McCain Suspends Campaign to Focus on Economy

Earlier today, John McCain said that he would suspend his campaign starting tomorrow to return to Washington D.C. to focus on the economic crisis.

McCain says he will stop campaigning after addressing former President Bill Clinton's Global Initiative session on Thursday. He said he will suspend his ads and campaign events until further notice.

In a statement earlier today, McCain also called on the Commission on Presidential Debates to postpone Friday night's debate on foreign policy and national security in Mississippi in light of the economic crisis and to ensure quick congressional action. In his statement, he emphasized bipartisanship and unity to solve the countries financial woes.

"I have spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of my decision and have asked him to join me," McCain said in New York City Wednesday. "I am calling on the president to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself. It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem.”

However, Barack Obama, who was preparing for the debate in Florida, argued that the debate should go on as scheduled.

"I believe that we should continue to have the debate," Obama said. "It's my belief that this is exact time when the American people need to hear form the person who in approximately 40 days will be responsibly for dealing with this mess and I think that it is going to be part of the President’s job to deal with more than one thing at once."

Obama said that he would not be suspending ads or campaign events before Friday's debate. He also said that he will not return to Washington unless they believe that he is needed.

“In my mind, it’s more important than ever that we present ourselves to the American people and describe where we want to take the country and where we want to take the economy.”

He added, "I've told the leadership in Congress is that if I can be helpful then I am prepared to be anywhere at anytime," he said. He also said that he did not want to clutter Capitol Hill with the partisanship and possibly counterproductive attention that presidential politics would bring along with him.

Now, let's get down to the nitty gritty. Why is McCain really doing this? In a word: politics.

By flying into Washington as the savior he might appear as a man of action to people who don't know how the Senate works. In reality, Obama and McCain's appearance in the Senate would instantly turn the entire event into a political circus and could possibly erase all of the progress that has taken place so far. And McCain knows as well as anyone that his presence won't have any major positive effect on getting the economic bill getting passed in the Senate.

Also, by pulling all of his TV ads for a few days saves his campaign money, something Obama has a lot more of.

On top of that, today's ABC News/Washington Post national tracking poll has Obama up 52 to 43 over McCain. Today's FOX News poll (that's right, FOX) has Obama up by six points nationally. The bottom line? McCain's in trouble.

The recent economic downturn does not bode well for McCain. He felt that he needed to do something--he needed a game changer. After all, that's what he did by picking Sarah Palin (who has mysteriously disappeared from the public eye, while Obama, Biden, and McCain duel it out over the economy). And we all know that McCain is an impulsive risk-taker, especially when times are tough.

This most recent move to suspend his campaign and not show up to Friday's foreign policy debate (which is , ironically, his field of expertise) is a risky, bold move. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean it's a smart move. In fact, I think it is reckless, and it will be looked back on as one of the major mistakes of his candidacy, along with calling the foundations of the economy strong.

I'm assuming that his plan is to say that he's going to put country first, and that he'd rather lose an election than an economically stable future, or whatever. But then he will reemerge at the debate on Friday with an attitude of "I would rather be solving the nation's financial problems than be here," which would demonstrate his willingness to put his country ahead of partisan politics. But right now, the American people aren't buying it.

Right after McCain's announcement, SurveyUSA interviewed 1,000 adults nationwide. It found that 3 of 4 Americans say the presidential campaign should continue, and 10% said it should be postponed. It also found that 36% of Americans think the focus of the debate should be modified to focus more on the economy. Just 14% say the presidential campaign should be suspended. If Friday’s debate does not take place 46% of Americans say that would be bad for America.

So, the public may not have responded to McCain's announcement in the way he might have liked. The question is, will the American people see it as a campaign stunt, or that he's actually going out of the goodness of his heart? Will they see this as his third recent reckless act (following the selection of an unknown female governor as his running mate and canceling the first day of the RNC) while Obama is cool, calm and collected, and looking more ready than ever to lead?

We'll just have to wait and see.

McCain's Remarks on the Economy

Here is John McCain's economic address that he gave yesterday in Green Bay, Wisconsin:

Thank you all very much. It's a great pleasure to be introduced by Governor Sarah Palin -- and I can't wait to introduce her to Washington.

If Governor Palin and I are elected in 46 days, we are not going to waste a moment in changing the way Washington does business. And we're going to start where the need for reform is greatest. In short order, we are going to put an end to the reckless conduct, corruption, and unbridled greed that have caused a crisis on Wall Street.

Here and all across our country, people are wondering what exactly is happening on Wall Street. And with good reason, they want to know how their government will meet the crisis. Clear answers are hard to come by in Washington.

As Senator Obama's leader in Congress memorably put it the other day -- and I quote -- "no one knows what to do." Perhaps given that reaction, it shouldn't surprise us that the Congressional leaders of this do-nothing Congress also said that they weren't going to take action until after the election, claiming that it wasn't their fault. I am hopeful that last night's discussions are a sign they have changed their mind and will take action soon. But any action should be designed to keep people in their homes and safe guard the life savings of all Americans by protecting our financial system.

There are certainly plenty of places to point fingers, and it may be hard to pinpoint the original event that set it all in motion. But let me give you an educated guess. The financial crisis we're living through today started with the corruption and manipulation of our home mortgage system. At the center of the problem were the lobbyists, politicians, and bureaucrats who succeeded in persuading Congress and the administration to ignore the festering problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

These quasi-public corporations lead our housing system down a path where quick profit was placed before sound finance. They institutionalized a system that rewarded forcing mortgages on people who couldn't afford them, while turning around and selling those bad mortgages to the banks that are now going bankrupt. Using money and influence, they prevented reforms that would have curbed their power and limited their ability to damage our economy. And now, as ever, the American taxpayers are left to pay the price for Washington's failure.

