Hon. James David Manning, PhD preaches about Obama’a mama, grandmama, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezco, William Ayers, and more in the message called “God Save America” preached on Saturday, 18 October 2008

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/5777

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish, and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension — so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That’s what you claim you do, when you accept people’s money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.
at must read article.

http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html

It just shows how in the tank for democrats and dishonest the msm really is.

From USA Today:

Group asks IRS to investigate Catholic bishop against Obama

By Daniel Burke

WASHINGTON — A church-state watchdog group has asked the Internal Revenue Service to investigate whether the Roman Catholic bishop of Paterson, N.J., violated tax laws by denouncing Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama.
In a letter sent to the IRS on Wednesday (Oct. 22), Americans United for Separation of Church and State accused Paterson Bishop Arthur Serratelli of illegal partisanship for lambasting Obama’s support of abortion rights.

In a column posted on the Diocese of Paterson’s website and published in its weekly newspaper, Serratelli also compared Obama to King Herod, the biblical monarch who ordered the death of John the Baptist.

The bishop did not refer to Obama by name but only as “the present democratic (sic) candidate.”

Under federal tax law, nonprofit groups — including religious organizations — are prohibited from intervening in campaigns for public office by endorsing or opposing candidates.

Serratelli wrote that Obama has pledged, if elected president, to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, abortion-rights legislation the Catholic Church vehemently opposes.

“If this politician fulfills his promise, not only will many of our freedoms as Americans be taken from us, but the innocent and vulnerable will spill their blood,” Serratelli wrote.

The Rev. Barry Lynn, president of Americans United, said it is “impossible to interpret this passage as anything but a command to vote against ‘the present Democratic candidate’ because of his promise to sign a certain piece of legislation disfavored by the Catholic Church’s hierarchy.”

http://usatoday.com/news/relig.....bama_N.htm

Perhaps he should have just said “I oppose any candidate whose pastor preaches hate and damns the fine country we live in.”

Of course “Americans United” (which of course represents few Americans at all) misses the point that it’s not just the petulant whim of this Priest, a Cardinal or even the Pope to oppose this legislation.

Rather it goes against a central tenant of the church’s teaching.

It’s as if Congress were preparing legislation saying Mary was not a virgin but rather a single mother that got knocked up, and had we had “Freedom of Choice” legislation she could have just aborted Jesus and stopped all this Christian bull.

(Don’t expect Democrats to not craft such a bill, but I digress.)

It wouldn’t merely be “disagreement” with the bill by the church’s hiearchy, it would be a completely against everything the church represented.

Now I know the Kennedys for one can sit in a Catholic Church and be given Communion while being directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of unborn children each year, but it’s amazing how Freedom of Speech means nothing in cases like this.

Pricey new duds aren’t helping Palin in polls

By Joe Garofoli

Receiving more than $150,000 in clothing and accessories from the Republican National Committee last month doesn’t just run counter to Gov. Sarah Palin’s image as a “Wal-Mart Mom from Wasilla,” it also might have violated the spirit if not the letter of a campaign finance law co-authored by her running mate, Sen. John McCain.

The 2002 McCain-Feingold law prohibits funds that “are donated for the purpose of supporting the activities of a federal or state officeholder” from being used for personal expenses, including clothing, but it doesn’t preclude party committees from doing so.

Politico.com first reported the expenditure on clothing, hair styling, makeup and other “campaign accessories” made in September, and the McCain camp couldn’t tamp down the story by saying that it intended to donate the items to charity after the election.

“With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses,” McCain spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt said. “It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign.”

However, in May 1993, McCain said, “The use of campaign funds for items which most Americans would consider to be strictly personal reasons, in my view, erodes public confidence and erodes it significantly.”

What’s eroding even more significantly – and quickly – could be the public’s confidence in Palin. For the first time Wednesday, according to a new MSNBC/Wall Street Journal poll, more people have a negative response to Palin than a positive one. The poll of 1,159 registered voters from Oct. 17 to 20 found that 47 percent viewed Palin negatively; 38 percent saw her in a positive light. The poll found that 55 percent felt she wasn’t qualified to be president.

In September, shortly after McCain asked her to join the GOP ticket, Palin enjoyed a 47 to 27 percent positive rating.

