But let us not forget about the existence of various McCainocrats.

If your answer is “not much,” you are probably right.

He was against it before Barack Obama was for it. Never let it be said that Joe the Plumber doesn’t have backup for his very sensible position and concerns regarding wealth redistribution.

I had no idea that the KGB were back in business:

A state agency has revealed that its checks of computer systems for potential information on “Joe the Plumber” were more extensive than it first acknowledged.

Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, disclosed today that computer inquiries on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher were not restricted to a child-support system.

The agency also checked Wurzelbacher in its computer systems to determine whether he was receiving welfare assistance or owed unemployment compensation taxes, she wrote.

Jones-Kelley made the revelations in a letter to Ohio Senate President Bill M. Harris, R-Ashland, who demanded answers on why state officials checked out Wurzelbacher.

Harris called the multiple records checks “questionable” and said he awaits more answers. “It’s kind of like Big Brother is looking in your pocket,” he said.

As the story indicates, Jones-Kelly donated $2,500 to the Obama campaign. The story “uncovered four uses of state computer systems to access personal information on Wurzelbacher.” As Auric Goldfinger put it, “once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time is enemy action.”

What precisely do we call it when something nefarious happens for the fourth time?

There were a lot of errors and overstatements in last night’s Obamamercial. They are cataloged here. Since the election is coming up in a matter of days, we can assume that there will be a lot of attention paid to these errors–along with suitable and appropriate commentary concerning what these errors say about the campaign.

Right?

Courtesy of an Iraq war veteran. The video can also be found here.

I presume the terms “absolute moral authority” apply here.

Incidentally, this post does not presume that Barack Obama opposed or opposes the reconstruction effort in Iraq out of bad faith. Far from it. But it does argue that he is wrong to have opposed it and wrong to deny his error in denigrating the effects of the surge and the counterinsurgency effort that have radically transformed things for the better in Iraq.

I didn’t catch this evening’s Obamamercial, though being a political junkie, I am sure that I will find a way to watch a replay. But the Economist saw the broadcast and came away with some choice catches in its liveblogging of the event:

8:06: “Cut taxes for those making less than $200,000″. Didn’t that used to be $250,000?

[. . .]

8:25: I like the words that keep appearing next to Mr Obama. It’s very Stephen Colbert.

8:24: Mr Obama talks about how Mark Dowd in Louisville can’t make ends meet…as Mr Dowd piles his plate full of pork.

8:21: Wow, they are really exaggerating his legislative accomplishments. Did Mr Obama really change the way Washington works in his four years in the Senate?

For this, they delayed baseball? Oh, and be sure to read that 8:06 observation a few times. Evidently, the income levels to get tax cuts keeps shifting.

Richard Epstein thinks not. Jacob Weisberg should take a gander at the Epstein op-ed, but since Weisberg is more intent on making an ideological point than he is on actual making a rigorous observation, one suspects that he will not take the time to pay attention to Epstein’s critique.

But that is more Weisberg’s loss and less Epstein’s.

Rasmussen:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Barack Obama attracting 50% of the vote nationwide while John McCain earns 47%. This is the first time McCain has been within three points of Obama in more than a month and the first time his support has topped 46% since September 24 (see trends). One percent (1%) of voters prefer a third-party option and 2% are undecided.

Read it all; McCain and Obama have virtually identical favorability ratings according to the poll. McCain campaign pollster Bill McInturff presents more evidence that the race is tightening. Gallup had Obama up by only two points–within the margin of error–yesterday, assuming a traditional turnout model.

We may yet be up longer than people expect us to be on Election Night. And whatever the outcome, the fact that McCain is keeping it this close in a year that is supposed to be nightmarish for GOP political prospects tells you that America essentially is a center-right country. Good luck in trying to push that “New New Deal” without encountering some serious voter backlash.

Let’s have more reporting on this. It seems kinda important:

Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.

The Obama organization said its extensive review has ensured that the campaign has refunded any improper contributions, and noted that Federal Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of donations.