Two years ago, I called for reform of this corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congress did nothing. The Administration did nothing. Senator Obama did nothing, and actually profited from this system of abuse and scandal. While Fannie and Freddie were working to keep Congress away from their house of cards, Senator Obama was taking their money. He got more, in fact, than any other member of Congress, except for the Democratic chairmen of the committee that oversees them. And while Fannie Mae was betraying the public trust, somehow its former CEO had managed to gain my opponent's trust to the point that Senator Obama actually put him in charge of his vice presidential search.

This CEO, Mr. Johnson, walked off with tens of millions of dollars in salary and bonuses for services rendered to Fannie Mae, even after authorities discovered accounting improprieties that padded his compensation. Another CEO for Fannie Mae, Mr. Raines, has been advising Senator Obama on housing policy. This even after Fannie Mae was found to have committed quote "extensive financial fraud" under his leadership. Like Mr. Johnson, Mr. Raines walked away with tens of millions of dollars.

Senator Obama may be taking their advice and he may be taking their money, but in a McCain-Palin administration, there will be no seat for these people at the policy-making table. They won't even get past the front gate at the White House.

My friends, this is the problem with Washington. People like Senator Obama have been too busy gaming the system and haven't ever done a thing to actually challenge the system.

We've heard a lot of words from Senator Obama over the course of this campaign. But maybe just this once he could spare us the lectures, and admit to his own poor judgment in contributing to these problems. The crisis on Wall Street started in the Washington culture of lobbying and influence peddling, and he was square in the middle of it.

The financial services industry -- and there are many honest and honorable people who work in it -- plays a vital role in our economy. Mutual fund companies help Americans save for retirement. Banks and lending companies provide the mortgages that help us buy our homes. Investment firms supply the seed money that helps entrepreneurs create tomorrow's jobs. Insurance companies protect us against unknown risks.

Yet as the financial crisis continues and bailouts and bankruptcies mount, it's clear financial firms have lost the trust of the American people. That trust cannot be regained unless we adopt some fundamental reforms. Government has a clear responsibility to act and to defend the public interest. That is exactly what I intend to do.

First, to deal with the immediate crisis, I will lead in the creation of the Mortgage and Financial Institutions trust -- the MFI. The underlying principle of the MFI or any approach considered by Congress should be to keep people in their homes and safe guard the life savings of all Americans by protecting our financial system and capital markets. This trust will work with the private sector and regulators to identify institutions that are weak and fix them before they become insolvent. The MFI is an early intervention program to help financial institutions avoid bankruptcy, expensive bailouts and damage to their customers. This will get the Treasury and other financial regulatory authorities in a proactive position instead of reacting in a crisis mode to one situation after another.

The MFI will restore investor and market confidence, build sound financial institutions, assist troubled institutions and protect our financial system while minimizing taxpayer exposure. This is an important step, but it is not enough. I will also take the additional actions needed to make sure a crisis like this is never allowed to build and break over the American people again.

Second, I will propose and sign into law reforms to prevent financial firms from concealing their bad practices. An inexcusable lack of financial transparency allowed Wall Street firms to engage in reckless behavior that padded their profits and fattened executive bonuses when times were good, but now imperil the financial security of millions of Americans when their bets turned sour.

So much of the damage to our economy could have been avoided if these practices had been exposed to the light of day. Americans have a right to know when their jobs, pensions, IRAs, investments, and our whole economy are being put at risk by the recklessness of Wall Street. And under my reforms for the financial sector, that fundamental right will be protected.

Third, we need regulatory clarity. The lack of transparency in our financial markets went unnoticed by the regulatory agencies scattered throughout Washington charged with protecting the common good. We've got the SEC, the FDIC, the CFTC, the SIPC, the OCC, the Fed. At best, this confusing assortment of regulators and institutions was egregiously lax in carrying out their responsibilities. At worst, they engaged in the old Washington game of guarding their bureaucratic turf, instead of safeguarding the public interest and protecting investors.

Many in the financial services industry also either forgot or neglected their duty to act ethically and honorably. This shortcoming was aided and abetted by the creation of financial instruments that allowed lenders to escape any responsibility for the risk of their loans. In the past, lenders had to pay a price if they made a bad loan. Today, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac worked with Wall Street to bundle together all these dicey subprime loans and then pushed them off on investors who didn't have the tools of transparency needed to assess or even understand the risk.

The current system promotes confusion, encourages bureaucratic infighting and creates incentives for financial firms to cut corners. We need to enhance regulatory clarity by holding the same financial activity to one regulatory standard. We don't need a dozen federal agencies doing the job badly -- we need the best federal agencies to do the job right.

Fourth, we must ensure that consumers and investors are protected. Our regulatory system must protect consumers and investors by punishing individuals who engage in fraud, break contracts, or lie to customers -- like the predatory lenders who know you can't afford an adjustable rate mortgage, but mislead you into signing one. These actions are criminal and the people who commit them should be behind bars. And corporate governance rules will be reformed so that shareholders have a clear say in determining the pay of CEOs and other senior executives. On my watch, the consequences for corporate abuse will not be more enrichment, but more likely an indictment.

Fifth, in cases where failing companies seek taxpayer bailouts, the Treasury Department will follow consistent policies in deciding whether to guarantee loans. It must have well developed remedies for a financial crisis. With billions of dollars in public money at stake, it will not do to keep making it up as we go along.

Finally, the Federal Reserve should get back to its core business of responsibly managing our money supply and inflation. It needs to get out of the business of bailouts. The Fed needs to return to protecting the purchasing power of the dollar. A strong dollar will reduce energy and food prices. It will stimulate sustainable economic growth and get this economy moving again.

All of these measures will calm and help us to avoid future panics and disasters in the financial markets. But to get through this tough time for America, and to come out stronger, we need a strategy of economic growth. And the massive new tax burden that my opponent plans for the American economy is exactly the wrong answer. His tax increase -- along with the enormous new federal programs he proposes -- are the surest way to turn a recession into a depression. In every respect, the Obama tax hikes would make things even worse for the working people of this country.

