McCain will carry N. C. by at least 10 points

A poll of North Carolina voters taken just after the end of the RNC and released yesterday has Sen. McCain up 20 points over Sen. Obama.

Most recent head-to-head polls of N. C. voters show McCain up by single digits, in some cases as few as 3 or 4 points.

So should we put much stock in this most recent poll?

People can decide that for themselves.

I’m treating it as the kind of outlier poll that points in the right direction, but overstates the margin.

My call – and I think I’m being conservative (small “c”) – is that McCain will carry N. C. by at least 10 points.

Why do I believe that?

Most of the “good news” about Obama – that he’s the “change candidate,” that he’s “the post-racial candidate,” “that he wants to ‘shake things up in Washington,’” etc., - is already well-known to N. C. voters.

We had a high-visibility Obama-Clinton primary here this Spring. Senator Obama and his wife were in the state often. They were very effective in getting their message out. Their efforts were backed by a large, organized, enthusiastic and heavily-financed campaign apparatus.

If I’m not mistaken, Obama spent more on his primary than any other presidential nominee candidate in our state’s history.

On top of all that, Obama’s media coverage was very positive to say the least.

Most of the N. C. media went along reciting his campaign themes without giving them serious scrutiny. I can’t recall Obama ever being asked tough, fair, and important questions such as:

“Senator, you say you’re a ‘post-racial’ candidate. But you’ve accepted the endorsement of one of the most powerful political organizations in this state – The Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People – which excludes all but blacks from membership. How do you square that with your post-racial stance?

And how is the Durham Committee’s racially exclusionary membership policy different from that of other groups with racially exclusionary membership policies?

But with much of the “good news” about Sen. Obama widely-known, N. C. polls still, as I’ve noted, consistently show him trailing Sen. McCain by single digits, the +20 outlier excepted .

Assuming the polls are a reasonably accurate gauge of Obama’s standing with N. C. voters, can he improve his standing with them?

I’m sure some will say, “Yes.”

But I can’t think of much he can do to improve his standing between now and election day; and I can think of a number of issues and factors likely to lower it.

I know his supporters say wait until voters hear Obama’s economic plan.

But North Carolinians have already heard it: from Vice-president Gore in 2000 and Sen. Kerry in 2004.

Let’s be honest: Obama’s economic plan is repackaged liberalism: just what Gore and Kerry promised.

For the record, Bush carried this state in 2000 by 13 points and in 2004 by 12 points.

By the time Election Day comes around the GOP will have seen to it that voters here know Sen. Obama was ranked the number 1 liberal in the Senate by National Journal. (The National Journal gave Sen. Biden had a pretty high liberal rating, too.)

Liberal presidential candidates just don’t do well in the old Tar Heel state.

That’s the main reason I feel safe saying McCain should carry this state by at least 10 points.

In future posts I’ll offer other reasons why I’m confident North Carolina belongs is the “Solidly for McCain” column.

Your thoughts?

The Churchill Series – Sept. 9, 2008

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

In the Autumn 1982 edition the Churchill Centre’s quarterly, Finest Hour, historian Richard Langworth reviewed Clementine Churchill (Houghton Mifflin, 1979), a biography by her daughter, Mary Soames and Family Album (Houghton Mifflin, 1982), Soames sequel to Clementine Churchill. Excerpts from Langworth’s review follows: - - -

This reviewer should begin by admitting to serious prejudice, which influenced his judgment: he thinks Lady Soames is, to borrow a piece of Georgia vernacular, a peach.

But the most critical reviewer would be hardpressed to complain about CLEMENTINE CHURCHILL, a tour de force in a class by itself; or about her sequel, FAMILY ALBUM, just released by the same publishers. Both books are in their way "standard works," mandatory for any Churchill bookshelf, and so far ahead of similar works as to be incomparable.

CLEMENTINE CHURCHILL is of course the second "Clemmie" biography, but Fishman's MY DARLING CLEMENTINE was justifiably criticized as a potboiler. Perhaps this has to do with the fact that CSC was still alive when Fishman wrote it - and CSC was a very private person. Her daughter Mary undertook a really authoritative biography on the understanding that it would not be published in Lady Churchill's lifetime.

All that aside, it is a tremendous, inspiring story, a love story first and foremost, for the wonderful relationship between Sir Winston and Clementine must be labeled thus; yet it is also a professional, well-researched, competent history, with Clemmie's faults not expunged from the record, though they were overwhelmingly exceeded by her virtues.

Lady Churchill was, of course, first and foremost, the perfect mate and foil for her complex genius-husband: "Clementine had no hobbies, such as gardening - that great solace and refuge for countless Englishwomen. For her it was more a matter of administration - not an absorbing or satisfying occupation; and her own active involvement stopped after deadheading roses and irises. Nor did tapestry, knitting or embroidery . . . appeal to her . . . she had lost the habit of driving [along with its] blissful measure of independence . . . Throughout her married life, Clementine's first priority had been. to run her home. Her standards of perfection never altered, nor her attention to minute detail."

The great strain of being Mrs. Churchill, the recurrent grappling with what WSC called the Black Dog - depression - following the Dardanelles, Plug Street, the loss of office in 1929, the bittersweet Thirties, the 1945 election, the 1955 retirement, are all measured here, and one gets the impression that each took its toll on Clementine.

But the real lady is here too: the determined loyalist, the closet radical, the saviour of social occasions otherwise likely to be Winston-monologues, with that all-pervading interest in those around her.

No one can know without reading this book the true greatness of Lady Churchill, nor appreciate the crucial role she played in delivering, unsullied by events, an ebullient Winston, time after time, crisis after crisis, to inspire and ennoble the world. . . .

The remainder of Langworth’s review is here. I hope you read it.

Langworth’s review is only one of thousands of Churchilliana documents the Churchill Centre has made available on the Net; thereby helping sustain his legacy and inform future generations.

Politico: Obama just “poked fun"

From Politico - - -

Amie Parnes reports from Lebanon, VA:

Obama poked fun of McCain and Palin's new "change" mantra.

"You can put lipstick on a pig," he said as the crowd cheered. "It's still a pig."

"You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."

"We've had enough of the same old thing."

The crowd apparently took the "lipstick" line as a reference to Palin, who described the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull in a single word: "lipstick." ...

Politico’s entire post’s here.

Did Sen. Obama, a long-time friend of the anti-America racist Jeremiah Wright and terrorist Bill Ayers, just “poke[] fun” at “McCain and Palin's new ‘change’ mantra?”

Is Politico sure Obama wasn’t really “lashing out?"

Please don’t call me a racist.

I’m just asking.

Obama wouldn’t use 527s. Remember?

It was all part of the new, post-racial, “change you can believe in” politics.

“That’s why I’m voting for Senator Obama.“

If he got his party’s nomination, Sen. Obama promised to campaign using public funds. He said he didn’t want “to be beholden to the special interests.”

He got the nomination and now Obama’s taking hundreds of millions from those special interests he said he didn’t want “to be beholden to.”

His public funds pledge? Forget about it.

But there was still his pledge not to encourage and get involved with those nasty 527s.

We were led to believe only Republicans did that.

Obama Come to Save Us made it clear he’d never get involved with the 527s.

Until today.

From Marc Ambinder at the Obama-supporting, left-wing The Atlantic.com:

… An Obama adviser privy to the campaign's internal thinking on the matter [of 527s] says that, with less than two months before the election and with the realization that Republicans have achieved financial parity with Democrats, they hope that Democratic allies -- what another campaign aide termed "the cavalry" -- will come to Obama's aid. [ Financial parity? It’s polls showing a McCain-Palin surge that has Team Obama and his MSM Tank Corps panicked and calling in the 527 “cavalry.” - - JinC]

The Obama campaign can't ask donors to form outside groups; it can only communicate, through the public and the media, with body language, tells and hints.

