Obama and the Tax Evaders Avoiders

I've got no particular sympathy for Tom Daschle and his tax problems--for cryin' out loud, didn't this guy have an accountant? On the other hand, I don't really think this round of tax problems is anything other than par for the course.

They will be different for Obama though, for one very good reason: he's Mr. Transformative, Mr. Change We Can Believe In, Mr. New Standard of Ethics and Morals in Washington. Set the bar so high and you are bound to trip over it, to the profound embarrassment of yourself and your friends.

Don't misunderstand: I think Obama really believes this stuff, and if he were the kind of guy to stomp around the Oval Office, then right now he would be stomping around the Oval Office ("why didn't somebody tell me," he must be thinking, and perhaps saying). What he's finding out, I think, is that it isn't that easy, and that the best intentions can get ground up in the sheer dailiness of life in the big city. And I'd certainly rather have a President with ill-founded good intention than one who didn't give a rat's patootie whether the government worked or not.

For perspective, I suspect we'd have the same kind of disconnect if we had elected the other great moralist in last year's campaign.--Obama's opponent, John McCain. But it would be different with McCain: even setting aside the really formidable array of talent and determination that Obama has seemed to assemble, with McCain we'd be left with a guy who likes to shoot dice.

McCain is Right on the Economy

Link. There. I thought I'd never hear myself say that. And, okay, he is not very right--but even a little right is a stretch.

I mean--okay, forget all that stuff about "making tax cuts permanent;" the Republican mantra is that we never have to pay for anything, ever, and that does not deserve to be taken seriously.

But payroll taxes--isn't he right that if we really want to get money back into the economy quickly, then a payroll tax about the fastest way to do it? I mean, short of firing off a cannon full of dollar bills?

Flip side: yes, yes, I know the Republicans are engaged in a lot of inspired silliness about wasteful spending. But at tne end of the day, we are going to find that a whole lot of the "stimulus" spending has nothing to do with "stimulus" at all (can you say "Washington Mall"?).

I'ts beginning to sink in on me that each side of this equation can screw things up in its own way: Republicans, by cutting the wrong taxes, Democrats, by pushing the wrong spending. Either way, it is looking more and more like a little economic ice age, and it may last for quite a while.

Afterthought: Does John Boehner think he is going to make points by attacking the public funding of condoms? Isn't there a good chance that that will turn out to be the one universally popular in the whole package?

On My Way

I'll be leaving the country in the morning (early!), to be gone until after the election, and I tell you, I couldn't be happier to put myself beyond a venue where I find myself listening to the Al Smith Dinner speeches three times in one night. I've done my bit and voted for the terrorist dude but I caution the complacent: John McCain has been funny and affable twice today: once at that dinner, and again on Letterman show (he needs to brush up on his pronunciation of "Zoarastrian," though). A few more days like this and people might actually begin to believe he is a nice guy.

Joe the Schlep

They say that in a monarchy you have to kiss up to the rich and powerful; in a democracy, to the vulgar and unwashed. Sounds like John McCain's Joe the Plumber could have used a bit more vetting. By the emerging evidence (which has the rudiments of a fair-to-middling straight-to-video movie) Joe is (a) ignorant; (b) angry; (c) self-important; (d) self-absorbed. The one thing he is not, by all appearance, is a plumber. The one thing he seems sure of is that he likes Sarah Palin, and who can blame him? From the look of things, he'd be a natural running mate for Sarah in 2012.

Afterthought: Boy, I must have been in a testy mood when I wrote that. I ought to have some compassion for a single papa who plays football with his son. And it was hardly his fault that he got sucked up into the vortex (though it will be interesting to see how he plays out over the rest of his 15 minutes of fame). And I have to admit that "If I made $250,000, I wouldn't want to pay taxes on it" is hardly incoherent. Still, I'd be just as happy not taking policy advice from Joe.

Boy, I Hope This is True

Obama as the fiscal discipline president? The ally of the blue dogs? As a bit of a blue dog myself, I hope this is true. As I've suggested before, I think a veto-proof Congress of his own party can be Obama's worst nightmare*--just as, I suppose, it would be of any president of either party. But perhaps my view is insufficiently nuanced: even if the Dems hit the magic 60 in the Senate, those numbers are bound to include just a few voices of fiscal sanity. And the House long has been (and will continue to be) a more conservative outfit.