I have proposed, and will sign into law, an economic recovery plan for working Americans that is directed to the middle class. It will grow this economy, create millions of jobs and bring opportunity back to Americans. You will get a tax policy that creates family prosperity and allows you to save for the future. I will not raise your taxes on income or investments. And we will simplify the tax code so people can understand it and do their tax returns themselves.

I will give every family a $5,000 credit to buy their own health insurance policy and let them chose their own doctor. This will make insurance affordable to every American.

I will double the child exemption from $3,500 to $7,000 to help families pay for the rising cost of living.

Under my plan, a married couple with two children making $35,000 will get $5,000 to pay for health insurance and additional medical expenses. This family would get another $1,050 from my child exemption. That adds up to over $6,000. That is a lot more than what any hardworking middle class family, gets under the Obama plan.

Business taxes will be cut from the second highest in the world at 35 percent to 25 percent. Tax incentives will spur investment in new plants and equipment. Research and development incentives will keep companies on the cutting edge of their industries. Healthcare costs will diminish. Companies will stop sending jobs overseas to low-cost, low-tax countries and start creating jobs here in America.

I will expand markets for our goods and services. A one in five of all jobs in this country are linked to world trade. In five states alone Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Colorado over 5 million jobs depend on trade. My economic recovery plan will create millions of jobs in America instead of driving them overseas.

I will adopt an "all of the above" energy policy which expands our use of oil, natural gas, clean coal and nuclear facilities. We will embark on a national mission to build an alternative energy base, creating millions of new jobs. We will create the most diversified energy economy in the world. And, I will return to the American economy the $700 billion dollars we send overseas every year to buy oil.

My opponent offers a very different economic future. He has continuously shifted his position on taxes. At the beginning of this campaign he promised to raise taxes on your savings and investments. He said he won't raise taxes for most people but he has voted 94 times in his short Senate career for tax increases and against tax cuts. He said he would only tax the rich, but he voted this year to raise taxes on those making just $42,000. Senator Obama has simply not given Americans good reason to trust him with your tax dollars.

My opponent is against lowering taxes on businesses which are the second highest in the world. He will impose mandated health insurance on businesses that would cost up to $12,000 per employee. He opposes free trade. He also wants to take away the fundamental right of workers to have a secret ballot when voting to be part of a union.

Now is not the time for these destructive policies that will cripple business growth, destroy jobs and hurt the middle class. Now is the time to take action to address this crisis and take action to put our economy back on a path of growth.

Even though Democratic leaders say they don't know what to do, I believe the deep problems afflicting our financial system won't be solved by one political party. There is only one candidate in this race who has a record of reaching across the aisle to work out the bipartisan solutions needed to move our country forward in times of crisis -- and I will bring that same spirit of bipartisan cooperation to the White House. It took members of both parties to get America into this mess, and it will take all of us, working together, to lead the way out.

Thank you.

Obama's Remarks on the Economy

Yesterday, in Coral Gables, Florida, Barack Obama finally made a formal address regarding the recent economic turmoil on Wall Street:

"We are facing one of the most serious financial crises in this nation's history. The events of the last week - from the failure of Lehman to the bailout of AIG to the continued volatility of the market - have not just threatened the trading floors and high-rises of Wall Street, but the stability and security of our entire global economy. Across this country, Americans are worried about whether they can make their mortgage payments, or keep their jobs, or ensure that their retirement is secure. Truly, we are all in this together.

Our government and the Federal Reserve have already taken unprecedented action to prevent a deepening of this crisis that could jeopardize the life savings and well-being of millions of Americans. But it is now clear that even bolder and more decisive action is necessary.

In recent years, I have outlined plans that would have helped prevent the problems we now face, and yesterday I proposed the outlines of a plan that would establish a more stable and permanent solution to strengthen our financial system. Today, I fully support the effort of Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke to work in a bipartisan spirit with Congress to find this kind of solution.

What we're looking at right now is to provide the Treasury and the Federal Reserve with as broad authority as necessary to stabilize markets and maintain credit. We need a more institutional response to create a system that can manage some of the underlying problems with bad mortgages, help homeowners stay in their homes, protect the retirement and savings of working Americans.

In the coming days, I will more closely examine the details of the Treasury and Fed proposal, and as I do, I'll work to ensure that it provides an effective emergency response by including four basic principles that my economic advisors and I just discussed this morning.

First, we cannot only have a plan for Wall Street. We must also help Main Street as well. I'm glad that our government is moving so quickly in addressing the crisis that threatens some of our biggest banks and corporations. But a similar crisis has threatened families, workers and homeowners for months and months and Washington has done far too little to help.

For too long, this Administration has been willing to hit the fast-forward button in helping distressed Wall Street firms while pressing pause when it comes to saving jobs or keeping people in their homes. We already know that the credit crisis that has emerged from our largest financial institutions is becoming a credit crunch for small business owners, homeowners, and students seeking loans in big cities and small towns. Now that American taxpayers are being called on to share in this new burden, we must take equally swift and serious action to help lift the burdens they face every day.

In the same bipartisan spirit that is being shown with regard to the crisis on Wall Street, I ask Senator McCain, President Bush, Republicans and Democrats to join me in supporting an emergency economic plan for working families - a plan that would help folks cope with rising gas and food prices, spark job creation through repair of our schools and roads, help states and cities avoid painful budget cuts and tax increases, help homeowners stay in their homes, and provide retooling assistance for America's auto industry. John McCain and I can continue to argue about our different economic agendas for next year, but we should come together now to work on what this country urgently needs this year.

The second principle I would like to see in the emerging plan from the Treasury and the Fed is that our approach should be one of mutual responsibility and reciprocity. It must not be designed to reward particular companies or the irresponsible decisions of borrowers or lenders. It must not be designed to enhance the personal gain of CEOs and management. The recklessness of some of these executives has helped cause this mess, even as they walk away with multimillion dollar golden parachutes while taxpayers are left holding the bag. As taxpayers are asked to take extraordinary steps to protect our financial system, it is only appropriate that those who benefit be expected to contribute to the protection of American homeowners and the American economy. Just as support is not designed to payoff egregious executive compensation, it should not reward those who are ruthlessly foreclosing on American families.