The upshot: Obama's campaign will no longer object to independent efforts that hammer John McCain, just as, in their mind, the McCain campaign has not objected to those efforts targeted at Obama. "I assume with their 527s stirring, some [Democratic] ones will as well," another senior campaign official said.

The money is there. The top two 527s -- the Service Employees International Union and America Votes -- are liberal in orientation. The SEIU fund has contributed to other 527 efforts, and America Votes has earmarked most of its money for what it calls the "largest grassroots voter mobilization" in history. . . .

There’s more.

You can read it all here.

World’s easiest prediction: The slimes and smears we’ve seen from major news organizations seeking to destroy Gov. Sarah Palin’s personal reputation and public career will seem like nothing in a few weeks.

Team Obama and Obama’s Tank Corps are just warming up.

Newest N. C. poll: McCain +20

ABC11-WTVD is reporting - - -

In an election for President of the United States in North Carolina Tuesday, September 09, Republican John McCain suddenly and breathtakingly surges to a 20-point win over Democrat Barack Obama, 58% to 38%, according to this latest exclusive SurveyUSA election poll conducted for ABC11-WTVD.

In 3 previous SurveyUSA NC tracking polls, McCain had led by 8, 5, and 4 points. Today: 20. McCain has gained ground in every demographic group. Among men, McCain led by 9 last month, 27 today. Among women, Obama led by 2 last month, trails by 12 today. McCain holds 9 of 10 Republican voters; Obama holds 3 of 4 Democratic voters; independents, who were split last month, break today crisply for McCain, where, in the blink of an eye, he is up by 25.

The following was asked of 671 likely voters (more data on collection listed at the bottom):

• If the election for President were today, would you vote for ... (choices rotated) Republican John McCain? Or, Democrat Barack Obama?
  
  58% McCain (R)
  38% Obama (D)
  2% Other
  2% Undecided

The Results of a SurveyUSA Election Poll
Geography Surveyed: North Carolina
Data Collected: 09/06/2008 - 09/08/2008

McCain is now in front among the educated and less educated, among the affluent and less affluent. He's polling at 64% in Coastal Carolina (up from 57%), at 60% in Charlotte (up from 53%), and at 54% in Raleigh / Greensboro (up from 44%). Pro-Life voters backed McCain 2:1 last month, 4:1 this month.

The rest of the story’s here.

I’ll say more about this poll and the presidential race in North Carolina tonight.

Just want to get this newest poll news to you now.

Red-State Feminism

Marriage and Caste in America author Kay Hymowitz writes about it at City Journal’s site - - -

Sarah Palin may be today’s Elvis, but that doesn’t mean she’ll be the Queen. Vice presidential nominees rarely change the course of presidential politics, and despite last week’s Google records, Palin may well take her place in the nation’s large pantheon of would-be veeps whose names history has forgotten.

Still, beware of underestimating Palinsanity, as blogger Ann Althouse has described the storm of comment that the Alaskan governor has aroused. Whatever Palin’s political impact, her cultural significance is profound. For better and for worse, she introduces a new and likely long-running cultural type to the national stage—the red-state feminist.

Of course, the feminist commentariat, primarily coastal and upper-middle-class, has been quick to deny that Palin is any sort of feminist at all. Yes, Palin can boast political success, activism, authority, and self-confidence in front of an audience of 37 million, and, though less widely discussed (perhaps because so profoundly envied), an egalitarian marriage of the sort that has become the foundational principle of feminist utopia.

But in most other respects, especially her position on abortion, she has struck female media types as something more like the Anti-Feminist. She is a “humiliation for America’s women” (Judith Warner for the New York Times) and a tool of the “patriarchs” (Gloria Steinem for the Los Angeles Times).

But the crucial point here is that Palin never wanted to be part of Steinem’s club, and in that respect she speaks for many of her sex. (emphasis added)
The large majority of women—surveys have put the number at somewhere around 75 percent—shy away from calling themselves feminists, even while supporting some movement goals like equal pay. The primary reason for their coyness: feminism’s ambivalence at best, and hostility at worst, toward motherhood and marriage. …

The rest of Hymowitz’s article’s here.

Warner, Steinem and feminists like them can't tolerate women who don’t behave like malleable, go-along members of NOW.

“Hurry and get that abortion. There’s no telling what could happen if you delay. This is a downright mean country.”

“NOW’s not saying Bill’s conduct was perfect. But she’s 22. And he’s done so much for our cause.”

I don’t wonder so many women don’t want to be identified as “feminists.”

Amazon has more about Hymowitz’s book, including 12 reader reviews, here.

Law Prof debunks WaPo’s latest Palin hit piece

Today’s Washington Post headlines:

Palin Billed State for Nights Spent at Home

Taxpayers Also Funded Family's Travel

After examining WaPo’s claims George Mason Univ. School of Law Professor David Bernstein concludes at Volokh Conspiracy:

[Palin] apparently maintained two residences, the governor's mansion in Juneau, which by state law is her official work "base" and where assumedly she didn't get a per diem (but where her predecessor had a personal chef whom she let go), and Wasilla, from where she commuted to Anchorage for work when the legislature wasn't in session.

Saintly to take the per diem she was legally entitled to when in the second residence? No.

Worthy of the lead headline on Washingtonpost.com? Please!

Not illegal, not unethical, and not a scandal. (Emphasis added)

No, not illegal, not unethical, and not a scandal.

But the members of Obama’s Tank Corp at the Washington Post were able to fire a hit piece at Gov. Palin anyway.

WaPo’s hit piece is here. Bernstein’s takedown of it's here.

Obama lashes out at McCain, Palin

Usually Sen. Obama’s MSM Tank Corps claim he's “responding to attacks” from critics.

The critics, as the Tank Corps' stories usually spin it, “have lashed out at the Senator who wants to bring a new tone to politics and is refusing to engage in personal attacks on his opponents.”

Etc., etc. . . .

But now, one of Obama’s leading Tank Corps divisions, Agence France Presse, fires this "news":

Barack Obama ripped into John McCain and Sarah Palin as never before Monday, accusing his Republican White House foes of "shameless" dishonesty with their claim to be "mavericks" ready to shake up Washington.

McCain and Palin were "lying about their records," the Obama campaign said after the Republican running mates advertised themselves in a television spot as the "original mavericks" who would stand up for hard-pressed voters. . . .
"I've got to admit, these folks are shameless," Obama told a rally here, displaying a passion and an intensity rarely seen from the Illinois senator. . . .

The rest of AFP’s story’s here.

Does AFP expect intelligent people to believe the meme about Obama's "passion and an intensity rarely seen?"

Sen. Obama was hugely passionate and intense after his racist, anti-American friend and pastor of almost 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, said he was “just another politician.”

Remember Obama's obvious upset when he said Wright was not “respecting” him.

Obama was also obviously passionate and intense when he publicly disowned Wright, something he'd said just weeks before in Philadelphia he could no more do than disown the black people.

I could cite other examples but you get the idea.

The entire AFP story's here.

BTW – When will journalists such as Maureen Dowd, Barry Saunders, Andrew Sullivan and Elizabeth Bumiller start insisting Sen. And Mrs. Obama answer questions about their long-term close friendships and activist relationships with Wright, terrorist Bill Ayers and convicted felons Kwame Kilpatrick and Tony Rezko?

The Churchill Series – Sept. 8, 2008

(One of a series of weekday posts about the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

To mark the 100th Anniversary Winston and Clementine Churchill’s marriage this Sept. 12 I’ve been running a series within the Series focused on the lifetime of love and support they gave each other.

Today’s post contains excerpts from a letter Clementine wrote Winston while taking a brief holiday in France in 1921. Winston had remained behind in London to tend to government business.

The F. E. Smith Clementine refers to was Churchill’s closest friend. They were each godfather to the other’s only son and together they founded The Other Club, composed of “agreeable people.” The club’s by-laws state its sole purpose was “to dine.”

