…the end of man is to know

Yes, yes I’m back…let’s spare the niceties.

Being a student at Northwestern, located deep in ObaManiac Headquarters, I’m trying to figure some stuff out. Namely, how on earth is Obama so damn good. The answer is that he has completely controlled political discourse, at least among 18-25 year olds. I ask why people support Obama and it’s all about “GDeorge W Bush’s failed policies”. Yea, I get that. The economy blows, Iraq was (probably) a mistake, Osama is still at large, and gays can’t marry (it’s not that I don’t think gay marriage in California or Massachusetts should be delegalized. It’s that I think anyone in California or Massachusetts should not be entitled to federal funding that results from marriage.). I won’t bother arguing whose fault it is. The, albeit correct, argument that Democrats are responsible for Fannie and Freddie mess is too indirect and convoluted to be effective. The argument that the surge has worked is irrelevant to those who opposed the war all along and think pre-emptive defeat is an adequate response to pre-emptive war.

McCain’s inability to find his message has kept dominated him. The only times he has surged in the polls were when he bashed Obama on being a celebrity over the summer and when he got Palin as his VP. It’s finding a message and delivering it. Since June we have seen: celebrity, foreign policy experience, maverick, Obama tied to Ayers, and now we get Joe the Plumber/taxes.

There are many roads to Rome (or the White House), but you have to actually take one. To borrow some of the brilliant Jay Cost’s analysis, I’d love to see McCain run this ad a lot more:

Weeks without a laptop and weeks into classes, I’ve been far too busy. As I sit in my Intro to Comparative Politics course, I was trolling through the internet and have read some deeply disturbing stuff.

First, Democratic schadenfraude needs to stop. I get it, the longer the bailout takes, the worse Bush (and the Republicans) look. Just compare the direct relationship between McCain’s poll numbers and the Dow Jones. It’s uncanny!

Second, Republicans need to get off their high-horse, and quickly. Just take the terms of the bailout and salvage the economy which is approaching free-fall. Though a bailout is still likely, the possibility of it not happening was worth 700 points in the stock market. I won’t guess what continued no votes are worth.

Many conservatives (namely, myself) believe that Iraq was a mistake, but McCain is still better than Obama on the Iraq issue. The past happened. The question is , “how can we best salvage the situation”. This is the EXACT inverse of the economy. Yes, the Democrats screwed up with their blind allegiance to Freddie and Fannie, but it doesn’t matter now. I’d love to see McCain throw up ads showing his opposition to blind lending and Obama’s support. In the interim, we still need to support a bailout. A trillion dollars of bad debt will cripple growth and send us back to the 1970s (or worse!). This need not “set a dangerous precedent” because this is the first time its happened. It also is likely to be the last full-scale bailout for quite some time. We had the largest bankrupcy of all-time in the past few months. The circumstances are very unique and we shouldn’t hide behind our fear of government control.

Conservatives can stand behind free-market ideals and support a bailout. The unfortunate fact of the matter of this: the government (and irrational consumers) got us into this mess and the government can get us out.

10. Sarah Palin has named her kids Bristol, Piper, Track, Willow, and Trig.

9. She has taken on corrupt Alaskan bureaucrats. She has angered Senator Ted Stevens and strongly supported her Lieutenant Governor’s bid to unseat 18-term congressman Don Young in the Republican Primary.

8. In light of McCain’s health problems: Sarah Palin runs marathons.

7. She is a moose hunter. Not a Bull-Moose hunter, but actual Moose. (Mooses? Meese? Moosen?)

6. Palin’s husband works as a commerical fisherman and is in a labor union…can’t much more blue-collar than that.

5. Palin’s husband is a champion snowmobile racer, winning the Tesoro Iron Dog, billed as the world’s longest snowmobile race, four times.

4. Her eldest son, Track, will be going to Iraq with the US Army next month, not unlike the other VP candidate

3. In 1984, Palin was named Miss Wasilla and runner-up as Miss Alaska.

2. Her youngest son, Trig, was born in April with Down’s Syndrome. Palin has made a point to talk about her son and her decision to not have an abortion despite knowing about Trig’s condition during pregnancy.