Third, this plan must be temporary and coupled with tough new oversight and regulations of our financial institutions, and there must be a clear process to wind down this plan and restore private sector assets into private sector hands after restoring stability to the system. Taxpayers must share in any upside benefit that such stability brings.

Fourth, this plan should be part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20. This is a worldwide issue, and while the United States can and will lead in stabilizing the credit markets, we should ask other nations, who share in this crisis, to be part of the solution as well.

One last point. We did not arrive at this crisis by some accident of history. What led us to this point was years and years of a philosophy in Washington and on Wall Street that viewed even common-sense regulation and oversight as unwise and unnecessary; that shredded consumer protections and loosened the rules of the road. CEOs and executives got reckless. Lobbyists got what they wanted. Politicians in both parties looked the other way until it was too late. And it is the American people who have paid the price. The events of this week have rendered a final verdict on that failed philosophy, and it will end if I am President of the United States. We must build upon the ideas I have laid out over the last several years about how to modernize our financial regulation in this country, and establish commonsense rules of the road for our financial system to help restore confidence in our financial system.

Finally, given the gravity of this situation, and based on conversations I have had with both Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke, I will refrain from presenting a more detailed blue-print of how an immediate plan might be structured until I can fully review the details of the plan proposed by the Treasury and the Federal Reserve. It is critical at this point that the markets and the public have confidence that their work will be unimpeded by partisan wrangling, and that leaders in both parties work in concert to solve the problem at hand.

I know these are difficult days. And I know there are a lot of families out there right now who are feeling anxiety - about their jobs, about their homes, about their retirement savings. But here's what I also know. This isn't a time for fear or panic. This is a time for resolve and for leadership. I know we can steer ourselves out of this crisis. That's who we are. That's what we've always done as Americans. Our nation has faced difficult times before. And at each of those moments, we've risen to meet the challenges as one people, and one nation. That is the America we need to be and can be today."

Palin Loses Her Luster

The Republican National Convention combined with the daring selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for as his running mate gave John McCain a comfortable week and a half bounce in the polls.

The national and state polls reflected this bounce, and Republicans around the country finally got energized about their candidate. Meanwhile, Democrats, as they are apt to do, started to lose faith in Barack Obama.

The main-stream media obsessed about Palin, and closely (but in my opinion, not unfairly) examined her thin resume, and the Republicans had her play the role of the sexism victim. And through this, McCain's numbers with white women improved.

But as the public got a better look at Palin, they liked less of what they saw. Her record of reform turned out to be largely exaggerated, as demonstrated by her flat-out lie about her position on the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere." It turns out that the earmark crusader was a big fan of pork as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.

Also, her continued involvement and lack of cooperation with the "Troopergate" investigation being leveled against her in Alaska has showed the public that she's not as squeaky clean as everyone thought she was at first.

On top of that, in her first major primetime interview with ABC's Charlie Rose, she basically admitted that she had no idea what the Bush Doctrine was--proving that she was out of the loop on foreign policy. I guess being close to Russia isn't enough. And I'm sure that Tina Fey's portrayal of her on Saturday Night Live didn't help her too much either.

Also, since the excitement around her selection began to die down, the American public began to discover what she actually stood for, and it became clear that several of her views are way, WAY out of the mainstream.

Women learned that she did not support abortions for victims of rape and incest, and in the past week her numbers with women have dropped. Others learned about the fact that she thought the war in Iraq was reflecting God's will, and that she didn't believe in evolution.

And thus, her favorable/unfavorable ratings--which were sky high last week--have suffered a stunning 21 point collapse in just one week, according to Research 2000 polling. Last week, 52% approved and 35% disapproved of the GOP vice presidential nominee (+17 net). This week, 42% approved and 46% disapprove (-4 net).

When McCain first announced that he had picked Palin as his running mate, and I saw the immediate effects of the pick, I thought that this was a stroke of brilliance from his campaign. But now, myself and many political pundits see her possibly as more of a liability than an asset to McCain. Sure, she helped to shore up the base, but it was only in places that were going red anyway.

Here is CQ Politics columnist Taegan Goddard's take on it:

"In a political environment not generally friendly to Republicans, McCain's biggest advantage over Obama has been his perceived readiness to be president. He hammered away at this message all summer and kept the race reasonably close.

However, when McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate -- a person just two years removed from being mayor of a town with fewer people than the Fenway Park bleachers -- he essentially gave up experience as a campaign issue. It's hard to argue that Obama is inexperienced when McCain's choice to be just a heartbeat away from the presidency has even less experience."

Palin still has to face off against Joe Biden in the vice presidential debate in two weeks, where his 36 years of experience in the Senate will dwarf her 2 years of experience as governor of a state with a quarter of the population of Brooklyn. To even keep it competitive, she must have the performance of her life, and all Biden has to do is not seem arrogant and not punch too hard.

Combining all of the negatives that have poured out about Palin in the past week with a poor debate performance could turn a significant number of voters off who were initially attracted (not literally) to her.

Now normally, I don't place too much stake in what effects the VP candidates have in the elections--I think in the end people vote based on the top of the ticket--but seeing as how much attention she's gotten and how much she's changed the dynamic of the race, she does have more power to gain or lose votes than a typical VP pick such as Biden.

McCain Daringly Picks Palin for VP

Last Friday, John McCain announced his running mate to offset the bounce and media hype that his opponent, Barack Obama, would get from his historic speech. Everyone expected him to pick either Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty, but he fooled everyone with a surprise pick.

McCain chose Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, a little-known figure on the national scale. Here's a little bit of background on Palin.

Palin is an evangelical Christian "hockey" mom, who hunts and fishes. She has five kids--two boys and three girls--all with extraordinarily bizarre names: Track, Bristol, Willow, Piper, and Trig. Yikes. She gave birth to her youngest son, Trig, in April knowing fully well that he would have down syndrome. She is strongly pro-life and said she never even considered aborting him, calling him "a gift from God."