Clementine didn’t like F. E., tried to discourage the friendship and even asked Churchill to break it off. She thought Winston drank and gambled too much when with Smith. But there’s nary a hint of any of that in the letter.

The Lt. Col. Maclean mentioned in the letter is John Bayne Maclean, the Canadian founder of The Maclean Publishing Company and Maclean’s Magazine, still today one of Canada’s most respected print publications.

Maclean and Churchill had recently clashed over a number of issues involving Anglo-Canadian relations.

__________________________

18 February 1921

Hotel Bristol
Beaulieu-sur-Mer

My Darling Winston,

Here I am feeling rather lonely in this vast hotel full of middle-class English people. But I have made the acquaintance of your formidable foe Lt. Col. J. B. Maclean.

I told Colonel Maclean that I had heard that he was a strong Imperialist and that you were one also, & that being so he ought to “wait & see” before attacking you.

He then talked a lot about F. E. & said that a lot of his prejudice against you was owing to the fact that you were his friend – I asked him why he did not like F. E. & he said that his visit to America & Canada during the War was a series of blunders & insolences.

That at every public dinner he was drunk, that every speech he made was tactless, patronizing & in bad taste, that at one town when he arrived some pretty women were asked to meet him at dinner & that he made a bet he would kiss all seven of them before the evening was out etc – etc – etc –

I told Colonel Maclean that since all these happenings F. E. had become Lord Chancellor & that he was said to be one of the greatest Lord Chancellors that had ever been, that he couldn’t have been nearly as drunk as he seemed, that he was a tremendous sportsman (hunting, tennis, etc), that his wish to kiss the seven ladies only indicated his general admiration of transatlantic women & that anyhow you weren’t in the least like him.

I then encouraged him to talk about Canada & himself which he did at enormous length.

He is naïf, vain, touchy, kindhearted, horribly energetic and vital. …

______________________________________________

You can easily visualize Churchill smiling and nodding as he read the letter.

For the last 56 years of his life Winston Spenser Churchill had no wiser or more devoted friend than Clementine Hozier Churchill.

The letter excerpts are found on pg. 231 of Speaking for Themselves: The Personal Letters of Winston and Clementine Churchill. Edited by their daughter, Mary Soames. (Black Swan, 1999)

WaPo editorial: “Ms. Palin's Pipeline”

A Washington Post editorial today says Gov. Sarah Palin’s “attempt to deliver natural gas from Alaska is revealing about her governing style.”

WaPo continues - - -

…Ms. Palin is indeed correct about the need to tap the 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas under Alaska's North Slope, the same region whose oil made the state wealthy but which has begun to run dry. …

Yet for decades the idea has been deadlocked by federal and state politics -- and unless the United States can install a pipeline to transport Alaska's gas soon, companies may commit to foreign sources of liquefied natural gas, thus locking in long-term dependency on imports. (emphasis added)

Congress passed legislation to expedite a pipeline in 2004. Ms. Palin's predecessor as governor, Republican Frank H. Murkowski, attempted to negotiate a deal with the three oil companies that control the North Slope gas, Exxon Mobil, BP and Conoco Phillips. His plan would have awarded the companies a long-term tax freeze in return for relatively weak commitments to actually build the pipeline.

But even though Vice President Cheney and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) lobbied hard for Mr. Murkowski's approach, Alaska's public and legislature balked, viewing the proposal as stacked in favor of the Big Three oil companies.

Ms. Palin rode criticism of Mr. Murkowski's deal to victory over him in the 2006 Republican gubernatorial primary and then to the governor's office later that year.

She reversed Mr. Murkowski's strategy, asking the legislature to pass a law setting criteria for a deal, then throwing the project open to companies other than the Big Three.

The result was a commitment by an experienced pipeline company, TransCanada, to build the project, which may take 10 years, in return for $500 million in state seed money derived from Alaska's recent oil windfall.

The oil companies still control the gas. So, if TransCanada actually gets all the necessary permits, assembles financing and builds the pipeline, the Big Three will have to be persuaded, years from now, to ship their gas through it on reasonable terms. Meanwhile, BP and Conoco Phillips have announced plans to build a pipeline of their own without the state's backing -- a sign that the political and economic wrangling over this immense and risky project is far from over.

But it is also a sign that Ms. Palin's outflanking of the oil companies injected some competition and urgency into a process that was previously stalled. Perhaps her Democratic opponent for the governorship in 2006, who campaigned on similar ideas, would have achieved these results. Nevertheless, Ms. Palin actually did.

The entire editorial’s here.

The WaPo editorial has, I’m sure, already upset Team Obama and its MSM hatchet crew trying to destroy Palin before the public gets to know her.

It also reminded me of a post last week in which I linked to a CNBC interview with Gov. Palin in which she discussed fossil and renewable energy development and use consistent with respect for the environment.

I’ve never heard a political leader of either party speak so knowledgeably and easily about those matters in combination.

The interview, which lasts 14 minutes, can be accessed here.

How USA Today treated REALLY bad news

One of the Obama Tank Corps most important divisions, USA Today, battled yesterday with how to present a REALLY bad news report which began:

The Republican National Convention has given John McCain and his party a significant boost, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken over the weekend shows, as running mate Sarah Palin helps close an "enthusiasm gap" that has dogged the GOP all year.

McCain leads Democrat Barack Obama by 50%-46% among registered voters, the Republican's biggest advantage since January and a turnaround from the USA TODAY poll taken just before the convention opened in St. Paul. Then, he lagged by 7 percentage points.

But those first two paragraphs don’t give readers the most important news of the damage suffered by Obama-Biden.

Yes, yes, I know. Journalists are supposed to get the most important news into the first two paragrahphs. They're the ones readers are most apt to read and remember.

But USA Today is part of the Obama Tank Corps. So you'll have to go to the eighth paragraph for that news because its bad for the O-B team. I've put the key sentence in the graf in bold.

The convention bounce has helped not only McCain but also attitudes toward Republican congressional candidates and the GOP in general.

"The Republicans had a very successful convention and, at least initially, the selection of Sarah Palin has made a big difference," says political scientist Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia. "He's in a far better position than his people imagined he would be in at this point."

However, in an analysis of the impact of political conventions since 1960, Sabato concluded that post-convention polls signal the election's outcome only about half the time. "You could flip a coin and be about as predictive," he says. "It is really surprising how quickly convention memories fade."

McCain has narrowed Obama's wide advantage on handling the economy, by far the electorate's top issue. Before the GOP convention, Obama was favored by 19 points; now he's favored by 3.

The Republican's ties to President Bush remains a vulnerability. In the poll, 63% say they are concerned he would pursue policies too similar to those of the current president. Bush's approval rating is 33%.

In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote. The survey of 1,022 adults, including 959 registered voters, has a margin of error of +/— 3 points for both samples.

Among the findings:

• Before the convention, Republicans by 47%-39% were less enthusiastic than usual about voting. Now, they are more enthusiastic by 60%-24%, a sweeping change that narrows a key Democratic advantage. Democrats report being more enthusiastic by 67%-19%.

• Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a national unknown before McCain chose her for the ticket 10 days ago, draws a strong reaction from voters on both sides. Now, 29% say she makes them more likely to vote for McCain, 21% less likely.
Obama's choice of Delaware Sen. Joe Biden as running mate made 14% more likely to vote for the Democrat, 7% less likely.

• McCain's acceptance speech Thursday received lower ratings than the one Obama gave a week earlier: 15% called McCain's speech "excellent" compared with 35% for Obama.

Raleigh N&O editor’s blatantly partisan email (updated)

Error Alert: N&O Executive Editor John Drescher is not the author of the email discussed below. Senior Editor Linda Williams is.

I'll say more this evening. Right now I just want to correct as quickly as possible.

I regret my error which was based on information given to me by people who have been reliable in the past.

I'll be sending a note to Drescher acknowledging and apologizing for my error.

