THE SYSTOCRAT PAPERS

By Paddy O’Brien

I’ve been having a lot of discussions lately regarding the bailout of the Big Three U.S. automakers and the general consensus from both sides seems to be that everyone is getting fed up with all these bailouts.  (I know that this isn’t technically a bailout but a loan but as someone once said, you can put lipstick on a pig yada, yada, yada.)  Regardless, we are helping them out (saving them) and the ultimate question is do we really need to save them?  All of them? 

I was forwarded Thomas Friedman’s recent NYT article on the bailout and it helped inspire this blog.  With this bailout of the Big Three are we in fact pouring money into a catalog business in the time of ebay?

Friedman’s article questions whether Detroit is capable of any innovation whatsoever.  It was shocking for me to learn that the 1908 Model T got better gas mileage than most of the vehicles currently on the road.  THAT’S ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO (100!!)  In other words, The Big three have failed to substantially increase gas mileage in a century.  Remember that we went from the Wright Brothers to the Moon in about sixty five years. 

While I’m not a "greenie" like Friedman, I do believe that the key to mass acceptance of an electric car is the ability of the vehicle to go long distances and to travel at an acceptable speed for the average highway traveler; approximately 80 MPH.  By mass acceptance I mean that people in Nashville, Boise, Amarillo and Jacksonville will buy the cars, not those who live on Louisburg Square, Wilshire Boulevard or the People’s Republic of Cambridge.  The key to Friedman’s article seems to be that the right kind of battery needs to be invented for the electric car and a national plug in network needs to be formed.  Friedman, as do most rational people, doubts that Detroit is capable of achieving either.  As currently constituted I agree with Friedman as Detroit has never grasped the need for vehicles with better gas mileage why would they now grasp the need for the appropriate battery for an electric car.

It’s my opinion that we shouldn’t bailout the Big Three UNLESS….they develop the right battery, a battery capable of producing the power to propel a vehicle for 80 MPH for 8-10 hours.   I find it hard to fathom that they can’t use some of this money (as originally designed) to advance the progress on this development.   Regardless of the need to pay salaries, health care, bad union contracts, etc, a portion of this money MUST be designated toward technological development; i.e. electric cars and/or natural gas/hydrogen vehicles.

But alas, the bailout of the Big Three is an inevitability for several reasons; not the least of which is the fact that one of every ten jobs in America is directly related to the auto industry.  The tentacles of the Big Three stretch far as they are the largest purchasers of steel, glass, and computer chips and we would be remiss if we also didn’t mention rubber, aluminum and plastic.  So it’s not just the auto jobs but all the jobs from their suppliers and other industries as well that would be effected by a failure of one or more of the Big Three.  As the great German philosopher Udo Dirkschneider once said, they got your balls to the wall.  While this is true, we should be able to dictate some terms to the Big Three, some of which are set forth below.

I wouldn’t bailout all three.  I’d bail out Ford and GM and tell Chrysler…owned by a private equity/venture capitalist firm to hit the road and sell off the good parts of the company to GM or Ford (not Toyota, Hyundai or Tata.)  At the very least, Chrysler needs to get rid of their CEO, Bob Nardelli, who was essentially FIRED b/c he helped drive Home Depot into the ground.  Nardelli lacked the vision to foresee the impact Lowe’s would have on Home Depot; how can we expect him to counter the new up and comer Tata Motors?  Prior to Nardelli becoming CEO Home Depot doubled in size about every four years.  Nardelli and his supporters argue that Home Depot was reaching it’s limit.  If it was reaching a limit, how do you explain the explosion of Lowe’s, essentially Home Depot’s only competitor? Couldn’t Home Depot have put some stores in those areas?  During his duration as CEO of Home Depot the stock price was essentially unchanged while Lowe’s nearly doubled.  Moreover, Nardelli’s salary was double that of the CEO of Lowe’s.  Are these the marks of a good CEO?  Your competitor’s share price doubles and yours does nothing and then you obtain a $210 MILLION DOLLAR Severance package so that you will leave in hopes someone can run Home Depot with a vision and awareness of competition.  Any bailout that would include Chrysler, a PRIVATE company, must include the removal of Nardelli.

GMs CEO, Rick Wagoner doesn’t exactly instill confidence either.  He is essentially a career auto industry man  who has run GM for nearly eight years and in that time the stock has essentially become slightly more
than worthless.  It appears he’s too far ingrained in the industry system to act as a CEO with the appropriate vision to resurrect GM.  If your a fan of sports and your team was always competitive and had won recent championships and the next manager or coach takes over and the team goes from perennial title contender to one of the worst franchises would that manager or coach keep their job?  It certainly appears that Wagoner has attempted to make the correct moves at GM and it can certainly be argued that if he hadn’t made those moves GM would have come begging a couple years ago instead of today.  Who knows, maybe with the appropriate parts of a Chrysler break-up Wagoner is the guy to turn around GM.  It is Sen. Chris Dodd who is pushing for Wagoner to resign and that makes me think that if a political hack/crook like Dodd, who has no comprehension of business wants him gone that’s probably good evidence that he should stay.  Let’s not forget that Dodd’s last endorsement of "a leader for ALL times," was Klansman and 1964 Civil Rights act opponent Robert Byrd.  I digress…despite the Dodd "endorsement," I don’t think we’ll be disappointed if Wagoner goes.   

Ford is another story, Ford’s CEO Alan Mulally only came on board about two years ago when the company was already hemorrhaging.  Granted he’s failed to stop the bleeding but that’s probably has more to do with the fact it was a Sisyphean task than any actions (or inactions) he has undertaken.   Moreover, it is important to note that Mulally comes from Boeing who 1) competes well w/ foreign makers (thanks in large part to Mulally) and 2) has come back from the abyss not once but twice both of which Mulally deserves a lot of credit.  It seems clear to me that Mulally deserves more time as he has a history of being able to compete with foreign competitors and saving troubled iconic manufacturers.  Additionally, he was a proponent of the 777, the plane that helped save Boeing…maybe he can use that experience to develop and electric or alternative car that will save Ford.

Lastly, I would make it clear to the Big Three that this is it.  The public trough is now empty to you guys.  This is Chrysler’s second time here and certainly there cannot be a third. 

Fellow Systocrats:

Twenty-two months later, we finally find ourselves on the other side of this epic campaign, during which nothing less was at stake than the immediate future of the United States as we know it.  We can all breathe a sigh of relief – our special brand of democracy, although far from perfect, remains capable of delivering regime change without a bloody revolution or a messy coup d’etat.  And, although our physical and economic infrastructure is crashing down around our ears, at least we finally have a chief executive that is willing to listen to we, the people. 

It does look as if Obama means to make good on his promise to have a "transparent" administration.  Since election night, he has launched a new website, where he solicits our suggestions on how to improve things, and he’s put the weekly Democratic address online in video format, for those people who simply aren’t likely to listen to a radio address. 

At last, we can turn to the real task at hand – cleaning up the mess that Dubya and his neocon cronies have left us.  Although things are bad and quickly getting worse, in the midst of this crisis, we have a tremendous opportunity to do away with obsolete government policies, programs and practices, and to reshape this country in a manner that effectively addresses the 21st century concerns of American citizens. 

Between now and Inauguration Day, TSP will offer some thoughts on the way forward for the fledgling Obama administration and the country in general.  If you have suggestions in this regard, don’t just send them to Obama – send them to TSP as well and we’ll post them for discussion.  Any subject relevant to the future vitality of the U.S. is fair game. 

At this critical juncture in our history, we should "think big."  For example, I think we need a Manhattan Project-type initiative to develop at least one renewable, sustainable, "green" energy source into a cheap, comprehensive replacement for fossil fuels, along with a plan of action to build the necessary infrastructure and implement this new power source throughout the country, and I think this can all be done in 2-3 years if we make these objectives an urgent priority.  Furthermore, I think that a cheap, renewable power source that allows consumers to independently generate enough power to satisfy all of their energy needs (home heating, transportation, etc) and sell excess power back to the grid would be ideal. 

I’ll look forward to hearing your comments. Till then, we’ll watch – and wait! 

One more thing – for those of you looking for information and inspiration re: the way forward, check out Thomas Friedman’s Hot, Flat and Crowded – a truly thought-provoking read.  I may have to do a full-fledged book review when I’m through with it. 

From Chris J:

I know that, most likely, President Obama will not solve every problem; there’s just too many piled up for any one person to get through.  I am confident that, as a smart man, he will work to get the country on the right road.  Whenever I hear him give an interview (like the 60 minutes one from last night), for the first time, I actually look up to a politician.  In my 32 years, I have never had so much admiration for a President (elect).  It’s one thing to be a good politician, but it’s another story to combine that with being a good person.