Her husband Todd is a (bearded) commercial fisherman, is a world champion snowmobile racer, and is a member of the National Steel Workers Union. A few days after Palin's selection, it was discovered that her 17 year-old daughter is pregnant and she is going to marry the father, Levi, who is also 17.

Sarah Palin was the runner-up in the Miss Alaska beauty pageant when she was younger and was a member of the local PTA before she became the mayor of Wasilla, which had about 6,500 people in it when she was mayor.

In 2006, she defeated the incumbent Republican governor in the primaries and defeated a former Democratic governor in the general election. She has been in office for 21 months. As governor, she has taken on members in her own party, has dealt with corruption in both parties in her state, and proudly calls herself a reformer.

Here's her stances on some major issues.

Palin is pro-Iraq war, and is a strong believer in Reaganomics--lower taxes (including the wealthy) and lower government spending. Palin is also a strong advocate for offshore drilling and drilling in ANWR, but has only convinced McCain on the former. She is a lifelong NRA member and a champion of right to bear arms.

Palin is and has always been strongly pro-life, even in the case of rape and incest. Her decision not to abort her youngest son, Trig, and her daughter's decision not to abort her unborn child are popular with pro-life groups.

She vetoed a bill denying benefits to gays, as unconstitutional, but is mostly against gay rights such as same-sex marriage. She is against stem cell research and believes that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public schools. She also opposes explicit sex-education programs.

Those are the facts. Tomorrow, I will go more into what kind of impact she's had on the race this past week, and what impact she might have in the future.

The DNC in Retrospect

Well, the Democratic National Convention is over, and let me tell you, it was a historic and nearly flawless one. Here's a recap.

Day 1:

Monday night was more special than I expected it to be with the surprise primetime addition of Sen. Ted Kennedy to the itinerary. Kennedy was diagnosed with a brain tumor earlier in the year, and has made few public speeches since then.

But he gave a rousing speech Monday comparing Barack Obama to his brother, John F. Kennedy, in their themes of hope and passing the torch to the next generation of Americans. Kennedy sounded strong and got a huge ovation from the crowd both before and after he spoke.

The headline speaker that night was Michelle Obama, who delivered a wonderful and touching speech talking about her family growing up and being a mother among other things. In her speech, she also went on to praise Hillary Clinton for the 18 million cracks in the ceiling that she created during the primaries in the first major attempt at the convention to unite the party.

There were lingering concerns about Michelle Obama's patriotism stemming from her quote earlier in the year about how she was proud of her country for the first time in her life. She completely alleviated those concerns in her speech by repeating (I think, genuinely) that she indeed loved her country and the opportunities it offered her and Barack. In short, she accomplished exactly what she needed to accomplish in her speech and I am under the impression that it was warmly received by the vast majority of viewers.

My only major criticism about Monday night was the fact that the Democrats completely failed to go negative or even mention John McCain. And God knows the Republicans won't be as kind next week.

But besides their lack of attacks on John McCain and the GOP and their lack of backbone, the Democrats started off on a good note Monday.

Day 2:

Hillary Clinton gave a rousing endorsement of Barack Obama Tuesday night in what was--what I think--the best speech of her political career. She told her supporters that they had fought a good fight but now the battle is over, Obama won, and the party must unite to elect him. She was gracious toward Obama and extremely supportive of him while still potentially leaving room for a future candidacy.

She even went on the attack, saying "It makes sense that George Bush and John McCain will be together next week in the Twin Cities, because these days they're awfully hard to tell apart." Bam! My only criticism of the speech is that it seemed to lack any reference to Obama's strong character or his ability to lead as commander-in-chief.

But she did the best she could to unite the party with her speech Tuesday night, and if she keeps her promise in campaigning for Obama, she will have done her job.

In addition, former Virginia governor Mark Warner delivered the keynote address Tuesday night that stressed mostly the strained economy and bipartisanship. Warner is a rising star in the party who is running for Senate and is expected to pick up a seat for the Democrats this year.

Day 3:

Wednesday marked the official end of the Hillary Clinton's candidacy as the delegates at the Democratic National Convention officially nominated Barack Obama as their nominee for president.

When the roll call got to New York, Hillary Clinton moved to suspend the voting and declare Obama to be the nominee by acclamation. Although this was clearly planned out ahead of time, it still received a thunderous round of applause and was truly a historic moment.

Also, Bill Clinton gave a fantastic speech, perfectly complementing his wife's speech the night before praising Obama's leadership ability, intelligence, judgment. He compared Obama to himself in 1992, when Republicans attacked him as too inexperienced, and how when he left office, things the economy and the country, he argued, were in good shape.

He then went on the offensive attacking McCain and the Republicans both on domestic and foreign policy. Perhaps the most memorable quote from his speech was "People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example than the example of our power."

After Bill's speech, Joe Biden took center stage, accepting his nomination as Obama's running mate. At first, Biden emphasized his working-class roots and his inspiring life story. After that, Biden went on the offensive going after George Bush and John McCain. At one point in his speech, he mistakenly called McCain "George, " calling it a Freudian slip.

He strongly criticized the handling of Bush and McCain's war pointing out that it was a failure and it was and still is costing $12 billion of the taxpayers' money each month. He then spoke about the economy, criticizing Bush, McCain and the Republicans for the swift downturn. Biden clearly understands his role as the attack dog in this campaign--I'm glad someone's started to do it.

Day 4:

Barack Obama accepted the Democratic nomination for president last night in front of 84,000 screaming enthusiastic supporters at Mile High Stadium in Denver last night.

His speech was an absolute masterpiece. It had the usual soaring rhetoric but in addition had plenty of policy details that many undecided voters really felt that they had not heard enough about.

He talked about his not-so-exotic background, his family and his American heritage. He noted that when he was a child, his mother was on food stamps because she couldn't afford to feed her family. He also pointed out that after he got his degree from Harvard Law School, instead of getting a high-paying job at a big law firm he decided to go to Chicago to help organize steel workers who had been laid off.