HT: Daniel Shaviro, who points out that a McCain presidency could lead to an even bigger fiscal mess.

*Vastly exaggerated. He would have many potential nightmares.

Hounshell on Frank on Ayers

Blake Hounshell (link) and your humble servant both this morning read Thomas Frank's Wall Street Journal profile of William Ayers (link). Hounshell interprets the story in the context of the "testosterone-poisoning" theory of radicalism--that it is largely the product of rootless, underemployed young men. I'm certainly sympathetic to that view, but I think Hounshell overrreaches when he describes Ayers as "a fully rehabilitated, functioning member of the Chicago political scene." Functioning, maybe. Fully rehabilitated? I'm not so sure. Frank concedes that he will not "quibble with those who find Mr. Ayers wanting in contrition." He adds that "his 2001 memoir is shot through with regret, but it lacks the abject style our culture prefers."

Well you know what, Tom? I kind of like contrition. And I suspect there isn't one of us that hasn't done something that he ought to be abject about, at least some of the time. My take is that for all his achievements in education and community service, that Ayers still just doesn't get it: that he put innocent people in harm's way, in an enterprise that vastly overestimated its own virtue (I am tempted to add: "and effectiveness"--I won't go quite that far, but I think a good case can be made for the proposition that the bombers did as much to aggravate the evils of society as they did to assuage them).

None of this, of course is meant to endorse the slimy and disingenuous efforts of the McCain campaign to demonize someone who should by all rights be recognized as a marginal, even trivial, figure. That's why I join Hounshell in endorsing McCain when McCain says "It's not that I give a damn about some old washed-up terrorist." Quite right, Senator. Now, back to the campaign.

For Extra Credit: The book that sold me on the testosterone-poisoning theory of revolution is James H. Billington Fire in the Minds of Men (link).

W/o Comment (Almost)

"We've Got Them Just Where We Want Them"--John McCain

Who was the general (Pappy Boyington?) who, when told he was surrounded, responded:

"They Can't Get Away From Us Now!"

Did He Say That?

Let's stipulate that this is one of the main things I will never understand: the McCain campaign. Today's move has me absolutely baffled. I'm talking about the 401k fandango: the idea that people with 401ks ought to be able to defer drawdown on their pension funds. Two points:

• As a solvent guy with no immediate need for my pension pot, I think this is a nice little early Christmas gift.

• As a campaign measure, it's absolutely daffy.

Here's Senator McCain: My friends (sic), we live in troubled times. And I feel your pain; I know what's worrying you. You're lying awake nights worried that you'll have too much money to spend next year. Well, worry no more my friends; SuperMcCain to the rescue--thanks to my new 401k program, you won't have the burden of extra cash to spend; you'll be able to let it sit and fester away in your mouldy old 401k.

Okay, I made that up. And like I say, as a guy with a steady income and a pension fund, I think the idea is really cool (actually, I think the whole deferred-tax fandango is terrible public policy, but leave that for another day). My question--my bafflement-- today is: am I really the market niche who needs special favors in order to be induced to vote for McCain? I think the question answers itself; I can't imagine who is making this stuff up.

The Conservative Canada

I've got a friend who claims she will move to Bangla Desh if McCain is elected. I tend to take that lightly, but I am intrigued by Slate's rundown on where Republicans can run to after the runup (link).

The McCain Housing Plan--What's Different?

I'm trying to make sense out of the "McCain HOME Plan" wherein, as I understand it, the government (we) will buy up toxic mortgages and write them down to the market value of the property. Will we be buying those mortgages at face value? If so, isn't this primarily another bailout for bad lending practices? If we will be buying them at market--isn't that exactly what is happening now, when secondary market bottom fishers buy up the toxic debt at distress prices and undertake to do the workout themselves?

[For clarification: I think "secondary market bottom fishing" is an honorable profession, and I hope we are seeing lot of it--would go a long way to putting this problem behind us, and without more taxpayer frontloading.]

Update: DeLong says it's a full frontal, and he is not impressed.

Why the Debate was So Hard to Watch

"The American public got a pretty candid assessment from both these candidates..."