John
__________________________________________________



Readers who complain to the McClatchy Company’s Raleigh News & Observer about the paper’s blatant liberal/leftist Anything for Obama bias usually get a quick dismissal.

The staff's default response to criticism is "The N&O's fair and accurate.” (That’s also the promotional slogans the N&O uses when drumming up advertising contracts.)

Sometimes an editor or reporter will go so far as to tell readers, “It’s you who have the bias.” I know that first hand.

With that as background, let’s turn to G. D. Gearino’s eponymous blog. Gearino’s a career journalists and prize-winning author who some years back worked at the N&O as a business editor and columnist. He has many friends at the paper.

Here’s part of a recent Gearino post - "The curtain pulled aside" - with my comments below the star line.

From Gearino - - -

… It’s common for a top editor at the N&O to send out an inter-office note most days celebrating the high points of that morning’s paper (as well as occasionally pointing out a lapse).

Among the staff, those notes prompt a daily exercise in something very close to Kremlinology, as they are pondered and studied for clues as to which way the management wind blows.

Below is [executive editor John Drescher's] note that was distributed to the staff yesterday, reprinted here as I received it. I will make no comment, lest I sway your judgment on what it reveals about the people who oversee the most influential newspaper in the state. But feel free to share your thoughts.:

A few comments on some good work in today’s paper:

–A lively front page that gave our readers plenty to talk about.

Has the political right truly turned the corner and will cease to demonize opponents on so-called moral issues, or are we witnessing the boldest, most cynical, most hypocritical political spin in modern history?

What is one to make of John McCain’s greeting at the Twin Cities airport yesterday of America’s most famous baby mama with a warm hug, and the apparent attaboy pat on the shoulder for the self-described “f***ing redneck” baby daddy?

Are we now celebrating teenagers’ raging hormones?

The claims department feature (see 8a) is a great reader service. I would like to see more scrutiny of the “facts” in Sarah Palin’s speech last night.

Now to our local politicians….Is Kenn Gardner just an inept liar or a man so greedy that he doesn’t care whether we think he’s an inept liar as long as he gets paid?

–A newsy and entertaining Triangle&Co. front.

I’d bet that Barry Saunders is hearing a lot of amens this morning as well as feeling a lot of hate. Good. A columnist should stir ‘em up.

Much of America may have forgotten, but the black community has a very long memory of Republicans demonizing black unwed moms. The black wire–radio and a growing black blogesphere–is crackling this morning with wicked “Juno” jokes.

In general, black bloggers (wearerespectablenegroes.blogspot.com. A warning to the easily offended, the name is a big clue) are having a great time with the GOP show in Minneapolis.

–Lots of interesting people stories in the sports section about college athletes and the pros. For those following tennis’ sibling rivalry, Serena has gained a slight lead by beating older sister Venus in the U.S. Open quarterfinals.

–Good, timely story–and an inviting headline (Life over breasts)– on the Life, etc. cover.

Gearino's entire post is here.

********************************************************

Comments:

You can read the Barry Saunders column to which Drescher refers here.

I've left the following comment (tweaked here for context clarity) on the thread of "The curtain pulled aside"

I’m in general agreement with the commenter above who says:

“This editor’s e-mail reveals what many N&O and general media critics say; that they are nothing more than left wing mudslingers. When an editor of the paper is comfortable enough sending a condescending, clearly slanted viewpoint to the organization, it is not a difficult leap to suspect that same slant and attitude will influence the content of the paper.”

Sure, there are no doubt N&O reporters and editors who do their best to steer clear of “left wing mudsling[ing],” but an executive editor sets the tone for a newsroom.

Drescher’s email reads like something MoveOn.org would circulate as the day’s talking points; and I think it’s fair to say most people at the N&O will want to go with the bosses “talking points.”

Drescher asks rhetorically: “What is one to make of John McCain’s greeting at the Twin Cities airport yesterday of America’s most famous baby mama with a warm hug, and the apparent attaboy pat on the shoulder for the self-described “f***ing redneck” baby daddy? Are we now celebrating teenagers’ raging hormones?”

I would ask Drescher and other journalists: “What is one to make of the N&O’s decision to withhold from its Mar. 25, 2006 front page story it said, with no suggestion of doubt, was about a woman’s “ordeal” which ended “in sexual violence,” the news it had of the Duke lacrosse players' extensive cooperation with police; and instead promulgate what it knew was the “wall of solidarity” lie which almost immediately morphed into the “wall of silence” lie?

What is one to make of Ruth Sheehan’s Mar. 27, 2006 “Team’s silence is sickening” McCarthyite screed hyping the “wall of silence” lie? [Disclosure: Some months later Sheehan apologized to the players for the column. In “It’s Not About the Truth,” pub. in Apr. 2007 she’s quoted extensively explaining how Mike Nifong served as the anonymous source for her Mar. 27 column with the N&O newsroom having passed on to her from Nifong the false information on which she based her column. No one at the N&O has denied what Sheehan’s quoted as saying. Publisher Orage Quarles emailed me saying only that the N&O doesn’t talk about it anonymous sources.]

I thank G. D. Gearino for putting Drescher’s disturbing email out there.

I wish Drescher would come on the thread, explain it and answer questions.

Thank you.

John in Carolina
_____________________________________

An N&O reader left a comment at the N&O's Editors' blog but its received no response.

That's nothing new.

I'll continue working this story.

What do you folks think?

Welcome Sarah Palin Sexism Watch blog

It's not here before we need it.

The Sarah Palin Sexism Watch's moderator says:

I am a female professional who lives in Wisconsin. I created this blog to monitor, and round up, the sexist treatment given to Republican VP nominee, Sarah Palin.

This blog will focus on sexist reactions to the Palin nomination by the media and politicians. Please email me tips at: palinsexismwatch@live.com

If ever a blog was needed, it's this one.

I've visited it three times today and yesterday.

I think Far Left Feminists, Andrew Sullivan and MSM journalists like him won't care for SPSW blog. It's already shining too much light on their sexism.

But if, regardless of party, you're an intelligent, fair-minded person; and you don't want the MSMers who brought us the bogus Texas Air National Guard story and the Duke lacrosse hoax and frame-up attempt lies "filtering" the news for you, you're going to appreciate SPSW.

It puts the sexist stories out there with links so you can judge them for yourself.

I'm sending SPSW's moderator the following email at palinsexismwatch@live.com.
_____________________________________________

Dear Moderator:

One blogger to another: my hat's off to you.

You ask for item tips. Here's one:

Scroll half-way down this LAT page and look at the right-hand column as you face the monitor:
Sarah Palin: Politics of Fashion

You have a great blog and are performing an important public service.

That said, have you considered interspersing with the sexism posts some “Why they fear Palin” posts?

Example: This brief post links to a 14-minute CNBC video of an interview with Gov. Palin some few days before Sen. McCain announced her selection as his running mate.

In it Palin discusses both fossil and renewable energy retrieval, distribution and use consistent with respect for the environment, all with the goals of making America as energy clean and independent as possible.

I’ve never heard a political leader of either party speak so knowingly and easily about those subjects.

The interview gives the lie to claims Palin is a lightweight.

It leaves no doubt “Why they fear Palin.”

I hope you give it a look here where you’ll find the link to the video.

Again, congrats and thanks for the great job you're doing.

I’ll be visiting and linking often.

Sincerely.

John
www.johnincarolina.com

Hat tip: Anon commenter who clued me to SPSW.

What’s going on at McClatchy?

The McClatchy Company owns the liberal/leftist Raleigh News & Observer.

The N&O’s news columns are great places to go for Obama-Biden talking points, but if you want to find out about the financially troubled McClatchy Company the place to go is McClatchy Watch.