“Coming at a time that more Americans are being asked to do more with less, this doesn’t look good,” said Linda Basch, president of the nonpartisan National Council for Research on Women.

“The question about her clothing fits in with her two-dimensional portrayal in this campaign: She’s either the attack dog or the hot babe,” Basch said. “The American people (in the MSNBC/WSJ poll) are showing that they believe that she doesn’t have a command of domestic or foreign policy issues. She has not spoken out about the issues that matter in this campaign to women.

“And now, people feel the hot babe is not going to be able to fix things,” she said. …

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....13MAOF.DTL

Could you imagine the “National Council for Research on Women” referring to any Democrat s “the hot babe?”

Where are the women’s groups complaining about the reduction of Palin to her appearance?

Nowhere, of course.

I also don’t quite buy the polls touting Palin’s falling ratings.

If they’re true, McCain is done anyway, so it doesn’t make a difference.

Funny how every Republican I talk to says they’re voting for McCain because of Palin.

So if the Independents hate her, we lose.

But the Conservatives hate McCain, so the GOP would have lost anyway.

Six of one, a half dozen of another.

Meanwhile, I love this analysis:

Perhaps Palin’s self-appointed “hockey mom” image was a bit overblown.

“She was never a hockey mom, she was always the prom queen sitting in the back of the convertible waving to the hockey moms,” said Simon Doonan, creative director at Barneys New York, the high-end clothing store.

As a fashion expert, Doonan didn’t have a problem with Palin’s expenditures, as $150,000 doesn’t go as far as it used to – especially when you’re a national candidate making several personal appearances a day. He estimated that outfitting Palin – shoes to accessories – in the style she has been sporting would run about $5,000 per outfit.

“In my mind, ($150,000) is not nearly enough,” Doonan said. “She should be out there feeding the economy – as long as she is buying American and shopping retail.”

Once again, she’s not normal, she’s the “prom queen” – she’s too attractive to be taken seriously.

Part of the clothing affair is a double standard that female politicians face. Democrat John Edwards drew scorn during the primaries last year for receiving two $400 haircuts, but Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s wardrobe was dissected in ways almost equal to examinations of her health care policy.

“Men have it easy in that they have this uniform – a dark suit, white shirt and red tie – while women are expected to be different,” said Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics.

Personally, I’m looking forward to Obama winning and letting the press get on to the real job of destroying the America we all know.

I’m sick of it all and just don’t see how McCain/Palin have a snowball’s chance right now with the forces aligned against us.

And that’s without whatever last minute smear the Democrats have ready to roll November 3 that will be impossible to refute before people hit the polls.

Finally, I’d like to see what percentage of people believe Obama isn’t qualified to be President – it’s got to be near 55% even among those voting for him, because they’re so enraged with false anger at Republicans they’d vote for Hitler if he was running as a Democrat.

You know that’s gotta piss Hillary off…

From the Los Angeles Times:

Bratton records phone message supporting Obama

The endorsement, which is not yet being used, extols the Democratic presidential candidate’s record on ‘policing issues,’ the LAPD chief says.

By Joel Rubin

Los Angeles Police Chief William J. Bratton waded into the contentious U.S. presidential campaign Thursday, recording an automated telephone message on behalf of Democrat Barack Obama.

The message challenged Republican John McCain’s “record on policing issues and extolled Obama’s,” Bratton said in an interview. It comes, he said, in response to a telephone message recently made by former Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani in support of McCain and critical of Obama’s law enforcement bona fides.

A spokesperson for Obama declined to comment. According to Bratton, the campaign held off from making fast use of it, opting not to send it out to potential voters on Thursday. It was unclear when, or in which states, the campaign planned to use the recording.

Describing himself as “an independent,” Bratton said he decided to assist Obama because “Democrats are much more supportive on policing issues. Republicans are just not good on local policing.”

Bratton, one of the nation’s leading law enforcement figures, is widely credited for his success in dramatically reducing crime rates in Los Angeles and New York, where he led the Police Department for two years in the mid-1990s. The tit for tat with Giuliani is steeped in ill-will between the two: Giuliani, mayor in New York when Bratton was police commissioner, clashed with Bratton over credit for the falling crime rate. Bratton eventually resigned his post.

