So people are buzzing about Palin's latest bluster:

At a rally on Saturday in California, Sarah Palin offered up a rather jarring argument for supporting the Republican ticket. "There's a place in Hell reserved for women who don't support other women," the Alaska Governor said, claiming she was quoting former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

The statement came after Palin had recounted a "providential" moment she experienced on Saturday: "I'm reading on my Starbucks mocha cup, okay' The quote of the day... It was Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State [crowd boos] and UN ambassador. ... Now she said it, I didn't. She said, 'There's a place in Hell reserved for women who don't support other women.'"

For one it was a misquote. Albright actually said "women who don't help other women", and who could argue with that' Furthermore, this was the same Sarah Palin who once said:

Once onstage, together with Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Palin talked about what women expect from women leaders; how she took charge in Alaska during a political scandal that threatened to unseat the state's entire Republican power structure, and her feelings about Sen. Hillary Clinton. (She said she felt kind of bad she couldn't support a woman, but she didn't like Clinton's whining.)

So apparently, in Palin's mind, you go to hell if you don't support other women, unless that other woman is a whiner. So many caveats it's hard to keep track of them sometimes!

But this is all pretty much an inconsequential blip in a week with far more interesting storylines. What really caught my eye about that story was this:

I'm reading on my Starbucks mocha cup, okay'

A mocha' At Starbucks''' So Palin is a latte-sipping elitist' Does she sip mochas while chomping on those gosh darned mooseburgers'

A Café mocha is a variant of a cafe latte. Like a latte it is typically one third espresso and two thirds steamed milk, but a portion of chocolate is added, typically in the form of a chocolate syrup, although other vending systems use instant chocolate powder.

So does that dash of chocolate makes mochas a "Joe Sixpack" sort of drink' Will "normal" Americans, the types that live in small towns without Starbucks "relate" to this' Shouldn't she be getting her coffee and creme the old fashioned officially-approved American way -- at a Dunkin' D's'

Or wait ... maybe -- just maybe! -- trying to define and politically categorize people by their choice of food and beverage (like Obama's orange juice) might just be stupid and idiotic' You betcha, okay'

Earlier today the McCain campaign had the gall to hold a conference call and have McCain's lawyer from the Keating Five scandal, John Dowd, claim that:

...he vehemently disagreed with the judgment of the Senate Ethics Committee that McCain had made some serious mistakes. "That's not something that as his counsel I accepted," Dowd said.

Dowd singled out the late Sen. Howell Heflin (D-AL), who vocally criticized McCain at the time, for particular scorn. "But you know, Sen. Mitchell was the majority leader, and Howell Heflin was his stooge," said Dowd. "And he was doing what he was told because the rest were Democrats in the hearing. So it's sort of a classic political smear-job on John."

And what did John McCain have to say about it...back in the day when he wasn't losing a presidential campaign, that is'

I created the appearance of impropriety so it was my -- I was guilty, and therefore did not represent the people of my state in the manner which they expected of me. [CNN, Larry King, 10/12/02]

The biggest mistake that I made in my life was attending a meeting with four other senators and four regulators because of the appearance of impropriety, and it is something that will always be a mark on my record, and something that people will judge me for the rest of my life. [GOP Presidential Primary Debate, 1/7/00]

Despite my recovery, the Keating Five experience was not one that I have walked away from as easily as I have other bad times. Twelve years after its conclusion, I still wince thinking about it and find that if I do not repress the memory, its recollection still provokes a vague but real feeling that I had lost something very important, something that was sacrificed in the pursuit of gratifying ambitions, my own and others', and that I might never possess again as assuredly as I once had.  [McCain, Worth the Fighting For Page 204]

For nearly 20 years, John McCain has talked about his involvement in the Keating Five scandal as the biggest mistake of his political career, but now that it's become a part of the campaign conversation, McCain is too much of a coward to stand up and accept responsibility for his past words and actions.

This, on top of their big radio buy:

The nation's biggest business lobbies are putting big bucks into a TV campaign to re-elect GOP Rep. Dave Reichert and fend off his formidable Democratic challenger, former Microsoft manager Darcy Burner.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce goes up Monday with a $156,000 TV buy -- anticipate ads that will smear Burner as a tax raiser -- on top of a previous $40,000 radio campaign against the Democratic challenger.

Next week, the National Federation of Independent Business begins a $219,000 television buy to boost Reichert....

The chamber's $40,000 radio buy was used to argue, falsely, that Burner would raise taxes on families with children.

A more basic question can be asked: After the Wall Street meltdown -- caused by deregulation measures that it supported -- what business does the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have telling us how to vote'

The U.S. Chamber has been given millions to fight against transparency, accountability and oversight of America's largest financial firms according to a report yesterday by the American Association for Accountability, a trial lawyers group.

In its brief, the association reports that the insurance giant American International Group (AIG) paid $23 million to the U.S. Chamber between 2001 and 2005. As it was going under last month, AIG was balied out by the Treasury Department -- e.g. the country's taxpayers.