Posts there yesterday included:

McClatchy about to reorganize? [CEO] Gary Pruitt resigns from 4 family trusts

Intrigue at McClatchy triggered by document filed Friday at 5:01 PM

Sacramento Bee: “Pruitt’s resignation from 4 family trusts doesn’t mean anything – it’s just good corporate governance”

Here in italics are “snips” from the posts’ comment threads with my responses in plain - - -

What has astonished me is the McClatchy clan's catatonia as Wonder Boy Pruitt took the company down. The bleeding of wealth is almost beyond comprehension.

Within the past 5 years McClatchy (stock symbol MNI) sold as high as the mid-70s.

In March 2006 when a series of biased and racially inflammatory N&O stories helped launch the Duke lacrosse witch hunt and enable the frame-up attempt of 3 obviously innocent Duke students, MNI sold in the mid-40s.

Friday, Sept. 5, 2008 the stock closed at $3.66.

Many of us are worried when it comes time to collect our severance it won't be there. It has gone from milking a dying cash cow to beating a dead horse.

A lot of McClatchy employees have that worry. Some also worry they may never be able to collect their pensions.

Will McClatchy set aside funds that assure it will meet its pension obligations?

I hope so.

Who wants to advertise in a cut and paste AP wire story paper when you can buy USA Today, even The weekly World News and National Enquirer are better than most of the McClatchy pulp.

I’ve been hearing that from many advertisers.

There’s also a question more and more advertisers are asking: Will anyone see my ad if it’s in the “A” or “B” sections?

Advertisers are catching on to the fact many newspaper readers scan the front page and then to straight go the Sports section, the comics, the crossword, and obits.

On salaries, I can find no MNI data on 2008 salary levels, but SEC filings show that in 2007, Bob Weil, Vice President, Operations got a $600,000, plus a 60 percent bonus, Frank Whittaker, Vice President, Operations, got 600,000 in salary plus a 60 percent bonus, Pat Talamantes, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, earned 500,000 and a 55% bonus, and Howard Weaver, Vice President, News got a $400,000 salary plus 50% bonus.

I know those 50, 55 and 60% bonuses sound pretty good.

But just imagine what they would've been if McClatchy wasn’t imploding and its stock price crashing.

Funny you should mention an "out in the contract". When we asked to see the contract before signing for the buyout they would not provide it to us. On the last day September 12, 2008 we work then we can see it but not before. We also will not receive our money for the buyout until we sign the contract. How much you want to bet that THERE IS SOMETHING in the contract that they will be allow to get out of it.

The commenter is voicing a complaint I’ve heard and read McClatchy employees make for some time now.

Is anyone surprised that a newspaper chain that’s always demanding other companies and government agencies release all their information, is holding back from its own employees their buyout contracts? And not telling their readers they’re doing that.

Keep checking in at McClatchy Watch. You’ll find news and commentary there you won't find in the N&O and I’ll bet every other McClatchy paper as well.

Hat tips: A number of readers, including journalists.

Bad news for smear-Palin MSMers

The smear-Palin MSMers are counting on something they call “Troopergate” to help destroy the reputation and public career of Gov. Sarah Palin.

Mind you, most of the smear crowd has nothing personal against Palin. It’s just that she poses a threat to the presidential election chances of their candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, a long-time friend of racist Jeremiah Wright, terrorist Bill Ayers, and convicted felons Tony Rezko and Kwame Kilpatrick.

Well, we can all understand that. Now to the bad news for the smear crowd.

CNN Investigative Reporter Drew Griffin found - - -

The Alaska state trooper at the center of a probe into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power says he has “made mistakes, and I’ve learned from those mistakes.” But in an exclusive interview with us, Mike Wooten, Palin’s former brother-in-law, also denies some of the biggest allegations against him. . . . .

The story is how he married into, then divorced out of, Alaska’s first family. The trooper finds his life at the center of the one and only potential scandal I can find concerning Gov. Palin, John McCain’s choice for running mate.

The scandalous allegation is the governor used her power to try and get her sister’s ex fired. When that didn’t work, it’s alleged Gov. Palin fired the public safety commissioner [Walt Monegan].

In our interview, Wooten rattled off a disturbing number of “mistakes” he’s made in his career.

He admits tasering his stepson, illegally killing a moose and admits to multiple reprimands in his file. A state trooper investigation even found credible evidence he was drinking in his patrol car. . . .

_______________________

A Washington Post story goes to great lengths to minimize the “mistakes” Wooten made and winds up reporting - - -

"I would like to put this behind me and move on with my life," Trooper Mike Wooten said in an interview with the Washington Post. "I don't wish ill will on anyone. I think that the nomination that Sarah got is great for the state of Alaska. I wish her good luck and the family good luck. I honestly think that everyone involved in this wanted to put this beyond us." . . .

_____________________________________

Wooten sounds just like Duke President Richard Brodhead, disgraced and disbarred former Durham DA Mike Nifong, and the editorialists at the Raleigh N&O and the Durham H-S who did so much to enable the Duke witch hunt and the frame-up attempt and are now doing their best to sustain the cover-up.

They all want to move on.

What looks like the best and is certainly the most detailed “Troopergate” reporting I’ve found is Mata Harley’s carefully-sourced, link-rich post at the blog Flopping Aces.

Harley’s post includes an events timeline and a narrative with pertinent information most of MSM has failed to report.

All text which follows and all emphasis until the star line are from Harley’s post:

Per Col. Julia Grimes in the Fairbanks Newsminer on July 28, 2008… and showing how long this “scandal” has dragged out…

The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable, and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession,” Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in March 1, 2006, letter suspending Wooten for 10 days. After the union protested it, the suspension was reduced to five days.

She warned that if he messed up again, he’d be fired. …

Monegan’s “truth” problem

According to Monegan, he insists he was pressured by Todd Palin,“numerous times to talk about Wooten as well as Frank Bailey from the governor’s office and Commissioner of Administration Annete Krietzer who also pressured him to fire Wooten”.

If trooper recruitment and poor morale was one of Palin’s concern about Monegan’s performance, why would her husband Todd be doing the talking for Palin? And why would Palin send her husband… sans gubernatorial power… to convince Monegan to fire Wooten?

But the problem with Monegan’s charge is.… Todd Palin was *ordered* to talk to Monegan since Wooten was a potential threat against Alaska’s first family.

2. Todd Palin was ORDERED by the head of the Governor’s security detail, Special Agent Bob Cockrell, to discuss Trooper Wooten with Walt Monegan, as Wooten presented a credible threat to the Governor’s safety. Here’s a direct quote from Special Agent Cockrell, who is now providing security for his sixth consecutive governor:

“When made aware of the security concerns regarding a state trooper, I instructed the First Gentleman to contact the commissioner of Public Safety. It is standard protocol to ask every governor about any threats they perceive or have realized. “I will not hesitate to set the record straight in answering these false allegations by former Commissioner Monegan.” (emphasis added) ….

Harley’s entire post’s here.

**************************************

Comments:

If a state trooper with Wooten’s record married into Palin’s family and she did nothing to try to get the guy removed from a position where he could go out cruising on the highway with state police powers, MSM would be reporting another kind of “Troopergate scandal."

Easy prediction: There’s a lot more for us to learn about Wooten and he knows it isn’t good. That’s why he wants to move on.

Easy question: Why is a blogger like Harley bringing us such a detailed report? That’s supposed to be the NY Times, NPR, WaPo, and the rest of Obama’s Tank Corps’ job.

Dear Mr. Obama

If you haven't seen this McCain ad featuring an Iraq vet talking directly into the camera telling Sen. Obama why he's wrong to call the Iraq War "a mistake," be sure to view it. The ending is especially powerful.

Obama, Team Obama and Obama-MSM's counters should be interesting.

Thanks, editor. And thanks, editors

A few minutes ago one of JinC's 24/7 Anon editors commented on the thread of "The Obama's have plans for U.S.":

John, please remove the apostrophe from Obama's.

It's done.

And thanks, editor, for calling the error to my attention.