The recording is the first time Bratton has lent his considerable reputation to Obama’s campaign. The police chief was widely seen as a firm supporter of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton during her unsuccessful bid for her party’s nomination. The recording is bound to refuel incessant rumors that Bratton is looking to land the top spot at the FBI or Homeland Security in a Democratic administration. …

http://www.latimes.com/news/po.....7272.story

Let’s see, there are at least two things here.

First, I hope no one was drinking coffee while reading the line that “Democrats are more supportive on policing issues.” If not, don’t blame me for the fact that you need a new computer now.

Democrats? Supportive of Police? On which planet would that be? Would those be the same Democrats who sued the Los Angeles Police because their commands to disperse at an immigration rally were only given in English? The same Democrats who regularly sue the LAPD for profiling? Those Democrats?

Second, Giuliani isn’t a sitting official. By recording this message, you’ve just told any Republicans in Los Angeles, few as they are, that their Police Chief cares more about politics than about protecting them. Nice.

Finally, what was the whine about a few posts up about Palin naming political supporters to positions of import? Not that Barry would name a supporter to a top spot at the FBI or DHS – no, not at all…

Palin Denies Accepting $150,000 in Designer Clothes

VP candidate calls herself “frugal,” insists she did not accept wardrobe from RNC and “that is not who we are”

ORMOND BEACH, Fla. — Sarah Palin insisted in an interview on Thursday that she did not accept $150,000 worth of designer clothes from the Republican Party and said the media spotlight on the story is evidence of bias against women candidates.

“I think Hillary Clinton was held to a different standard in her primary race,” Palin said in an interview with the Chicago Tribune posted on the newspaper’s Web site Thursday night. “Do you remember the conversations that took place about her, say superficial things that they don’t talk about with men, her wardrobe and her hairstyles, all of that? That’s a bit of that double standard.”

Palin, who is John McCain’s vice presidential running mate, said the clothes were not worth $150,000 and were bought for the Republican National Convention.

Most of the clothes have never left the campaign plane and “that is not who we are,” she told the newspaper.

“It’s kind of painful to be criticized for something when all the facts are not out there and are not reported,” Palin said.

“That whole thing is just, bad!” she said. “Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are.”

News of the purchases of designer clothes, largely from upscale Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus, contrasts with the image Palin has crafted as a typical “hockey mom.”

McCain was asked several questions on Thursday about the shopping spree — and he answered each one more or less the same way: Palin needed clothes and they’ll be donated to charity.

“She needed clothes at the time. They’ll be donated at end of this campaign. They’ll be donated to charity,” McCain told reporters on his campaign bus between Florida rallies.

Asked for details on how they’ll be donated, McCain said, “It works by her getting some clothes when she was made the nominee of the party and it will be donated back to charity.”

Asked if he was surprised at the amount spent, McCain said, “It works that the clothes will be donated to charity. Nothing surprises me.”< ?b>

McCain offered no further comment, except to say that the Republican National Committee doesn’t buy his clothes.

Also on Thursday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a private watchdog group in Washington, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against Palin, the Republican National Committee and several political operatives alleging that the purchase of clothing for Palin and her family violates Federal Election Campaign Act.

The law prohibits a candidate for federal office from converting campaign funds to personal use. CREW notes that FEC regulations make clear the prohibition applies to clothing but also provide that donations by candidates to charity are not for personal use. CREW argued this exception might apply to Palin’s clothes but doesn’t appear to apply to clothes for her family.

Asked Wednesday who had paid for the suit he was wearing, Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden told WSLS-TV in Roanoke, Va.: “I pay for my suits. I pay for all of my own clothing.” …

http://elections.foxnews.com/2.....r-clothes/

Of course you’ll either not hear this in the MSM, or it will be reported with a knowing smirk and sneer.

Meanwhile I like the way McCain’s comment almost directly contradicts Palin’s.

I really wish Palin would simply admit she’s having to run against McCain, not with him… :-(

Palin appointed friends and donors to key posts in Alaska, records show

100-plus jobs went to campaign donors or their relatives, sometimes without apparent regard to qualifications. Several donors got state-subsidized loans for business ventures of dubious public value.

By Charles Pillar

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, plucked from relative obscurity in part for her reform credentials, has been eager to tout them in her vice presidential campaign.

