Obama reached the 270 electoral vote mark on Nov. 4th, 2008, becoming the 1st African American President-Elect in the history of the United States of America.
God bless this country, the history we are making and road we have ahead of us.
We did it. Its over, and it begins...
OBAMA 44
and although I won't have updates today here's a good place to check to support your local Texas liberal blog. The Left of College Station will be updating numbers as they come in.
As for me, I'm recovering from my beautiful trip to the bahamas and will be with about 1 million other partiers celebrating Obama's win in Grant Park in Chicago. Hopefully I'll get some pictures up, should be a good time!
I was gonna write something on this but this said everything I was going to and more...watch and be scared.
Nobel prize season is upon which makes me a little giddy, along with the rest of the science community. So far prizes in medicine, physics, and chemistry have been handed out, with literature, peace, and economics still to come.
Today three Americans were rewarded for their work on Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP), which I'll try to get to later this week (damn development exam tomorrow). Well one of those winners, Martin Chalfie, made quick work to put his name on the list of laureates who have signed an open letter in support of Obama's presidential aspirations.
Just today Martin was announced as one of the winners of the Chemistry prize and he called up his friend and fellow laureate Robert Horvitz (Medicine, 2002) in order to join the list.
"I said, 'Bob, the one thing I really want to do is, I understand there’s a list of Nobel Prize winners supporting Barack Obama, and I want to get my name on the list.’”That takes the count from 61 to 63 as shortly after the letter was published Murray Gell-Mann (Physics, 1969) came forward to add his name to the list.
I love it, two debates in one week. Politics junkies like myself are definitely getting our fix.
This should be an interesting debate. McFAILin's campaign has taken a nasty turn this week, both in tone and in polling. They have apparently decided that discussing the issues facing the nation is a losing strategy, and looking at the polling as of late, coupled with McCain's disastrous policy history and proposals, I kinda have to agree with them.
So he's taken a drubbing in the polls, but this debates format is supposed to be McCain's strong point. For some reason, the conventional wisdom is that McCain excels in "town hall" style events, while Obama does not. I know, I laugh too. The idea that in any speaking role, McCain could surpass Obama in coherence, eloquence, or poise is completely ridiculous.
The bottom line, the economy is still the number 1 issue facing Americans today, followed by the Bush/McCain wars. Both issues are losers for McCain; public opinion and reality both favor Obama's positions in each area. So whatever character assassination, slime politics, "Johnny Drama" bullshit McCain wants to throw around is only going to further alienate him in the eyes of American voters. Americans are smart, whatever McCain may think, and they want to see answers. They want strong leadership, not playground politics. We shall see tonight which candidate can offer us what we are looking for.
Edit: Damnit Barack, that was such a non-answer. Gonna need to do better than that. Eh, McCain's answer was no better.
Edit: Did McCain just tell that questioner that he was wrong? Bailout vs rescue, who gives a damn? And here he goes on a Freddie and Fannie rant. Johnny Drama, there are more than 2 companies involved in this crisis. Jesus.
Edit: Fantastic rebuttal by Obama. Well done.
Edit: What the hell is he talking about? An overhead projector? Who gives a damn? Can McCain please answer a question?
Edit: I hate it when Obama starts talking about offshore drilling and "clean coal." Bullshit proposals that don't offer any solutions. We need to move away from these archaic energy sources, towards new, cleaner types of energy. And damn it, he should be leading on that point, not merely co-signing the same tired policy that has gotten us where we are.
Edit: I'm not happy. Obama keeps making the same points over and over again. Move on man. Make a new point, or change the damn topic. I know, 95% of tax payers will get a cut under your plan. Move the fuck on! Talk about McCain's plan to tax employers healthcare expenditures. Something. McCain is actually talking about policy, Obama is floundering. Shit...
Edit: Shut the hell up Tom.
Edit: Ok, Obama recovered a little on the healthcare debate. M looked petty and spiteful on his "how much is the fine?" comment. On to foreign policy.
Edit: Shit. I give the debate to McCain. It was exactly what he needed to do to get his campaign back on track. I hate to admit it, but Obama looked befuddled and slow. McCain was crisp and likable. I'm going to have a drink and try to not think about politics for a while. As a better man than myself likes to say, good night and good luck.
Let the madness begin. How will Palin embarrass herself, her campaign, her party, and her country tonight? Let us count the ways.
Seriously, Biden needs to just sit back, answer his questions succinctly, and let Palin talk. If he does that, he will win. But what the R's are praying for is for him to lay into her (i.e. he is picking on the poor little hockey mom), or for him to be overly-respectful (i.e. patronizing the powerful and respected Governor of Alaska. They'll bitch either way. Biden doesn't need to beat Palin, he just needs to stay out of the way while she beats herself.