As far as issues go, I’ve got my top few.

1) Reverse the ban on Stem Cell Research via executive order on 1/21.  We’re falling behind in an area where we’ve traditionally excelled.  

2) Cut all tax breaks to oil companies and take those credits (and more) to help fund the "Manhattan Project" of renewable energy (your point is right on).  Energy can be a driving force in manufacturing if we want it and, it’ll help national security in the long run.

3)  Tax incentives for companies that keep manufacturing jobs in America and SEVERE penalties for companies that use off shore accounts as a tax shelter.

4)  Investigate everything Bush/Cheney have done over the last 8 years.  There’s bona fide war crimes in their history.  How can we ever have the moral high ground if we let our leaders get away with murder, torture, and illegal spying on the American people?

From Robert Horr:

Hi All,

Congratulations to an historic election. My hope and prayer is Mr. Obama will lead this Great Republic forward . However please remember this country was built on the individual liberties and FREEDOM.  They have been stomped on enough from the last president!!

Freedom to fail and freedom to succeed is what this country was built on. Some of my greatest success came AFTER my greatest screw ups. I agree with the founding fathers a small government is the best government.

Happy Thanksgiving to all just one more gift to the world from the greatest country ever.

From Mary J:

As usual, I agree that Obama and we have to think big as we move ahead with putting the country on track again for ourselves and our children.  If you are looking for concrete ideas on how we do this, I recommend a pleasurable read in Barbara Kingsolver’s Animal, Vegetable, Miracle.  Kingsolver has been writing for years but was plummeted onto the national seen by The Poisonwood Bible being on Oprah’s book list.

The basis of the book Animal, Vegetable, Miracle (a non-fiction book that reads like her fiction) is to point out with very specific examples how just buying food more locally (and additionally though not necessarily growing your own food or raising your own poultry as Kingsolver does) can make a huge impact on cutting down our use of fossil fuels.  As we look for ideas on how our government can help us turn things around, I highly recommend this read as providing simple and specific ways we can make a difference.  I’m not trying to be coy in saying that two things have changed my life and given me a positive perspective lately – Obama’s commitment and this book, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle.  I hope folks read this book and make a change themselves and I hope Obama doesn’t burn out in office.  His character is amazing in taking on what he has taken on.  He has yet to show us results but I am confident he will.

Fellow Systocrats:

Break out your EV projectors and your miniature American flags – election day is finally here!  As we all get ready to hit the polls, check out these suggested responses to some of the more nefarious right-wing talking points that you may encounter at the polls tomorrow.

1. OBAMA WANTS TO "REDISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH:" What’s wrong with redistributing the wealth?  Every government and every economic model designed by humankind "redistributes" resources in one way or another, including laissez-faire capitalism.  Over the last eight years, the wealth of the middle class has been accelerated upward and "redistributed" to the upper class by various means, most notably (at least for me) the Iraq war, which diverted gazillions of our tax dollars into the hands of wealthy private corporations with ties to the Bush administration.  Maybe instead of "redistributing" the wealth to these rich turkeys, we could spread some of it around for the benefit of the other 99% of America’s citizens.  Just an idea . . . 

2. OBAMA IS A SOCIALIST: Obama has repeatedly stated, both in his book The Audacity of Hope and on the campaign trail over the last two years, that he is a firm believer in the free market.  At worst, that makes him an advocate of a mixed economy, i.e. something akin to the tenuous compromise between outright socialism and laissez-faire capitalism that has persisted since FDR’s New Deal. 

Obama is no more a socialist than Bill Clinton.  Furthermore (I have to say this), liberal economic policies get a bad rap in this country, mostly because wealthy Americans have been working hard to stigmatize these policies for generations so that they can hold on to as much of their wealth as possible.  The fact is that most of the countries that rank higher than the U.S. on the Human Development Index have much more aggressively liberal economic policies than the U.S.  In other words, these are countries "in which people can [better] develop their full potential and lead productive, creative lives in accord with their needs and interests." Think about it.

3. OBAMA WANTS TO RAISE TAXES: Obama’s proposed tax plan cuts taxes for 95% of working families in this country.  Period.

4. OBAMA IS A MUSLIM: He’s not.  Furthermore, if you think that being a Muslim is unacceptable in and of itself, congratulations!  You are a victim of the Bush/Cheney fear-propaganda machine, and somewhat of a bigot.  Oh, and by the way, he’s not a Muslim.

5. DUBYA DIDN’T RUIN OUR ECONOMY, JIMMY CARTER DID: The obvious implication here is that Democrats in the White House will screw things up.  This is a new one for me – just heard it tonight at my local pizza shop while picking up dinner.  JIMMY CARTER?  ARE YOU F-ING KIDDING ME???

I haven’t heard that crap since Reagan ran for office in 1980.  The truth is that Carter dealt with out-of-control inflation caused by deficit spending during the Vietnam War and the OPEC oil crisis of 1973.  You might recall the OPEC crisis.  Yeah, that’s the event that unraveled Keynesian economic theory, which had held sway since the 1930s, by demonstrating that the internal controls on our economy instituted by the New Deal were inadequate to remedy the effects of a global economic crisis.  Not Jimmy Carter’s fault by a long shot. 

6. OBAMA’S TAX PLAN WILL PUT SMALL BUSINESSES OUT OF BUSINESS:  Obama proposes a return to Clinton-era tax rates, with a slight tax hike for small business owners making over $250,000.  McCain claims that this will result in increased taxes for the majority of small business owners.  Simply not true – most small business owners would see no change at all in their taxes, and many would see a tax cut. 

7.  OBAMA PALS AROUND WITH TERRORISTS: BILL AYERS??  YES HE WAS A TERRORIST IN THE 60s WHEN OBAMA WAS A SMALL CHILD!  OBAMA KNOWS THE RECENT, RELEVANT INCARNATION OF MR. AYERS.  YOU KNOW, THE RESPECTED UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS PROFESSOR AND CHICAGO’S 1997 CITIZEN OF THE YEAR. 

BY THE WAY, DOESN’T MCCAIN PAL AROUND WITH G. GORDON LIBBY?  NOW THERE’S A TERRORIST FOR YOU!!  (Okay, I’ll stop yelling . . .).  

8. OBAMA WANTS TO "CONCEDE DEFEAT IN IRAQ:" Absolute, utter nonsense.  McCain should have learned from his experience in Vietnam that you cannot defeat an enemy that you cannot find. After Vietnam, no military force facing the awesome might of the U.S. is ever going to present itself on the battlefield to be conveniently annihilated.  In Vietnam, we learned the hard way that it is possible for a disciplined guerilla force to defeat a military superpower, but that it’s nearly impossible for the reverse to occur. That’s why we paid Osama Bin Laden to draw the USSR into a Vietnam-like quagmire in Afghanistan, and that’s why even General Petraeus won’t talk about Iraq in terms of "victory" or "defeat." 

9. OBAMA HAS THE MOST LIBERAL VOTING RECORD IN THE SENATE: What does that even mean?  Seriously?  Can anyone explain what this means in objective terms?  

ONE FINAL NOTE – AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, YOU HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO VOTE, SO DON’T TAKE ANY CRAP AT THE POLLS!!!   

Call 1-866-OURVOTE to report any irregularities at the polls.

To report voting issues to the media, call 1-877-GOCNN08.     

Fellow Systocrats:

There’s been a lot of talk lately about the "real America" and "real Americans."  This year, I caught a glimpse of what the "real America" actually looks like on Halloween: 

This is Cedar Street in tiny Belfast, Maine, where any given house welcomed upwards of 800 to 1000 trick-or-treaters.  As you can see from these pictures, this public Halloween festival of sorts started before the sun went down and continued well into the evening, with lines of well-mannered, costumed youths consistently extending 25 or 30 feet from our well-provisioned porch, all the way into the street and beyond.  I had never seen trick-or-treating quite like this before, and I’m betting you haven’t either, unless you live in Salem, Massachusetts, the Halloween capital of the world. 

Personally, I had thought that real trick-or-treating was a dying tradition in this country, replaced by more manageable Halloween parties and the like.  In the middle class New Jersey suburb I grew up in, wholesale trick-or-treating passed into memory long ago, after several Halloween candy incidents in the eighties (poison, razor blades, etc. found inside treats). The local matriarchs decided that it was just too dangerous and, with few exceptions, shut the practice down.  In other words, people in many communities decided that they could no longer trust their neighbors to dispense safe treats. 

Scenes like this one are hard to find in the United States nowadays, for the same reason – fear of one’s neighbor.  