--Wolf Blitzer, CNN

What rot. The last thing you political campaign is candor, and who can blame them? The candid candidate finds himself in single digits. Reminds me of what they used to say about the small town weekly newspaper--people buy it every week to see how much of the truth the editors will tell.

Were We Nuts?

Were we nuts to think that the quirky flyboy would run a campaign less loathsome and contemptible than that of his predecessor? Joseph Lelyveld provides a moment of solace:

Here was the man who'd stood with Russ Feingold, the Wisconsin Democrat, on campaign finance reform; with Edward Kennedy, on immigration reform and a patient's bill of rights; who'd denounced Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson as "agents of intolerance"; who'd voted against Bush's proposed amendment to outlaw gay marriage and played a leading part in normalizing relations with Communist Vietnam ...; the man who brokered a bipartisan Senate compromise that doomed three of President Bush's most conservative judicial nominations ....; who was disparaged as McKerry, on the suspicion that he'd briefly entertained John Kerry's proposal four years ago that he join the Democratic ticket; who, even as the delegates were ;packing to come to St. Paul, had them worried that he was going to try to shove Al Gore's hitherto pro-choice Democratic running mate, Joe Lieberman, down their throats as this year's Republican nominee for vice-president ...

Oh, that guy. Remember him?

Source: Joseph Lelyveld, John & Sarah in St. Paul, New York Review of Books 10-14, 10, Oct 9, 2008.

Update: Charlie Cook also remembers another and different McCain:

There was a time when McCain could speak intelligently and persuasively on a multitude of subjects, but it would seem that his tunnel vision on Iraq, some might even say obsession, has considerably narrowed areas in which he can speak authoritatively. In short, he has become a Johnny One-Note, and that note isn't the one that people seem to be listening for right now.

--From Cook's email newsletter "Off to the Races" for October 7, 2008.

SuperCheney

Back from my hiatus, I am a little surprised that not-more attention is being paid to Sarah Palin's claim in the debates that Dick Cheney doesn't have enough power. Apparently it was not a slip; she repeated it on Saturday.

I think it might be fun to ask McCain for his views on the matter (or whether, indeed, he has even heard of her power-grab; he seems remarkably disconnected).

I'm inclined to take it as one more index that she doesn't much care what he thinks; that she has pretty much written him off and focusing on 2012.

Which is ironic, in its way. Because if she does run for President in 2012, the idea that the Vice-president needs more power is one claim you're likely never to hear again.

Who's Your Daddy?

They say that the most important part of any job is figuring out who your real boss is--figuring out who has the final say over whether you live or die. For example, Donald Regan only figured out too late that the one who wore the pants in the Reagan family was Nancy.

Apparently John McCain knows who's boss.

Must-Read: Citizen McCain Goes to Washington

Jonathan Weisman's tictoc of McCain in Washingon on Thursday is a must-read in a weekend when we are all drowning in ink. The whole thing rewards attention, but I'll excerpt the guts of it here:

McCain's dramatic announcement Wednesday that he would suspend his campaign and come to Washington for the bailout talks had wide repercussions.

Democrats, eager to reach a deal before McCain could claim credit, hunkered down and made real progress ahead of his arrival. Conservative Republicans in the House reacted as well, according to aides who were part of the talks.

The Republican Study Committee, an enclave of House conservatives, had already begun turning against the Paulson plan. When McCain announced his return, the conservatives feared he would forge an agreement largely along Paulson's lines, with slight alterations and the GOP leadership's blessing.

"No one knew where he was going," one of the aides said.

Boehner, who had initially greeted Paulson's plan with some warmth, faces a brewing battle next year for the party leadership. Conservatives were making it no secret that they were thinking of backing House Deputy Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) in a challenge to Boehner, and Paulson's request for $700 billion was not making matters better.

On Wednesday afternoon, Boehner appointed a new working group, led by Cantor, Ryan and Republican Study Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.), and including some moderates, to see if they could put together an alternative proposal. McCain's impending arrival shifted that effort into high gear. By the time McCain arrived in Boehner's office Thursday, the principles of a new plan were ready.