“I took on the old politics as usual in Juneau when I stood up to the special interests and the lobbyists and the big oil companies and the good old boys,” Palin told the Republican National Convention in her acceptance speech. She said that as a new governor she “shook things up, and in short order we put the government of our state back on the side of the people.”

By midway through her first term, she had signed an ethics reform bill, increased oil profit taxes and tweaked Big Oil again by awarding a gas pipeline contract to a Canadian company.

In some other respects, a Los Angeles Times examination of state records shows, her approach to government was business as usual. Take, for example, the tradition of patronage. Some of Palin’s most controversial appointments involved donors, records show.

* More than 100 appointments to state posts — nearly 1 in 4 — went to campaign contributors or their relatives, sometimes without apparent regard to qualifications.

* Palin filled 16 state offices with appointees from families that donated $2,000 to $5,600 and were among her top political patrons.

* Several of Palin’s leading campaign donors received state-subsidized industrial development loans of up to $3.6 million for business ventures of questionable public value.

* Palin picked a donor to replace the public safety commissioner she fired. But the new top cop had to resign days later under an ethics cloud. And Palin drew a formal ethics complaint still pending against her and several aides for allegedly helping another donor and fundraiser land a state job.

Most new governors install friends and supporters in state jobs. But Alaska historians say some of Palin’s appointees were less qualified than those of her Republican and Democratic predecessors.

University of Alaska historian Steve Haycox said Palin has been a reformer. But he said she has a penchant for placing supporters, many of them ill-prepared, in high posts. He called it “cronyism” far beyond what previous governors have done and a contradiction of her high-minded philosophy.…

http://www.latimes.com/news/pr.....6906.story

Wow, can you imagine a politician appointing friends and donors to key posts?

I’m shocked, shocked I tell you.

She should have appointed her enemies and political opponents instead – the Democrats would have.

What?

They do the same?

Silly me.

I mean really, appointments from family members of donors? That never happens with Democrats,

But that’s OK – Democrats never even mention “reform” so they don’t need to even try.

From the (Madison) Wisconsin State Journal:

Van Hollen case tossed, may ease lines for voters

By Mark Pitsch

The decision by a Dane County circuit judge Thursday to toss out a lawsuit seeking to force the state to double-check voter registrations going back two years likely means a smoother Election Day, with fewer voters having to re-register at the polls and faster-moving lines, officials said.

But Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, who filed the suit against the state Government Accountability Board in September, said not doing the checks raises the odds of voter fraud, and he vowed to appeal.

The lawsuit sought to force the accountability board to order local clerks to check hundreds of thousands of voter registrations since January 2006 against state driver, death and felon databases to ensure accuracy and comply with the federal Help America Vote Act. The suit also sought to purge ineligible voters from the rolls.

Critics said the move would throw hundreds of thousands of registrations into doubt, possibly creating a post-election ballot-counting frenzy such as that seen in Florida after the 2000 presidential election. Van Hollen maintained the checks were needed to guard against fraud that could possibly sway the presidential election.

Ruling 12 days before the election, Judge Maryann Sumi said Van Hollen failed to show that state or federal law was being violated.

“Nothing in state or federal law requires that there be a data match as a condition on the right to vote,” Sumi said. “HAVA does not supplant Wisconsin’s constitutionally protected right to establish its own voter eligibility standards.”

Sumi also said that Van Hollen did not have standing to bring the lawsuit. The U.S. attorney general is charged with enforcing HAVA, she said, and Van Hollen should have asked the accountability board for a hearing on the matter before filing suit.

Van Hollen said he was disappointed but said he would appeal.

“We cannot lose sight of the goal of this lawsuit,” Van Hollen said in a statement. “Wisconsin needs an accurate statewide voter list. Wisconsin needs to comply with state and federal laws designed to protect the right to vote. Looking the other way is not an option.”

A spokesman said Van Hollen was still hopeful of a resolution before the Nov. 4 election and that the appeal, possibly directly to the state Supreme Court, would be filed soon.

Sumi also ruled Thursday that the state Republican Party has no standing to join the suit. Reince Priebus, chairman of the state party, said party lawyers would review the order and consider an appeal.

Lester Pines, a lawyer for the accountability board, called the ruling “an absolute validation.”