As a Systocrat, I would like to see the kind of community-oriented sentiment revealed by these pictures in every city and town in America.   I would like to see Americans start to trust each other again.  But this kind of unity and trust can never occur when people are constantly being exhorted by our political "leaders" to fear each other.  For example, suppose you had one of those Muslim "terrorists" living in your neighborhood? What if people in your community are of a different ethnicity or have different political views?  Worst of all, what if you were living next to someone who wasn’t a "real American," whatever the hell that means? 

Halloween in Belfast epitomizes what’s at stake in this election – harmony vs. division, community vs. factionalism.  As a citizen of this country, you must ask yourself, "what kind of America do I want to live in?"  Personally, I want to live in an America where I don’t fear my neighbor, my neighbor doesn’t fear me, and where we are not encouraged by our political leaders to be intolerant of fellow citizens who see things differently than we do.

I urge any remaining undecided voters out there to consider their vote carefully in light of these considerations.   Which candidate seeks unity, and which candidate has run a campaign premised on the politics of division and distraction?  Get the facts, and vote on Tuesday. 

To obtain the location of your local polling place, click here.

Fellow Systocrats:

The Systocrat Papers is pleased to announce its endorsement of Barack Obama for President of the United States.  At this critical juncture in American history, a vote for Senator Obama is nothing less than a vote of confidence in the power of the American people to unite in common purpose in order to move this country forward.  A vote for Senator Obama also constitutes an emphatic rejection of the divisive, failed agendas of the Bush administration, which is almost exclusively responsible for the sorry state of affairs in which this country finds itself at present.

Earlier this year, I read Senator Obama’s second book, The Audacity of Hope.  I found this insightful passage in the first few pages:

Not only did my encounters with voters confirm the fundamental decency of the American people, they also reminded me that at the core of the American experience are a set of ideals that continue to stir our collective conscience; a common set of values that bind us together despite our differences; a running thread of hope that makes our improbable experiment in democracy work.  

Senator Obama went on to discuss the need to unite the American people in common purpose:

I recognize the risks of talking this way.  In an era of globalization and dizzying technological change, cutthroat politics and unremitting culture wars, we don’t even seem to possess a shared language with which to discuss our ideals, much less the tools to arrive at some rough consensus about how, as a nation, we might work together to bring these ideals about . . . .

My argument, however, is that we have no choice.  You don’t need a poll to know that the vast majority of Americans – Republican, Democrat and independent – are weary of the dead zone that politics has become, in which narrow interests vie for advantage and ideological minorities seek to impose their own versions of absolute truth.  Whether we’re from red states or blue states, we feel in our gut the lack of honesty, rigor, and common sense in our policy debates, and dislike what appears to be a continuous menu of false or cramped choices.  Religious or secular, black, white or brown, we sense – correctly, that the nation’s most significant challenges are being ignored, and that if we don’t change course soon, we may be the first generation in a very long time that leaves behind a weaker and more fractured America than the one that we inherited.  Perhaps more than any other time in our recent history, we need a new kind of politics, one that can excavate and build upon those shared understandings that pull us together as Americans.

Obama’s message of unity, which we have heard him iterate in countless ways on the campaign trail over the last two years, echoes a universal truth that applies to the entirety of existence on this crude material plane – that all things are fundamentally interconnected and interdependent.  We are all in this together, and what happens to one of us happens to all of us. 

This is not just empty rhetoric.  In a personal sense, what this means is that if a fellow citizen can suffer a wrong today, you can be wronged under the same circumstances tomorrow.  For example, once our government decides to compromise the civil liberties of one person, the civil liberties of all are at risk.  Moreover, no one seeking broader, concrete examples of the interdependency of Earth’s citizenry need look any further than the current economic crisis, which started with a relatively small number of greedy, irresponsible parties here in the United States and quickly fanned out to cripple the global economy.  Global warming is another ready example – the greenhouse effect threatens the existence of many forms of life in every sector of the planet, irrespective of the fact that this issue has been perpetuated by a subset of the entire population.  The systematic pollution of our air and oceans also exemplifies this principle in action – it is indisputable that we depend on the rest of humankind to safeguard the integrity of these two components of our biosphere so that conditions conducive to the perpetuation of life on this planet continue to exist.  

The unassailable truth of the matter is that many of the immediate problems facing humankind cannot be solved unless we develop the capacity to work in concert with disparate factions to achieve and implement solutions.  For example, anything less than a global consensus to keep our oceans clean will likely render any effort in this regard futile.  We have reached a stage in our development as a species where it has become clear that we must move forward together or not at all. 

The reality of today’s globally interconnected society has conclusively rendered the politics of division obsolete – the only real function of divisive politics is to keep ordinary people at each others throats in front of the halls of power while the real criminals enter from the rear, stage a quiet coup d’etat and surreptitiously arrange things to suit their own selfish ends. 

The Bush administration executed this strategy to perfection over the last eight years, skillfully parlaying our fears in the aftermath of 9/11 into a misguided war on the Iraqi people.  As it turns out, the Iraq War was really nothing more than a front to funnel billions of our tax dollars into private hands through lucrative, cost-plus, no-bid contracts awarded to defense and reconstruction contractors fortunate enough to have ties to the Bush administration.  During this sustained looting of our tax coffers, the Bush administration utilized various devices to distract and otherwise keep the American electorate in line.  The creation of a fear index, otherwise known as the Homeland Security Advisory System, which perpetually modulates between "Elevated" and "High" alert levels, is one such device. 

The deliberate act of demonizing every single Muslim in the world by labeling adherents of the mainstream Muslim faith "terrorists" is another. Thanks to President Bush, the stigma against Muslims in this country is so strong that a presidential candidate dare not risk even the appearance of being in any way affiliated with this faith, a ridiculous state of affairs given the millions of fine, patriotic Muslim-American citizens.  Former Secretary of State Colin Powell recently pointed out the absurdity of the Muslim situation – this is indeed a shameful chapter in the history of a country that, at least in theory, purports to offer equal rights to all.

After eight years of Bush, the country is so divided that most rational discourse between people of different views has ceased. In the resulting bilateral vacuum, unsupportable viewpoints are transformed into unchallenged, and over time, unchallengeable dogma.  While many of us insist on defending indefensible positions and otherwise bicker amongst ourselves, our markets have been crippled, our children are not being educated, our jobs are being shipped overseas or otherwise eliminated and we are fighting wars on three fronts (if you count the ill-named "war on terror" as a separate front).  If we cannot even discuss these issues in a rational way with our neighbors, who may hold different views, we cannot reach consensus and move forward in any meaningful way.

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick and tired of the current state of affairs.  Like Senator Obama, I’m
absolutely convinced that we are more alike than we are different, and that if we can find a way to engage in rational discourse with people we disagree with, we’ll find that we’re not as far apart as we think we are.  For example, I have a neighbor who is a fiscal conservative.  We frequently argue the relative merits of various economic policies and philosophies, but when the dogma and the talking points are dispensed with, in many instances we are able to reach consensus.  For example, although we stand on opposite ends of the fiscal spectrum in terms of ideology, we both agree that if people truly cannot support themselves, despite their best efforts to do so, the government should provide assistance to these people.  We also agree that people who are capable of working should be forced to do so in lieu of receiving a government handout.  To cite another example, although we may disagree about the justification for the Iraq war, I think we can all agree that our troops deserve to be fully and properly equipped before they are sent to the front lines, and that injured soldiers are entitled to the finest, most comprehensive medical care that we can provide, in contrast to the neglect and frustration that our troops experienced at Walter Reed Medical Center.

If you agree that rational dialogue and real consensus are necessary elements in crafting solutions to today’s problems, Senator Obama is your man.  John McCain, once an honorable man, and a man who deserves our respect for his years of dedicated military service to this country, has lost his moral compass in his quest for the White House and now seeks to rule by any means necessary.  His campaign has made the conscious and deliberate decision to focus on the politics of division to make up for the lack of anything remotely resembling a cohesive campaign strategy.  Instead of focusing on the issues and/or saying anything positive about his candidacy, McCain has decided to promote the idea that Obama is "different," and that therefore we should fear him.  After all, Obama IS different . . . He’s black.  He pals around with terrorists.  He’ll raise taxes and increase the size of government.  He’s a Muslim.  He’s a socialist.  He’s a communist.  He pals around with an anti-white preacher.  He’s had dinner with members of the PLO.

Here’s a thought – what we really should fear is a man who has done everything in his power to align himself with the Bush administration over the last three years, an administration that tricked us into a needless war, used that war as a means to steal billions of dollars from us, and in the process murdered thousands of U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians.  What we should really fear is a man who seeks power for its own sake and is willing to use ugly, dishonest, divisive tactics to achieve this dubious end.  John McCain will not lead us forward.  He will keep us right where we are – locked in a tight downward spiral towards oblivion.