And….the best thing about Sarah Palin is:

Her parents were called this morning by their son-in-law to listen to the radio for a special announcement. They almost missed hearing about their daughter’s VP nomination because they were *drumroll* CARIBOU HUNTING.

Lest there be no doubt: the GOP has returned to the party of small government, increased transparency, and support the working-class!

McCAIN-PALIN 2008!

YES HE CAN! YES SHE CAN! YES THEY CAN!

After watching Biden’s speech, I was pretty impressed. Not as a fan of Biden, but as a political observer. He hit all the notes that he had to and did everything he could. It was going to be interesting to see Biden’s style and I give him a ton of credit for last night.

As a self-professed moderate who happens to be the 3rd most liberal in the entire Senate, Biden couldn’t pander to the far left. As someone who said he would run on John McCain’s ticket, he had to temper the negativity. As someone who said Barack lacked the experience to lead, he needed to limit his own Oba-Mania.

Check. Check. Check.

Biden played it as a moderate Democrat. He harped on Iraq spending, the low minimum wage, outsourcing, oil profits, not privatizing Social Security, education spending, and bringing focus back on Afghanistan and Pakistan. He’s wrong on most, if not all, of these issues. However, he played some winning issues in a non-extremist way. Most importantly, he didn’t lose any credibility as an experienced moderate.

He handled McCain the best. He did throw out some red meat to his supporters. He did attack McCain on some of the comments he has made. However, this is the line that Democrats need to hit, “These times require more than a good soldier; they require a wise leader, a leader who can deliver change–the change everybody knows we need.” There it is. I think calling Obama “wise” is somewhere short of hilarious, but the mood is right. Biden, and now Obama, CAN’T HIT McCAIN ON PERSONAL ISSUES. The man has been through too much personally and politically to be attacked for partisanship or corruption or experience. Shifting the debate from personality and leadership to politics is exactly what Obama-Biden must do. Biden handled his friendship with McCain and campaign against McCain extremely well.

His support of Obama was also at the appropriate level. Biden will not be able to escape his criticism of Obama in the debates. His arguments were not policy, but overly questioned Obama’s ability to lead. Through his own overinflated sense of self, Biden now can argue that he brings the wisdom and experience to Obama’s vision and message. If the GOP can divide the ticket into: 1. Biden is a Washington insider who is very liberal and supported McCain before he supported Obama and 2. Obama has no idea what he is doing and no plan for the future, they win. If the Democrats can hold the ticket as a solitary unit, we’re in trouble.

As important as unity between Hillary supporters and Democrats is, I think ticket unity is more important. Biden recognizes that united they win, divided they lose. And in a speech that was short on vision, message, and style, Biden made a great stride in achieving unity.

Good luck tonight as you watch Obama. I heard that being so close to The Chosen One and hearing his clarion calls can cause people to speak in tongues, hyperventilate, or have heart attacks. .

Just so this post cannot be interpreted as support of Biden or Obama:

1. Biden wants to critique McCain on foreign policy?

Biden opposed the Persian Gulf War in 1991.

Biden supported the Iraq War that apparently only Obama had the fortitude to oppose (mind you, Obama wasn’t a Senator in 2002, so he never actually voted against the war)

Biden opposes McCain’s support of spending money in Iraq, but voted for the spending (Biden even criticized Obama for not supporting the spending because Obama wanted to withhold money necessary to safely and properly equip our soldiers)

Biden opposed the troop surge, which has been fantastically successful

Biden opposes free trade agreements, like NAFTA. Since NAFTA was passed in 1994, the American economy has grown by 50%!!!! Those kinds of gains are only possible when countries can freely swap goods and maximize profits.

Biden wants to tax oil companies for offering a fair service at market value. The real “audacity” is not of hope, but of the idea that the government can arbitrarily declare when companies make too much money, seize that money, and give it to constituents.

Biden is too afraid to let Social Security money enter the economy and spur economic growth instead of being a lender for pet projects. He also fails to recognize the impending collapse of the system unless we start making fundamental changes soon.

If John McCain sends out a telegram (we know he doesn’t do text messaging), I really want it to say, “McCain-Lieberman. Tell that Obama boy to take his partisanship and shove it…” Alas, it won’t.