According to Republican aides, McCain was in Boehner's office when the announcement of a deal crossed their BlackBerrys. Rep. Spencer Bachus (Ala.), the House Republicans' representative in the talks, stumbled into the meeting to be peppered by participants with incredulous questions.

It was Ryan who made it most clear that there really was no deal. The core of Paulson's plan -- using $700 billion in taxpayer money to buy distressed assets from failing financial firms -- had to be changed, he told McCain. Instead, banks should have to pony up money for a new federally administered insurance program, like the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Banks suffering from mortgage defaults would then be able to draw funds from the insurance pool to remain solvent.

It was not a new idea, White House and Treasury officials said. Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke had considered a similar option and rejected it. For one thing, asking banks teetering on the edge of bankruptcy to pay into the insurance fund would be like asking a patient facing heart surgery to buy health insurance before being wheeled into the operating room. The banks would be too weak to pay, and the cost of the insurance would be so high, drawing on the fund after a round of mortgage foreclosures would merely be repaying the banks what they had paid in.

Besides, one Treasury official said, it would do nothing to address the problem at hand. Banks would have no more money than they do now to lend. And they would still be holding the bad assets that are making it impossible for them to borrow.

Paulson made those points Wednesday at a contentious meeting with House Republicans. But Ryan convinced McCain that the idea had to be taken seriously to bring House Republicans on board.

"McCain has been trying to help the House guys, trying to get their ideas into the broader bill," said a senior Republican Senate aide. "If McCain can do that, he can bring 50 to 100 House Republicans to the bill. That would be a big damn deal."

McCain and Graham made just that point at the Tex-Mex lunch, but McCain also spoke in the starkly personal terms of a presidential candidate in trouble: "You all put me on the hook for $700 billion," he told his colleagues, according to an aide familiar with the lunch.

The breakdown was serious enough that word reached Paulson. Just 25 minutes before the scheduled meeting at the White House, Paulson phoned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to alert her to trouble, according to a Senate Democratic leadership aide. When congressional leaders converged on the White House, the Democrats peeled off into the Roosevelt Room to discuss the revolt over the insurance plan. President Bush was kept waiting, something he has always hated.

After the cameras left the Cabinet room, Bush thanked everybody for their spirit of cooperation and said he knew it was not an easy vote. He knew elements still needed to be worked out and said he wanted to go around the table to hear people's views.

Pelosi said Obama would speak for the Democrats. Though later he would pepper Paulson with questions, according to a Republican in the room, his initial point was brief: "We've got to get something done."

Bush turned to McCain, who joked, "The longer I am around here, the more I respect seniority." McCain then turned to Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to speak first.

Boehner was blunt. The plan Paulson laid out would not win the support of the vast majority of House Republicans. It had been improved on the edges, with an oversight board and caps on the compensation of participating executives. But it had to be changed at the core. He did not mention the insurance alternative, but Democrats did. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, pressed Boehner hard, asking him if he really intended to scrap the deal and start again.

No, Boehner replied, he just wanted his members to have a voice. Obama then jumped in to turn the question on his rival: "What do you think of the [insurance] plan, John?" he asked repeatedly. McCain did not answer.

One Republican in the room said it was clear that the Democrats came into the meeting with a "game plan" aimed at forcing McCain to choose between the administration and House Republicans. "They had taken McCain's request for a meeting and trumped it," said this source.

Congressional aides from both parties were standing in the lobby of the West Wing, unaware of the discord inside the Cabinet room, when McCain emerged alone, shook the hands of the Marines at the door and left. The aides were baffled. The plan had been for a bipartisan appearance before the media, featuring McCain, Obama and at least a firm statement in favor of intervention. Now, one of the leading men was gone.

Link. I'll let it stand on its own, but for more acerb commentary, go here, and here.

The Debate: The Morning After

I went to sleep last night thinking the Presidential debate was pretty much of a yawn draw. I wake to find that it may have been an Obama win. What happened? Where have I failed?

Before I try answer that, let me say I seem to be in good company. Skimming my Google news feed, I find that a number of commentators followed the same trajectory: started by thinking it was a push, discovered to their surprise that their guy had scored. So, revise the question: where have we all failed?