The report Connelly is referring to is here (pdf), and details how AIG funded the Chamber's anti-oversight, anti-regulation efforts, getting us into this mess. These are the same people who bear direct responsiblity for the current economic meltdown -- they took $23 million directly from AIG to lobby for deregulation and reduced oversight and then lobbied hard in favor of the $700 billion bailout.

And now they're trying to scare Washington voters, lying to them telling them that Darcy Burner is going to raise their taxes. I think that pretty much defines despicable, considering that the bailout they lobbied for will actually cost every taxpaying household in America $5,300, by Paulson's estimate (and that was before the Senate's "enhancements"). Hell, even Reichert (a man not known for his mental acuity) was smart enough to know this could look pretty bad, and voted against final passage. But he's not going to refuse their help.

It'll be hard for Darcy to respond against this kind of money. Now might be a good time for the DCCC to consider going into debt (and twisting some arms to get that $14 million in unpaid dues) to help Darcy out. Obviously, protecting Reichert is a a huge priority for the Republicans. The DCCC should put an exclamation point on what is shaping up to be a real rout by Democrats by ensuring that the Chamber, the NFIB, the NRCC, and their poster boy Reichert are crushed in November.

On the Web:
Darcy Burner for Congress
Orange to Blue list

Thirty seconds of Sarah Palin:

Media polls influence narrative. We need to pay attention to the CNN poll (Obama 53-45), the trackers... all the polls. But this, along with ABC/WaPo, CBS/NY Times, Pew and Gallup, is one of the most influential of the national polls.

NBC/WSJ Poll  

10/3-5 (9/19-22) MoE +/- 3.8

Obama   49 (48)
McCain  43 (46)

Other points of interest... remember we told you that the polls said Obama and Biden won their respective debates' The NBC/WSJ poll agrees.

By a 21 point margin, 50%-29%, voters said the Democrats had the debate edge over rival Republican running mates John McCain and Sarah Palin, while 10% of respondents said the two tickets were equally as good and 4% said neither was good.

OTOH, racism is alive and well:

And cautionary notes remain for Sen. Obama. The poll suggests that the first African-American to win a major party nomination could be vulnerable to race-based attacks tying him to unpopular black figures such as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his former pastor and Al Sharpton, an outspoken and controversial figure.

Thirty-five percent of all voters -- and 40% of white voters -- said those connections bother them. This is absent any candidate or party pressing hard on those themes, something Republicans have hinted they may start to raise more aggressively in the campaign's closing days.

Also of note:

Independent voters are among the most important voting blocks because many of them would consider voting for either candidate. In the last WSJ/NBC poll two weeks ago, independents favored Sen. McCain by 13 points. The new survey finds Sen. Obama leading by four points.

And Sen. McCain's support in rural areas and small towns, where he led by 21 points after his convention, has steadily dropped and he now has just a three-point edge.

Remember to factor in your standing... it's not easy for Sarah Palin to attack when you are 41-50 not qualified to serve. Biden's "qualified" is 74-18, including 62% of McCain voters. That's what the debates taught the American voters.

More to come when the full poll is published.

Dino Rossi's role in the illegal fundraising activities by the state's Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) (which I posted about last week, could be building. Here's Goldy:

The Buildergate scandal takes a new twist this morning as former Washington State Supreme Court Justices Faith Ireland and Robert Utter filed notice with Attorney General Rob McKenna of their intent to bring suit against Republican gubernatorial challenger Dino Rossi, alleging illegal campaign coordination with the Building Industry Association of Washingtion (BIAW) and its political committees.  They also filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court claiming that the BIAW’s coordination with Rossi disqualify it from making "independent" expenditures in the 2008 gubernatorial.

These dramatic legal developments could have a huge impact on the gubernatorial race.  The BIAW has already spent over $2 million on behalf of Rossi this year, mostly smearing Governor Chris Gregoire, and plans to spend an additional $700,000 during the final weeks of the campaign.  The justices are asking that further "over limit" expenditures be barred by court order.

Well, it will heat up if the pathetic local media starts doing its job. (Note: the state's largest daily, the Seattle Times, didn't even run the story in its print edition.) Thus far, reporting on the scandal has been mostly been Rossi's denials of any knowledge of the illegal activity, when they've bothered to report it. Which is kind of hard to swallow, given the opinion of these Justices after having reviewed the evidence:

The evidence upon which we base our legal action can be construed to show that Dino Rossi was not just a beneficiary of these illegal activities, but was a knowing and active participant. The evidence shows, moreover, that the attack ads of the BIAW are not really "independent" of their beneficiary Dino Rossi. This is because Dino Rossi helped the BIAW to amass the war chest for these attack ads.

This is an important issue for all races.  Special interests are increasingly supporting candidates through "independent expenditures" that are not subject to contribution limits.  These "independent" campaigns also tend to contain the most vicious and dubious negative attacks, since the benefitting candidate can say that they have no control over these messages.  It is critical to enforce the law that prohibits candidates from providing fundraising assistance to or otherwise coordinating with "independent" committees.