Edit: Palin sounds good. Doesn't sound smart, but she's speaking English, so its a start.
Edit: HAHA! Holy shit, did she just say that she may not answer the questions the moderator asks? Awesome. Nice burn by Biden, calling her on the bogus charge that Obama voted all those times to raise taxes.
Edit: She's just like McCain, smiles at the wrong times.
Edit: Oh damn! "the ultimate bridge to nowhere." Well said.
Edit: Oh my God, a plan to remove troops from Iraq is a "white flag of surrender"? Jesus....
Edit:This is intense. Good debate so far. Biden seems sure of himself and knows his stuff. Palin is cute, I guess. Still lacking some substance as I see it.
Edit: "Dog-gone-it Joe?" Are we electing fucking Howdy Doody to the VP office?
Edit: Jesus, these "beauty pageant" answers are freakin' killing me. Can she answer a damn question?
Edit: I dunno, Biden looked great, but Palin didn't piss herself either, so I'll reserve judgment for tomorrow.
But she makes it so easy. Does Palin even have a running mate? I've lost track.
Interesting article over at Culture11.com. A conservative argument for Sarah Palin excusing herself from the GOP ticket to save McCain's chances in November. Seems pretty compelling to me, but I'd also be dancing naked in the streets if the McPalin ticket imploded like that (The author, Conor Friedersdorf, is a HuffPo writer, so apply grains of salt as needed).
Then on the same site, some guy, Joe Conor, rebuts Conor's position, claiming that Sarah is only bad on television. Outside TV, she's got a great personality, and personalities, not issues, are what this election (supposedly) is all about.
Making judgments about Palin — or any candidate — based on how they come across on television seems to me to be irrational and dangerous.Did this guy see those interviews? Sarah Palin isn't just bad on TV. John Kerry was bad on TV, so was Nixon. Sarah Palin is an atrocity, on TV and in person. She's a god damn journalism major who can't name a single newspaper or magazine she reads to keep up on the news; she shouts contradictory campaign positions in Philly sandwich shops; she lies her damn head off!
She has, however, revealed she has the character to make the right decision on such issues, even at great personal cost. This, in my view, is the core of leadership and the primary reason she is more qualified to be the chief executive than anyone on the Democratic ticket.More of that gut-feeling decision making, W. style. That hero-worship of "instinctive" leaders and demonetization of intellectual prowess has done wonders for the country these last 8 years, hasn't it?
Brian Lehrer's radio show is taking on actual issues of the campaign for the next 30 days (actually today is day 7). I've listened through the first week of it and someone should give this guy a broadcast medal, he is covering issues that matter in a fact-based forum with experts, historians, policy wonks, and real callers.
To cut through the play-by-play campaign noise and focus on a long view perspective this is a must listen.
The full listing, with streaming, is available here.
Ya'll seen this Palin chick? She's freakin' hilarious! I don't know who her writers are, but she is a comedic genius. That Borat guy better look out, there is a new kid on the block of awkward humor, and she looks like the big leagues. This whole PR stunt she's puling with the faux-VP bid is revolutionary. Obviously, no one really believes she wants to be the Vice President, but the publicity Palin and her comedy troupe have received is priceless. /snark
Seriously, Sarah Palin is a train wreck by any standard. Her anti-science, fiscally unsound policy and debilitating lack of experience should be enough to disqualify her for the 2nd highest office in the country. The woman wants Creationism taught on par with Evolution and actually tried to ban books from the Wasilla Library. Done. The argument is over at this point, she should not be VP. Period.
But oh no, Palin is the candidate that keeps on giving. Get comfortable. Pour a second cup of coffee and settle in.
She's packing major baggage in the "personal" area, such as the influence of "first dude" Todd Palin in her administration, her 17 year old daughter Bristol's pregnancy (not a problem at all in itself, but a poignant highlight of Palin's defunding Alaskan programs to help teenage mothers and emphasis on abstinence-only sex education), and the infamous "Troopergate" scandal. So this religious wacko who (allegedly) acknowledges the existence of witchcraft has been using her government office to wage personal vendettas against the former husband of a slighted family member. Again, done. The argument against her election is over, a second time. She should not be VP.
And friends, there is more. Apparently, Sarah Palin has a little problem with coherence and sentence structure. Her (few and meager) media interviews have been physically painful to watch. I seriously had to leave the room when I saw that poor Governor sputtering on about Russia and Canada sharing boarders with Alaska and Putin "rearing his head" over her state. During her interview with Couric, Palin's answer about the bailout bill will go down in history with that Miss Teen America contestant's response.