“Judge Sumi’s decision was exceptionally scholarly, well-reasoned and supported by the law,” Pines said. …

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/310899

So, just to sum up, a Wisconsin judge ruled that the Wisconsin AG “does not have standing” to enforce voter registration laws, only the Federal Government does.

Sounds like an Obama voter to me.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Sarah Palin’s college years left no lasting impression

In the five years of her collegiate career, spanning four universities in three states, Palin left behind few traces. Not many professors or students even remember her.

By Robin Abcarian

Reported from Moscow, Idaho — What can we learn about our political stars from impressions they made in college?

Sen. John McCain is remembered as a passionate contrarian who won the hearts of his classmates at the Naval Academy. Sen. Barack Obama, who attended Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School, is remembered as a daunting scholar and calming influence. Sen. Joe Biden, who had a brush with plagiarism at Syracuse University College of Law, is remembered fondly by professors who found him charming.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, however, is barely remembered at all.

In the five years of her collegiate career, spanning four universities in three states, Palin left behind few traces.

“Looking at this dynamic personality now, it mystifies me that I wouldn’t remember her,” said Jim Fisher, Palin’s journalism instructor at the University of Idaho, where she graduated with a bachelor of science degree in journalism in 1987.

Palin, he said, took his public affairs reporting class, an upper-division course limited to 15 students. “It’s the funniest damn thing,” Fisher said. “No one can recall her.”

“I don’t remember her,” said Roy Atwood, Palin’s academic advisor at the university.

Indeed, interviews with a dozen professors yielded not a single snippet of a memory.

Most were perplexed and frustrated that they could offer no insight into a woman who has become their most famous former student. Only a few classmates recalled her, and those with the strongest memories were people she had grown up with in Alaska. …

http://www.latimes.com/news/po.....9822.story

I wouldn’t expect my professors or fellow students to remember me either.

If you’re a quiet student who gets their work done why would you be notable?

Yet somehow this is bad; perhaps Palin should have held some protests instead.

From the Los Angeles Times:

The ‘real’ America, really

America today looks less and less like the one extolled by GOP mythmakers.

By Rosa Brooks

According to Sarah Palin, she and John McCain “believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hardworking, very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation.”

Um, very, um. … Yeah.

Palin later backed away from these remarks, but the McCain-Palin campaign’s staff and surrogates — and even the guy at the top of the ticket — keep hammering the same message: Some parts of America — and some Americans — are just more authentic and “pro-America” than others.

On Saturday, for instance, McCain advisor Nancy Pfotenhauer suggested that although northern Virginia may have “gone more Democratic,” “real Virginia” (the “part of the state that’s more Southern in nature”) will be “very responsive” to McCain. Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.) joined the chorus, telling the crowd at a McCain rally, “Liberals hate real Americans that work, and accomplish, and achieve, and believe in God.”

Hayes, like Palin, later forswore his remarks, but on Tuesday in western Pennsylvania — one of the few parts of the state where Barack Obama doesn’t hold a clear lead — McCain worked the same theme: Western Pennsylvania “is the most God-loving, most patriotic part of America.”

The GOP code isn’t hard to crack: There’s the America that might vote for Obama (a suspect America populated by people with liberal notions, big-city ways and, no doubt, dark skin), and then there’s the “real” America, where people live in small towns, believe in God and country, and are … well … white.

The divisive GOP rhetoric we’ve been hearing lately is hardly new. But with each passing year, the “real” America of GOP mythmaking bears less and less resemblance to the America most Americans live in.

About 80% of Americans live in metropolitan areas, not small towns. A third of us are ethnic and racial minorities, but that’s changing: Already,nearly 45% of children under 5 are minorities. Although 88%of us believe in God, 70% think that religions other than our own are equally valid routes to truth. And while 59% of us think that wearing an American flag pin is a decent way to show patriotism, even more of us (66%) think that protesting U.S. policies we oppose is a good way to show patriotism. These days, more than half of us say we prefer the Democratic Party to the Republican Party. …

http://www.latimes.com/news/op.....478.column

She’s actually proving the GOP’s point.

The majority of those living in metropolitan areas are liberals who think protests are somehow patriotic and are, of course Democrats.

