Obama also made fun of McCain trying to compare him to Bush. On a side note, McCain's rally in Albuquerque today drew an announced attendance of 1,500 people, although MSNBC said it was less than 1,000. Obama is expected to draw 40,000 in Albuquerque tonight.

I saw this briefly on CNN yesterday and thought it was interesting. Here's a map of how the world would vote for our President, if they could. Blue, Obama, Red, McCain. If I'm reading this corrrectly, Obama 9,009 electoral votes; McCain 278. I haven't scrolled around the whole thing, but to the right of the map you can check individual countries. How they came up with their info I don't know.

TIS

http://www.economist.com/Vote2008/

Maybe from the IP address of the voter perhaps?

Georgia makes sense, since McCain wants them in NATO, and I'm sure that Georgia would rather not get its ass invaded by Russia again.

But Cuba? I'm sure those who did vote for McCain will have Uncle Fidel and Uncle Raul knocking their door down at the dead of night.

Mr. Babe and I almost wet our pants laughing at the idea of Obama and Palin on Dancing With The Stars!

I don't know if anyone has posted this yet, but:

The order and memorandum came down at approximately 6:15 p.m. on Friday. Philip Berg's [federal] lawsuit challenging Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president of the United States had been dismissed by the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick on grounds that the Philadelphia attorney and former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania lacked standing.

[Judge] Surrick, it seemed, was not satisfied with the nature of evidence provided by Berg to support his allegations

I didn't know the name, but forgot about that lawsuit. I would have been shocked had it gone any other way. Talk about last resort efforts. Not to mention a waste of court time.



TIS

I never heard of this. Can you provide a link?

Poor Michael Savage will have to find a new topic for next week.

Get ready for 'Pipelinegate':



AP INVESTIGATION: Palin pipeline terms curbed bids

By JUSTIN PRITCHARD and GARANCE BURKE, Associated Press Writers Justin Pritchard And Garance Burke, Associated Press Writers 10/25/2008

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin's signature accomplishment — a contract to build a 1,715-mile pipeline to bring natural gas from Alaska to the Lower 48 — emerged from a flawed bidding process that narrowed the field to a company with ties to her administration, an Associated Press investigation shows.

Beginning at the Republican National Convention in August, the McCain-Palin ticket has touted the pipeline as an example of how it would help America achieve energy independence.

"We're building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline, which is North America's largest and most expensive infrastructure project ever, to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets," Palin said during the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate.

Despite Palin's boast of a smart and fair bidding process, the AP found that her team crafted terms that favored only a few independent pipeline companies and ultimately benefited the winner, TransCanada Corp.

And contrary to the ballyhoo, there's no guarantee the pipeline will ever be built; at a minimum, any project is years away, as TransCanada must first overcome major financial and regulatory hurdles.

In interviews and a review of records, the AP found:

_Instead of creating a process that would attract many potential builders, Palin slanted the terms away from an important group — the global energy giants that own the rights to the gas.

_Despite promises and legal guidance not to talk directly with potential bidders, Palin had meetings or phone calls with nearly every major candidate, including TransCanada.

_The leader of Palin's pipeline team had been a partner at a lobbying firm where she worked on behalf of a TransCanada subsidiary. Also, that woman's former business partner at the lobbying firm was TransCanada's lead private lobbyist on the pipeline deal, interacting with legislators in the weeks before the vote to grant TransCanada the contract. Plus, a former TransCanada executive served as an outside consultant to Palin's pipeline team.

_Under a different set of rules four years earlier, TransCanada had offered to build the pipeline without a state subsidy; under Palin, the company could receive a maximum $500 million.

"Governor Palin held firmly to her fundamental belief that Alaska could best serve Alaskans and the nation's interests by pursuing a competitive approach to building a natural gas pipeline," said McCain-Palin spokesman Taylor Griffin. "There was an open and transparent process that subjected the decision to extensive public scrutiny and due diligence."

___

ONLY ONE VIABLE BIDDER

There were never more than a few players that could execute such a complex undertaking — at least a million tons of steel stretching across some of Earth's most hostile and remote terrain.

TransCanada estimates it will cost $26 billion; Palin's consultants estimate nearly $40 billion.