Notice the similarities? I did.
She has exhibited less-than-perfect message discipline as well, contradicting McCain's Pakistan policy when talking to voters. Then when called on it, McCain issues this doosy:"I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitive policy statement made by Governor Palin,"
Come on guys, just because she said it, doesn't mean she meant it.
So this debate looks like its over before it began. On both substance and style, Palin looks dead in the water. Biden, a career vet of foreign policy and the intricacies of policy and government, ought to be able to pick her apart with relative ease at the VP debate on Oct. 2nd. The man is a hell of a speaker and an amazing personal story as well.
So on paper, this thing is over. Whatever happens with the top of the tickets, the VP question has been answered. Yet if my party affiliation has taught me anything, it is to never underestimate the Democrats ability to really knuckle down, do some hard work, and completely blow a "gimme" election. Or issue. Or vote. Democrats are pretty much the leading experts in the field of professional fuck-ups and are more than capable of adding this VP debate to the long list of pathetic foot shots in our history (for further reading, see 2004 Presidential Election, or even better, the FISA debate).
So we need to shut the hell up. Palin is a joke, we all know that. Even the Republicans know she's isn't even approaching "ready," as is evident by the Great Palin Media Blackout of 2008. She has been ridiculed into the ground. Tina Fey, of SNL, doesn't even change her dialogue when she mocks Palin. She doesn't need to. Palin mocks herself. The poor woman must cry herself to sleep at night, I know I would. But then, I don't have an army of handlers insulating me from the scary media, or any outside contact at all for that matter.
At this point, if Palin spells her name correctly on the debate sign-in sheet, she's going to be a freakin' all-star. The media and the public are going to expect her to tank in epic fashion; come on stage with her head shaved or with a plug of chewing tobacco in her lip or something. So now, if she shows up fully dressed and speaks passible English, this debate will be a "win" for the McCain/Palin ticket. She is already expected to make very little sense and play defense the whole 90 minutes, so when she does just that, the talking heads are going to be crowing about her "meeting expectations" and "holding her own." She is already being held to a lower standard for success than anyone else on this campaign trail, and it is only getting worse. We used to care about a candidates qualifications in this country. We ought to still. As citizens, we should be demanding well-qualified, educated, knowledgeable statesmen and women run this country, not just some lady who manages to make it through a debate without wetting herself.
There is enough to disqualify Palin to be the VP without running her mental capacities into the ground. All we are doing is making it easier for her to exceed those expectations. So lets be honest, Sarah Palin is dumb, vicious, and incompetent, but you don't become the governor of a state by being a complete waste of oxygen. She will eventually exhibit some ability during this campaign, and we should be asking if that paltry offering is enough. I'm sure there is some kind of mental process going on behind those glasses, but the issue should be the quality of that process, not that we are all "so impressed" that this infant-woman actually does possess a functioning mind.
I'm not the economic guru so I've been wading through a bunch of sensationalized reports about everything going in the tank and how Congress needs to step up now to save us. I've been very skeptical about the whole 'bailout' plan but realize something needs to get done.
Here is the most level-headed, non-partisan analysis I've seen about the finance meltdown with some good ideas about dealing with it.
So, really, a lot of it comes down to how well such a government fund is managed -- and right now that's a huge open question. If it's managed well, by folks who actually have the ability to get a pretty good read on the likely real value of these distressed assets -- then the splurge plan could work wonders. But how often do you see the government do anything right -- especially when it comes to managing money? So, while, in theory, I don't have a problem with the government entering the market as a buyer, you have to worry significantly about the fact that it's the government, and they're prone to screwing things up badly -- especially once politicians get involved. Once you have people trying to get elected on a regular basis messing around with the decision making, you know things are going to get bad fast.Honestly I think we need this bailout, but in incremental steps and with an oversight committee who knows what they're doing. I'm thinking an actual group of economists, and being in Chicago I've gotten some great input from some of the most awarded financial guys on the planet at the U of Chicago. And here are Robert Shimer's (University of Chicago) thoughts in an email to Greg Mankiw (Harvard University). The wheels have been churning lately at the U of Chicago's world renowned Department of Economics (and with 6 Nobel laureautes in the economic sciences currently on faculty you'd expect it) and the news has been diverse, interesting, and way over my head. I wish I understood more, but all I know is that it's bad news for me once I get out of school, good thing I'll be in medical training for the next 15 years!