Then, he got into the specifics. He promised to cut back taxes for 95% of all working families, paid for by rolling back the Bush tax cuts (which McCain now supports) for the rich and large corporations. He talked about eliminating the capital gains taxes on small businesses. He also promised to end America's dependence on Middle East oil in the next ten years by investing $150 billion in alternative energy sources such as solar, wind, biofuel, nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas.

Obama also went after McCain on foreign policy, which is usually McCain's greatest strength. Obama talked about turning Iraq back over to the Iraqis and focusing the War on Terror on Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the majority of al-Qaeda still roam free. In a blistering attack on McCain, Obama said that McCain loves to say that he'll chase Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but in reality would not even follow him to the cave where he currently resides.

Obama attacked McCain relentlessly on his record, comparing his potential presidency as being Bush III, noting that McCain has voted with Bush over 90% of the time in the Senate. He said it's not that McCain doesn't care, it's that he just doesn't get it. He said McCain thinks that anyone making under $5 million per year is middle class. That's why he proposed billions in tax breaks for big corporations and nothing for ordinary Americans. That's why his health care plan taxes employer-paid health benefits. That's why he wants to gamble with people's retirements by privatizing Social Security.

With this speech, Obama did exactly what he had to do: outline clear policies and put John McCain on the defensive.

These attacks show that the Obama campaign realizes that they have been too soft with their attacks on McCain and foreshadows a change in campaign strategy for the next 67 days.

He did make a lot of promises that he probably can't or won't keep, but the overall message stayed true. But the bottom line is that Obama clearly succeeded with his Mile High gamble and left the convention with a strong advantage over his opponent.

Obama Picks Biden

So the hype is finally over. At 3 AM early Saturday morning, Barack Obama told the masses who his running mate would be via text message.

The message read:"Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee. Watch the first Obama-Biden rally live at 3pm ET on www.barackobama.com Spread the word!" My guess is that he'll probably keep those millions of phone numbers handy come election day.

So now that it's official, here's a quick bio of Biden, and it's an interesting one.

He was born in Scranton, PA to a working-class Irish Catholic family. His father, Joe Sr., was a car salesman and struggled to make ends meet.

At 10, Biden and his family moved to Delaware. He went to college there and then got his law degree at Syracuse University. At 27, he was elected to the local city council in Delaware. Two years later, at 29, he ran for the U.S. Senate and won.

A few weeks after his election to the Senate, his wife and baby daughter were killed in a car accident and his two young sons were almost killed. He wanted to resign from the Senate, but ultimately decided to stay on, commuting back and forth from his home in Wilmington every day--something he does to this day-- to take care of his boys.

In 1987, he ran for president but dropped out quickly after he was caught plagiarizing a speech from a British politician. In 1988 he suffered a life-threatening brain aneurysm but recovered fully.

But Biden came back from that and is now a widely respected Senator, from both sides of the aisle. He is now the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and was previously the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Here come the pros and cons of pick Biden. Let's start with the pros.

No one knows more about foreign policy than Biden. Anyone in the Senate--even John McCain--or anyone who follows politics would tell you that. And that's incredibly important considering the fact that many people are concerned with Obama's lack of foreign policy experience. Expect the attacks from the McCain campaign regarding Obama's inexperience on foreign policy to lessen in the coming weeks, because they don't want to pick a fight on that topic with Biden.

He also brings along with him 35 years of experience, which balances out the ticket because the main concern undecided voters have with Obama is that he's inexperienced. Older voters especially might feel more reassured about voting for Obama now that's he's got someone old (Biden is 65) and experienced on the ticket.

Biden could also potentially help Obama electorally by appealing to working class folks in northern Appalachia. He could emphasize his working class roots while campaigning in states such as Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, and Ohio. Obama should have no trouble winning Biden's home state of Delaware.

Also, after seven senatorial and two presidential campaigns, he has become a solid campaigner, an excellent debater (as long as he knows when to shut up), and a great attack dog. This especially will be important because Obama is clearly afraid to go negative, even though he knows he has to.

Biden has also become a pro at dealing with the media. And they love him, much like they love Obama (excluding FOX News, of course).

Here's the cons.

Biden cannot stop talking. He always says what's on his mind, and frequently makes verbal gaffes and blunders, like calling Obama "articulate," and going on and on and getting incredibly off-topic during the Roberts and Alito Supreme Court confirmation hearings, and so on and so forth.

The Republicans might also attack him on his plagiarism charge from '88 and say that we can't trust him. Biden has apologized for it several times, and might just do it again along with saying that it was literally decades ago. Two to be precise.

Also, in a debate during the primaries, Biden stood behind a statement he had made about Obama saying that he was too inexperienced to become president and that the job doesn't lend itself to on-the-job training. On top of that, early on in the campaign, Biden said that he would be happy to run with or against McCain. The McCain campaign has already put those two quotes together in a new ad of theirs.

That's about all I've got on Biden. Obama made a great pick. We'll see how long it is until he makes his first gaffe.

All Indications Point to Biden

After a day of painful political drama craftily created by Sen. Barack Obama, several recent events and leaks indicate that Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware has been selected as Obama's running mate.

All day, much of the media and many other curious individuals (myself included) who waited for the imminent text message bearing the message of Obama's pick were sorely disappointed when no such message came.

But several news media sources confirmed tonight that Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana and Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia--the two other apparent finalists on Obama's short list--had been phoned by Obama telling them both personally that they had not been selected.

Also, a senior Democratic official who had spoken to Sen. Hillary Clinton earlier told CNN Friday night that the Obama campaign has communicated to Clinton through private channels that she would not be Obama's pick.

On top of that, ABC News reported that the U.S. Secret Service has dispatched a detail to assume the immediate protection of Biden at his home in Wilmington, Delaware. This is yet another indicator that Biden has been selected as Obama's running mate.