The fact that Dino Rossi had not publicly declared his candidacy when this alleged coordination took place is not a defense.  A person becomes a candidate when he helps a political committee to amass a war chest to support his candidacy.  And the evidence suggests this is what happened here.

If this coordination took place, then the BIAW’s expenditures would not qualify as an independent expenditure, and would be legally limited to $2,800.  The millions of dollars of attack ads that have blanketed our airwaves would be illegal, and further expenditures should be enjoined.

A great deal of damage has already been done by those attack ads, which continue to blithely lie about Christine Gregoire's record as governor, and about the health of the state's economy. At the very least, the people of Washington who have been subjected to Rossi's ads, plastered all over cable television all summer long, deserve to know that they were paid for illegally.

This is the key gubernatorial race in the country and the Republicans will do anything for revenge for 2004, and is evidence of how much mileage you can get out of sour grapes. Particularly when you've got such a lazy traditional media going for you.

Update: Good news from Goldy:

Shortly after receiving a complaint in Utter vs. BIAW this morning alleging illegal collaboration between Dino Rossi and the Building Industry Association of Washington, a King County Superior Court judge has issued an order approving the plaintiffs’ request to immediately subpoena witnesses and begin taking depositions. Subpoenas will be served by October 7, and depositions will begin October 15.

Last week I posted on the Montana Republican party's efforts to disenfranchise 6,000 voters in six predominantly Democratic counties. More details, and reactions, have emerged over the weekend, including some of the people they have on their list. Consider Army 1st Lt. Kevin Furey of Helena, a former Montana state representative.

Furey got the news just days before he will ship off to Kuwait and then Iraq for his second tour of duty.

"It is ironic that at the same time I am about to return to Iraq to help build a democracy that my own right to vote is being challenged at home for partisan purposes. These challenges are a blatant and offensive attempt to suppress the rights of voters," Furey said in a telephone interview from Chicago, where he was on leave visiting his ailing grandmother.

Furey submitted a change of address to his post office, so that his mail will go to his parents' house while he's deployed. Pretty nefarious stuff, there.

It gets, unbelievably, worse. This is from an op-ed written this weekend by Montana's lt. governor, John Bohlinger:

Frank St. Pierre, of Anaconda, fought in World War II. He is one of the most decorated living veterans in America. And yet, on Wednesday, my party — the Montana Republican Party — tried to invalidate his voter registration because he lives in a county with a lot of Democrats. Incredible as this may sound to you, it is the truth...

A significant number of the 6,000 voters targeted were servicemen, including Kevin Furey, a former state legislator from Missoula who left the legislature to serve in Iraq; Cindie Kalan-Green, who is also serving in Iraq; and Mathew Robison, who I am told has been deployed to Fort Drum.

Many were college students and elderly people. For example, Babe Aspholm, of Anaconda, an elderly man, simply moved across town from his house to a senior living center. The Republicans tried to void his registration. Tom Detonacour, a policeman from Deer Lodge County who simply bought a house in another county, also got targeted.

But worst of all is the legendary Frank St. Pierre, 86, also of Anaconda, who helped save thousands of allied troops at Dunkirk in World War II and has 10 Medals of Honor. St. Pierre, too, moved from one end of town to the other, and the Republicans tried to void his and his wife's registrations. I have a copy of the signed affidavits from the Republicans, declaring that Frank and Marilyn St. Pierre's voter registrations must be purged. An utter disgrace.

That's the stupid part of the move by the Republican, according to Matt Singer, director of Forward Montana, with whom I spoke this morning. "This shows how insane the list is." It proves how terrible their list is, and how terrible the standards they used to draw up the list were. He said he likes to give the Republicans the benefit of the doubt and assume that some of the people on this list were included out of sheer stupidity. And it would appear they were, because Matt himself is on that list. Matt, as director of Forward Montana, is just about the worst person a dumb Republican can target in a voter disenfranchisement scheme. Because he knows his shit, and because he has a big megaphone.

But there's also a high degree of maliciousness driving the move to disenfranchise so many, and most of them from Democratic counties. For example, five percent of all the registered voters in Missoula County--1 in 20 voters--is on the list. That's primarily college students. I asked Matt how county election officials--the people who will have to determine the eligibility of all these challenged voters--are reacting. He told me that Vickie Zeier, the elections clerk who is normally one of the most unflappable people he knows is "mildly flapped." At the busiest time in the season (not counting election day) she's had to put five full time employees on the task of dealing with these challenges. It's going to take potentially tens of thousands of dollars in staff time and printing and mailing costs, money that a relatively small county with a small tax base like Missoula Co. just doesn't have.

To put into perspective the scope of what the Republican challenge means for the state, 6,000 voters was just twice the margin in the Tester/Burns race in 2006. In a small state like Montana, 6,000 people is a lot. Which is a double-edge sword for the Republicans there. It means that while the vote could be easily changed, when an effort is as half-assed and stupid as this one has been, more people will be pissed off because everyone is going to know someone whose right to vote is being challenged.