The pipeline would run from Alaska's North Slope to Alberta in Canada; secondary supply lines would take the gas to various points in the United States and Canada. The pipeline would carry 4.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas daily, about 8 percent of the present U.S. market.

Building such a pipeline had been a dream for decades. The rising cost and demand for energy injected new urgency into the proposal.

So too did the depletion of Alaska's long-reliable reserves of oil, which are trapped in the same Arctic Circle reservoirs as clean-burning natural gas. Not only does that oil provide jobs, it pays for an annual dividend check to nearly every Alaska resident. This year's payment was $2,069, 25 percent higher than 2007 — plus a $1,200 bonus rebate to help offset higher energy costs.

Palin was elected as governor two years ago in part because of her populist appeal. Promising "New Energy for Alaska," she vowed to take on Exxon Mobil Corp., ConocoPhillips and BP, the multinational energy companies that long dominated the state's biggest industry.

Oil interests were particularly unpopular at that moment: Federal agents had recently raided the offices of six lawmakers in a Justice Department investigation into whether an Alaska oil services company paid bribes in exchange for promoting a new taxing formula that would ultimately further the multinationals' pipeline plans.

Palin ousted fellow Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski, who pushed a pipeline deal he negotiated in secret with the "Big Three" energy companies. That deal went nowhere.

With Alaskans eager for progress and sour on Big Oil, Palin tackled the pipeline issue with gusto, meeting with representatives from all sides and assembling her own team of experts to draw up terms.

Palin invited bidders to submit applications and offered the multimillion-dollar subsidy. Members of Palin's team say that without the incentive, it might not have received any bids for the risky undertaking.

___

TIES THAT BIND

Palin's team was led by Marty Rutherford, a widely respected energy specialist who entered the upper levels of state government nearly 20 years ago. Rutherford solidified her status when, in 2005, she joined an exodus of Department of Natural Resources staff who felt Murkowski was selling out to the oil giants.

What the Palin administration didn't tell legislators — and neglected to mention in its announcement of Rutherford's appointment — was that in 2003, Rutherford left public service and worked for 10 months at the Anchorage-based Jade North lobbying firm. There she did $40,200 worth of work for Foothills Pipe Lines Alaska, Inc., a subsidiary of TransCanada.

Foothills Pipe Lines Alaska Inc. paid Rutherford for expertise on topics including state legislation and funding related to gas commercialization, according to her 2003 lobbyist registration statement.

Palin has said she wasn't bothered by that past work because it had occurred several years before. But Rutherford wouldn't have passed her new boss' own standards: Under ethics reforms the governor pushed through, Rutherford would have had to wait a year to jump from government service to a lobbying firm.

Rutherford also has downplayed her work for Foothills.

"I did a couple of projects for them, small projects," she told a state Senate committee examining the TransCanada bid earlier this year. While a partner, Rutherford said, she "realized that my heart was not in the private sector, it was in the public sector, and I sold out for the same amount of money I bought in for."

At one point, Palin's pipeline team debated Rutherford's role, but concluded there was no problem.

"We were looking at it in terms of is this an actual conflict or is there the appearance of impropriety of Marty's participation," said Pat Galvin, the commissioner of the Revenue Department and another top team member. "It was determined that there was none, and so we moved forward."

Patricia Bielawski, Rutherford's former partner at Jade North, spent last summer in Juneau, the state capital, serving as TransCanada's lead private lobbyist on the pipeline deal. While the Legislature debated — and ultimately approved — the TransCanada deal, Bielawski met with lawmakers and sat in on the public proceedings, several legislators said.

Bielawski told AP earlier this month that Rutherford's employment at her firm was irrelevant. She said Rutherford never directly lobbied the Legislature for Foothills, and that Rutherford broke no rules based on 2003 state ethics guidelines.

"There's no statutory or regulatory prohibition that extends to things that many years ago," Bielawski said. "So there's no issue."

But others say it's a legitimate question.

"I'm not saying someone's getting paid off for a sweetheart contract, but it's very hard to ignore that this is your former partner and your former client standing there before you," said Republican Sen. Lyda Green, a Palin critic who in August was among the handful of lawmakers who voted against awarding TransCanada the license. "Every time it was mentioned to the governor or to the commission, it was like, 'How could you question such a wonderful person?'"

Tony Palmer, the TransCanada vice president who leads the company's Alaska gas pipeline effort, rejects the suggestion that his company benefited.