Before I crash the bi-partisan party, humor me as I look at all the positives:

1. Lieberman still caucuses with the Democrats, but could be powerful in slamming them. He was kicked out by the Democrats after losing his primary to Ned LaMont. After no Democrat asked for his support in 2008 and McCain did, Lieberman officially supported Johnny Mac because he wants to cut through partisan hackery. As a punishment, the Democrats stripped Lieberman of his superdelegate status, making him the same as an *bad pun coming in 3,2,1* average Joe.

Lieberman could be effective in talking about how the Democrats have failed him, and America. His public disputes with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi could be very effective. If Obama wants to pretend that he has great bi-partisan support, he will have a hard time selling the American people if Lieberman is on the other side. Also, McCain’s negative ads may not seem so harsh since they are coming from both sides of the aisle.

2. He is a moderate liberal on domestic issues. libertarianism (small “l” is intentional) is growing as a political movement. The public is seeing the value in enhancing personal liberty. Whether that means low taxes through the elimination of superfluous issues or protecting a “woman’s right to choose”, libertarianism is an appealing philosophy. With McCain running policy, he can hold the conservative base together while Lieberman dances on the sidelines and convinces confused liberals to jump ship. Unless voters are willing to bet on McCain’s death AND a Supreme Court vacancy, Lieberman will be helpless to promote a progressive social agenda on the courts. In any event, some voters are on the fence and a pro-choice VP on the GOP ticket could be just enticing enough.

3. If McCain doubles-down on experience, they could absolutely tear apart Obama-Biden. Obama took Biden because he knew he was lacking in experience. Four years in the Senate simply doesn’t cut it to be a successful President. Biden brings 35 years in the Senate and is the Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. These solid credentials will be thrown out if McCain takes Lieberman.

Think of it this way: if McCain takes a foreign policy lightweight, like Romney or Pawlenty, then McCain can crush Obama, but Biden will hit Romney/Pawlenty in debates. Though the Presidential debates are more visible and more important, not taking Lieberman mitigates McCain’s great policy advantage.

With Lieberman, McCain gets to maintain a strong edge on foreign policy AND accuse Obama of being a hypocrite by taking a Washington Insider as a running mate. It’s win-win.

4. Lieberman is old and will not seek a second term. In this race, the only way McCain can win is to be far as possible from party identification. In a generic election, voters prefer Republicans to Democrats by double-digits. Therefore, it is crucial to make this election as non-generic as possible. McCain can win on the platform of being a maverick outsider. Bringing in Lieberman fits that mold. Given their ages, it is a sure bet that neither will run in 2012. The White House will have two men who have proudly served their country and are immune to the rigors of campaigning for re-election or kowtowing to party bosses. If America wants to give it a try, it can get four years of good, honest politicians working for the people, not themselves. That is a powerful message, but is incumbent upon McCain and Lieberman promising not to seek re-election.

5. Lieberman is Jewish. I know that being Jewish and in politics is not rare enough to be “special”, it would dispel a few myths and problems for the GOP. First, if Obama wants to be the first bi-racial person in the White House, then McCain can ask Americans to put the first non-Christian in the White House. The DNC spent all night last night focusing in on minorities (Pelosi: female Italian-American, Jesse Jackson Jr: black, Ted Kennedy: catholic, Obama’s half-sister: Asian, Michelle Obama: black). It is hard to call the GOP the WASP party when it’s VP nominee is Jewish.

Also, being Jewish offers electoral advantages. Prior to Obama’s run, Jews were the most partisan demographic, including African-Americans and Hispanics. Lieberman will certainly appeal to Jewish voters and can go hog wild on Obama’s anti-Israel stance (call me anti-anti-Semitic, but I’m pretty sure Lieberman could have a field day talking to Jewish retirees in Boca Raton about Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan). While most Jews are in solid blue states, Florida, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Nevada are battlegrounds and could use any boost possible.

The negatives:

1. McCain is already too far to the left. The conservative base is pretty unhappy with McCain. Campaign finance reform, a path to citizenship for illegals, opposing torture, and waffling on the Bush tax cuts are all very damaging. McCain got beat by Bush in 2000, because the Rove machine turned out the Evangelicals. McCain certainly will have trouble doing that if he has a pro-choice running mate who is mildly sympathetic to gay rights. If McCain can’t hold together the conservative base, there is no amount of moderates that can save him.