I'm taking a short break from my NYC trip today to bring you a post about reality and rationality. If you watched the first presidential debate last night you saw a lot of talk about the economy.
When questioned about what to do about the financial crisis in the US John McCain fired away at the government for funding a $3 million study on the DNA of bears in Montana. This was his first attack on the financial subject and of course as a science guy I was a little pissed that he would go after the funding status of science agencies (which have seen stagnation and declines in funding under Bush). Here's a nifty chart put together to keep funding and government excess in perspective when you hear the candidates speak about stuff like this.
Back to the science posting while I have a second. Yesterday, Obama's campaign released a letter of endorsement signed by 61 Nobel Laureates. This is the largest number of Nobel prize winners to ever endorse a Presidential candidate and it shouldn't be surprising.
Obama's answers to the ScienceDebate2008 questionnaire were scientifically sound and gave the impression that he had a very good scientific advising team. This was confirmed last week when Wired detailed the five members on Obama's scientific advising team (which included 2 signees of the Nobel letter). The team is very strong, with a former NIH director and some well respected researchers.
McCain has yet to release his scientific advisory committee members.
A short blurb from the endorsement letter:
During the administration of George W. Bush, vital parts of our country’s scientific enterprise have been damaged by stagnant or declining federal support. The government’s scientific advisory process has been distorted by political considerations. As a result, our once dominant position in the scientific world has been shaken and our prosperity has been placed at risk. We have lost time critical for the development of new ways to provide energy, treat disease, reverse climate change, strengthen our security, and improve our economy.
Senator Obama understands that Presidential leadership and federal investments in science and technology are crucial elements in successful governance of the world’s leading country. We hope you will join us as we work together to ensure his election in November.
McCain is apparently putting his campaign on hold in response to the economic crisis at hand. He is calling for a meeting of both party's leaders, himself, and Obama to address the financial meltdown and the governments response.
Seems very level headed, responsible, and surprisingly bipartisan. Damn. So that means the post about McCain's unacceptably partisan tone during this crisis that I have been writing is now worthless.We must meet as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans, and we must meet until this crisis is resolved.I am directing my campaign to work with the Obama campaign and the commission on presidential debates to delay Friday night's debate until we have taken action to address this crisis.
I know, its from Drudge. It hurts me to even admit that I read that garbage. But damn, the man breaks some stories.
So, is this some cheap trick to give McCain some breathing room for the debate he is about to lose and to give him further excuse to keep Sarah "Delicate Little Flower" Palin out of the harsh, scary media sunlight? Doesn't seem so at first blush. This does actually sound like a smart idea. As the economy veers towards the cliff of depression, maybe a little time away from soap opera politics and some focus on nuts and bolts legislation is a good thing.
Or perhaps what we need is precisely that, a focus on the politics that will determine the next 4 or 8 years of our country's future. Honestly, I cannot think of a more pertinent question to this crisis than which governmental philosophy we will follow going forward.
I am not ready to make a pronouncement yet, but my political lean obviously makes me slightly skeptical of this new-found love of legislation that John "Absentee Senator" McCain has developed.
I eagerly await Obama's response.
Update: Obama wont play McCain's game.
Emphasis mine. I like it. I'm still not sure if McCain's idea is a good one or not, but it is nice to see a Democrat not asking "How high?" when a Republican says "Jump.""I believe that we should continue to have the debate," Obama said. "It's my belief that this is exact time when the American people need to hear form the person who in approximately 40 days will be responsibly for dealing with this mess and I think that it is going to be part of the president’s job to deal with more than one thing at once."
Obama said that unlike McCain, he will not suspend ads, or campaign events scheduled between now and Friday's debate.
"I think it's very important that the American people see the people who potentially could be in charge of this problem within the next couple of months and so my attitude is that we need to be focused on solving the problems, as I have been," Obama said. "It's also important that we communicate where we need to go in getting us out of the situation."
Obama said he will stay in Florida for the time being and will not return to Washington unless asked by Congressional leadership.
"I've told the leadership in Congress is that if I can be helpful then I am prepared to be anywhere at anytime," he said.
Today the Dow closed at 10609.66, a full 50 points lower than the day George W Bush took office (how's that market economics working out for you?). That means that in 8 years of Republican stewardship the economy has shown a net negative movement.
I wish I had more time to devote to this subject, but as a lowly medical school student I honestly don't know much about the economy, probably about as much as John McCain.
What I do know is the Bush administration, as well as his surrogate nominee John McCain have proposed that our tax money to fund Social Security should be placed in private markets. Some of the names mentioned for these holdings should sound familiar right about now; Lehmann Brothers and the no-longer-independent Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch.