I’m voting for Senator Obama because I’m tired of the politics of division, and because I want to see liberals and conservatives come together, dispense with the dogma and the talking points, and work in concert to achieve consensus and make this country and the world a better place. 

I’m voting for Senator Obama because a vote for him is a vote for all of us.

To obtain the location of your local polling place, click here.

Fellow Systocrats:

On Friday, I encountered this provocative billboard not far from my home:

I received a picture of this billboard on my cell phone Friday afternoon and not surprisingly, I found myself standing in front of it a few hours later.  I was not alone – a young man arrived a minute or two after I did, also drawn to this rather unique display of partisanship in an otherwise sleepy town.  As it turned out, both of us had dead batteries in our cameras, and as we briefly commiserated about this, our host made his appearance. 

Robert Horr appears to be a reasonably fit gentleman in his early to mid fifties, maybe six feet tall or so, with grizzled hair and mustache.  He greeted us in faded pants, a black t-shirt bearing a military slogan and workboots.  Mr. Horr declined to be photographed for this interview, recognizing that "this sign will bring hate," although apparently I had just missed a television crew from the local news station. 

During our conversation, Mr. Horr declared himself a "Constitutionalist" ("it means what it says") and an "NRA member who votes" (per another sign prominently displayed in the yard).  Although he has never served in the military, two of his sons have enlisted (although he declined to say where or in what branch they were serving).  The sun was going down, and Mr. Horr bade us welcome even as he busied himself setting up industrial strength spotlights to illuminate the billboard for evening motorists.  At length, he approached and I asked him if he had created the billboard himself.  He did not – the billboard represents the work of a talented artist-for-hire.  I then explained who I was (blogger, Obama supporter, etc) and hinted that he might be a McCain supporter.  Mr. Horr shook his head vigorously. 

"This sign is neutral," he insisted.  "I’m just trying to get the facts out there about these two candidates.  If something about this sign makes you nervous, perhaps you should reconsider your vote."  Later, in response to a direct question from the young man who witnessed our conversation, Mr. Horr would refuse to divulge who he was voting for.

I assured him that the sign didn’t make me nervous and questioned his claim of neutrality, pointing out that on the one hand, a young McCain was featured in military gear, which might be appropriate given that McCain had a rather complete career as a Navy pilot.  On the other hand, the Obama rendering was drawn from a picture of Obama in traditional African garb during a visit to Kenya in 2006, an outfit that he wore maybe a day or two in his entire life.  Why choose to display this particular image? 

"That’s his heritage," Mr. Horr explained.  "Obama was born in Africa, you know."  At some point during our interview, I asked him if Obama was a Muslim.  Mr. Horr said that he didn’t know, but wasn’t ready to take me at my word when I told him that Obama was not an adherent of the Muslim faith.  "I don’t know what’s in his heart . . . "  he said with hands apologetically raised, adding for good measure that "we don’t really know anything about Barack Obama."  This last, despite the fact that Obama has been continually and ruthlessly vetted during the two years that he’s been on the national campaign trail.  I never did get around to asking Mr. Horr what’s wrong with Muslims in general.

Mr. Horr also argued that the images on the billboard were not misleading images of the candidates because they are based on actual photos. 

Some of you will recall that this picture first surfaced in late February, in advance of important primaries in Texas and Ohio.  The Drudge Report broke the story, claiming that the photo had been released by the Clinton campaign, which didn’t deny releasing it, but instead insisted that there was nothing misleading or provocative about it.  By contrast, Obama’s campaign characterized the photo as an attempt to paint Obama as an anti-American Muslim, Obama’s campaign manager describing it as the "most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either side in this campaign."  Obama himself told a Dallas radio station that "the notion that [the Clinton campaign] would try to use this to imply in some way that I’m foreign, I think is, you know, unfortunate."   

Now, less than three weeks away from election day, this photo has resurfaced in my backyard, of all places. 

I assurred Mr. Horr that Obama was not born in Africa, but in Hawaii.  Mr. Horr continued to insist that not only was Obama born in Africa, but that he spent the first 12 years of his life there and went to "school" in Kenya.  I again insisted that Obama spent most of his childhood in Hawaii, but Mr. Horr was having none of it. 

Instructing me to "get the facts," Mr. Horr reminded me that Obama may not be qualified to be president of the United States, citing a pending lawsuit to get to the bottom of the Obama birth certificate situation.  I presume that he was referring to the lawsuit filed in the federal court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporter Phillip J. Berg, Esq. who maintains that under the Constitution, Obama is not qualified to be president because he was: 1. born in Kenya, not Hawaii, and 2. that even if Obama was born in Hawaii, he renounced his American citizenship by moving to Indonesia with his mother as a child.  The Obama campaign, together with the DNC has filed a motion to dismiss this complaint on the same grounds for which a similar complaint against McCain was dismissed a few months ago – that Mr. Berg lacks legal standing to maintain suit, as he has not alleged that he will be personally injured by Obama’s candidacy in any legally cognizable fashion.  No decision yet on the motion to dismiss, but you can view the entire case docket here. 

In terms of Mr. Berg’s qualifications as a lawyer, a brief internet search turned up this opinion by the Honorable Curtis Joyner of the very court in which Berg filed his controversial lawsuit.  In this 2005 Order, the Court affirmed the imposition of sanctions against Mr. Berg, noting that Mr. Berg had filed a complaint "completely devoid of any basis in fact or law." Joyner wasn’t finished with Berg, however:

Mr. Berg’s conduct . . .  is the reason [court rules imposing sanctions on lawyers for frivolous conduct] were implemented.  Other attorneys should look to Mr. Berg’s actions as a blueprint for what not to do when attempting to effectively and honorably perform the duties of the legal profession.  This Court has grown weary of Mr. Berg’s continuous and brazen disrespect towards this Court and his own clients.  Mr. Berg’s actions . . . serve to divert judicial resources from legitimate matters and this Court cannot, in good conscience, allow this conduct to go
unpunished. 

So much for Mr. Berg.

Mr. Horr went on to say that because Obama’s parents were not American citizens at the time he was born, Obama cannot satisfy the qualifications for president set forth in Article II of the Constitution.  Art II provides as follows:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. 

By his remarks, I presume that Mr. Horr is of the opinion that Obama is neither a "natural born Citizen" nor a "Citizen of the United States," as required by Article II.  Certainly some rather convoluted arguments in support of this idea were making their way around the Internet last summer.  However under the 14th Amendment ("Citizenship rights"), all persons born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens of the United States.  Therefore, even if both of Obama’s parents were non-citizens, Obama would still be a U.S. citizen by virtue of his birth in Hawaii. 

With respect to the Ronald Reagan quote on his billboard, Mr. Horr could not identify the context in which Reagan made these remarks.  With a minimal amount of digging around, I did find Mr. Horr’s Biden and Reagan quotes cited a couple of lines away from each other in an article entitled "Comrade Barack Hussein Obama" on the Patriot Post website.  The Post styles itself the "Internet Journal of the conservative revolution" and defines its mission as follows:

The Patriot Post believes that individual liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values can only be secured through the exercise of individual rights and responsibilities as ordained by God and established by our nation’s Founders in our Declaration of Independence and its subordinate exposition, our Republic’s Constitution.

Sounds about right to me – given the proximity of the quotes in the cited Post article and the content featured on this website, I’m guessing Mr. Horr found the text for his billboard here. 

Update: since the initial publication of this story, Mr. Horr himself has written in to say that the Reagan quote came from an address at the Citadel.  See his comment below.  He didn’t say whether he reads the Patriot Post or not. 

Returning to the context in which Reagan made the above-quoted statement, Governor Palin used it in her closing remarks at the VP debate, only to have the liberal media quickly point out that "Reagan was not warning about a general lack of vigilance about freedom, he was warning what would happen if Medicare was enacted."  Looks like Palin, The Patriot Post and now Mr. Horr have all taken this quote out of context. 

In all fairness to Mr. Horr, I should say that throughout our interview, he was reasonably friendly and polite, despite our profound disagreements re: the candidates, and he also declared his willingness to discuss his views openly with anyone who might seek him out, which is what American politics are supposed to be all about.  I should also mention that at least three or four cars signaled their approval by some combination of honking their horns and/or giving Mr. Horr the thumbs-up as they drove by. 

One final note – beware to those who would visit ill-will upon Mr. Horr and his sign.  Mr. Horr made it clear to me that although he’s not looking for trouble, he will "defend his property if necessary." 

Fellow Systocrats:

WELCOME TO OUR LIVE COVERAGE OF THE THIRD PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE!! 