The Obama campaign has revealed that Obama's pick will be announced Saturday morning via text message, before he speaks in Springfield, Illinois--where he launched his campaign 20 months earlier--with his vice-presidential nominee (Biden) tomorrow afternoon.

After that, maybe all the hype will die down, and we can all (again, myself included) stop making a big deal out of something that will probably not even matter all that much in the end.

Last Minute V.P. Speculation

Well, I’m back, and this time it’s for good. Here’s what’s happened since I’ve been away.

John Edwards admitted that he had an affair back in 2006 and his wife, Elizabeth, knew all about it. This means that his political future is basically over and he certainly will not be in Sen. Barack Obama’s cabinet, should he become president. Too bad, he might have made a great attorney general.

In addition, Russia invaded Georgia and started an “armed conflict” over a pro-Russian region in Georgia called South Ossetia. The United States has only verbally defended their close Georgian allies. And thus, another Cold War may have begun. John McCain has been active on the campaign trail, using this to his advantage by flaunting his foreign policy knowledge while Obama ate ice cream in Hawaii.

Other than that, all the political hype has centered on the non-stop speculation about who Obama and McCain will pick as their running mates. The short-lists have narrowed since we last spoke, so here’s my take on the remaining few. Since Obama will pick his in the next five days, let’s start with him.

When the Edwards scandal broke, his name was immediately taken off of the short list (if he was even on it). He didn’t really have much of a shot anyway, and admitted that he did not want the job at one point. But that just makes things official.

Former governor Mark Warner of Virginia’s name was officially taken off when it was announced that he would be the keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. He also was also an unlikely pick to begin with.

That leaves Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas on everyone's short-list of Obama’s most likely running mates. And none of them are perfect or completely safe choices.

Joe Biden would bring oodles of foreign policy expertise to the ticket if he were to be selected. He is the chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and—coincidentally—just got back from an “information gathering visit” in conflict-torn Georgia. He also has enough experience for himself and Obama--he is now in his sixth term as a U.S. Senator. He is an enthusiastic campaigner and can hold his own in a debate, as demonstrated by his performances in his struggle for the nomination.

On the down side, Biden’s age and 36 years of experience in the Senate would go against Obama’s theme of change and would conflict with his image as a Washington outsider. He is also a loose cannon who often says the wrong thing, like calling Obama “articulate.” Earlier today at his home in Delaware surrounded by reporters, Biden shouted “I’m not the guy,” suggesting that he wasn’t going to Obama’s running mate. Later, he dialed down his earlier comments by saying that he had not spoken with anyone from the Obama camp recently. In fairness, he may have just been bluntly lowering expectations, but it’s those kinds of blunders that could bring harm to the ticket. But all in all, I think he’s the best choice Obama's got at this point.

Tim Kaine would be an interesting pick. He is a popular governor from a red state that Obama has prioritized that has 13 electoral votes. He was and early supporter of Obama’s and the first governor to endorse him. Kaine has executive experience and would be considered a Washington outsider, which would fit perfectly with Obama’s theme of change. However, he is a newcomer to national politics and is only four years older than Obama. He also does not have any foreign policy experience, something that many pundits believe is necessary to balance the ticket. Outside of Virginia, he would not make a whole lot of a difference, but if he could tip that state in Obama’s favor and not cause any harm, he would be a fantastic pick.

Evan Bayh was a popular two-term governor and is a current senator from Indiana, a state with 11 electoral votes that Obama hopes to make competitive this November. Bayh could help win Indiana and other rust belt states by appealing to blue-collar Democrats who have thus far been wary of Obama. In addition, many of his votes and credentials could compensate for Obama’s weaknesses, and he could complement Obama in areas such as economic expertise and executive experience.

However, there is one major downside: he was an ardent supporter of the Iraq War back in 2002. If Obama picked Bayh, he would alienate many progressive Democrats and anti-war independents. It would also undercut his theme of change, and he could no longer flaunt his judgment in opposing the war from the start. Other than his vote on the Iraq War, he would be a safe pick. Some have even gone so far as to call him bland, unexciting, and even a cream puff. But all in all, he’d be a solid pick, but one with a good deal of baggage.

Kathleen Sebelius would be another interesting pick. As the second-term governor of an overwhelmingly Republican state, she has worked across party lines an incredibly successful way--in a way that fits with Obama's theme of unity and bipartisanship. Also, she might appeal to women who were excited by the prospect of having a woman (Hillary) on the ticket. But at the same time, these women might see her as a lesser Hillary, and might ask "what does she have that Hillary doesn't?" She also has the same gaps on foreign policy that Obama has and she would not put her home state, or any specific state, in play. In addition, her response to the State of the Union fell flat, as she often seems to do in such situations. All in all, Sebelius would not hurt Obama, but would not really help him either.

Now, on to McCain. He has already announced that he will reveal his running mate to the public on August 29, his 72nd birthday (yikes) and the day after the Democratic Convention is over. It’s all a part of his plan to recapture the media spotlight and deaden any bounce Obama might get from the convention.

The first and most obvious pick is Former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts. His new-found conservative views make him popular among conservatives in the party, who have been lukewarm, at best, to McCain. His business experience makes him an appealing pick during a recession. Romney was fantastic at fundraising during his bid for the presidency and would help out an outmatched McCain campaign in that department. He is well-known nationally, is an excellent debater, and has already been vetted and tested by the media. His ties to Michigan may help McCain carry that much sought-after swing state, and his Mormon appeal could help in western battleground states such as Colorado and Nevada.

A downside to picking Romney is that he’s a major, major flip-flopper. Even McCain said that he has changed his position on nearly every single major issue, and voters could believe that he changes his views when it is convenient. Also, his Mormon faith would not sit well with the religious right, who have not been warm to McCain from the start. Also, McCain and Romney have never really gotten along all that well since the bitterly contested New Hampshire primaries. But overall, he’s a helpful and fairly safe pick and the one who I think McCain will choose on August 29.

