Russia and Georgia. And a number of post mortems gave him good marks for his performance during an Aug. 16 forum on values and religion at a California mega-church. At the same time, Obama again faced a media narrative focused on a divided Democratic Party and his tricky relationship with the Clintons.

Another major storyline last week also did not bring good tidings for Obama. A new attack book called "Obama Nation" -- from the man who co-authored "Unfit for Command" about John Kerry in 2004 -- accounted for 6% of the campaign news. Even as stories questioned author Jerome Corsi's accuracy and motives, the book made Page 1 of the New York Times and Washington Post and Corsi hit the talk show circuit in a major way.

With the war in Georgia leading the campaign discussion and the economy accounting for another 5% of the narrative, all the policy issues combined accounted for 23% of the week's campaign coverage. Once again, however, the episodic nature of the campaign was highlighted as coverage of energy policy fell to less than 1%. Only a week earlier, it had been the No. 1 election theme, accounting for 23% of the coverage.

For the second week in a row, Obama also had to share billing with Hillary Clinton. Two weeks ago, she was a significant or dominant factor in 15% of the election coverage. Last week that increased to 17% with the news that her name would be placed in nomination at the convention. While both the Obama and Clinton camps portrayed that as a gesture of unity, some analysts saw it as a sign of weakness and a potential embarrassment for the Democratic nominee. (The headline on Michael Goodwin's column read: "Barack Obama blinks in Hillary face-off.")

Another 5% of last week's coverage involved a post-mortem of the Clinton campaign, some of it stemming from a much-discussed Atlantic magazine article. Among other things, the Atlantic story reported on Clinton advisor Mark Penn's advice -- not taken by the candidate -- to target Obama's "lack of American roots," which some critics think has a continuing resonance in the argument about Obama now coming from Republicans in the general election. All told, stories related to Hillary Clinton, Democratic disunity, and the upcoming convention accounted for 20% of last week's campaign coverage.

One event late in the week emerged as the No 2. campaign storyline. The Aug. 16 forum hosted by evangelical superstar Rick Warren generated 10% of the coverage. Here too, the news was generally good for McCain. While many accounts said both candidates did well, some noted that McCain -- who had previously displayed some unease discussing religion -- surpassed expectations. "If Obama hit a home run, McCain scored a grand slam," wrote Margaret Carlson on Bloomberg.com

Overall, the campaign accounted for 21% of the newshole as measured by PEJ's News Coverage Index for the week of Aug. 11-17. But it was the No. 1 story in only one media sector -- cable news where it accounted for 44% of the airtime studied. The war between Georgia and Russia, at 26%, was the top story in newspapers, online and in the radio sector. (The last time another story trumped the campaign was Nov. 4-9, 2007 when a state of emergency was declared in Pakistan.) And if one combines the 26% of the newshole devoted to stories about the conflict with the coverage that focused largely on the presidential candidates' positions, the subject actually accounted for about 30% of the overall coverage last week.

The week began with the first full-blown foreign crisis of the presidential campaign, the conflict which quickly put the U.S. at loggerheads with its old Cold War rival. McCain's tougher stance toward the Russians combined with more cautious language from the vacationing Obama created a sense in the media that the Republican was benefiting politically.

As ABC's George Stephanopoulos saw it on the Aug. 14 edition of Good Morning America, the conflict "ends up, I believe, helping in the short-term John McCain. He has long warned about aggressive, belligerent Russia. Barack Obama is playing it a little more safe."

The next night, in a discussion on MSNBC's Hardball, Democratic strategist Chris Kofinis said Obama had done "a pretty good job" handling the crisis. His Republican counterpart John Feehery was less measured. He talked about a "stature gap" between the two candidates on foreign policy. "I think it really hurt Barack Obama that he didn't come off his vacation and come back and look presidential," he said.

If Russia was the top international concern last week, Obama's primary domestic political challenge in the press seemed to be dealing with the fallout from the primary campaign. An Aug. 12 Associated Press article on AOL News was one of many that focused on the Atlantic's reporting about Mark Penn's blueprint for beating Obama.