"We have gained clearly no advantage from anything that Ms. Rutherford did for Foothills some five years ago on a very much unrelated topic," he said.

Rutherford did not respond to interview requests made directly to her and through the governor's office. But Griffin, the spokesman for the McCain-Palin campaign, said Rutherford "had no decision-making role or authority," and contended that such matters were handled by others on the Palin pipeline team.

TransCanada also had a connection to the team hired by the Palin administration to analyze the bid. Patrick Anderson, a former TransCanada executive, served as an outside consultant and ultimately helped the state conclude that TransCanada's technical solution for shipping gas through freezing temperatures would work.

___

NARROW SET OF RULES

In January 2007, Palin spoke the first of at least two times to Vice President Dick Cheney, the Bush administration's point person on energy issues, according to calendars obtained by the AP through a public records request. Cheney's staff pressed the Palin administration to draw in the energy companies, said current and former state officials involved in those discussions.

As the governor's approach unfolded in the spring of 2007, there were signs it was skewed in a different direction.

Palin said she saw problems if the firms that own the gas also owned the pipeline. They could manipulate the market or charge prohibitive fees to smaller exploration firms, discouraging competition.

Several important requirements in the legislation were unpalatable to the big oil companies. In the talks under Murkowski, the firms asked that the rates for the gas production tax and royalties be fixed for 45 years; Palin refused to consider setting rates for that long.

Under the Palin process, the pipeline firms had an advantage because they simply pass along taxes paid by oil and gas producers.

Oil company officials warned lawmakers they wouldn't participate under those terms. Still, in a near unanimous vote, the Legislature passed the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act in May 2007, generally as written by Palin's pipeline team.

Once the state issued its request for proposals on July 2, 2007, the level of communication between the government and potential bidders was supposed to decrease drastically, so that no one would be accused of gaining unfair advantage. State lawyers advised public officials to keep their distance, and bidders were told to submit questions on a Web site where answers could be seen by all.

Several of the state's gas line team members interviewed by AP said they had no contact with possible bidders. But Palin had conversations with executives at most of the major potential bidders during that period, according to her calendars.

While the calendars don't detail what was discussed, the documents indicate that the pipeline was the subject of the discussions, or that the conversations occurred immediately after a briefing with Palin's pipeline team.

When she was in Michigan for a National Governors Association summit in late July 2007, Palin and her team met executives from Williams Co., a pipeline builder that ended up not bidding.

"The purpose of the meeting was to more fully understand the details of the project, which we were still evaluating at the time," company spokeswoman Julie Gentz said in a statement.

TransCanada's Palmer described communication with state officials as nonexistent.

According to the governor's official schedule, however, Palin called TransCanada President and CEO Hal Kvisle on Aug. 8, 2007. Asked about that call, Palmer said it was to clarify the bidding process.

Griffin said that in keeping with legal guidance, Palin never spoke in any of the meetings about the competitive bidding process.

By the Nov. 30 submission deadline, there were five applications. But the state disqualified four for failing to satisfy the bill's requirements.

That left TransCanada.

The Canadian giant had been pursuing an Alaska pipeline since at least 2004, when the company negotiated a deal with Rutherford that the state ended up shelving. While the details remain confidential, six people familiar with the terms told the AP that TransCanada was willing to do the work then without the large state subsidy.

In testimony this July before the state Senate, Rutherford herself confirmed such a willingness, but described the 2004 deal as presenting a different set of trade-offs. A state lawyer warned her not to say more, lest she violate a confidentiality agreement.

Others who reviewed the deal think much of the $500 million will be wasted money.

"Most definitely TransCanada got a sweetheart deal this time," said Republican Sen. Bert Stedman, who voted against the TransCanada license. "Where else could you get a $500 million reimbursement when you don't even have the financing to build the pipeline?"

Now ain't this the truth??


TIS

Go to World Net Daily.

Well said Freddie C. And so many people wish to attack palin and her lack of experience.

Umm...yeah. I wouldn't trust Sarah Palin to be the clerk at a gasoline station let alone step into the VP role...one she isn't even familiar with. (Agreeing with Dick Cheney all the way on what a VP's job is...very sad. It's seventh grade civics you stupid, dangerous bitch.)