I think the clue is that people who make this kind of judgment tend to be political junkies. For them (for me?) the debate ended up being a non-event: they'd heard it all before. They were waiting for a Lloyd Bentsen moment (or at least, for John McCain to pop his cork--Mrs. B.says, "for Captain Queeg to drop his marbles"). None of this happened; so, a non-event.

We'd forgotten that some people have lives don't give all their attention to politics. In particular, for a lot of people, Barack Obama is, if not exactly the anti-Christ, at best an unknown quantity. Some of them, when at last they tuned into the debate, were surprised that he did not have horns and a tail.

As a (somewhat lukewarm) Obama supporter, I suppose I should take heart from this news. Well I guess I'll lift my leg, but I won't dance. These things go in waves, and as Harold Macmillan Wilson (!) might have said had he lived long enough, a nanosecond is a long time in politics. Who knows what they will be thinking by Sunday night?

Footnote: Hey, what's the problem with festoon?

Debate Postmortem

Well, that's over. I guess it wasn't so much of a liveblog as an attempt at a transcript. David Gregory is saying something about "prize-fighters" scoring blows, but I'd say it is more like aging plug-uglies whacking away at each other with a serious hit. I can't think of a single thing except the odd preposition or adverb that I hadn't heard before.

Maybe the most notable point is negative: in the end there was no Captain Queeg moment; McCain did tend to natter on a bit but there was nothing to suggest that he's had a stroke, or is otherwise losing it. So, score one for McCain for not losing. Obama for his part was not as boring or wonky as he can be. But both of them were somewhat boring or wonky; both tended to drift into details that were bound to be beyond the average voter (even the average debate watcher). And nobody, nobody, had a Ronald Reagan moment, or a Lloyd Bentsen moment.

McCain seemed to have been coached to hammer away at his long experience, which was perhaps a two-edged sword--it was what sidetracked him into no more than marginally relevant ancient history. And he certainly seemed to be determined to tell us that on foreign policy, Obamna was "naive."

Obama was controlled, a bit bloodless, somewhat wonky--the curse of Democratic candidtes for a generation--but on none of these so fatally constricted as to wind up looking like John Kerry or Michael Dukakis. He never seemed to get rattled; he never lost his cool--but at times, I was praying that he would lose his cool, just to make things the least bit intereting.

I deliberately turned the sound down at the end so I wouldn't hear the postmortem. Now, to find out whether Chris Matthews agrees with me...

Update: The commentators are all remarking that McCain never made eye contact with Obama. I never noticed that.

Live-Blogging the Debate

Never done this before. May not follow through. But a starter point: seems to me the candidates have to be prepared for two debates tonight: the scheduled topic is foreign policy, but everyone knows (assumes?) that the moderator will be asking about the economy.

5:58--Eeuw--Chris Matthews speaks of "the Captain Queeg factor," and he isn't talking about Obama.

6:00--Jim Lehrer says it is about foreign policy--which of course (he says) includes the global financial crisis.

Will Obama run out of time before he finishes his preliminaries?

Yep, he made it. Bullet points.

McCain opens by trying to wrap himself around Ted Kennedy. Followed by blah blah. He slipped in a bit of a menu but he is mainly talking process.

6:05--Obama: I warned you this was going to happen. "We shredded so many regulations" is sly.

McCain: I warned you too. Let me tell you about Dwight Eisenhower. Accountability. I'm against greed, and in favor of responsibility.

Lehrer to Obama: say it directly to him.

McCain: You think I couldn't hear him? (Cute.)

Obama is hammering at bullet points; McCain is warning of hard times.

Lehrer: how do you guys differ?

McCain says we've got to cut spending, and goes to beating up on Republicans.

Did he just say I'm going to veto every single spending bill that comes across my desk.

McCain: Obama has a lot of earmarks.

Obama: he's right, that's why I backed off. But earamarks account for $18 billion; Senator McCain is proposing $300 in tax cuts to the wealthiest.

(Earlier, Obama called him "John;" McCain responded with "Senator Obama," and Obama shifted to "Senator McCain.")

6:18--Has anybody said anything about foreign policy yet?

McCain is back to talking about earmarks. The process corrupts people. That's why we have people in jail.

Obamas interrupts (and Lehrer lets him get away with it) to challenge McCain on what McCain says about Obama's tax plans.