Why we should let New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles drive policy for the rest of the country (you know, those “fly over” idiots who cling to Guns and God) is something she never quite makes clear, but I don’t think I need even ask if she has the infamous “Jesusland” graphic hanging on her office wall.

Of course there’s the little matter of race, too, but liberals are never afraid to inject racism on our behalf.

Sarah Palin’s RNC-funded makeover: a fashion do or don’t?

The beauty or scandal of the Republican vice presidential nominee’s new look appears to be in the eye of the beholder’s party.

By Robin Abcarian and Kate Linthicum

She portrays herself in campaign appearances as an average working woman with small-town values, a hockey mom who shops at Wal-Mart, the wife of a union member who works with his hands.

So the news that the Republican National Committee has bought Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her family nearly $150,000 worth of clothing since September has fueled charges of hypocrisy by her detractors and sparked questions about the legality of the expenditures.

At a time when GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain is struggling to convince voters that he understands their economic pain — introducing them to “Joe the Plumber” last week to prove it — his running mate’s shopping spree at the most rarefied retail temples may undercut his message.

“What is shocking is that in the middle of a credit crunch, when all the candidates are trying to demonstrate they understand Joe Six-Pack and Main Street, that Sarah Palin would go shopping at the high end of 7th Avenue,” said Susan Scafidi, a professor at Fordham University School of Law who specializes in fashion law. “I am surprised that the RNC was careless enough to let its bill show up in the press.”

The RNC listed the expenditures in its September and October Federal Election Commission filings. The website Politico first reported the story.

The purchases occurred primarily on Sept. 10 in New York and Minneapolis at Neiman Marcus ($75,062.63), Saks Fifth Avenue ($49,425.74) and Bloomingdale’s ($5,102.71). Some money was apparently spent on clothes for her husband, Todd ($4,902.08), and her children, including a $92 romper from an upscale Minneapolis baby store that her infant son wore at the Republican national convention.

The shopping spree cost about 75 times more than the average American spends per year on clothing; in 2006, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, that figure was $1,874. It also totaled more than the $125,000 Palin makes annually as governor.

In the February issue of Vogue, Palin joked that her preferred designers were “Patagonia and North Face.” But by the time she arrived onstage in St. Paul, Minn., last month to accept the nomination, her wardrobe transition was well underway: She wore a narrow black skirt and a Valentino silk jacket worth $2,500.

Though she has not disclosed the labels she is wearing, fashion observers think she has worn Gianfranco Ferre, St. John and Anne Klein. On the trail, she is accompanied by a hairstylist and makeup artist.

In Los Angeles on Wednesday, shoppers were split along partisan lines.

“It’s hypocritical for her to say she’s a hockey mom on one side and then spend $70,000 at Neiman’s,” said Floyd Allyn, 45, who was shopping at Target in West Hollywood. “It’s just like McCain not knowing how many houses he owns.”

But McCain supporter Christy Huber of Omaha was accepting. Shopping with friends in Beverly Hills, Huber, 60, paused in front of Saks Fifth Avenue. “If she had worn crappy clothes,” Huber said, “then everyone would have made fun of her for it.” …

http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....4359.story

The press is really trying so hard to get a “scandal” to stick to Palin, but nothing seems to be working.

Meanwhile, someone’s got to be able to come up with Hillary’s shopping receipts, not to mention Michelle Obama’s.

Surprisingly enough, someone from Hollywood had perspective:

Though voters may debate the wisdom of Palin’s purchases, and election law experts quibble, one wardrobe expert was impressed.

“I am an Obama supporter, but when I heard that for $150,000, they dressed her, her children and her husband, I thought, ‘that’s not much,’ ” said Vicki Sanchez, a costume designer who dressed Geena Davis as the first female U.S. president on the short-lived TV show “Commander in Chief.”

“When you start buying $3,000 suits, boots that cost anywhere from $800 and up, and designer shoes, which cost $500 at least, it goes fast,” Sanchez said. “She looks damn good. Get over it.”

New citizens eager to vote

Number of naturalizations swells in months before election

By Georgia Pabst

An episode of gout put Jiju Kalapurakkal on crutches Wednesday, but he was determined not to miss his naturalization ceremony at Milwaukee’s federal courthouse.