Thanks also go to all of you who call my errors to my attention.

You make JinC a better blog.

Re: Low moaning Dems & MSM this morning comments

Low moaning Dems & MSM this morning was an “after action report” following Gov. Sarah Palin’s historic and outstanding speech before the GOP convention

Here in italics are parts or all of comments it drew with my responses in plain

Tarheel Hawkeye @ 10:12 - - -

My two thirty-something daughters, who were rabid Hillary supporters and were planning to sit out the election or vote for Hillary as a write-in, have both called me to say they're voting for McCain-Palin. I believe there will be a large number of women who will do the same based on Sarah "Barracuda's" speech at the RNC last nite.

This brings strength to the GOP in several ways: the older female vote will belong to McCain; the religious right is now off the fence and solidly behind Sarah; the conservatives are riled up because of the cheap shots from MSM talking heads; and the Reagan Democrats are likely to return to the GOP fold. This spells disaster for St. Barack and Joe "Kinnock" Biden.

I hope you’re right on all points. You’re mention of “Kinnock” from whom Biden plagiarized brings to mind this: So many pundits have been pointing out Palin didn’t right her speech, but I can’t think of one who's add: “Of course unlike Biden, she didn’t plagiarize it.”

Anon @ 11:27 - - -

You see, the MSM is bitter and they cling to their left wing ideology and their false narratives and their antipathy toward politicians who represent Americans who are not like them.

Obama’s “bitter … cling to” remark is the gift that keeps on giving. I used it just today in a post.

Steve in N.M @ 12:26 - - -

Hawkeye: Always look forward to your comments. Am praying you are correct (as you usually are) with this one! Maybe Chris' leg will go numb! Steve in New Mexico

Gee, Steve, if MSNBC’s Chris Matthews' leg goes numb, how will he be able to judge The One’s speeches?

Ex-prosecutor @ 1:30 - - -

A very important asset of Governor Palin, which the MSM and Democrats ignore, is that, unlike the candidates the Democrats continue to produce, she's very likable and has lived a life much like the rest of us.

For that reason, as well as the others discussed in your post, the Democrats must be very careful in how they jump on her. Attacks may cause fence-sitters to rally to her.

To sit by her on a long flight on a plane would be enjoyable, unlike having Gore, Kerry or Obama as companions.

Sitting by Gore or Kerry on a long flight?

No thanks. I’ll "Go Greyhound."

Now, Obama?

I’d turn to him after the beverage service and ask: “Do you think you can get through Election Day with someone asking: ‘Well, if you slept through all those sermons, OK I guess, but didn’t Michelle tell you what he said after you woke up?”

Anon @ 2:51 - - -

Of course they will come after her and they're too blinded to realize she's armed and dangerous. She'll fight back and win.

I hope you’re right about Palin ultimately winning the Smear War so much of MSM has launched against her. There’s a lot out there which gives the lie to their smears. This CNBC interview in which Palin discusses energy and the environment is one example. I can’t recall a leader of either party discussing those topics so knowledgeably.


Another serious problem they have and don't understand is even though no one thinks this is a woman who needs protection, decent people will be angered by the continued attacks and will be defensive of her as well.

They used the American people's sense of decency and fair play to sustain Bill Clinton. Defending him as a flawed but 'good man'. Saying, over and over again, how his transgressions were personal matter (his wife forgave him, we had to).

Now they don't realize how the public will rise up to defend against outrageous, unfounded attacks on the girl next door?

I think what we are seeing with Palin is just what we saw with the Duke lacrosse players. Leftist ideologues and foolish people pulled along in their wake are saying things that don't make sense. Fair-minded, intelligent people are seeing what's going on and speaking out. And some people don't know what to think.

Anon @ 5:36 - - -

The moaning might grow louder. A CBS poll conducted over the previous three nights (which did not even catch the full impact of the Palin speech) has the race tied. A week ago, they had Obama up 48-40.

This is one poll and they can jump around a bit but it will be interesting to see how the polls look when more come out. The Gallup and Rasmussen rolling averages have shown a bit of movement toward McPalin but, as Palin spoke after 10 PM last night, I doubt any poll has picked up on her performance with the possible exception of including some people called on the West Coast last night by pollsters.

McPalin’s a new one on me. I’m fine with it.

Today, Sept. 6, Rasmussen (Obama +3) and Gallup (Obama +2) both caution the full impact of the GOP convention won’t show in their polls until next week, which fits with what you were pointing out.

Thank you all for commenting.

The Obamas have plans for U. S.

The most important thing Sen. and Mrs. Obama can do now for America is participate in a lengthy televised Q&A with not "In the Tank for Obama" journalists who'll ask them questions about why they remained in Wright's church almost 20 years, why they brought their children for religious instruction to the church of such a hate-filled racist and anti-American preacher, and why they developed a close friendship and activist alliance with the terrorist Bill Ayers?

The Q&A needs to happen before America should trust the Obama's with the keys to The White House.

While we're waiting, I encourage you to read the excerpts which follow from Investors' Business Daily's The Audacity of Socialism series - - -

... [Sen.] Barack Obama was a founding member of the board of Public Allies in 1992, resigning before his wife became executive director of the Chicago chapter of Public Allies in 1993. Obama plans to use the nonprofit group, which he features on his campaign Web site, as the model for a national service corps. He calls his Orwellian program, "Universal Voluntary Public Service."

Big Brother had nothing on the Obamas. They plan to herd American youth into government-funded reeducation camps where they'll be brainwashed into thinking America is a racist, oppressive place in need of "social change."

The pitch Public Allies makes on its Web site doesn't seem all that radical. It promises to place young adults (18-30) in paid one-year "community leadership" positions with nonprofit or government agencies. They'll also be required to attend weekly training workshops and three retreats.

In exchange, they'll get a monthly stipend of up to $1,800, plus paid health and child care. They also get a post-service education award of $4,725 that can be used to pay off past student loans or fund future education.

But its real mission is to radicalize American youth and use them to bring about "social change" through threats, pressure, tension and confrontation — the tactics used by the father of community organizing, Saul "The Red" Alinsky.

"Our alumni are more than twice as likely as 18-34 year olds to . . . engage in protest activities," Public Allies boasts in a document found with its tax filings. It has already deployed an army of 2,200 community organizers like Obama to agitate for "justice" and "equality" in his hometown of Chicago and other U.S. cities, including Cincinnati, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, New York, Phoenix, Pittsburgh and Washington. "I get to practice being an activist," and get paid for it, gushed Cincinnati recruit Amy Vincent.

Public Allies promotes "diversity and inclusion," a program paper says. More than 70% of its recruits are "people of color." When they're not protesting, they're staffing AIDS clinics, handing out condoms, bailing criminals out of jail and helping illegal aliens and the homeless obtain food stamps and other welfare.

Public Allies brags that more than 80% of graduates have continued working in nonprofit or government jobs. It's training the "next generation of nonprofit leaders" — future "social entrepreneurs."

The Obamas discourage work in the private sector. "Don't go into corporate America," Michelle has exhorted youth. "Work for the community. Be social workers." Shun the "money culture," Barack added. "Individual salvation depends on collective salvation."

"If you commit to serving your community," he pledged in his Denver acceptance speech, "we will make sure you can afford a college education." So, go through government to go to college, and then go back into government.

Many of today's youth find the pitch attractive. "I may spend the rest of my life trying to create social movement," said Brian Coovert of the Cincinnati chapter. "There is always going to be work to do. Until we have a perfect country, I'll have a job."

Not all the recruits appreciate the PC indoctrination. "It was too touchy-feely," said Nelly Nieblas, 29, of the 2005 Los Angeles class. "It's a lot of talk about race, a lot of talk about sexism, a lot of talk about homophobia, talk about -isms and phobias."

One of those -isms is "heterosexism," which a Public Allies training seminar in Chicago describes as a negative byproduct of "capitalism, white supremacy, patriarchy and male-dominated privilege."