The story included Penn's idea that Obama's "lack of American roots" made him vulnerable. And it quoted a Penn memo ("Won't a single tape of Wright going off on America with Obama sitting there be a game-ender?") essentially hoping for a smoking gun in the relationship between Obama and his controversial pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

The agreement to place Clinton's name in nomination at the convention in Denver spawned plenty of media commentary suggesting peril for Obama. "A roll call of the states with delegations methodically announcing tallies has the potential of turning divisive. Emotions attached to each candidate are still raw," declared CBS correspondent Dean Reynolds on the Aug. 14 newscast. As if to illustrate the point, the story then featured a clip of a Clinton backer confidently predicting that her candidate will be the next president.

"With Obama the certain winner," Reynolds continued, "this gesture may amount to less than her supporters wish."

Nonetheless, more than two months after the primary battles ended, the question of "what does Hillary want?" (and her supporters, too) is still attracting plenty of media attention."

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/929/war-in-georgia-is-bigger-news-than-the-c...

Presidential Debates: who

edenpprairiefactchecker — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:45:06 -0500

Presidential Debates: who wins?

The first debate between Obama and McCain could be the deal breaker. Here's a little debate history to get ready.

"Who will win the presidential debates? What does each candidate’s use of words say about how he would govern as president? Can Obama’s rhetorical skills lift him to the heights of Lincoln, FDR, and Reagan—or will his speechmaking do him in? After watching all 47 (!) of the primary season’s debates, our correspondent has the answers—and some harsh criticism for the moderators.

"Recently I did what no sane person would: I watched the entire set of presidential primary debates, in sequence, like a boxed set of a TV show. In scale this was like three or four seasons’ worth of The Sopranos. The Democrats had 26 debates, nearly all more than one hour long, and all but one of them with both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The Republicans had 21, if you count the session for which a single “debater” showed up. That was the NAACP forum in Detroit, which all eight Democrats but only Representative Tom Tancredo of the Republicans agreed to attend. I had seen only two of the debates in real time because so few were carried internationally. Those that were available in streaming video were too slow and jerky to be watchable in China, where I’ve been living. (It eventually took more than two weeks of round-the-clock Internet downloading to collect all the files.)

I had read many of the transcripts and much of the resulting coverage, but had not been part of the shared viewing experience of getting to know the candidates through the drawn-out series of live encounters. As with trial testimony, job interviews, and blind dates, seeing people interact is the only way to understand what is going on. We don’t watch debates to learn what someone thinks about Social Security. We watch to see how the contenders look next to their opponents, how they react when challenged, how well or poorly they come up with the words we later see in print. That’s what I hadn’t seen until I watched the debates end to end.

Reagan dismisses Carter with a “There you go again” in 1980

There have been nine series of televised general-election debates. These started with Kennedy-Nixon in 1960, resumed with Ford-Carter in 1976, and have been a campaign fixture ever since. In all but one election, the debates produced a moment that figured in the ultimate outcome. (The exception was Clinton-Dole in 1996, when neither man said anything that changed a voter’s mind.) The dramatic exchanges that made a difference—Ronald Reagan’s amused and dismissive “There you go again” against Jimmy Carter in 1980, Michael Dukakis’s too-composed look when asked in 1988 how he would react if his wife were raped, George H.W. Bush’s desperate “when will this end?” glance at his wristwatch during a town-hall session with Bill Clinton and Ross Perot in 1992, Al Gore’s operatic sighs about George W. Bush in 2000—would have passed unnoticed in a transcript. The transcript conveys only part of, for example, the alarming meandering in Ronald Reagan’s soliloquy at the end of his second 1984 debate with Walter Mondale. Reagan, looking confused and forgetting his point, was rescued only when the moderator, Edwin Newman, announced that time was up: “Mr. President, I’m obliged to cut you off there, under the rules of the debate. I’m sorry.” Mondale should have been sorry, too.

I paid more attention to the Democrats, and will concentrate on them here, because their debates went on three months longer, mattered more, and revealed more about them as possible leaders. What the debates did for the Republicans was eliminate one candidate, on grounds of sheer torpor: Fred Thompson. They gave another, Ron Paul, a platform for ongoing Internet-based influence and elevated a third, Mike Huckabee, out of the fringe category, thanks to his sounding wittier and more amiable than the other candidates. John McCain gave clues to what he will do this fall, but nothing he said in the debates was a key to his success in winning the nomination, nor were Rudy Giuliani’s and Mitt Romney’s debate performances pivotal in their failures.