The next best pick in my book is Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska. She would be a surprising yet bold pick, and picking her would certainly steal the spotlight from Obama after the convention. Her age (she’s 44) would certainly balance out McCain’s, and she would add to the maverick…ness of McCain’s campaign. Having a woman on the ticket might be appealing to the many Hillary supporters who wanted to see a woman in line for the presidency, and could potentially steal millions of votes from Obama. She’s extremely popular with the conservative wing of the Republican Party—something McCain has never been—yet is disconnected from the current administration. She’s a fiscal conservative, a lifetime member of the NRA, and is staunchly pro-life.

However, she only has two years of experience, which could get in the way of the party’s ongoing accusations that Obama is too inexperienced. Another major concern is that she would outshine McCain, which would be a major problem. She has also not been included in any reports from the McCain campaign as being a finalist in the veep speculation, so it is unlikely she will get picked. But overall, she would be a very interesting and I think rewarding pick for McCain.

And finally, we have Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota—the ultimate safe pick. The strongest reason for picking him is solely to win his home state of Minnesota, traditionally a blue state with ten electoral votes. The polls are showing that it’s a close race there, and losing it would certainly be a thorn in the Democrats’ side. Pawlenty was also one of McCain’s earliest backers and a close friend. Also, at 47, his youthfulness could offset McCain’s abundance of age. His immigration plan is stricter that McCain’s which could be good and bad. Conservatives would warm up to the ticket more but the new plan would alienate Latinos, who like McCain and his policies on immigration to some extent, and might cause them to lose southwestern states such as New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada. In other departments he is generally well-liked by the conservatives, but would not wake them out of their overwhelming apathy.

Former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania would make a good pick, except for the fact that he’s pro-choice, which for McCain is not even an option right now. He needs the religious right more than ever. Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida has been floated around as a possibility, but if McCain can’t carry Florida on his own, then he doesn’t have a shot anyway. Another plausible pick could be former Rep. Rob Portman of Ohio, who would bring economic expertise to the ticket, and could be greatly rewarding to have on the ticket during a recession. But essentially, I think it’s down to Romney, Palin, and Pawlenty.

There’s my take on the veep speculation. Just to recap, for Obama it's down to Kaine, Biden, Bayh, and Sebelius, and I think he should pick Biden. For McCain it's down to Romney, Palin, and Pawlenty, and I think he should pick Romney. Feel free to comment, and I’ll keep you posted over the next week.

Summer Recap

Hey everyone, sorry I have been away for about a month. I know you were probably all lost and confused and misguided without me, but hopefully this lone entry will help. This is my last entry before I go away for another three weeks, but after that I'll be back in full swing to cover the last two and a half months leading up to the election.

So since I've been gone, not too much has been happening. The New Yorker put a controversial picture of Barack Obama on their cover that was supposed to be a joke, but people didn't get it and thought it was offensive.

The next big thing was Obama's much-anticipated foreign trip. This thing was a huge gamble, because if he made any gaffes, John McCain would not let him hear the end of it, and the American people would still believe that he was too inexperienced on foreign policy matters. But if he succeeded without making any major mistakes, he would be seen as more presidential, and more foreign policy savvy. And we all know that elections are about impressions, not policy.

Obama visited Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Israel, and is now making his last stop in Germany today, where he will be giving a speech in Berlin to about one million people. Now that's presidential.

This trip was an absolutely brilliant idea. Obama made almost no gaffes on the trip, met with world leaders, took photo ops, talked with generals, and was received very well in all of the countries he visited. All in all, he looked very presidential (as if he was already president), and I think this will make a good impression on undecided voters.

On a side note, Obama now plans to extract all of the soldiers from Iraq within the first16 months of his presidency, and then move them to Afghanistan to fight "the real front" in the War on Terror. Obama spoke to several generals while he was abroad on the matter, including Gen. David Patraeus.

Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki was quoted as saying that he agrees with Obama completely about the withdrawal plan. That is a huge slap in the face to the Bush administration, because the guy they put in power is now going directly against them one year later. He later said that he was misquoted and did not want to get involved in American politics.

On the VP front, a few big names have taken themselves off of the list. On the Democratic side, Sen. Jim Webb--my personal choice--took himself off of the list, saying he was focused on being a U.S. Senator for the time being. That basically just leaves Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Tim Kaine, Chris Dodd, Wesley Clark, and Hillary Clinton left.

I think all Obama needs right now is foreign policy experience and expertise, which is why Biden and Richardson are now my two top choices for Obama. Biden is old, experienced, and the go-to guy for foreign policy expertise. Richardson has foreign policy experience and could help to win over Latinos, but the Black-Latino ticket might be too risky.

Obama no longer needs to pick Hillary Clinton as his running-mate, because the party is largely unified--time heals all wounds. At this point she would bring in more negatives than positives.

On the Republican side, Mitt Romney is now the front-runner. His ability to raise money, his business experience in the time of a recession, and his pull in Michigan are looking more and more attractive to the McCain campaign. There have been leaks from the McCain campaign reporting that he is the front-runner. He is also my current choice for McCain for VP.

It also helps that Gov. Bobby Jindal--my other personal choice--effectively took himself out of the running, saying that he was not going to be a vice presidential candidate or vice president. How sad for the McCain campaign, they don't know what're they're missing.

So that essentially leaves Mitt Romney, Charlie Crist, Tim Pawlenty, Rob Portman, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Lindsey Graham, Mark Sanford, and Joe Lieberman.

Graham, Sanford, and Lieberman would be comfortable choices for McCain, because he is close friends with all of them and he would be compatible on the ticket with them. Palin would be an exciting pick that would shake up the race but might overshadow McCain in the process. Huckabee's only positives are that he's nationally known and the evangelicals love him. Portman would help with the economy, and Crist and Pawlenty would help to carry specific states.

It was leaked that the McCain campaign might announce their pick for VP this week to distract the media from Obama's headline-grabbing trip overseas. But he will probably pick his some time after the Democratic National Convention in August. Obama should announce his running-mate in the week before the convention.