Matt and Forward Montana are fighting back, wanting to "make sure that people know that their right to vote is challenged, but the challenge is so weak that they will be able to vote." Montanans can call his group at 406-542-VOTE to find out more, including whether they are on the list and what to do to be able to vote. They have a full list of targeted voters at MontanaVoterSuppression.org, a "a one-stop location for voters to find out what to do if they are challenged, for people looking for updates and news on the suppression efforts, and for Montanans looking to demand an end to voter suppression in our state."

Additionally, the Montana Democratic Party has filed federal suit to stop counties from sending letters challenging these voters.

The suit names Jacob Eaton, executive director of the Montana Republican Party, Max Hunsaker, another Montana GOP employee, the state party itself and Secretary of State Brad Johnson as defendants....

The suit alleges the Republican party didn’t follow federal voting law when it asked Montana counties to verify address changes of registered Montana voters. Because the party submitted its requests to counties, the suit alleges, the GOP tactic also means that voters in some parts of Montana will be treated differently than voters in other parts of the state. Finally, the suit alleges the Republican party illegally targets voters "not likely to support (Republican) candidates," which is illegal.

Montana is just a microcosm of how far the Republicans will be willing to go to win. Chances are, it's a small enough state and outrage will be high enough (even among some some Montana Republicans) that it won't work there. But voter suppression efforts are happening all over the country. To help fight back, contact Election Protection, a non-partisan group headed up by the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. They're operating a hotline, 866-OUR-VOTE, that voters can call to have their questions answered, and to report problems. Go to their Web site, Election Protection, to find out what you can do to help.

The latest poll from the DCCC, just released today, shows one of our own - Orange to Blue candidate Eric Massa - with a substantial lead over his Republican rival, incumbent Randy Kuhl.

Benenson Strategy Group for the DCCC. Dates unreleased. Likely voters. MoE 4.9%.

Massa (D) 47
Kuhl (R) 42  

This is the first poll conducted released on this race (especially odd considering how close the race was in 2006, when Kuhl defeated Massa by four points, 52% to 48%).

Research 2000 will be polling this race for Daily Kos soon, and it will be interesting to see if the results match the DCCC poll.

These polling results are obviously terrific, particularly in an R+5 district (the most Republican district in the state). In the absence of public polling data, we had assumed that the race was leaning Kuhl's way. It may be time to rethink that assumption, particularly if our independent polling confirms this.

In the meantime, head over to the Orange to Blue page, and help Eric Massa finish strong.

On the web:
Eric Massa for Congress
Orange to Blue ActBlue Page

On Sunday, we ran a Research 2000 poll of the IL-10 race, showing incumbent Republican Mark Kirk with a small 44-38 lead over Democratic challenger Dan Seals.

Today, the Kirk campaign has reacted violently to the poll.

The ultra left-wing Web site Daily Kos commissioned a poll by Research 2000, which was conducted in Illinois’ 10th Congressional District from 9/30-10/1.  The survey was flawed on three levels.  First, the survey over-sampled voters age 18-29 while under-sampling voters 60+.  Second, the survey over-sampled Democrats and Independents while under-sampling Republicans.  Third, the survey was intentionally conducted on the Jewish High Holy Day of Rosh HaShanah that would exclude observant Jewish Democratic voters who lean more toward Kirk than average Democrats.

Skewed Age Sample:  According to the database of actual registered voters, only 16 percent of voters are aged 18-29, while 30 percent are over age 60.  The Research 2000 poll filled sample quotas differently, showing 19 percent of those surveyed between the ages of 18-29 and only 18 percent of voters over age 60.  Mark Kirk has always done better among older voters.  Skewing the poll by age skews it toward Seals.

So far, so fine. If they want to argue over sample composition, that's their right. We include all that data to be 100 percent transparent.

And yeah, every Republican campaign that doesn't like the results of these polls will point out that we're scary "ultra left wing" liberals blah blah blah, but fact of the matter is that Research 2000 is a respected non-partisan pollster used by newspapers like the St. Louis Post Dispatch and the Reno Gazette.

But the Kirk campaign, obviously feeling the heat, go way beyond quibbling over sample composition or taking cheap (and irrelevant) shots at Daily Kos:

Excluding Kirk-Leaning Jewish Voters:  It is no surprise that DailyKos, which has come under attack by Democrats like Harold Ford Jr. and Lanny Davis for anti-Israel and anti-Semitic content, chose to conduct its poll on the Jewish High Holy Day of Rosh HaShanah.

So we're now anti-semitic. Seriously, are they freaked out much'

The timing of the poll was mentioned in our post announcing the poll, but unlike the hyperventilating Kirk campaign, we argue that the timing depressed Democratic-leaning voters that would support Seals, rather than Kirk. While Kirk may have some Jewish support, that community is still Democratic leaning and will deliver a majority of its support to the Democrat this November. Arguing that excluding some Jewish voters is actually an anti-semitic ploy to depress Kirk's numbers is laughable. And desperate.