In recent weeks, questionable contributions have created headaches for Obama’s accounting team as it has tried to explain why campaign finance filings have included itemized donations from individuals using fake names, such as Es Esh or Doodad Pro. Those revelations prompted conservative bloggers to further test Obama’s finance vetting by giving money using the kind of prepaid cards that can be bought at a drugstore and cannot be traced to a donor.

The problem with such cards, campaign finance lawyers said, is that they make it impossible to tell whether foreign nationals, donors who have exceeded the limits, government contractors or others who are barred from giving to a federal campaign are making contributions.

“They have opened the floodgates to all this money coming in,” said Sean Cairncross, chief counsel to the Republican National Committee. “I think they’ve made the determination that whatever money they have to refund on the back end doesn’t outweigh the benefit of taking all this money upfront.”

Yup. And how many people actually think that the Obama campaign would have given money back if there had not been at least some attention paid to the lax security measures and lack of disclosures surrounding its campaign contribution efforts?

I call shenanigans on this entire operation. Anyone would. There is a lot of funny business going on with the Obama campaign and that funny business could very well constitute actual fraud. Are we going to proceed directly to the coronation or are we actually going to have a discussion concerning whether the Obama campaign skirted campaign finance laws in its effort to get the best funded political operation on the planet?

Joe Wurzelbacher is evidently a “neocon.” Check out the supposed “reason” why.

There are a lot of people who maintain that “neocon” is, in the hands of some, a way to smear a certain group of people–a group to which I proudly belong. Andrew Sullivan just went a long way towards justifying those concerns. And yes, others have noticed Sullivan’s tendency to engage in this kind of despicable rhetoric.

Indisputably, it is McCain. And indisputably, that is to McCain’s credit. In tough economic times, this consideration should factor mightily in the voting booth.

Or do people now think that Smoot-Hawley was a good idea to embrace during an economic slowdown?

Inadvertent straight talk like the kind commented on here would be getting a lot more attention. Wonder how much the income threshold will come down after the election if the Obama-Biden ticket prevails. And why on Earth should we feel comfortable enough to venture to find out?

As always, it is fair play.

I always get amused by those who claim that Barack Obama will get along famously and wonderfully with leaders around the world and that his election would magically cause tensions between the United States and other countries to disappear. These assertions are nonsensical; nation-states have permanent interest that outlive and go beyond whatever influence is exercised on foreign policy by the specific personalities in charge of a particular nation-state.

In the event that we needed confirmation that Obama would not–contrary to popular opinion–be received like some conquering hero by the international community, I give you this:

Read More →

Link:

Two people were arrested Monday afternoon after an altercation led to five Republican campaign workers being sprayed with Mace at their headquarters in Galax.

Galax Police Chief Rick Clark said officers were dispatched shortly before 1 p.m. to the Galax Republican headquarters on East Grayson Street when a caller reported someone had sprayed office workers with Mace.

Responding officers arrested Daniel Cason Meinecke, 29, and Cara Annis Hindman, 26, both of Galax.

[. . .]

Read More →

I would add commentary, but this story speaks for itself:

In a room full of television industry executives, no one seemed inclined to defend MSNBC on Monday for what some were calling its lopsidedly liberal coverage of the presidential election.

Read More →

Back in 2006, Democrats were telling us that we ought to vote them into office because one-party rule was bad and we wanted to have divided government.

Nowadays, they are telling us that there is nothing wrong with one-party rule . . . so long as they are the party that is doing the ruling:

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said Monday that he’s looking forward to one party controlling all aspects of government, despite GOP charges that it would be a disastrous Nov. 4 outcome.

“Republicans had a chance to rule. They failed miserably. I think it’s time to give the other party a chance,” Dean said on MSNBC.

Of course, when Democrats had one-party rule from 1977-1981 and 1993-1995, the voters thought that Democrats made a hash of things and elected Republicans in droves, so one does not quite know what to make of Howard Dean’s statement.

But isn’t that always the case with Howard Dean?

Read More →

Another excellent video from Dan Mitchell and the folks at Cato, who stand athwart conventional wisdom and force its denizens to rethink their assumptions:

An excellent case put forth by Gary Becker, who is worth at least 1 million Naomi Kleins.