2. Lieberman is hawkish, hurting chances of building a bi-partisan coalition. If the Democrats want to win this election on the drumbeat of failure in Iraq, then Lieberman doesn’t help McCain. Democrats can turn the tables and say that it didn’t leave Lieberman, Lieberman left the party. Joe’s hawkish stances on Iraq, Iran, and Israel are all directly at-odds with the Democratic Party’s platforms. The Democrats will only need to make a slight alteration from “The Republicans caused this war and the war needs to stop” to “the War Hawks caused this war and the war needs to stop”. It’s a pretty simple sidestep and mitigates the appearance of bi-partisanship.

3. Lieberman is too old. If you thought the charges of senility on McCain were bad, wait until he gets Lieberman. The campaign will be branded Grumpy Old Men. I think of Walter Matthau as more McCain and Jack Lemmon more Lieberman, but the Obama people can sort it out. As Obama is trying to show, it is very easy to cast old people as “out of touch”. And that is exactly how the Dems will play it.

The easiest way to win an election is to get 50.1% of the population as close as possible to the edge of not voting for you. The GOP needs a big coalition to take down Obama. To cater to multiple groups, it must be willing to risk losing them. But it cannot afford to. The question is whether or not McCain-Lieberman pushes to the Evangelicals into staying home. If not, this pick will all but seal a Republican victory. It is this question that is tearing up the McCain War Room.

I come bringing wondrous news: BARACK OBAMA BRINGS CHANGE! Change! If you don’t like high oil prices, Obama will change them! Lost your job? Change the economic situation! Think that the public campaign system should be altered? Change!

It’s Change, y’all! How can you not want change! Everyone wants change! Barack Obama and panhandlers agree: Change is good.

One small hitch: change doesn’t mean progress. It doesn’t mean improvement. It definitely doesn’t mean prosperity.

Joe Biden never got the message. In this “welcome video“, he seems ridiculous. The same man who said that Barack was not ready to lead as recently as this past winter, now joins The Movement. He speaks to Obamaniacs as an outsider. He knows that he was not part of The Movement. He has been in the Senate since Barry was in Hawai’i. He is part of the big, bad political machine that Obama wants to tear down. He does all but apologize at the altar of Change and beg for forgiveness. He praises Obama’s parishioners and congratulates them. He then asks that they accept him as one of their own.

How does he do it? He calls on Change. Eight times in 2 minutes and 57 seconds he says “change”!

This clip is proof-positive that Obama is completely out of touch with mainstream America. He picks a moderate liberal with a ton of experience and this guy is the outsider. Joe Biden, Mr. American politics, has never been an outsider. He offers a solid balance of relative youth and experience, foreign policy and domestic policy. He is from Delaware, a state that doesn’t conjure up any negative images. THe fact that Obama’s campaign is so radically left and so unapologetically “grassroots” makes Biden the annoying step-father who you have to obey to get what you want but don’t actually respect.

Though I am no Biden supporter, I feel awful for him. A proud, distinguished senator is being emasculated by a young upstart with a fresh face and smooth speaking-style. Biden is put in the position of being forced to renounce his past so that he become a full-fledged member of Change.

We are counting down to the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado here at blogivists. The coronation of Barack Obama as the savior of humanity is nearly complete. I’m not a huge fan of the Democrats, but I don’t wrecklessly bash them, either. However, I will put some fun facts up.

1. Kwame Kilpatrick will be attending the convention. In case you were curious, Mr. Kilpatrick is the disgraced mayor of Detroit. Aside from facing previous scandals, he most recently was thrown in jail for violating his probation after assaulting a policeman. The cop’s offense? He was serving a subpoena to one of Kilpatrick’s “friends”.

I know you think Kwame’s mother must be very proud of her baby boy, right? Well, the voters in the Detroit area thought so highly of her as to re-nominate her as the Democratic nominee for Michigan’s 13th congressional district.