But let's thank the Kirk campaign for 1) betraying their insecurities. No campaign goes nuclear on a poll they consider to be an outlier; and 2) giving the poll higher visibility. These things have a habit of falling through the media cracks. Thanks to their outsized freakout, they've created the sort of conflict that will ensure a higher profile for the results.

They are freaked out, that much is clear. Throw some anvils at Kirk and let's help Seals close the deal this November. The districts voters, regardless of age, sex, religion, or race, deserve capable representation, not the kind of "leadership" that brought us the Iraq War and the financial system's collapse.

Lost in the economic crisis, the lousy horserace numbers for McCain, and the personal attacks of the McCain camp is the ongoing health care crisis in the United States. With our current system, there remain 47 million without care and millions more who are underinsured. Cost issues exist alongside inequalities of care access. And now, with unemployment rising, the issue is becoming more acute (see What's The Effect Of Recession On The Health Care Safety Net'.)

As I have written before, this is not an easy or simple solution to solve. But one thing is clear: John McCain's idea of a solution, aimed at costs but not quality or access, is a terrible idea.

Paul Krugman:

Conservative Republicans still hate Medicare, and would kill it if they could — in fact, they tried to gut it during the Clinton years (that’s what the 1995 shutdown of the government was all about). But so far they haven’t been able to pull that off.

So John McCain wants to destroy the health insurance of nonelderly Americans instead.

Not good. Obama's idea is different. Today, he signed on to the Health Care for America Now principles, which do not endorse specific legislation, but are compatible with single payer and other approaches. From a press release:

Today, Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) signed the Health Care for America Now statement declaring that he is on the side of quality, affordable health care for all and opposed to leaving Americans on their own with unregulated health insurance.

There's still plenty of room to argue about the best way to get there, but with a recession looming and people in danger of losing their jobs, this is not an issue that can be ignored any more. Expect it to be brought up in the town hall debate tomorrow - unlike the phoney stuff being brought up by McCain's campaign and his increasingly shrill VP candidate, who caters only to the shrinking Republican base, this is an issue that all Americans actually care about.

"Health Care for America Now's goal this year is to get the next President and a majority of Congress committed to the principles of quality, affordable health care for all and opposed to policies that would tax our benefits at work and leave us on our own with the unregulated, bureaucratic private insurance industry," said Richard Kirsch, National Campaign Manager, Health Care for America Now. "With Senator Obama's signature, we are taking a major step towards getting the next President and Congress to make comprehensive health care reform a priority in 2009."

John McCain's plan is anything but acceptable. Since it's all about saving money and nothing else, he proposes, according to the WSJ:

McCain Plans Federal Health Cuts
Medicare, Medicaid Spending Would Be Reduced to Offset Proposed Tax Credit

In the months since Sen. McCain introduced his health plan, statements made by his campaign have implied that the new tax credits he is proposing to help Americans buy health insurance would be paid for with other tax increases.

But Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Sen. McCain's senior policy adviser, said Sunday that the campaign has always planned to fund the tax credits, in part, with savings from Medicare and Medicaid. Those government health-care programs serve seniors, poor families and the disabled. Medicare spending for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30 is estimated at $457.5 billion.

Let's hope we get a chance to discuss the details with the American people tomorrow night. This is something I think they'd be interested in.

CBS:

Days from becoming the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history, Lehman Brothers steered millions to departing executives even while pleading for a federal rescue, Congress was told Monday.

"Congress" was told Monday'

"Congress" is fucking gone, dude.

"Congress" handed out the $700 billion and skipped town on Friday, leaving a skeleton crew in place to find this shit out on Monday.

Yes, there are a few hearings going on in the House Government Oversight Committee in the next few weeks, despite the fact that the House is adjourned until next January. But to what end, exactly' Better something than nothing, to be sure, but Congress can't legislate on the issue without reconvening. And there are no plans to do that.

In fact, Congress can't even be 100% sure anyone will show up for their "vigorous oversight" without the ability to subpoena witnesses and make it stick, because the fully body has to be there to vote contempt (See also: Troopergate). Not that having the full body there to vote contempt would make a difference, of course. It hasn't in the cases of Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten, both of whom are now a year and a half overdue for their appearances before the Judiciary Committee.

The only good news in this is that the government didn't bail out Lehman, so in the end, our tax dollars didn't -- in this case -- go to paying executive bonuses.

So... that settles the question of what's happening in that part of the world that didn't get our $700 billion.

Jury's still out on the part that did.

You can argue all you want about the propriety of the bailout, but don't tell me it's OK to pass it because there'll be "vigorous oversight" and then adjourn Congress for three months.

John McCain might be pretty confident about winning Texas, but it looks like he has lost the wealthiest part of Dallas — which is to say, the Park Cities. Texas Rep. Dan Branch commissioned a Baselice & Associates poll of his district the week after the Republican convention, and what he found was surprising. While McCain was enjoying a national "Palin bounce," District 108 wasn’t feeling the love. Branch’s poll found that 47 percent of voters planned to pull the lever for Obama, only 45 percent for McCain.