“I didn’t want to postpone it because I wanted to become a citizen before the election,” he said.

Kalapurakkal, 38, who came here from India 10 years ago, is among thousands swelling the ranks of new Americans just in time for Nov. 4.

“Since the summer of 2007, we’ve seen a tremendous surge of applications for naturalizations, which takes from six to 12 months,” said William Wright, a spokesman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in Washington, D.C.

One reason is the jump in the application fee from $300 to $595 in summer 2007, he said.

“But there was also a major movement from advocacy groups who pushed for naturalization as part of the get-out-the-vote campaign,” he said. “There was a lot of talk about comprehensive immigration reform, so many wanted to get in while they can. That motivated a lot of folks.” …

Ruby Pascual Briones, 52, of Williams Bay, who emigrated from the Philippines five years ago, said it’s her privilege and duty as a citizen to vote. She wasn’t shy about her presidential pick.

“I’m voting for McCain,” she said with a big smile. “I’m pro-life, conservative and Christian, and that’s who I’m going for.”

Armando Padilla, 34, a Mexican immigrant who works at a meat packing plant in Milwaukee, said he’s glad to become a citizen for the opportunity it will mean. He hopes one day to bring his parents here from León. He said he has not quite decided for whom to vote, although he’s leaning toward Barack Obama.

“I think he wants to help Hispanics,” he said. …

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=809355

You know Briones’ vote has got to piss off the advocacy groups.

But someone should let Padilla know of “Amnesty” McCain’s background.

[Moved to its own thread.]

Voter fraud, suppression battle to intensify as election approaches

By Greg J. Borowski

For those weary of the battle between Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama as the presidential election approaches, there is another clash sure to intensify in the final days: Fraud vs. Suppression.

Republicans and allies warn of voter fraud and attempts to steal the election, while Democrats and supporters decry voter suppression and intimidation.

That fight is being waged in legal filings, conference calls, formal protests and news releases across the country, including in Wisconsin, where a dispute over the statewide voter list goes before a Dane County judge today.

It may be easy to dismiss the debate as typical partisan wrangling. But the fight has a real impact on what voters experience at the polls and who casts ballots.

From one side: Are voter lists clean, to guard against ineligible votes being cast on Nov. 4? And the other: Will polling places operate smoothly, without long lines, so eligible voters don’t walk away in frustration?

In Wisconsin, the questions carry special importance. The 2004 election was decided by about 11,400 votes, or 0.4%. The state has one of the most open systems in the nation, with same day registration and no photo ID requirement.

“There’s no question, our laws place a great deal of trust in individual voters,” Bruce Landgraf, an assistant Milwaukee County district attorney focused on election issues, said Wednesday at a forum at the Marquette University Law School.

The debate will take center stage today, when a judge returns to the lawsuit filed by Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, a Republican, against the state Government Accountability Board.

At issue: Whether the board and local election officials will be required to compare people who registered between Jan. 1, 2006, and Aug. 5, 2008, against driver’s license records. Under federal law, those checks were supposed to start Jan. 1, 2006, but the state’s computer system couldn’t run the checks until this August.

The board says there is no time to make the checks before the election.

Van Hollen says the checks are needed to assure only valid voters are on the list. Critics, noting he is a state co-chair of McCain’s campaign, say the lawsuit reeks of partisanship. The accountability board says most of the discrepancies are minor, such as missing initials.

While that lawsuit has garnered the most attention, the fraud vs. suppression battle has played out in many ways and often focused on Milwaukee — the state’s largest city, a Democratic stronghold and site of election problems in 2004.

For instance, a coalition of labor unions recently sent letters to the city Election Commission threatening protests if they were not satisfied with the city’s election plans, from the number of voting machines assigned to each ward to staffing levels. The protests did not materialize after they talked with city officials.

The city has been a flashpoint in the national debate over voter registration drives run by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, known as ACORN.

In the final presidential debate, McCain said the group was “on the verge of perpetuating one of the greatest voter frauds in the history of this country” and highlighted links between Obama and ACORN. The FBI has said it is investigating the group.

Democrats have noted McCain has ties to a firm now embroiled in its own voter registration fraud allegations. And the Obama campaign has asked an independent prosecutor to review what it considers voter suppression efforts.