DA, Don't bother. He pops in here to either agree or disagree with some post and then pops out again.

As for Governor Palin, it's NOT her inexperience alone that terrifies me. It's her complete and utter inability to answer even the simplest questions. She can't name a newspaper, and she can't name a Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade. But most of all, it's her role as a fear- and hate-mongerer than appalls me.

And while a VP hasn't needed to take office in decades (thankfully), this particular presidential candidate has age and health issues that make his choice of VP far more critical.

FWIW, the other polls don't agree with John Zogby, but....

Obama lead drops to 5 points
Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54am EDT

By Andrew Quinn

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama's lead over Republican rival John McCain has dropped to 5 points, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Sunday.

Obama leads McCain by 49 percent to 44 percent among likely U.S. voters in the daily tracking poll, which has a margin of error of 2.9 points. Obama's lead has dropped over the last three days after hitting a high of 12 points on Thursday.

"Things are trending back for McCain. His numbers are rising and Obama's are dropping on a daily basis. There seems to be a direct correlation between this and McCain talking about the economy," pollster John Zogby said.

Obama, 47, took the lead in most national polls in recent weeks as the financial crisis and plunging stock market seized center stage ahead of the November 4 election.

McCain, 72, appeared slow to respond to Obama's financial message but in recent days has ramped up the economic themes of his own campaign. On Saturday the Arizona Republican warned voters of the dangers of what he termed a Democratic take-over in both the White House and Congress.

Obama has countered by seeking to link McCain's proposals to the policies of outgoing Republican President George W. Bush, who fares very poorly in public approval surveys.

Obama's lead among voters making less than $35,000 per year remains substantial at a little over 70 percent. But McCain, who had previously scored well only with the highest income brackets, now holds slight leads among voters in all income groups starting at $35,000 and above.

"You've got to think that it is tax-and-spend that concerns them. Is McCain starting to connect with the middle class?" Zogby said.

Obama still had solid, if slightly diminished, leads among two important groups which could play pivotal roles in the November 4 election. Among independents he had a 14 point lead, down from a peak of 29 points. Women also still backed Obama by a 14-point margin, down from 20 points late last week.

McCain, who once had a 4-point deficit among male voters, now has a 4-point lead at 48-44 percent. And whites back McCain by a 12-point margin, up from 6 points on Friday.

Independent Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr both received support from 1 percent of those polled, a slight dip for Nader. Three percent of the people said they remained undecided in the race.

The rolling tracking poll surveyed 1,203 likely voters in the presidential election. In a tracking poll, the most recent day's results are added, while the oldest day's results are dropped to monitor changing momentum.

The president is determined by who wins the Electoral College, which has 538 members apportioned by population in each state and the District of Columbia. Electoral votes are allotted on a winner-take-all basis in all but two states, which divide them by congressional district.

This is really weird. My brother predicted this last week. He said that as Election Day got closer, so would the polls. However, he said that Obama would still win a narrow popular vote and a strong electoral one.

McCain hasn't gained anything in the Gallup and Rasmussen polls, so I don't know if it means anything. In fact, Obama has been at 52% the last 4 days in the Rasmussen Poll. That's the highest he's been at.

I agree about the final results. I think the popular vote will be around 5%, but it will be an Electoral Vote landslide.

I can understand why the candidates wouldn't want to look at these polls every day. Man, how nerve wrecking. I don't know really what to make of it. It "could" be since McCain is trying to actually talk about issues now, instead of ridiculous attacks. What state was it in the Primary (New Hampshire?) that the polls showed Obama won(maybe by exit polls) and they thought they won, only he DIDN'T?. Anyway, I don't quite have full faith in any polls, although usually they tend to be fairly accurate.....I think. Yet, this time, I just feel some big surprises in some form or another. This election is different IMHO.


TIS

Well said. But here are a couple of others things to consider:

Both Presidential candidates were selected through an arduous and onerous primary process involving tens of millions of Americans. The VP candidates were chosen by one person.

While issues are subject to debate, the Constitutional powers of the Vice Presidency are not. They are explicitly stated in the Constitution. The Vice President is not in charge of the Senate; the Founding Fathers did not include language in the Constitution that provides the Vice President with flexibility and authority if he chooses to use it. Sarah Palin thinks it does. It's embarrassing.