Political comedy mocks authority. Conservative comedy in the Age of Bush venerates authority. The "heavies" that corrupt Malone and (temporarily) ruin the lives of his conservative extended family are powerless, silly activists. Malone simply gets slapped around a bit and decides the establishment was right. If you transported Zucker back to 1978 and pitched him Animal House, he’d direct Niedermeyer: Man of Iron.

When the McCain campaign announced this weekend that it would start attacking Sen. Barack Obama via guilt by association, peddling smears about people he barely knows, I thought the tack would lead to the Keating Five.  But I didn’t know it would happen this quickly.

The Obama campaign swung into action immediately.  By the time the Sunday news shows were taping, Democratic surrogates were hitting McCain with opposition research on his associations with extremist, racist groups (Begala) and the Keating Five (Emanuel). Today, of course, camp Obama is pushing a new Keating Economics website, which begins streaming a documentary about McCain’s Keating problem at noon.

Obama’s campaign has never pushed the Keating button before, so this attack carries an original punch–and is clearly salient given the current financial crisis. Because the scandal involved McCain’s actions in public service, it is more likely to arise during the remaining two debates.

The Obama campaign was ready with the Keating Five stuff, waiting for the moment the McCain campaign started flinging Ayers and Wright around. This isn't your father's Democratic presidential campaign.

Republican Leaning 527s outspend Democratic Leaning 527’s by more than 10X on Presidential Race. Democrats have a 3-1 advantage in the House.

In the Senate, it's a 2-1 Republican advantage. So while our party committees crush their Republican counterparts in the money department, the outside money is keeping them in the game.

One of Obama's big mistakes early in the cycle was killing the Democratic 527s. While the campaign has reversed itself on that, and while Democrats are trying to get new 527s off the ground, we're playing catch up.

FL-18: Hilarious! Republican incumbent Ileana Ros-Lehtinen has rushed out an ad cobbled together from 1980's-era footage. Why' Perhaps it has to do with her terrible new haircut'

I wish I was kidding...

Throw her an anvil by dropping a few bucks to her Democratic opponent, O2B candidate Annette Taddeo.

Republicans always seem guilty of the things they accuse Democrats of doing. For example, the McCain campaign recently demanded the FEC investigate Obama's small dollar fundraising. Yet it looks like it's McCain with the actual donor problem.

While the Republican Party is pushing the Federal Election Commission to investigate the possibility that Democrat Barack Obama collected excessive contributions, its own candidate is facing scrutiny on the same subject.

The FEC sent a letter to Sen. John McCain's campaign treasurer Sept. 30 demanding the candidate turn over more information about "contributions that appear to exceed the limits."

The letter is accompanied by a nine-page list showing scores of overages from McCain's August campaign finance report, including nearly $13,000 from Texas rancher Ray R. Barrett Jr.; $9,200 from an Iraqi security consultant, H. Carter Andress; and $5,000 from Joseph F. Davolio, an executive at a major national liquor, beer, and wine distributor.

"Please inform the Commission of your corrective action immediately in writing and provide photocopies of any refund checks and/or letters reattributing or redesignating the contributions in question," the letter from the FEC's senior campaign finance analyst, Leah S. Palmer, says. "The acceptance of excessive contributions is a serious problem."

Sen. Ted Stevens told wealthy businessman Bill Allen they needed to stick together and "really lay low" to beat an FBI investigation into their cozy relationship, according to audiotapes played Monday at the senator's corruption trial.

"Screw them, if they prove we did something wrong," the senator says in one of a series of secretly recorded telephone calls in the fall of 2006. "In my heart, I don't think we did. ... I say, screw it."

Stevens, unaware Allen already was cooperating with investigators, advises him, "We ought to really lay low right now." He also tells him to cut down on drinking, watch his health and await the outcome of the probe into more than $250,000 in renovations on the senator's cabin and other gifts provided by Allen's oil pipeline company, VECO Corp.

"Let's stick this thing out together, OK'" Stevens says [...]

"I think they're probably listening to this conversation right now," Stevens says in the recording.
"We might have to pay a fine and spend a little time in jail," he continues. "I hope it doesn't come to that."

Via Roll Call:

House Democratic leaders made an impassioned final plea Thursday night to get their rank and file to cough up more money for their effort to expand the party’s majority, just as Members are set to head home to hit the campaign trail a month before Election Day.

In a closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) implored their colleagues to come up with the $14 million in Members’ dues needed to meet their overall $50 million goal, according to people who were present.

While we still have a cash advantage over the NRCC, the number of seats in play as we approach crunch time is so enormous that even the relatively hale DCCC needs a big money infusion to stay competitive everywhere. This is a once-in-a-generation (or perhaps lifetime) opportunity, and we need every last dime we can get. The good news is that members of our caucus still have a lot they can give:

Democratic lawmakers who are not politically in danger or in competitive races are collectively sitting on roughly $153 million in their re-election accounts, according to party tally sheets. (Emphasis added.)

Fortunately, it looks like some Dems are seriously stepping it up:

Several Members announced on the spot that they were writing checks, according to sources in the room.