TD: Good evening, and welcome to our live coverage of the last presidential debate.  Tonight, I’ll be joined in the virtual TSP studio by Paddy O and Mary J, who will provide expert political commentary as events unfold.  If you’d like to weigh in during the debate, email me at td@systocracy.com. 

Here’s my take on tonight’s event.  The stakes are higher than ever for John McCain.  At 72, he must be coming to terms with the fact that his last conceivable bid for the presidency now stands on the brink of failure. According to the most accurate projections available to us, if the election were held today, Senator Obama would claim over 360 electoral votes(!), and Obama is also holding a significant advantage among early voters in swing states.  McCain, ever the fighter, has vowed to "whip Obama’s [ass]" tonight in order to get back into this race, but he’ll need more than mere bravado to turn the tide in his direction.  The McCain campaign needs a clear, well-conceived strategy to counter Obama’s gathering strength in these final weeks, which is something that’s been lacking since the beginning of McCain’s presidential run. 

Mary J: Well TD, it probably goes without saying that tonight’s debate is important for McCain.  With his numbers declining in just about every poll, it is more important than ever that he come off as uber-confident.  If he can pull that off and look a lot less tired that he has of late, he’ll provide assurance to those undecided voters that he can work well under pressure and that he’ll make a fine President. 

Those same undecideds will be watching Obama as well.  Any big snafus on Obama’s part are going to give credence to McCain’s arguments that Obama is just a short-term superstar with no experience.  My money is on Obama who is always cool under fire, confident and smart.  That’s just what America is looking for after all these years with W looking scared of his shadow.  Even among those of us who have already decided who to vote for, there’s nothing like a good debate, and I think folks in my true-blue state are looking forward to tonight’s event. 

Paddy O: IT’S OVER!!  Tonite is nothing but an afterthought.  If Obama loses this election he’ll go down in history with the Yankees as the biggest choke jobs. 

I was trying to think of a theme for this opening but there were really too many to choose from including "STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES" for McCain, his campaign and Sarah Palin‘s pathetic interview answers.  His campaign, as Tom Cruise said in A Few Good Men is GALACTICALLY STUPID!!!!!  Not once have they ever even attempted to define Obama.  You don’t define your opponent by he’s liberal once or twice in debates.  You do it INCESSANTLY, 500,000 times on commericals, TV appearances etc.  This campaign is clearly just as bad as Gore’s and Kerry’s.  Gore foolishly ran away from Clinton, Kerry ran a cowardly campaign by refusing to address the negative perceptions of him and McCain quite simply it seems has no plan; it’s been FUBAR since he won the nomination.  It certainly has been non-confrontational.  Sure he’s lobBed a few attacks the last week  – BIG FRIGGEN DEAL!!  He’s let softball after softball pass without any mention.  He should have been running Ayers commericals when there were 7-8 primaries left in the Dem nomination process AFTER Obama had the nomination locked up.  He should have been SCREAMING that he’s the most liberal member of the Senate from day one.  He should have had Tony Rezko ads running non-stop in Ohio, PA and Mich.  He hasn’t once brought up the clings to guns and religion remark, he hasn’t once brought up the fact Obama broke his word on campaign funding.  He hasn’t once mentioned Barney Frank‘s and several Dems defense of Fannie/Freddie.  He hasn’t once brought up the fact that Obama’s tax plan mirrors Clinton’s and Clinton RAISED taxes.  He hasn’t once brought up Rev. Wright.  He hasn’t once brought up Chris Dodd‘s KICKBACK from Fannie/Freddie in a below market home loan. 

Quite frankly, his campaign, is two things, PATHETIC and for lack of a better word, has sucked and therefore, Obama will be the next President, McCain will forever be a footnote to history and regardless of who his handlers are McCain will have nobody to blame but himself for failing to display the intestinal fortitude to confront his opponent on a plethora of areas where his opponent was weak.  As Robert Plant said, "Nobody’s fault but mine/It’s nobody’s fault but mine/Try to save my soul tonight/Oh, it’s nobody’s fault but mine."

TD: And we’re off!!  Bob is reminding me of Bob Barker (the Price is Right) with that tie.  Another awkward embrace at the middle of the stage to start the debate. 

TSP fashion consultant Mucho joins us in the studio: What’s with all the striped ties??????  Are ugly striped ties a requirement for this event? 

TD: McCain just told Obama that it’s good to be with him again. Could this be a kinder, gentler McCain? 

Paddy O: McCain…..YAAAAWWWWWWWWWNNNNNN.  How can he mention Fannie/Freddie and NOT mention Barney Frank and Christopher "kickback" Dodd?

Mary J: I’m going to have to second Paddy O in his sentiments about McCain being weak.  He says "friend" a lot (not so far in this debate) and is just too nice.  He started out the first debate by telling us that Teddy Kennedy is in the hospital again.  Tonight he starts off saying Nancy Reagan is in the hospital.  We get it, John, you are a nice guy.  I get that but let’s see something beyond a nice guy.  Get a pair!!!

Special guest Chris J joins us in the studio:  This is the last chance for shakes McCain to act like he’s got a plan.  I hope Scheffer has his goalie gear on, because these two will be all over the place, again.  Yeah Bob…hitting them right from the start.  We want something else for dinner tonight, not the same old reheated crap.

Special guest Dave L joins us in the studio: I’d like to say a few things about Paddy O’s opening.  It is too bad for McCain that he ran a more honest campaign then the Republicans would have liked but I think it speaks about his "maverick" personality.  He even bucks their regular MO of lying to and scaring the general public.  The Ayers issue is actually a non-issue and the "most liberal" rating was from the National Journal for 2007.  He was 10th and 16th the previous 2 years.

We should help out those folks who may loose their houses but we have to make sure this price correction to the housing market is maintained.  We can’t let the bubble get that big again or this will happen all over again.

Paddy O: McCain bringing up the plumber is a good idea.

Mary J: I like that Obama ended the first question by talking about the long term financial issues that we face as a nation.  More short term solutions are going to h
elp for just the short term and sink us farther behind as a nation if we don’t focus on the bigger picture too.  I haven’t seen McCain give more than a nod to the long term. 

Chris J: Is "Joe" real?  Does this mythological "Joe" know how to read and understand tax proposals?  Why the hearsay?

Dave L: I wonder if either of them actually knows anything about the other guy’s plans.  Or if they just believe their own rhetoric. 

Paddy O: Another example of McCain not responding correctly.  YES, Oil companies are making a fortune . . . but he needs to tell everyone that their profit margins re: percentage over cost is one of the smallest of any industry. 

This tit for tat re: Joe the Plumber is the best exchange in the 3 debates.

Chris J: Wow . . . so Obama is now labeled as a tax-raising socialist.  Now is the time for Barack to bring up the failure of trickle-down theory. 

Special guest Luke-O joins us in the studio: McCain, Obama just explained how Joe the plumber’s tax will not go up.  How does claiming a second time that Joe is going to get taxed make it true?  Are we following the Sarah Palin strategy that merely by repeating something makes it true?

Dave L: McCain doesn’t want to raise taxes!!  The national debt is beyond belief and every American owes $2000-$10,000 in national debt (depending on who’s numbers you believe). 

Chris J: Great point about responsibility, but unfortunately, American isn’t all about responsibility.  If we were, we would not object to higher taxes during a time of war.  Sacrifice shouldn’t be on some, it should be on all, if the cause is just. 

TD: So far, I’m hearing the same old, same old from McCain.  A few minutes ago, the tired point about unreasonably high corporate taxes that Obama addressed two debates ago – corporate taxes are high ON PAPER in this country but there are so many loopholes that they are effectively among the lowest corporate tax rates in the world.  The same tired points about raising taxes, etc. 

Re: Obama’s comment a few minutes ago, not sure a "pay-go" policy is going to be possible with the huge deficit and economic recession we’ll be dealing with over the next few years.

Mary J: Obama’s answers so far are going to appeal to folks who are desperate in this economy.  A lot of folks are asking, "how did we get to this point?" and are rethinking the big picture.  He keeps hitting home the points about the bigger picture.  Nice.  Offshore drilling, McCain, is not only a far off solution but just a Band-Aid to help Exxon Mobil.  As a country we are headed nowhere but away from an oil-based economy and McCain/Palin won’t acknowledge that. 

Paddy O: Would it kill either of these guys to come up with an original statement we haven’t heard in these first two debates?  It’s an abomination the lack of thought they put into these things.

TD: Agreed, Paddy, but status quo means victory for Obama.  So far, though, this has been a a repeat of the first two debates, I agree.

Chris J: The planetarium projector line is almost as tired looking as the bags under the hobgoblin’s (Cindy’s) reconstructed eyes.

Luke O:  Obama, McCain, answer the question of what you will cut or put off as a result of the 700 billion dollar bailout. 