TIS, if Obama loses, they're going to blame you, me and Lou for being overconfident.

Actually, I attacked her for acting like a flake in an interview with Katie friggin Couric.

Care to spin that one?

Also, you all have so far failed to explain or even bother to mention all those Republican moderates who have jumped ship. Denying reality doesn't make it go away.

(and watch as I get no-sold by Iceman and gang)

I hear ya PB. I DON'T want to be over confident. It's hard not to be encouraged. Deep down, I KNOW that. Someone talk me down!!! Tell me again the downside for Obama.


TIS

Your ship analogy is right. Those fringe Republicans are jumping off a sinking ship.

I'm not surprised that no one seems able to defend Obama's lack of experience and qualifications - he has none.

My neighbor who stays right below my apartment used to have a "McCain/Palin for 2008" message on a small greeting card sized poster on their door until recently. Since last week, they have decorated their entire door with Halloween stuff and creatively painted one half of the door with black and other with orange. The black part has all obama photos and says "trick" and the orange part has mccain photos and says "treat". If it is an original idea, I think it is really creative, irrespective of whether I agree with them or not.

Just what experience is required to be elected as President? Experience with what? What is the threshhold that one must obtain? There is none. One offers oneself to Americans and we accept or reject the offer. There's no experience required or useful for that matter. The Presidency is so unique that nothing prepares one for its slings and arrows. A President is surrounded by a staff of advisors and a Cabinet who provide options for the President's selection. There's no magic in that selection process. Experience doesn't affect the probability of an option's success or failure.

There is a series of books entitled the Making of the President by Theodore White that chronicles the road that successful presidential candidates travel on the way to the Presidency. Read them. There are also any number of bboks out there about Presidents. Read them also. You won't find in their pages apriori experience that was helpful to our Presidents except among those that had been Vice-Presidents. Even then it was residual.

According to the constitution:

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

Yes, like it or not anyone can grow-up and try a run for President.

The experience issue, while desirable, I agree with Olivant, where exactly do you look for it? Exactly, in what area would a future Prsident need experience? And, how many years???

Perhaps many people who are voting for Obama, are considering the fact that for the last 8 years we had a President who was Governor for (4 or 8, I'm not sure). He, was seen to many, as likeabe and folksy. This moron fucked us up like no other President in my lifetime (perhaps ever). So maybe, just maybe, America is encouraged by an smart, strategic, organized, non-warmongering type, who is willing to even talk to our enemies (gasp)before going Rambo on another nation. Yea, perhaps his inspiration isn't a bad thing. Perhaps it is time for a change. God knows we've had enough shit happen the last 8 years, change sounds pretty good to me.

TIS

Experience? What experience did Ronald Reagan have in foreign policy, and yet I remember him standing proudly and saying, "Tear down this wall." He stood up to the Russians and he made this nation proud again. He fired the air traffic controllers and he showed the world that he wasn't going to take any crap.

Was he a good President? It almost didn't matter. After years of drifting, after the embarrassment of Watergate and the Iranian hostages, the US regained its status in the world.

So, is Obama any more ready? Time will tell. But the same failed policies backed up by an unworldly woman who can't name the newspaper she reads in the morning, who gave her husband (who was NOT elected by the people of Alaska, btw) the power of the gubernatorial office, that's something I'm willing to walk right past. Actually, not walk. RUN.

The president with the most experience in national politics was James Buchanan, who until George W. Bush came along won most "worst President ever" contests. If you look at these, experience alone does not make a good public official.


Lincoln was considerd to have great judgment despite little traditional government experience -- two years in Congress and a few terms in the Illinois State house (sound familiar?). Obama is around the middle range for all over our presidents, having only 20 presidents with MORE experience than he does.

And you say "none"? Obama had eight years spent in the Illinois senate before his serving in the U.S. Senate. He serves on three of the four Senate Committees dealing with foreign policy issues including the Foreign Relations and Homeland Security. He is the Chair of the Subcommittee on European Relations and serves on the Subcommittees on African Affairs, East Asia and Pacific Affairs, and International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs, and International Environmental Protection. He has traveled extensively visiting Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan in Asia, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, and the Palestinian Territories in the Middle East; and Chad, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, and South Africa in Africa (unlike Palin who only got a passport last year).

I could go on but that should be enough to cover "none" for now.