Rep. Chet Edwards (Texas), who is included in the DCCC’s "Frontline" program for vulnerable incumbents even though his re-election in November seems certain, said he wouldn’t be in Congress if it weren’t for the generosity of the Caucus and announced he was giving $100,000 — news that elicited audible gasps from his peers.

Edwards sits in the reddest district held by a Democrat in the entire country - Texas's 17th CD gave 70% of its vote to George Bush. Meanwhile, Rep. Ron Klein (FL-22) gave another $100K on top of the $100K he's already given, and he's only a freshman. If folks like Edwards and Klein can kick it up a notch, then almost every other member can as well. Time's a-wastin'.

It's that darn media filter, preventing her from talking about "the issues" rather than fling shit at Obama.

Palin has devoted a significant portion of every one of her stump speeches in recent days to lamenting that the "filter of the mainstream media" has not given her a chance to do what she really wants to do: talk about the issues. But in filter-free forums across the country, Palin continues to speak in generalities about where she and John McCain want to take the country, calling for tax cuts, winning the wars, and reforming government, while providing very few details on how she would accomplish those goals.

Instead, Palin has increasingly focused her remarks on tearing down Obama.

"Either do the math or just go with your gut," Palin said at a rally here this morning. "Either way you’re going to come up with the same conclusion — Barack Obama is gonna raise your taxes. So there’s a pattern here of a left-wing agenda that is packaged and prettied up to look like mainstream policies."

Their ship is sinking fast. Fear mongering is all they have left.

Today the Obama  campaign released a 13-minute documentary called "Keating Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis," outlining John McCain's role in the scandal that cost U.S. taxpayers $2.6 billion.

The McCain campaign's response' Via Americablog:

The Keating Five Investigation was "a political smear job on John [McCain]." WTF' He called Howell Heflin, who led the hearings, a "stooge" of the Democratic machine out to get poor, innocent John McCain.

Wow, really' That's not what McCain said in his book, Worth Fighting For:

I made the worst mistake of my life by attending two meetings, the first with the chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the government agency charged with regulating the practices of the nation’s savings and loans, and a week later with four bank examiners based in San Francisco who were at that time investigating the investment and lending practices of Lincoln Savings and Loan of Irvine, California, owned by my good friend and generous supporter Charles Keating.

And it's not what he was saying last year:

I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment.

But now that McCain is being called out for his role in the Keating 5 scandal, he has decided to cut and run from taking responsibility for his own actions.

(Discussion of the video's release is also going on in Steven R's recommended diary.)

Pat Condell has a few words for the people who got YouTube to ban his last video, and a bit of a clarification on his views about the religious apartheid kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

If you’re using Internet Explorer version 6, you may have noticed the left sidebar seemingly disappearing.

It wasn’t really disappearing, it was being pushed down to the bottom of the page when the “Top Rated Links” area opened up. The reason: without getting too technical, Internet Explorer is simply the buggiest browser still in common use, and since we moved to a pure CSS float-based layout the bugs have been crawling out of everywhere.

This problem is fixed now, at the cost of having the columns look slightly lopsided. We’re using conditional comments to serve modified styles to IE6, so the lopsided look only shows up in that misbegotten browser.

As we write, the Dow index is down more than 700 points. We’re in free fall, as the effects of a worldwide sell-off ravage the markets.

It’s bad enough when the Obama supporters do it, but it’s worse when Sarah Palin’s creationist supporters try to distort her record to suit their purposes. A letter to the editor of the Indiana Star Press: Be an informed voter.

There’s not enough space to address each and every “ignorant” comment made by the pro-Obama writers, but I must correct one writer who unfairly attacks Palin’s views on the teaching of “creationism and abstinence-only sex education in public schools.” The writer is simply ignorant of the facts. The truth is Palin would like creationism and abstinence added to the curriculum. She believes students should be subjected to both views.

The highlighted statement above is absolutely, completely, 100% false. Palin has stated on several occasions, very explicitly, that she does not want to add creationism to school curricula.

The Anchorage Daily News: ‘Creation science’ enters the race.

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

“I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.

Even the Associated Press was forced to admit that Palin has never pushed creationism into schools as governor of Alaska.

And in Palin’s interview with Katie Couric, she repeated that she supports the teaching of evolution, and that “science should be taught in science class.”

In Slate Magazine, William Saletan says the polls are so stacked against John McCain, there’s no possibility he can win. The race is over.

Oh, wait. That was eight years ago, and he was talking about George W. Bush.

Why Bush Is Toast.

Since Labor Day, the media have released about 20 polls on the presidential race. Three show a dead heat, one shows George W. Bush leading by a single percentage point, and the rest show Al Gore leading by one to 10 points. In the latest polls, Gore leads by an average of five points. It’s fashionable at this stage to caution that “anything can happen,” that Bush is “retooling,” and that the numbers can turn in Bush’s favor just as easily as they turned against him. But they can’t. The numbers are moving toward Gore because fundamental dynamics tilt the election in his favor. The only question has been how far those dynamics would carry him. Now that he has passed Bush, the race is over.