Even the Democratic Wizard of Oz, the Daily Kos, has asked Kilpatrick not to attend.

If you were concerned about Democrats doing the Larry Craig tap dance, just do the Kilpatrick shove, find an attractive mater and tell him/her that John Edwards says “help is on the way”.

2. The Democrats have no idea what to do with Hillary Clinton. The woman whose husband has been the face of the party for almost two decades and nearly won the nomination is stuck in purgatory. The party needs to satisfy Clintonites and win them over. However, this convention must be about Barack Obama. They have settled on letting her speak on Tuesday night. Traditionally, Monday goes to someone cool, Tuesday goes to a rising star, Wednesday to the VP, and Thursday to the candidate. The Dems made the wise move of giving Hillary her time in the sun on Tuesday night. One small hitch: SHE WILL NOT BE KEYNOTING! Hillary is being upstaged by *drum roll* Mark Warner. Way to go, DNC. You found a way to make a compromise that ticks off both sides.

3. While Hillary will be speaking Tuesday night, Monday night’s keynote will be Michelle Obama. I may be opposed to Michelle more than most, but this is an unfathomably bad idea. Her favorable-unfavorable is 30-35! When more people think negatively than positively about you, it’s unfortunate. When you are married to a presidential candidate and speaking in front of tens of millions, it’s a trainwreck.

Some of the things I hope Michelle brings up during her DNC speech:

A.

B. Her senior thesis at Princeton ranges from scary to racist. Some of the highlights (and these are quotes)

i. “…I find myself striving for many of the same goals as my White classmates - acceptance to a prestigious graduate school or a high-paying position in a successful corporation” - since when is being successful a “White” goal?

ii. “Predominately White universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the White students comprising the bulk of their enrollments,” - aside from capitalizing “white”, why is offering unparalleled opportunities a “White” thing and why is it bad? Princeton doesn’t force anyone to take racist jobs as capitalist pigs.

iii. “My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my ‘Blackness’ than ever before” - this coming from the wife of the first post-racial candidate? Are you ‘effing kidding me? NO. ‘EFFING. WAY.

C. “The truth is most Americans don’t want much. Folks don’t want the whole pie. Most Americans feel blessed to thrive a little bit — but that’s out of reach for them.” - Michelle Obama advocates austerity, even when it isn’t necessary. Way to boost morale. I have HOPE that Barack can bring CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN. I BELIEVE that he will only give me a little bit, but won’t let me get the whole pie.

Michelle Obama is so scary that Democrats have created the… Michelle Obama Truth Squad. Funny, I don’t remember Laura Bush ever getting a Truth Squad.

4. The actual convention itself redefines what it means to be liberal. Here are some facts:

A. The convention will have 800 people in a trash brigade to make sure all garbage is disposed of properly (no word on whether or not Obama’s speeches count as “recyclable trash”)

B. The host committee lamented its inability to find 15,000 fanny packs for volunteers. And the packs have to be made in the USA. By unionized labor. And out of organic cotton.

C. All food served is highly regulated. Fried food will not be allowed. Each meal must include at least three of these colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple, and white. 70% of ingredients must be grown organically and/or locally.

D. Those sinning, conservative, greedy capitalists at Coors finally have come to reason - and will donate biofuel made from beer waste. This one ticks me off the most, because every college student knows: there’s no such thing as “beer waste”. Wasting beer is downright un-American!

Beer waste? Republicans don’t believe in beer waste. They believe in beer-amids!

E. The DNC is actually proud of their insanity and showcases its arrogance here.

So there it is. The Democratic National Convention is simply unbelievable. It is over-the-top liberal and oppressive in its inner-workings.

The only way it will win voters is if this country is farther to the left than I can possibly imagine. Please let it NOT be pragmatically political.

How delightful that just after my post about the glory of the Olympics, I get to discuss war. American media has been very kind in not reporting various international conflicts that don’t directly involve the United States. However, when a petro-state that has nuclear capability and a checkered past invades a democratic ally, it tends to get some press.