Say we would have bet our Social Security future on the market in 2001 assuming that the stewardship of the Republicans would have led to larger gains in those investments. Remember a lot of their platform is based on larger tax breaks for the wealthy which leads to higher investment in the market and large returns. Those assumptions would have been wrong. According to the Center for American Progress, the Bush economic plan (the same one John McCain is pushing, "make the Bush tax cuts permanent", let Phil Gramm who created this mess continue his policies as he is McCain's top economic advisor to the campaign) has stifled the average familial income (PDF) and given large gains to the yacht riding wealthy of the country.
Again, I know next to nothing about the economy, but I can read a chart and seeing the Dow Jones head down down down is not a good sign. More of the Same????
John McCain has been in the news quite a bit recently. His comments on the economy are the definition of irony, and the media has finally begun calling a spade a spade, and McCain's campaign press, well, bullshit. Not to mention the Palin soap opera/Law & Order episode.
Little noticed news item, McSame finally answered the ScienceDebate2008 presidential candidate questionnaire. Obama's answers here. On the energy question, McCain made a passing reference to wind, solar, geothermal, tide, and hydroelectric energy potential, without mentioning a serious effort to increase the use of these technologies. Seems like he was primarily concerned with explaining away all those votes he had cast against renewable energy. He mumbles something about "reforming" the tax credits for the industry (in repubspeak: remove all responsible regulation). Just more lip-service, no policy.
Then he rants about nuclear power. He proposes building 45 new reactors by 2030. Thats a lot of nuclear power plants folks. You want one in your backyard? I don't. And he completely whitewashes the reality of this option as well.
Nuclear power is a proven, domestic, zero-emission source of energy and it is time to recommit to advancing our use of nuclear energy."Zero-emission?" Yucca Mountain, anyone? Was he even awake when his lobbyists/advisers were writing this tripe?
Bear Stearns back in March, if we hadn't we may have lost Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch, and who know's what else. Oh wait...
Brought to you by that economic genious Phil Gramm, who just happens to be the guy who will be in charge of our whole economy under John McCain. Chew on that one...
A Picture is worth a thousand words and although I've previously covered why offshore drilling is a pander with no real substance I think this graph does a much better job of getting the message across.The "teaching the controversy" canard that many anti-evolutionists roll out concerning fairness is something that irks me to no end. I always fall back on the point that disagreeing with a viewpoint is not a controversy, and now a Christian and religious scholar from Butler University has brilliantly put my thoughts in his own words.
Is it "indoctrination" if we teach the history of the Holocaust and do not give equal time to the deniers of the Holocaust?
Is it indoctrination if we teach astronomy and make no mention of astrology?
Is it indoctrination if we teach the heliocentric view of the solar system without giving equal time to geocentrists?
Asking for equal time for "alternatives" to evolution is in exactly the same category. It is asking that a point of view with nothing but questions and complaints to offer be treated as the equal of a scientific field of research that has been remarkably productive and consistently confirmed by all sorts of evidence not available when the theory was first formulated. The media makes much of being "fair" in trying to always hear another side of the story, and there is something indeed laudable about checking to see if there is an opposing viewpoint. Too many of us forget to do that, and forget too often. But not every opposing viewpoint has merit, and the reason we have education standards is to ensure that educators do not waste time on nonsense to the detriment of things that are truly important, valuable, and (ultimately) true.
The McCain campaign has decided Sarah Palin is off limits for interviews at this time until she can be fully brought up to speed on the issues at hand. Of course the news media is up in arms over this decision but let's face it, it is McCain's campaign and it is fully within his right to run it this way.
My concern is over someone who is 57 days away from possibly assuming a vice-presidency needing secret meetings to make sure she can fully communicate her (supposed) own ideas concerning the platform.
For all I know about Sarah Palin she is a very well-spoken woman who has little experience outside of firing museum directors, librarians, teaching creationism, banning books, denying human caused global warming, and asking for $27M in federal earmarks for the "bridge to nowhere".
She also lives really close to Russia which the Republicans would like you to believe means she has great international relations experience even though she only recieved her passport in 2006 and has visited a total of 4 countries.
All of this makes me believe she doesn't know a whole lot about what she's talking about or what her job would be as vice-president, I think she says it best:
For me this all adds up to one thing, it was a highly political decision by John McCain, who has touted his campaign as getting away from the Washington influence and doing what is best for our nation. It seems like this decision is better for him personally in his quest for the presidency, a stance that politicians in Washington have held forever. The reformed maverick showing his true intentions again.
Posts
All Comments
0 comments:
Post a Comment