In the Milwaukee case, the city has referred 49 workers from ACORN and the Community Voters Project to the district attorney’s office. Charges related to fraudulent registration cards have been filed against three, all with the voters project.

Janet Boles, a political science professor at Marquette University, said the fraud vs. intimidation battle intensified after the 2000 election, in which a Florida recount gave the White House to Republican George W. Bush.

She noted it also coincides with another factor: rising turnout.

Numbers were up in 2004, and many believe a record turnout is possible this year.

“Those who dropped out and were not participating are disproportionately the poor,” said Boles. “Suddenly, we get blatant attempts at voter suppression just as those who were dropping out are dropping back in.” …

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=809369

What a shocking statement from a Marquette University professor! You’d think being a professor requires one to be liberal or something.

What a sad state of affairs as well that waiting in too long a line to vote is also now somehow “voter suppression,” as is merely observing:

A recent e-mail from a state party official seeking police officers and military officials to be poll watchers in “intimidating” wards in the city drew a rebuke from Democrats, who said the intent was to discourage voters.

“When Republicans send poll watchers into the city of Milwaukee, it’s an effort to reduce the number of people getting a ballot,” said Scot Ross, head of the advocacy group One Wisconsin Now.

Yes, I’m sure Republicans will be at polls with guns drawn to make sure the poor and minorities don’t vote… yet the left would like people to believe just that, and I’m sure that far too many people actually do.

From a delighted AP:

Telemarketers quit over anti-Obama phone calls

By Scott Bauer

MADISON — Telemarketers in Wisconsin and West Virginia asked to make calls bashing Barack Obama and linking him to 1960s radical William Ayers quit their jobs rather than read the required script.

The calls were paid for by the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee and are being placed in several states across the country.

In West Virginia, Fairmont State University student Chaylee Cole said she and a friend refused to call people and read a script last week that linked Obama to Ayers.

“I just didn’t agree with it,” Cole said Wednesday. “I didn’t know it if was true and I wasn’t going to call people and push this on them.”

Cole, 18, said she and her friend Kelsey Stalnaker left work that day without getting paid. Cole said she quit the following day, on Friday. Stalnaker did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

The McCain campaign defended the Ayers call.

“At no point has anyone disputed any point in this phone call,” said campaign spokeswoman Sarah Lenti. “Barack Obama has yet to answer the many questions the American people have about his connections to an unrepentant domestic terrorist. If the script is troubling, it is because many find Obama’s associations and judgment very troubling.”

Neither she nor Republican National Committee spokesman Chris Taylor would say how many states the call is being placed in. Democrats have reported receiving the call in battleground states across the country including Wisconsin, Ohio, Colorado, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Missouri.

Cole, a Democrat who said she will vote for Obama, felt the call crossed the line.

“Democrat or Republican, the candidates ought to be about what they can do best for our country and not slandering one’s name,” she said.

The call claims that “Barack Obama has worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge’s home and killed Americans. And Democrats will enact an extreme leftist agenda if they take control of Washington. Barack Obama and his Democratic allies lack the judgment to lead our country.”

Obama has denounced Ayers’ past violent activities and has said Ayers is not and has never been involved in the campaign. …

http://www.madison.com/tct/news/310763

So an idiot 18 year-old self-professed Democrat who is voting for Obama refuses to make a phone call for McCain because she in her bubbleheaded ignorance hasn’t done the research to know of Obama’s links to Ayers, and it’s news.

No bias. None at all.

Ex-GOP operative tells cautionary tale about ‘how to rig an election’

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) — Allen Raymond is living proof that political dirty tricksters do exist.

The former Republican political operative went to federal prison after he pleaded guilty to charges of phone harassment. He jammed the phone lines of New Hampshire’s Democratic Party on Election Day six years ago

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI.....index.html

Need I post anymore? We all know how this one turns out. Can anyone find me where in the MSM ACORN, or any other legitimate voter fraud, is linked to the Dems. Or how all the voter fraud this election is overwhelmingly biased toward Obama. No, they just need to dig up 6 year old dirt to smear the republicans. Needless to say he never stopped one person from voting, nor did he cast, nor was responsible for any fraudulent ballots. But none the less, he is a dirty trickster. And by the way, Republican is mentioned no less than 8 times in the article.

What media bias?