McCain, most of our oil comes from North America, not the Middle East. 

Obama, good point that earmarks are only 1/2 of 1% of the overall budget.  John, do you understand the big picture?  Getting rid of pork barrel spending isnt going to do squat.  What are you going to cut? 

Paddy O: Well done by Obama on the earmarks.  They’re small, they suck, we’ll fix it, let’s move on.  However, if McCain had a campaign staff he would know the exact figure because I bet 1/2 of 1% of the US budget is a BOATLOAD of money. 

Mucho: I feel violated.  I don’t want McCain anywhere NEAR me with either a hatchet or a scalpel, that’s just a nasty mental picture.  By the way . . . what was the question he was supposed to answer?  Did he ever get to it? 

Mary J: Nice comment by McCain that he’s not George Bush.  Not a nice comment that he can balance the budget in 4 years.  It’s what he has to say but it’s not believable at all.  Clinton had projected surpluses in 8 years and I just don’t belive in 4 years they can do it.  If they were a king, maybe, but as a President who executes the laws rather than creates them?  No.  It cannot be done while America fails to weigh in on the Congressional races as much as they do in the Presidential race. 

Chris J: I love it when Barack calls McCain on his lies.  One question – what is gollum writing while Barack speaks?

Paddy O: Obama is a great counterpuncher.  Anytime McCain thinks he scores points, Obama hits him right back.

Chris J: All those words to describe McCain (erratic, etc) were absolutely true.

Dave L: I agree, I think Obama will hold all Americans responsible or at least hold them to a higher standard.  Especially if he can hold Congress to a higher standard.  He always talks about the poor people pulling themselves up.  I think that is important, the gov’t clearly isn’t going to help anyone but themselves. 

Chris J: What an egomaniac.  The campaign turned dirty when Barack Obama decided not to give McCain exactly what he wanted (town hall debates), how childish.

TD: Agreed.  The way McCain is trying to accuse Obama of running a dirty campaign is a laughable gambit that the voters will definitely see through.

Luke O: Poor McCain.  He felt he needed to follow Bush in the years leading up to the election, despite the fact that he disagreed with him.  Now
McCain is trying to prove that he is a maverick.  He was a maverick, in
some regards, and he may continue to be so, but having sucked up to Bush
the past two years does not give his claim a lot of merit.

Paddy O: FINALLY, McCain brings up Obama’s lie regarding financing the campaign…too little–too late for McCain.  It should have been his FIRST commercial. 

Obama’s avoiding this question better than Palin avoided questions. 

Mary J: Nice.  “I don’t mind being attacked for the next three weeks.”  Good answers by Obama.  I understand that McCain’s handlers told him to be tougher but he’s coming off as a whiny sore loser.  And I liked this guy a couple of years ago.

Mucho:  . . . and the other shoe is on it’s way down. Obama is coming across as a calm cool collected individual and John is erratic, interrupting, and making faces when he is faced with challenges from the left.  And with perfect timing, here comes the question regarding "taking he high road" and the "say it to my face!" demand we all heard in 3rd grade.

It’s like mediating a grade school fight between two bullies. "you didn’t say you were sorry and now I hate you!" (roughly translated) and the rebuttal "look, you started it and I wanna talk about what were supposed to be talking about. Important stuff like how right I am and what an old out of touch tool you are" (again, I may have lost a few key points in translation, but hey I figure it’s good enough for government work).

Dave L: Ugh, get over the ads.  They all lie, we know it, we don’t believe a word of it!

Chris J: Obama didn’t talk about why he abandoned the campaign finance pledge, that’s something that I’d like to hear answered.

Wow..McCain is
pissed.  He’s moving his mouth without speaking.  He looks crazy.  Oh my.  He just said that he’s proud of the people who come to his rallies…holy sh*t.
 

Paddy O: Obama is baiting him to bring up Ayers, baiting him.

TD: Obama’s telling the country about Ayers.  Good deal, especially when McCain said he didn’t care about Ayers after making him the "centerpiece of his campaign," as Obama stated.  Now he’s distancing himself from ACORN.

Luke O: The first two debates seemed closer.  In this one, McCain is showing
how he cannot answer a follow-up question.  McCain is getting killed on
the issues.  This like a jousting match between Winnie-the-Pooh, and Sir
Galahad.  John, show that you can think on your feet!

Chris J: 35 minutes in and Ayers and ACORN are brought up.  Ridiculous.  No issues to be found, only tidbits that matter to the lunatic fringe

Dave L: The facts about these topics are easily available all over the Internet, why are we wasting our time on it? 

I am glad to hear about who Obama does associate with.  How can we know MORE about him?  I have never seen any candidate more vetted. 

Chris J: Is Barack dropping his "g"’s to pander to the working class?  No need for that.

TD: Awwwwww sh*t – here come the running mate questions.  I hope Bob asks McCain whether Palin is qualified. 

Luke O: McCain is going down in flames.  If he can’t have his major issue be
anything other than Obama’s loose past connections to Ayers, etc., he is
in major trouble.  McCain, you need to win on the issues, not the
bogus, lame attacks.

Bob, good question about the relative merits of the respective VPs.  A
legitimate question given McCain’s age.  (Holy scary-ness if Palin were
to inhabit the Oval Office.  Yikes!)

Paddy O: McCain can’t win this VP question….at least he’s making an attempt.

TD: He did all that he could with that question.  He’s lucky Bob didn’t ask HIM whether Palin is qualified.  I wish McCain had been questioned about Palin’s lousy interview answers . . .

Chris J: Of course she understands special needs families, she’s about as smart.

Special guest Dennis H joins us in the studio: Okay, this is getting boring…
if this were a boxing match, the ref would have stopped it.
McCain seems battered and unable to defend himself.
McCain keeps repeating about not raising taxes like a punch-drunk
boxer.

TD: Yeah, he’s starting to remind me of his little protege, just randomly spewing talking points regardless of context . . .

Chris J: That question was the perfect opportunity for Barack to say, "no, she is not capable of being President, she would be catastrophically dangerous to the safety and sovereignty of the United States".

TD: Yeah, but O doesn’t need to go negative.  Her approval rating is so low and her disapproval rating so high, he doesn’t need to go there. 

OUR LIVE COVERAGE OF THE FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE CONTINUES HERE!!

-- toctype = X-unknown -->

OUR LIVE COVERAGE OF THE FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE CONTINUES BELOW:

Mary J:

Questions on the VP?

BRING IT!

"Americans have gotten to know Sara Palin, shes a reformer. She’s an inspiration to women…" yeah, if only we lived in the 1800′s when abortions were still performed with tree bark and a prayer.

Wait, did he just say that Biden has bad foregin policy? Did he forget that his running mate has all of 15 minutes of foregin policy experience and has only used 1 page on her brand spanking new passport?

OK.  My ears are smoking.  Sarah Palin knows more than just about any other American about special needs children?  She has a six month old Down syndrome son!!!  I didn’t know jack about parenting after six months when facing that first time experience after having tons of experience with children.  Sarah Palin doesn’t know jack about children with disabilities simply because she was irresponsible and popped one out over the age of 40 so she could be a sitting governor who was pregnant.  How has this advanced women?  If men could give birth I’d say it’s just as irresponsible.  I think it’s pretty widely accepted now that McCain made a huge mistake in picking Palin.  The average American voter may be a dope but not so dopey (thankfully) to have fallen for her hook, line and sinker like we/they were supposed to because she’s a woman with a special needs child.  And you can’t tell me McCain knew a thing about the pregnant daughter before picking her.  His pick of Palin is an absolute disgrace and was the last nail in the coffin to what could have been an amazing race by McCain.

TD: My god, woman, can you type fast!!!!

Chris J: A nuclear reactor on a ship is DRASTICALLY different than a regional scale nuclear power plant.  That is the weakest argument ever, for nuclear power.

Special guest Bryna Bear joins us in the studio:

Palin - A reformer who will cut out the crony-ism and the good old boys?  I’m not so sure that she will actually do that considering her track record with pressuring for the firing of her ex-brother in law.  hmmm. If people are questioning Obama’s experience in terms of being qualified to lead this country, I don’t understand how they could look the other way when considering Palin.

And Biden voting against the first Gulf War?  Maybe that wasn’t such a
"wrong" thing to do.
 

Chris J: Bringing up NAFTA can only help Obama.  The deal that shipped American jobs to the four corners.

Dave L: It is almost like McCain secretly works for the Obama Campaign.  He keeps setting him for great and believable come backs.
 

TD: I think McCain is a little tight, like a team down three touchdowns in the fourth quarter of a playoff game.  I will note that there’s some concern in my living room that Obama keeps openly laughing at McCain.  Beware the condescension factor!