The government now funds about half of Public Allies' expenses through Clinton's AmeriCorps. Obama wants to fully fund it and expand it into a national program that some see costing $500 billion. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the military, he said.

The gall of it: The Obamas want to create a boot camp for radicals who hate the military — and stick American taxpayers with the bill.

Hat tip: BN

Tom Maguire pokes fun at The One

Matt Drudge linked to an AP report of a New Jersey fundrainser at which Sen. Obama assured the big-bucks givers:

"We're not going to be bullied, we're not going to be smeared, we're not going to be lied about," Obama said. "I don't believe in coming in second."

Just One Minute’s Tom Maguire saw an opportunity to offer “free advice to Team Obama:”

Whether Obama is revealing personal weakness or simply highlighting the historic weakness of his party, this is not talk that projects strength, especially in the current context - what is Obama saying, he won't be bullied by a 44 year old hockey mom?

Stand Tall, Barack - you won't be bullied by Sarah Palin!

OMG, is this a secret plan to assassinate Putin by making him laugh so hard he gets an aneurysm?

Or is this Laugh Attack launched at the Right Blogosphere (It's working! I can barely type through the tears).

Man up, Barry - even though she was a state champ, you are probably a better baller, too, what with being 6' 2" and a guy to boot. 'Course there is that cigarette smoking that may have cut your wind...

Our next President - ready to take on hockey moms, PTA heads and small town mayors. Even former ones.

The rest of Tom’s post is here.

From Team Obama’s point of view, the bright side of the “We’re not going to be bullied” whine is that the Senator didn’t add: “By these bitter small town Moms who cline to hockey sticks and religion.”

Bob Novak’s column today

begins:

The main reason I am writing this column is that many people have asked me how I first realized I was suffering from a brain tumor and what I have done about it.

But I also want to relate the reaction to my disease, mostly compassionate, that belies Washington's reputation.

The column continues here.

It’s interesting, touching, affirming and graceful.

I hope you all give it a look.

O'Reilly steps on Sally Quinn's apology

A friend who sent on this clip said: "O'Reilly takes what could be a gracious and interesting moment and, of course, bloviates."

I agree. Take a look and decide what you think

The Churchill Series - Sept. 5, 2008

(One of a series of weekdays posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

By virtue of his position, Churchill's long-time bodyguard, Scotland Yard's Detective-Inspector Walter Thompson, was witness to many of Winston and Clementine's private moments.

Tom Hickman is author of Churchill's Bodyguard, a book part Thompson biography and part collection of Churchill anecdotes Thompson collected. Here are two of those anecdotes:

Churchill ends his autobiography, My Early Life, with the oft quoted words: “until September 1908, when I married and lived happily ever afterwards.”

It was the late 20s and the Churchills were about to drive in an open two-seater from London down to Chartwell. Thompson sat in the back in what the Brits call the dickie seat (our rumble seat).

Winston was habitually late, but this was one of those rare times when he was ready first, seated at the wheel. Soon Clementine joined him.

Thompson carries the story from there:

[Clementine] appeared dressed in a most gorgeous black dress decorated with gold thread. Winston voiced his delight.

“Clemmie,” he said, “you look beautiful. What a lovely dress.”

“I am so pleased you like it, darling,” she replied, as she took her seat beside him.

It was not until we were out in the country that the dress was again mentioned.

Winston gazed sideways and quietly said: “And what did it cost?”

She replied: “I dare not tell you.”

“I thought not," he said. “I am sure it was very expensive.”

“I will tell you later, Winston,” she replied.

“But there is no harm in knowing now, in view of the fact you have bought it.”

The car almost came to a standstill when she said: “Two hundred guineas.”

“I suppose,” he said, “you have not paid for it yet?”

“Let us talk about it later,” she replied.

Dead silence followed and not another word was said.

Where trains were concerned, Churchill was a classic last minute race-to-the-station traveler.

When he was a cabinet minister or PM, and later when out of office but "a great man," Churchill's last minute habit didn't cause him any problems. Staff simply phoned ahead and the train was held.

But when out of office during the 20s and 30s, Churchill frequently had to race to catch a train. Often he lost.

Thompson once heard Clementine explain Churchill's "last minute" habit this way: "Winston's a sporting man. He likes to give the train a chance."

I hope you all have a good weekend. Special thoughts go to those of you in areas hit by the storms.

John

I owe Anons and other Commenters

JinC Regulars have read this before: A lot of the best reporting and commentary at this blog is on the threads.

And that's where I find the best editing, too.

I'll never forget the time I posted about one of the English Kings.

An Anon editor told me I'd put up "a good post," but it was about "his 'reign,' John, not 'rain.'"

The foregoing is intro to this: There's been so much informed, revealing, humorous and other important and good kinds of comments showing up on the threads.

I've got to get at least some of them onto the main page.

I'll do some of that tomorrow.

Give a look here for the post about 2 PM ET.

And thank you to every one of you who makes worthwhile comments here.

John

Dem Majority Leader Harry Reid v. Gov. Sarah Palin

The following from James Taranto's WSJ Best of the Web Today with a brief JinC comment below the star line.

Taranto - - -

The New York Times reports on a priceless response to Sarah Palin's speech.

First, here's what she said:

Harry Reid, the majority leader of the current do-nothing Senate, not long ago summed up his feelings about our nominee. He said, quote, "I can't stand John McCain."

Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps no accolade we hear this week is better proof that we've chosen the right man. Clearly what the majority leader was driving at is that he can't stand up to John McCain.

Here's Reid's answer, as reported by the Times:

Now Harry Reid is hardly thin-skinned and almost anything else Ms. Palin could have said about him might not have drawn much of a reaction.

But to the former boxer from tiny Searchlight, Nev., that insinuation from Governor Palin amounts to fighting words. He sees himself as more than capable of standing up to Mr. McCain and, through spokesman Jim Manley, Mr. Reid fired back.

"Anyone who knows Senator Reid knows he never backs down when he's fighting for what's right and that he always stands up to John McCain when he is wrong," said Mr. Manley. "Shrill and sarcastic political attacks may fire up the Republican base, but they don't change the fact that a McCain-Palin administration would mean four more years of failed Bush-Cheney policies."

So Reid is "more than capable of standing up," and he shows it by hiding behind a spokesman--named Mr. Manley!(emphasis added)

*************************************
Comments:

Mr. Manley!

You can't make that up, can you?

Who'd believe it?

And by the way - Has Sen. Reid ever apologized to the American people, President Bush, and most of all our military in Iraq and their families for saying "the war there is lost?"

If he hasn't, he needs to ASAP. I'm sure it would help if Sen. Obama asked him to.

Just doing their job on Gov. Palin

Polls show most Americans believe Alaska’s Gov. Sarah Palin is the victim of MSM sexist smear attacks.

While by no means all MSM journalists are participating in the attacks, many who are claim they're simply “doing our job.”

Let’s take a look at some of what Jonah Goldberg at Realclearpolitics.com reports about the “job” the leftist MSM attack machine is doing on Palin. I add a few comments below the star line.

Goldberg begins - - -

"What is wrong with these people?" was the nigh-upon-universal reaction among conservatives at the GOP convention this week.

Liberal reporters inquired of conservative journalists, Republican delegates, right-leaning janitors, free-market short-order cooks, even the guys walking around in elephant suits: Will Sarah Palin drop out? What about the Eagleton Option?

For those who don't know, the Eagleton Option refers to Thomas Eagleton, George McGovern's first VP pick in 1972, who was forced to withdraw because of allegations of mental illness. . . .

Of course, it was hardly the only journalistic will-o'-the-wisp unleashed from the media bog. The claim that Palin was a Buchananite -- and hence an acolyte of a "Nazi sympathizer" according to Florida Rep. Robert Wexler -- was not true.