Russia has swiftly come to the military aid of South Ossetia, a separatist region of Georgia. Reminder: Georgia is a former Soviet republic, not just the home of Ty Cobb, sweet tea, and T.I

The question is: what should we do? Well here are the options:

1. Military intervention:

As far as I’m concerned, this is off the table. We absolutely can’t send more American troops into harm’s way. We have lost billions of dollars and thousands of lives in the Middle East, and are spread too thin. More broadly, the United States’ soft power has been crippled by interventions. Proceeding without international consent would destroy whatever shred of diplomatic sway we have.

2. Condemn from afar

Virginia Governor Tom Kaine would have us believe that Barack Obama’s foreign policy is not just effective, but also is causing international change. Governor Kaine said, “And I’m very, very happy that the Senator’s request for a ceasefire has been complied with by President Medvedev.”

Because we all know that the Russian President is making monumental foreign policy decisions based on the words of an American presidential candidate who hasn’t even been officially nominated by his party.

Allow me to yet again remind Barack that HE IS NOT PRESIDENT. Allow me to also remind Tom Kaine that HE IS NOT THE VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE OF SOMEONE WHO HAS NOT YET BEEN PUT IN OFFICE! Simply hanging out in Washington D.C. and saying that violence is bad is pointless.

3. Sanction

I think that sanctions are the most effective way to deal with quasi-rogue states. I use “quasi” because I believe that Russia is willing to stand in the face of the international consensus, but still has very calculated, rational decisions. However, they simply will not be enacted. Industrialized states are simply too reliant on Russian oil and natural gas. More importantly, Russia knows that it can outlast Europe. A few days of decreased energy revenue is far less painful than sending massive price shocks through the oil and gas market.

4. Prepare an alternate grand strategy

Here is the most effective, and complex, solution. The United States needs to recognize that the former USSR will continue to take any lands it can. Like the board game Risk, you always take neighboring territories that are easily defeated and ill-defended. Therefore, the United States must recreate a situation which counterbalances and deters Russian aggression. A meeting between NATO and allied former Soviet republics is in order.

When NATO was first formed, it was created as a means of mutual protection from a Soviet invasion. I now suggest a NATO backed alliance among emerging Eastern European democracies. Countries like Georgia, Ukraine, and the “-stans” must publicly work together. Using their own political and economic resources, create a union which will oppose Russian entanglements.

I cannot offer guarentees that a rag-tag group of fledging countries can hold off Russian invasions, but I think it is the best available option. At the same time, the world needs to be talking with Russia. Let’s the naiive discourse and put Russia’s intentions on the table. There is enough room in the world for Russia as a regional power. Russia has a large population, military, and economy. It deserves a commensurate amount of influence. Yet, influence is earned. Russia can offer strong leadership, but needs to be kept under the watchful eye of the international community.

Whether it’s former Soviet Republics or the international community, all would be wise to remember Ben Franklin’s words, “we must all hang together, or assuredly we shall hang separately”.

No ‘Effing Way is back. Considering it took last week off, it’s hungry. But it isn’t any hungrier than 33 year-old Tremayne Durham was!

Mr. Durham is a New Yorker who traveled to Oregon to settle a matter. Durham purchased an ice cream truck for $18,000, and then decided he didn’t want to be an ice cream man. So the BadHumor Man was denied his request to return the truck for a refund. He then killed a former employee of the truck company.

In exchange for a guilty plea, yielding a life sentence with a chance for parole after 30 years, Durham wanted a break from jail food. So he got KFC fried chicken, Popeye’s fried chicken, mashed potatoes, cole slaw, carrot cake, and ice cream last month. He now receives his second (and final) feast, with an Italian theme: calzones, lasagna, pizza, and ice cream.

As with every N.E.G., here are some thoughts:

1. How crappy is your lawyer that this is the best you can do? You bypass a trial, ensuring at minimum 30 years in the slammer, to get two dinners? Hell, the dinners aren’t even all that nice. Fast food fried chicken and sides are not exactly the classiest options. Hell, I’d sooner have a chipotle burrito with chips and guacamole. Whatever happened to the good ol’ days of Prime Rib or Surf and Turf?

2. Plea bargaining:good politics and bad policy. The obvious benefits are a guarenteed conviction and it saves the time and money of a trial (and the inevitable appeal). The clear cost is that it doesn’t provide a “fair” trial or allow prosecutors to seek maximum punishments. I won’t pretend to offer any groundbreaking analysis, but I will pose this question: can you put a price tag on justice?