Chris J: What’s more expensive than the War on Terror, well, the War on Drugs and McCain swings and misses again.

Bryna B: Drill baby drill?  not a sustainable solution.

I’m glad that Obama brought up human rights in the whole scheme of our
economic concerns with free trade.  The US has a long history of putting their economic interests over the lives of people in other countries, particularly in Latin America (see: Haiti, Nicaragua, Panama…)

TD: No doubt, and most Americans don’t know squat about it.  They should teach that sh*t in grade school!

Mucho: Mccain- we have to listen to the words cause this is wayyyyyyyyyy past my bed time and I cant keep up if he uses more than 2 syllables"

Obama, STOP LAUGHING AT THE OLD FART! He doesn’t know any better!

Luke O: McCain is getting killed.  Come on John, give us something new, other
than your old talking points! 

Paddy O: Great answer by Obama on the car makers and the way they make cars.

You no what, F McCain and his god-damned pre-conditions.  I’m so sick of that friggen line.  I hope you lose your Senate re-election whenever that is.  26yrs is too friggenlong in DC.  A horrible campaign…your staff sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TD: I agree with everyone who has expressed the sentiment that McCain is falling on his face here.  So far, this is the clearest victory for Obama of the three debates. 

Chris J: Man….all these people show up to these rallies that JUST happen to have the perfect situation to turn into a ridiculously long anecdote that does nothing but make my eyes roll back into my head.

Paddy O: In case anyone is interested, the Phillies are up 5-0 in the 5th inning and a good scene in the Matrix is about to come up on HBO2.

TD: Right on, bro.  Obama’s putting this thing out of reach.  Hard to believe they’d send McCain out there with the same old ammo. 

Dave L: Oh my god, the answer to health care isn’t electronic files…  Obesity!  He said it.  We need to cut the funding to ADM and Cargill so they can buy corn cheaper then it costs farmers to produce it.  They can then turn that corn into all that cheap processed food that is killing Americans.

TD: This guy (McCain) is talking about gold-plated health insurance plans.  Says the guy with 13 houses! 

Chris J: And McCain is down folks.  The business tax smackdown just threw gollum into Mt. Doom.

McCain…listen.  Don’t put the blame on people for not belonging to a gym, put the blame on subsidies that allow twinkies and happy meals to be dirt cheap next to farm raised chicken and carrots.

TD: SENATOR GOVERNMENT!!!!!  FROM "THAT ONE" TO "SENATOR GOVERNMENT!!!"

Dave L: Here he goes again pitching softballs to Obama.

Dennis H: It seems like McCain is trying to agitate Obama. O isn’t taking the
bait. Mc doesn’t recognize that he is overmatched.
God bless Mc, he was a commendable soldier. He follows commands. He is
not that good at tactics. He is out of his league when it comes to
strategy.

I bet Joe the plumber is wishing he were never brought up. But Mc isn’t
giving up on Joe’s vote in Ohio.

After O’s answer on Joe …re: small business, and health care, I bet
Mc is wishing he hadn’t brought Joe up again.

Mary J: I am SO tired of hearing about Joe the Plumber!  I think America ’s abhorrence for Sarah Palin shows us that little slogans and trying to repeat them as much as possible is not going to score points in this debate.  It’s like hearing Sarah Palin talk about Joe Sixpack (I still can’t believe she said that; she must have gotten 20 lashes for improvising on THAT one) and HaaaKeey Moms every other sentence.  Barack’s answers are well thought out and detailed and that’s what people are looking for.  Can you guys already see him making his first address to the country?  These debates and the last severa
l weeks have really turned things around.  In the first debate I thought Obama was a little smirky and nervous.  Now he appears nothing but confident and smart but McCain is looking nervous.

Chris J: Alito, Roberts, and Thomas.  I’m sure McCain voted for all three.  Why not dig up Marshall to bring the court back to the center?

Luke-O: McCain, a federalist is not someone who believes in local power.  A
federalist believes in a STRONG CENTRAL government.  McCain thinks that
divesting power from the federal government to the states is federalism.

Dave L: Oh my god the abortion issue!  I was hoping it would never come up. Returning abortion to the states will just send women out of state to get one.  The idea is that abortion is murder is belief based and we can’t allow the state or federal gov’t legislate one group’s beliefs over another’s. 

Bryna B: oohh boy.  Roe v. Wade and the issue of supreme court appointments.
I agree that nominees should be judged on their qualifications, but it is
incomplete to judge them solely on that.  A variety of ideologies on the
supreme court is essential to the system of checks and balances.  To
appoint judges in an ideology-blind way is not looking at the whole picture.

TD: McCain needs to be mindful of the look on his face.  Boy did he just look angry a minute or two ago while Obama was speaking.  Fact is, the Roe v. Wade issue is in Obama’s wheelhouse.  HE’S A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR, for pity’s sake!

Chris J: Why is it that Republicans feel that they have the right to legislate our morals?

TD: Well, they feel that abortion is murder.  Murder is certainly legislatable. 

Mucho: Any one have a white tee shirt johnny boy can borrow as a flag??

Mary J: Did McCain just make that googly-eyed crazy look at Obama?  Wow.  He’s finished.  Obama still has to keep steady for three weeks – a lot can happen and he can’t be overconfident – but the independents watching and trying to make up their minds have to be unimpressed with McCain’s answers and behavior. This guy wants to be present in less than 3 months and he’s looking more like W with his goofy looks than like a guy with a respectable record who can lead the nation.

Chris J: Obama’s "tell", when he’s angry, is that he takes a sip of water.  Very interesting….look for it.

Dave L: Sorry, I think some of you are giving the American public a little to much credit.  Marketing 101 is hit them with your product as often as possible.  No one will even remember you until the 9th time they see your commercial (Gorilla Marketing).  Repeating something enough makes most American’s drink cheap beer and buy tons of sh!t they don’t need.  SUV’s, HDTV, fancy import beer, HBO, all the crap for their kids…

Luke O: Obama, 91, McCain gets sacked in the end zone.  Will McCain come out and endorse Obama tomorrow, conceding that he is the better person for the job?  If O doesn’t get elected, after this debate, I am moving to
Canada.  McCain, put your glasses on and look at the score-board.  John,
cut your losses and fake a heart attack.  At least you’ll get the
sympathy vote.

Paddy O: For Luke:  "New Federalism" brought forth by Reagan is the return of power to the states from the federal government….and pretty much championed by the Rehnquist Court.

Mucho: Charter schools are a business. They offer a service. It should be the parents choice whether or not to buy this service. If education becomes privatized, then all or most "good" teachers and educators will be seduced by higher paychecks and the public education system will cease to do it’s job, OFFER GOOD PUBLIC EDUCATION.

Dave L: Obama hit on responsibility again w/ teaching kids at home and turning off the TV.  So many Americans just want to throw their kids in school and expect a valedictorian to come back.  Most schools in America suck and it isn’t just about funding or charter schools.  Its about doing work at home too!

Bryna B: the answer to improving education is not necessarily the answer.
changing the culture of education and the expectation of cultivating critical
thinking skills is crucial to the change that we need for this country.

And as someone who is looking at tens of thousands of dollars in
undergrad debt, plus possibly $150,000-$200,000 more from med school, yeah, I’d say that making higher education more accessible & affordable is something that should be considered.
 

TD: Okay, debate’s over.  More comments from all of you still in the pipeline, but let’s get everybody’s final take on this debate as well, who won, etc. 

Chris J: I don’t agree here.  We’ve seen that the free market doesn’t work when it comes to economics, I don’t think that it would work with schools either. 

Dave L: To TD, if you are pro-choice then abortion is about constitutional law.  IF you are pro-life then it is about FAITH, and you and I have discussed that recently.  It’s about a completely different worl view.

TD: If you are pro-choice it’s about a woman’s right to choose.  Most of those women don’t know squat about constitutional law, a penumbra of privacy that isn’t spelled out in the constitution, or any of that crap. If you are pro-life, you probably believe that life starts at conception per the bible, and therefore abortion is murder.
 

Paddy O: At least my prediction is correct, this is soooooooooooo over.  Time to start picking cabinet members.

Chris J: Earth to McCain….Palin’s kid does NOT have Autism..so why would Palin know anything about Autism?

This debate was an utter mauling.  McCain jabbed, and Barack responded each time with consecutive roundhouse.  Obama looked and performed like a President, and McCain looked like an irrational child.  Bob Sheiffer was an amazing moderator. 

McCain’s cut man has some work to do.

Yes, there have been a long line of McCain’s that have served in the military…that’s how he kept his flight status after crashing his plane 5 times, one of which almost brought down an aircraft carrier.