The claims she cut funding for pregnant teens, that she was a member of the more-goofy-than-scary Alaska Independence Party, that Trig Palin -- her special-needs baby -- was really her daughter's: these were all bogus.

As for the even more disgusting smears peddled at the Daily Kos and one blogger [, Andrew Sullivan,] at The Atlantic -- smears that drove much of the prurient investigation into the Palin family's privacy by more reputable sources -- they were as untrue as they were repugnant. …

The rest of Goldberg’s article’s here.

**************************************************
Comments:

So the MSMers attacking Palin are just doing their job? Really?

Is a requirement for their job getting so many things wrong that could easily have been gotten right?

Do you think everyone in MSM busy doing their job on Gov. Palin has heard the joke about how the Palin’s could’ve kept their daughter’s pregnancy a secret? Told MSM the father was John Edwards.

Everyone instantly understands that joke which tells us a lot about MSM’s liberal/leftist bias and gives the lie to the “we’re just doing our job” blather.

Oprah wants Palin AFTER the election

At Drudge Report this morning:

BIG DILEMMA: OPRAH BALKS AT HOSTING SARAH PALIN; STAFF DIVIDED

That’s followed by:

Oprah Winfrey may have introduced Democrat Barack Obama to the women of America -- but the talkshow queen is not rushing to embrace the first woman on a Republican presidential ticket!

Oprah's staff is sharply divided on the merits of booking Sarah Palin, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

"Half of her staff really wants Sarah Palin on," an insider explains. "Oprah's website is getting tons of requests to put her on, but Oprah and a couple of her top people are adamantly against it because of Obama." …

Last year, Winfrey blocked an appearance by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, timed to a promotional tour of his autobiography.

Oprah and executive producer Sheri Salata, who has contributed thousands of dollars to Obama's campaign, refused requests for comment.

A short while later Drudge posted the following:

OPRAH'S STATEMENT:

"The item in today's Drudge Report is categorically untrue. There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show. At the beginning of this Presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates [Except Sen. Obama. – JinC]. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over." (emphasis added)

Oprah is obviously trying to be as even-handed as the NY and LA Times, NPR, the networks, Joe Klein, Chris Matthews, Andrew Sullivan, Kos and Team Obama itself.

And she’s succeeding.

Rasmussen reports beginning of McCain bounce

From Rasmussen - - -

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows the beginning of John McCain’s convention bounce and the race is essentially back where it was before Barack Obama’s bounce. Obama now attracts 46% of the vote while McCain earns 45%. When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 48%, McCain 46% (see recent daily results).

Tracking Poll results are based upon nightly telephone interviews and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. Virtually all of the interviews for today’s update were completed before McCain’s speech last night. Roughly two-thirds of the interviews were completed before Palin’s speech on Wednesday night. Tracking Polls are released at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time and a FREE daily e-mail update is available.

Both Obama and McCain are now viewed favorably by 57% of the nation’s voters (see trends). However, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is viewed favorably by 58%--a point more than either Presidential hopeful. Forty percent (40%) have a Very Favorable opinion of her. ...

The rest of today's report's here.

So after a week of relentless smearing by much of MSM, Gov. Palin is viewed more favorably than Sen Obama -- 58 to 57%.

Yes, that's a statistical dead heat. And if Obama's news organizations continue to heap sexism and smears on Palin while glorifying The One and ignoring his efforts to suppress and distort news about his friendship with the unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, Palin's favorable rating could drop and we could see an ascension in The One's favorable rating.

Only time will tell.

But we now know why Obama's media flacks immediately set out so ruthlessly to destroy Palin.

Rasmussen's report today gives us the answer.

The Churchill Series – Sept. 4, 2008

(One of a series of posts about the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

We continue today the series within the Series leading to the 100th Anniversary of the Churchill’s wedding September 12, 2008.

Churchill historians will tell you Clementine often smoothed things over when Winston’s temper got the better of him in social situations.

Jon Meacham, author of Winston and Franklin: An Intimate Portrait of an Epic Friendship, recounts one such incident which occurred at a small London dinner party the Churchill’s hosted during WW II when First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt who was in Britain on a goodwill visit.

The dinner guests included a few Cabinet members, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, a number of British women who were leaders of war relief work, America’s Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, and Eleanor’s companion-secretary Malvina Thompson.

Things were going along nicely until:

Eleanor and Churchill exchanged words over Loyalist Spain.

“I remarked that I could not see why the Loyalist government could not have been helped, and the prime minister replied that he and I would have been the first to lose our heads if the Loyalists had won – the feeling against people like us would have spread,” Mrs. Roosevelt recalled.

[She continued]: “I said that losing my head was unimportant, whereupon he said: ‘I don’t want you to lose your head and neither do I want to lose mine.’

Then Mrs. Churchill leaned across the table and said: ‘I think perhaps Mrs. Roosevelt is right.’

The prime minister was quite annoyed by this time and said: ‘I have held certain beliefs for sixty years and I’m not going to change now’” (p. 200)

And what followed next? Meacham doesn’t say anything more other than that Eleanor’s friends found Churchill “hopeless.”

Historians who continue recounting the incident agree that right after an angry Churchill had said he wasn’t changing his views, Clementine said she thought dinner was just about over and it was time to serve desert in a drawing room.

The transition from dining table to drawing room gave a “grace period” Churchill used to recover his temper while Clementine began, as the Brits say, “chatting up” the guests on various light subjects.

Eleanor Roosevelt and Churchill had some mutual respect, but they were oil and water.

Had Winston and Eleanor married, I can easily imagine what would have happened.

I would have used Lord Rosebery’s words when he erroneously predicted at the start of the Churchill’s 56 year love match:

”The union will last about six months, with luck.”

Law prof’s “feminist blood boils.”

Here’s part of Univ. of Wisconsin School of Law professor Ann Althouse’s post concerning Gov. Palin’s speech last night - - - -

IN THE COMMENTS: Doyle writes:

It was definitely well-executed, but I thought the speech was too sarcastic.

Oh, yes, sarcastic. That reminds me. I saw Paul Begala on some morning show and he was using that word. He said that Palin was excellent when she was telling her life story, but then when she got into the criticisms of Barack Obama, she was sarcastic, and that wasn't good.

Step back, little lady. Be good. Be nice. Tell us about your children and what you like to cook for dinner and how much you love your hubby.

Grrrr... my feminist blood boil.

Althouse's entire post's here.

The trashing Palin's receiving is making a lot of women's and men's blood boil.

Guess the guilty pol's party

The Detroit Free Press reports - - -

Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick has pleaded guilty, ending a nearly eight-month drama that has transfixed the region, paralyzed much of city business and halted a political career that once held such promise.

At 7 p.m., the mayor is expected to speak about his decision in a televised address.

Judy Smith, Kilpatrick's Washington, D.C.-based public relations consultant, said details are still being finalized, but 7 p.m. is the tentative time.

In a courtroom this morning, Kilpatrick pleaded guilty to two felony counts of obstructing justice by committing perjury. He will spend four months in jail, pay up to $1 million in restitution, and serve five years' probation. He also agreed not to run for office during that five-year span.

The rest of the Free Press' lengthy report is here.

It never mentions his party affiliation. Can you guess what it is?

The article also doesn't say whether Kilpatrick can delay serving his time until after the election so he can work to get out the vote for Sen. Obama and his mother, Congresswoman Carolyn Kilpatrick

Palin knows energy - Don't misss this video

Folks, a Regular sent along the link below to a CNBC interview of Gov. Sarah Palin by CNBC's Maria Bartiromo.

The interview was taped a few days before Sen. McCain named Palin his V-P pick. It lasts almost 12 minutes.

Energy development, distribution and use compatible with care for the environment are the only topics.

The sound/visual quality is excellent and Palin's outstanding.

Listen to her and than ask yourself when you last heard an American politician of either party speak so knowledgeably about energy and the environment?

Take a look here.