We refuse to negotiate with terrorists under any circumstances, but gladly cave to any alleged criminal who is willing to take a lesser sentence. Can a country which claims to have the moral highground on everything legitimately not pursue justice?

I say yes. I put my faith in District Attorneys to determine if a plea bargain is appropriate. Also, I’m relatively at peace with putting convicts in the Witness Protection Program if they testify against other criminals. It’s more important that kingpins are behind bars than it is that their mid-level henchmen get their just desserts.

That’s just me being Pragmatically Political.

Have a good weekend and be sure to check out Telemundo, MSNBC, CNBC, NBC, and possibly C-SPAN for all your Olympic coverage!

During May, June, and July, Obama was enjoying near double-digit leads over McCain nationally. Coming off of a hardfought victory over Hil-dog, Obama had all the momentum in the world. He was a fresh face with new ideas and oozed charisma. He believed that he could change not just the world, but the electoral map. Obama used Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy and set up outposts in hostile territory. Though the election is still 3 months away, it appears that Obama has failed. In his boundless hubris, he has failed to understand that you can’t make an entire country blue. The old swing states of 2000 and 2004 will be the same deciding votes in November.

First, we should look at what states Obama targeted and why. The most fun is Alaska. One of the reddest states, Alaska supports Republicans under any and all circumstances. If not for potential jail time, Ted Stevens was up for re-election. The same guy who has been using federal pork for Alaskans and thought the internet was a “series of tubes” ran virtually unopposed for decades. I would say that Obama thought he could take advantage of McCain’s opposition to drilling in ANWR, but so does Obama!

Obama also thought he could do well in the South. North and South Carolina and Georgia were up for grabs for about .3 seconds. The huge amount of unregistered black voters was a potential boon for Barack. But there are two small problems: blacks don’t vote and are outnumbered by whites. Southern whites overwhelmingly support McCain and the African-American population represents a relatively small portion of likely voters. So the Solid South is yet again solid…this time in the GOP column.

Obama has also looked at the badlands area: Montana and the Dakotas. He’s still in the mix in those states, but McCain is the favorite. Since these states have so few electoral votes and such sparse populations, building political infrastructure is next to impossible. Frequent visits to Bozeman, Montana and Bismarck, North Dakota are inefficient. These voters have lifestyles and preferences that are not identical to suburban Virginians or inner-city Philadelphians. Obama has a serious problem tapping into a voter-base that is largely conservative and only votes for a moderate Democrat in the face of a weak GOP candidate and a strong party candidate (such was the case in ‘92 and ‘96, when Clinton did very well in the Badlands). Yet, if Obama is doing so much better than a weakened McCain, he doesn’t need the Badlands’ electoral votes anyway. Huge margins beget upsets in traditional non-swing states. That isn’t politics, that’s history.

The Four Corners Region (NM, NV, and CO) are not new battlegrounds, so I award Obama no points for bravery. The area is getting an infusion of Californians and Hispanics, both of which have liberal tendencies. If McCain wasn’t so good (and Obama so bad) at courting the Hispanic vote, these three states would already be in the Democratic column. Any race where the GOP can effectively neutralize the Hispanic tendency to vote Democrat offers a huge advantage for the Republican.

McCain, with fewer resources, elected to not bother defending these states.

So what states are the big tickets and who has to win what?

Using the Cook Political Report, Obama is up 240-174 with 124 EVs in play. So if Obama can win at least 30 of the 124 remaining EVs, he takes the White House. In the interest of making the race competitive, I’ll give McCain any “toss up” state where he currently has a lead (MO, FL, NC, VA) for a total of 56 EVs.

We are now at Obama: 240, McCain 240, Undecided: 68. After giving McCain Nevada and Obama Iowa and Colorado it is 256-245 with only OH and MI left. If Obama wins either OH or MI, it’s over. If McCain can pull out OH and MI he wins 282-256. Yet, if McCain dominates the rust belt, but loses Virginia, it’s 269-269. At that point, bust out your Civics textbook, because we got a tie!