Denn H: no incumbent party has ever won a presidential election by running away from its own.
Dems lost in ’68 when Humphrey ran against Johnson, more than against
Nixon
Reps lost in ’76 when Ford ran against Nixon legacy
Dems lost in ’00 when Gore distanced himself from Clinton
Reps will lose this year, McCain can’t get far enough away from Bush

TD: Amen, brother.

Mucho: What are the requirements for receiving a voucher to attend a charter school? is it the child’s performance in said school? Or the family’s income and financial status? This is the first that I have heard of the voucher system for attending charter school. What happened to treating charter schools like private colleges and accepting students and offering students financial aid to attend?

Final statements… lets see if ol’ johnny boy can contain himself enough NOT to interrupt after Obama speaks. His closing argument was like Chef Boyardee Beefaroni, overprepared and full of tox
ins

Obama sounds more or less like he is speaking from the cuff. Way to bring out the "work every single day" way to point out W.’s extended vacation

CINDY!!!!!!!!!!!!! we told you NOT to match the carpet!

Bryna B: did Cindy not know that the carpet was going to be matching her suit? Yikes!!!

Luke O: Paddy-O, my apologies for my ignorance about the New Federalism.  How is it that federalism is a term that got attached to state power?  The word "federalism" seems to imply federal power.

TD: Luke, it’s just a temporal thing.  There’s a difference between Hamilton’s Federalism, which advocated for a strong central government, and Calabresi’s Federalist Society, which originated in the 1980s. 

Mary J: Well, I’m not impressed with the closing speeches.  And what was that little nervous dance by McCain after he shook Obama’s hand? I think I said it all during the debate but I’ll repeat:  (1) Obama must not get cocky and must remain humble or he’ll lose ground. (2) I agree with Paddy O that a heart attack and a sympathy vote could work wonders for McCain at this point.  These debates are a big part of the campaign but not the only part.  Three weeks is a long time and what happens with the economy is going to affect the outcome of this race.  Plenty of voters not listening to these debates and watching Fox News so I’m not 100% confident that the best man for the job in so many respects i.e. Barack Obama has it in the bag until I see those election returns on November 5th.

Let me also be a kiss a** and add a thank you to TD for putting this online live blog together.  This has been a fun way to participate in these debates.  Now go get some sleep since you and I are in Obama’s 95% that must go to work and could desperately use a break.

Luke O: I echo Mary J. Tom, thanks for the forum.

Dennis H: McCain gets a couple of points for showing up and staying through the end. The mercy rule should have been invoked though. Obama pulled ahead by more than 10 points early on and never looked back.

TD: Amen, brother.  Preacher DH is sermonizing tonight!

Chris J: TD:   You can’t base legislation on faith nor can you make a coherent rational argument that revolves around faith.  You CAN argue with facts and the constitution.  Their worldview is irrelevant, their faith is their own and not anyone else’s.

TD: I disagree on both points.  Many societies have legislated based on faith.  What about these Muslim legal codes that millions adhere to?  You can also make a coherent rational argument based on faith, the only drawback being that if you’re relying on faith, there may not be any scientifically provable facts to back it up. 

Chris J: We’re not talking about "societies", or muslim culture’s, we’re talking about the modern secular American society.  We are a nation of many beliefs and, part of the protection our constitution offers is equal protection of our beliefs.  You cannot, in this environment, in THIS country, base your legislation off of a faith based worldview.  It is unethical and unsupportable and, insane.  I believe this, because the giant unseen hamster in the sky tells me so.

Dave L: The muslim legal codes that millions follow are followed by millions of muslims.  America is full Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Agnostics and Atheists.  We can’t legislate any one’s beliefs.

TD: Gentlemen – if you’re talking about whether legislating based on religious beliefs is advisable or desirable, I agree with you that it’s not, unless of course we all agree on a set of beliefs.  It is possible to do so, though, which is the point I was making. 

Dave L: Kind of a lame ending.  I did like the format and I am glad they got to exchange face to face.  McCain never did try to kick ass though.  A very disappointing performance from McCain who relied on the old marketing ideas of repeating until blue in the face.  It did keep in in line with Palin’s short story to tell.  Sticking to a short list of talking points might help her on the stump but did no good for him in this debate.  I was really hoping McCain would do something to attract my vote but he failed miserably.  Obama looked in control and presidential and definitely won my vote…  As long as nothing bizarre shows up in the next 3 weeks.

Luke O: Yes, Kudos to Bob, he was far superior to the other moderators at
limiting answers and directing the debate as well as asking provocative
questions.

Nora, I like the Chef Boyardee  (lol).

TD: If you ask me, I think somebody got their ass whupped, but it wasn’t Obama!  Paddy O was right – McCain came with the same tired talking points and arguments that either Obama or the press have refuted a thousand times.  Most importantly, McCain was clearly losing his temper towards the end, while Obama remained calm, cool and collected.  Admittedly, Obama was mostly playing defense, but with his poll numbers, that’s all he needed to do, so this was a clear victory for Obama.  If I were him, I’d triple my security detail over the next three weeks, because unless something drastic happens, he will be our next President! 

This live-blog without a doubt featured the most reader participation of the four.  THANKS TO ALL OF YOU FOR MAKING THIS LIVE-BLOG A RESOUNDING SUCCESS!!

PLEASE JOIN TSP LIVE ON ELECTION DAY AS WE LIVE-BLOG THE ELECTION RESULTS!!!  CHECK IN WITH US AT TD@SYSTOCRACY.COM WITH YOUR ELECTION DAY STORIES AND WE’LL POST THEM!!!

ALSO, PLEASE VISIT TSP SOON TO VIEW OUR OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT OF BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!!

Fellow Systocrats:

Senator Obama, leading in the latest nationwide Washington Post/ABC News poll by 10 points, unveiled his four point "Economic Rescue Plan for the Middle Class" while on the campaign trail in Toledo, Ohio today.  Systocrat-minded folks should be very pleased with the "Main Street" orientation of the plan, in contrast to the 700 billion dollar "Wall Street" plan that so far has done little to stabilize our flagging markets. 

Here’s a brief summary of the four main points of the Obama "Main Street" plan:

Point 1: A self-described "aggressive" proposal to create jobs, which includes a $3,000 tax credit to businesses for each new full time employee hired, no capital gains tax on small business investments, and the preservation/creation of jobs by making 25 billion dollars available for infrastructure projects, such as repairing our deteriorating roads, bridges and schools.

Point 2: This provision provides immediate relief to "Main Street" by providing expedited tax cuts/rebates – $500 for workers and $1000 for families, by extending unemployment benefits, by allowing people to withdraw up to $10,000 from retirement accounts in 2008 (retroactively and going forward) and in 2009 without penalty, and by supplementing the recently passed federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program ("LIHEAP") to ensure that additional funding is available to residents of cold-weather states to help meet rising heating costs.

Point 3: Entitled "Direct, Immediate Assistance for Homeowners, not a Bailout for Irresponsible Mortgage Lenders," (my emphasis), this provision includes a mandate to allow the Treasury Department, HUD and bankruptcy judges to aggressively restructure the terms of mortgages in favor of homeowners.  Point 3 also calls for 25 billion in relief to state governments to meet expenses and therefore keep property taxes down, and a 90 day moratorium on foreclosures for homeowners living in their homes who are making "good faith" efforts to pay their mortgages. 

Point 4: This is somewhat of a catchall provision calling for additional "rapid, aggressive" action as needed to unfreeze the credit markets, ensure the continued functioning of non-financial institutions such as state/local governments and small businesses by making funding available as necessary, and additional measures to get our stalled economy moving again.  

In general, I think this plan represents a thoughtful attempt to chart a course out of this economic crisis.  I’ll be very interested in the reception Senator Obama’s proposal receives on Capitol Hill this week.  

I do have a couple of comments.  In any proposed financial rescue-type bill like this one, I would like to see a provision imposing formidable civil and criminal penalties for flagrant abuses of bailout money, such as AIG’s wasteful expenditure of $440,000 to attend a sales conference a few days after we gave them $85 billion dollars of our money.  This behavior is a direct affront to every American taxpayer and should not be tolerated or encouraged.

Also, with respect to Point 3, I think that the "good faith" provision will be difficult to interpret and/or enforce unless this bill contains an explicit definition of "good faith" and perhaps some commentary, with examples, on the types of homeowner actions that will be considered "good faith."  For example, one phone call in thirty days to your rich Aunt Louise to ask for mortgage money while you are unemployed, capable of working yet not actively seeking a job, does not constitute good faith.  Working two jobs, cutting expenses to the bone and still not being able to make the mortgage (like lots of people I know these days) – go ahead and claim your 90 day foreclosure moratorium.

Click here to see Obama discussing the main points of his Main Street Plan.