What is worse for John McCain’s candidacy, an endorsement from Osama Bin Laden or an endorsement from Dick Cheney?

“‘Dick Cheney came out, and he hit the campaign trail, and he said, and I quote, that he is “delighted” to support John McCain,’ Mr. Obama said. ‘You’ve never seen Dick Cheney delighted before, but he is. That’s kind of hard to picture. So, I would like to congratulate Senator McCain on this endorsement, because he really earned it.

“‘Here’s my question to you, Ohio,’ he said. ‘Do you think Dick Cheney is delighted to support John McCain because he thinks John McCain is going to bring change, because he thinks that somehow John McCain is really going to shake things up, get rid of the lobbyists, and Haliburton, and the old boys club in Washington? Ohio, we know better.’”

I have to admit that I haven’t heard that much regarding the dreaded “robocalls” before this election.  They seem to be getting a little less attention in the media as we enter the last weekend before THE ELECTION.  I think the following video sums up my feelings on automated calls.

There are many reasons to vote. Make sure your voice is heard.

Why didn’t we see this coming? It’s another example of how Caribou Barbie is just like every other normal Joe Six-Pack in the country.  It looks like the highest paid member of the McCain campaign is Sarah Palin’s makeup artist. Makeup artist?

Ms. Strozzi, who was nominated for an Emmy award for her makeup work on the television show “So You Think You Can Dance?”, was paid $22,800 for the first two weeks of October alone, according to the records. The campaign categorized Ms. Strozzi’s payment as “PERSONNEL SVC/EQUIPMENT.”

The payment on Oct. 10 made Ms. Strozzi the single highest-paid individual in the campaign for that two-week period. (There were more than two dozen companies that got larger payments than Ms. Strozzi). She easily beat out Mr. Scheunemann, who received $12,500 in the first half of October, and Ms. Wallace, who got $12,000.

If Sarah Pain is so pretty and has all this “experience” as a beauty contestant, why does she even need makeup?

I’ve written before about the gross hypocrisy in portraying Sarah Palin as anything close to an average American. The money she and her husband makes and her job simply remove her from consideration. How can you consider the governor of a state the same as an ordinary working class citizen. By definition, as a governor you are part of the ruling class. And now surprise! Palin has spent more than what I make in FIVE YEARS on clothes.

Yet Republicans expressed consternation publicly and privately that
the shopping sprees on her behalf, which were first reported by
Politico, would compromise Ms. Palin’s standing as Senator McCain’s
chief emissary to working-class voters whose salvos at the so-called
cultural elite often delight audiences at Republican rallies.

That possibility was brought to life, for instance, on “The View” on ABC, as Joy Behar, a co-host, noted the McCain campaign’s outreach to blue-collar workers — like an Ohio plumber who recently chided Senator Barack Obama over taxes — after another co-host, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, defended the expenditures.

“I don’t think Joe the Plumber wears Manolo Blahniks,” Ms. Behar said.

The argument from Republicans is that Palin needs to look good and if she didn’t, the press would criticize her for it. They could have turned this to her advantage if they had purchased clothes at Wal-Mart or Sears. The Republicans, who were a formidable political force just a few year’s ago, are now so out of touch with real Americans that it’s no surprise that Democrats will be sweeping them out of the White House, the Congress and the Senate in just 12 days.

I can’t put my finger on it but I just have this feeling that this whole bailout thing is simply a poorly conceived and executed plan to provide political cover for our so-called leaders. And to especially help Bush leave office in less disgrace than he will already.

Is there a true economic crisis? Especially of the magnitude that’s been reported. The economy’s been in trouble for quite a while already. Here’s an excerpt of a minnpost.com report from a panel of economists at the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey Institute for Public Affairs Tuesday night:

The Bush administration has acted in this crisis the same as it has acted for the last eight years, Chari said. “The consistent message is: We’re grown-ups. We understand the real problems. You don’t. We need to go into Iraq. We need to spend $720 billion. Because we have the information that you don’t.”

The publicly available data don’t support the need for the type of bailout bill pushed by the president, Chari said, and if the administration has more telling data, it should be disclosed. Without seeing what they’re seeing, the bailout appears to be “remarkably unwise,” he said.

“They’re not telling us what we’re not seeing that they are seeing,” Chari said. “There is this nagging fear maybe they’re reacting to weird things in their heads.”

Stinson acknowledge the problem that many people believe they are being misled, but said he believes the threat to the economy is credible.

“This isn’t Mr. [Ahmed] Chalabi reporting visions of mobile bio weapons labs running around the streets of Baghdad,” Stinson said of a key figure in the run-up to the Iraq war in gathering information that turned out to be false.

Instead of a grainy satellite image in a Colin Powell slide show, what economists are seeing is a widening gap in the rate banks are charging each other compared to what the Federal Reserve charges.

Something’s fishy about this “bailout”. Time will tell whether the administraton’s response was warrented or whether it was just a “let’s cover our ass” move. People don’t trust the Bush administration’s version of the “crisis”. Well, I have no idea why that would occur?