For the Democrats, though, the debates were dramatic in themselves and important in shaping the result. Hillary Clinton seriously blew only one answer of the countless hundreds she delivered. That was her fumbling response on whether she thought illegal immigrants should get driver’s licenses—delivered 100 minutes into a late-night debate in Philadelphia last October, when she looked drained. As with Gerald Ford’s famous fumbled comments about Eastern Europe when debating Jimmy Carter in 1976, what she meant to say was obvious. Ford meant to say that the Poles and others behind the Iron Curtain had an unconquerable spirit and would never accept Soviet domination. What he actually said, and dug himself in on, was that they were free.

Clinton answers a question about issuing licenses to illegal immigrants

What Clinton meant to say was that then-Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York, in proposing licenses for illegal immigrants so as to regulate their safety on the roads, was making the best of a bad situation created by the chaos of federal policy on immigration. The state of New York had no way to enforce a border-control policy of its own. So it was doing what it could to reduce the traffic risk.

What she actually said, and stuck to when atypically given several chances to clarify by the questioner, the late Tim Russert, was that Spitzer’s plan made “a lot of sense” but wasn’t “the best thing” to do, without indicating how those two views could coexist. In other circumstances, she would have batted away this issue as she routinely did much tougher questions. (The two signs that she was ready to dispose of a nuisance issue: “I’ve said many times …,” so whatever has come up can’t be news; and “the real question is …,” the politician’s standard way of shifting discussion back to more-favorable ground. Barack Obama’s version of this tactic is to say “it’s just common sense …,” indicating that what he’s about to say is restating the obvious and reasonable. “Look” or “listen” at the start of an answer is his version of “the real question is,” a sign that he wants to answer something different from what was asked.) But in the real circumstances, the blog and cable-news controversy over her “stumble” and “equivocation” significantly cut her then-large national lead over Obama and gave him an opening.

For Democrats, the season’s debates produced more news and newsworthy quotes than those in past campaigns. Indeed, the most newsmaking comment that came from anywhere except a debate was Obama’s remark at a California fund-raiser that economically strained and “bitter” people clung to their guns and God—which of course became a question for him at the subsequent debates.

And apart from their effect on the nomination contest that has ended, the Democratic debates show something unexpected about the general-election contest this fall. The conventional wisdom is that debates were Obama’s great weak point. While Hillary Clinton time and again beat expectations, Obama never managed to put her away or receive big acclaim after a debate.

Because his major speeches were so influential, long, and carefully wrought, it seems natural to conclude that today’s bear-baiting debates are just the wrong vehicle for him. “You’ve got to remember, he is a constitutional-law professor,” I was told by Newton Minow, who as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission under John F. Kennedy declared television a “vast wasteland” and who as a partner in the Chicago law firm Sidley Austin hired Obama as a summer associate 19 years ago. “He’s used to seeing all sides of an issue, and he tends to lay out all sides before giving his own view.” By that time, the clock has run out.

Obama in a 2004 debate with Alan Keyes as “a relaxed, funny politician unafraid to go jab for jab”
That’s true, but it can’t be the whole answer. There was a time when he seemed naturally suited to rapid-fire debate, as I found by watching an earlier and less familiar set of Obama’s debate performances. The contrast is not as stark as one I discussed in an article before the presidential debates of 2004, which concerned George W. Bush’s transformation from the on-point and seemingly silver-tongued Texas politician who bested Democratic opponents in gubernatorial debates in the 1990s to the aphasic figure we have known on the national scene. But it is readily apparent. The Obama who took on the Republican ambassador, perennial presidential candidate, talk-show host, and motormouth Alan Keyes in the Illinois Senate debates of 2004—a relaxed, funny politician unafraid to go jab for jab—differed noticeably from the surprisingly tentative, slow-to-attack candidate who survived but did not triumph through this season’s debates.

I won’t contend that Beijing, over a shaky Internet connection, is the ideal vantage point from which to follow every nuance of a primary campaign. But living at a remove from day-by-day coverage on TV and minute-by-minute chatter in Washington can highlight certain trends and details that are easily lost in the ongoing wash of news. For me, it had the effect of clarifying the strengths and occasional weaknesses created by Obama’s rhetorical style; suggesting what he has to fear in the debates with John McCain; and indicating how rhetoric might affect his governing style if he wins. It also provided a surprisingly sharp reminder of the latest twist in the story of the press’s role in helping choose our president."

The entire article is at this URL:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200809/fallows-debates