6:20--Again (this time to McCain), Lehrer says: respond directly to (Obama).

McCain is defending corporate tax cuts.

Obama: yes, corporate tax rates are high, but there are so many loopholes...

Now he is say something wonky about health care.

McCain interrupts Lehrer to go back to earmarks. Now he's on to tax reform.

They're both playing inside baseball IMHO. Inside rotisserie league.

Lehrer: What are you going to have to give up to pay for the financial plan?

Obama: hard to say, but we'll have to forego some stuff. But we need energy independence. We have to fix health care. And infrastructure.

With his dark eyes and dark eyebrows, Obama looks more menacing than I rememeber.

McCain: We've got to cut spending. Ethanol. Cost-plus. I know how to do that. I've fought that kind of stuff, and people ended up in Federal prison.

Lehrer: neither one of you has suggested anything you will give up.

Obama: Okay--some of the energy program. Subsidies to private insurers. I worked with Tom Coburn to list every dollar of Federal spending to see how is promoting these projects.

Lehrer is not impressed.

McCain: spending freeze on everything except defense, veterans and entitlements.

Obama: it's a hatchet, not a scalpel (he doesn't mention that the "exceptions" are most of the budget.

McCain: stop sending money to people who don't like us very much. Oh, and we should build nuclear power plants. I've worked on it, along with Senator Clinton.

Lehrer is still not impressed. Are you willing to acknowledge, etc.

Obama: no doubt about it (he's trying to remind people that the bailout might actually make money, but it's too abstruse for the format).

McCain: I don't want to pass health care over to the Federal government (is it just me or is he bouncing around like a cat on a hot tin roof?). I have fought against spending.

Obama: you're part of the problem.

McCain: (I think this is the second time he says he is not "Miss Congeniality").

Lehrer: what are the lessons of Iraq?

McCain: you cannot have a failed strategy. The war was very badly mishandled. We will come home with victory and with honor. Petraeus is a saint.

Obama: the first question is whether we should have gone into this war in the first place. I opposed it. I said we weren't sure what it would cost, and we hadn't finished the job in Afghanistan. I wish I had been wrong but that's not the case. Al Qaida is stronger now than at any time since 2001. We are spending and the Iraqis have a surplus.

McCain: (He's on the attack against Obama for what he has not done on Iraq).

Obama: "... but that is Senate inside baseball" (right). Petraeus is a saint (now Obama goes on the attack).

McCain: "I'm afraid Senator Obama doesn't understand..." Senator reform refuses to acknowledge we are winning in Iraq (Obama, interrupting: not true).

Obama: not true, not the case, etc. etc.

6:49: No soundbytes yet on either side. No bullet points.

Lehrer: Do we need more troops in Afghanistan?

Obama: yes. Kharzai has to do a better job. We've got to deal with the poppy trade. We've got to deal with Pakistan.

McCain: I won't repeat the mistake that I regret enormously that we walked away after the Russians left (is he taking the blame for that?) (I think he is muddling "cutting off aid to Afghanistan" to "dealing with Pakistan") (he's trying to draw differences between himself and O on Afghan strategy, but they aren't obvious). By the way, did I say that Petraeus is a saint? And he was wrong to threaten to invade Pakistan.

Obama: That's not what I said. And you sing songs about Bombing Iran (I haven't been watching the screen; McCain puts his head down and scowls when he is attacked).

McCain: Let me tell you my record. I admire Ronald Reagan. I voted against sending Marines into Lebanon. Tragically, I was right. I supported the first Gulf War. I supported going into Bosnia when a number of my colleagues opposed. I supported going into Kosovo. I opposed Somalia. I have a record (where is this going? I guess the point is that he has had a lot of experience. This is the first time he has sounded like an old man, as in "why did I tell you about the time a fly flew into my mouth?). I got a bracelet from a woman who lost her son.

Obama: I've got a bracelet, too. The question is, are we making good judgments. We took our eye off Afghanistan and the people who perpetrated 9/11 (McC's head is down, this time with a grimace).

McCain: You might think he would have gone to Afghanistan. I've been there. We will prevail.

Lehrer: Iran?

McCain: If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to Israel. I have proposed a league of democracies. We could impose sanctions.

Obama: I believe the Republican guard is a terrorist organization. The single thing that has strengthened Iran has been the war in Iraq. Obviously our policy over the last eight years has not work. Not only has it threatened Israel, etc. We need sanctions but we can't do it without Russia and China. We need tough direct diplomacy.

McCain: Senator Obama said he would sit down with bad guys without preconditions. Bad idea. Really bad idea. (Hm, I don't see the camera on Obama when McCain is criticizing him)

Obama: I reserve the right to meet with anybody if I think it will keep the US safe. Kissinger says we should meet with Iran and he is one of McCain's advisers. And the Bush regime has done it. Compare North Korea: we cut off talks and they got way ahead on nukes. When we reengaged, we made some progress (split screen again, I can't say whether this is a grimace or a smirk).

McCain: "What Senator Obama doesn't seem to understand..." "Naive...dangerous" (now I think he is saying we shouldn't be talking to North Korea).

Obama: That's not my position "and Senator McCain knows it."

McCain: (got a mild laugh for a mocking joke. Now we have a split screen. Obama is shaking his head, interrupting a bit, bobbing around a bit).

Lehrer: Russia?

Obama: We have to explain to the Russians that you can't be a 21st century power and act like a 20th Century dictatorship (is this as near to a one liner as I have heard so far?). We have to make clear that some other countries may join NATO. "You don't deal with Russia by staring into his eyes and seeing his soul" (another one-liner?). But there are areas of common interest.

McCain: Naive. "I looked into Mr. Putin's eyes and I saw three letters, a K, a G and a B" (why are all the one-liners about Russia?). South Ossetia: I went there once (he is off on the Ukrain now; sounds like wandering to me).

Obama: I think we agree on most of this. We have to have foresight and anticipate some of these problems. I warned the administration against Russian peacekeepers. Energy: that's another reason we need an energy strategy. And that means, yes, increasing production and offshore drilling (no kidding?). But oil isn't enough. I've got a plan. Over 26 years, he voted against alternative energy 23 times. He's got to walk the walk.

Lehrer: What are the chances of another 9/11?

McCain: Safer than the day after 9/11. I've worked across the aisle. With Joe Lieberman. Opposed by the administration. I'm opposed to torture. We have to work with our allies; I know our allies and I can work with them.

Obama: Safer in some ways. Airport security. But chemical sites, transit, ports. Suitcases. Why nuclear proliferation is so important. We have to focus on Al Qaida, not just Iraq. It is important for us to understand we need cooperation--restore America's standing, less respected; greatest country on earth; I give Senator McCain credit on the torture issue.

McCain: Something about Reagan and missile defense. Senator Obama still doesn't get it about Iraq. We can't have specific dates. Gerneral Petraeus says...

Obama: They've focused on Iraq. Bin Laden is still out there. He's not captured, he's resurgent. We owe China a bunch of money; they are active in Latin America, Asia, Africa, because we have been focused on Iraq. Not to mention look at our economy. We can't provide health care, science and technology. We won't be able to fund the military. We can't fund veterans care. A broader srrategic vision.

McCain: I've been involved, etc. There are advantages to experience (now it is Obama who has his eyes down). Failing to acknowledge he was wrong about the surge. I know the veterans. I know they know I will take care of them. Safe and secure. Reform, prosperity, peace. I don't need any on the job training.

Obama: My father came from Kenya. The values of the United States inspire the entire world. I don't think our standing is the same. Send a message. Invest.

McCain: When I came home from prison, I saw our veterans being mistreated.

(Thank God that's over)

You Think?

I have a hunch the McCain campaign wanted to get out as much bad news about the Palins as possible on a day when a hurricane reached U.S. shores.

Steve Benen at Political Animal (link). Also see his spot-on commentary re what the press cares about (link).

Sisterhood is Powerful: Maureen on Miss Congeniality

Forget about all the nasty things Republicans are saying about their veepinee (link, link, etc.) Count on Maureen Dowd to rally round.

Oh, no, wait, Maureen is only quoting the candidate herself. Facing Putin. At the Bering Strait:

“Back off, Commie dude,” she says. “I’m a much better shot than Cheney.”

Link. Wonder if she is a better shot than Cheney? My guess is probably so.