(Hat tip: Tim Blair.)

Good grief.

Lieberman: McCain draws the line at using Rev. Wright.

Wallace asked Lieberman if McCain would bring up Rev. Jeremiah Wright after condemning state Republican parties for running ads criticizing Obama for his relationship with the controversial figure.

Lieberman responded: “He [McCain] didn’t like that approach. Senator McCain feels that same way about bringing up Reverend Wright through his campaign. And that’s the kind of line drawing that I think John McCain is all about.”

Later on Fox News Sunday, Brit Hume said the McCain camp would be “out of their mind” to not bring up Obama’s relationship with Rev. Wright.

“What on earth are Joe Lieberman and John McCain talking about when they say that the long association with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright is off the table'” Hume said. “Why is that off the table' It’s an important part of Obama’s background and record. It’s one of the reasons people wonder about who he really is.”

The mainstream media is now engaged in a full court press to defend former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, with article after article minimizing his crimes. The lefty blogs go even farther; some of them are actually calling Ayers a “patriot,” and claiming he never intended to harm anyone.

So here’s an article by John Murtaugh (who was also very young when William Ayers was on the rampage), telling the story of what it was like to be Ayers’ target: The Weathermen tried to kill my family.

In February 1970, my father, a New York State Supreme Court justice, was presiding over the trial of the so-called “Panther 21,” members of the Black Panther Party indicted in a plot to bomb New York landmarks and department stores. Early on the morning of February 21, as my family slept, three gasoline-filled firebombs exploded at our home on the northern tip of Manhattan, two at the front door and the third tucked neatly under the gas tank of the family car. (Today, of course, we’d call that a car bomb.) A neighbor heard the first two blasts and, with the remains of a snowman I had built a few days earlier, managed to douse the flames beneath the car. That was an act whose courage I fully appreciated only as an adult, an act that doubtless saved multiple lives that night.

I still recall, as though it were a dream, thinking that someone was lifting and dropping my bed as the explosions jolted me awake, and I remember my mother’s pulling me from the tangle of sheets and running to the kitchen where my father stood. Through the large windows overlooking the yard, all we could see was the bright glow of flames below. We didn’t leave our burning house for fear of who might be waiting outside. The same night, bombs were thrown at a police car in Manhattan and two military recruiting stations in Brooklyn. Sunlight, the next morning, revealed three sentences of blood-red graffiti on our sidewalk: FREE THE PANTHER 21; THE VIET CONG HAVE WON; KILL THE PIGS.

For the next 18 months, I went to school in an unmarked police car. My mother, a schoolteacher, had plainclothes detectives waiting in the faculty lounge all day. My brother saved a few bucks because he didn’t have to rent a limo for the senior prom: the NYPD did the driving. We all made the best of the odd new life that had been thrust upon us, but for years, the sound of a fire truck’s siren made my stomach knot and my heart race. In many ways, the enormity of the attempt to kill my entire family didn’t fully hit me until years later, when, a father myself, I was tucking my own nine-year-old John Murtagh into bed.

Read the whole thing...

UPDATE at 10/6/08 9:00:34 am:

The Sydney Morning Herald calls Ayers a “former anti-Vietnam war militant.”

(Hat tip: Tim Blair.)

If you were having trouble seeing all the comments in longer threads with Firefox 3, reload the page and this should now be fixed. Apparently the Windows version of Firefox has a serious bug with its implementation of the CSS “overflow” property, which we added to a certain page element to fix another problem. We’ve removed the “overflow” property now; the other problem wasn’t as serious as disappearing comments.

Prepare yourself for a shock — the New York Times article on Barack Obama’s associations with former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers did not tell the whole story: NY Times Confirms Ayers’ Role in Obama Appointment as Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

I can easily understand why some readers may have become confused by the explosion of stories today on the Obama/Ayers relationship.

The partial story of the Ayers/Obama relationship told by the New York Times today is collapsing of its own weight but has likely added to the confusion. Since I am one of the “bloggers” referred to without an explanation in the Times’ story I thought I would summarize the top ten highlights of the current state of play.

It turns out as these ten key points confirm what I have argued all along - that Bill Ayers was responsible for the elevation of Obama to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge board and the New York Times reporting on this story actually supports my conclusion, though inadvertently.

Some very clean, complex fingerpicking from Antoine Dufour.

They’re relentless.

The latest Associated Press masterpiece of journalistic malpractice: a headline that goes right to the edge of saying Sarah Palin called Barack Obama a terrorist (which she did not): Palin defends terrorist comment against Obama.

They’re parroting Obama campaign propaganda, word for word, and doing everything they can to minimize William Ayers’ terrorist acts.

But while Ayers and Obama are acquainted, the charge that they “pal around” is a stretch of any reading of the public record. And it’s simply wrong to suggest that they were associated while Ayers was committing terrorist acts. Obama was 8 years old at the time the Weather Underground claimed credit for numerous bombings and was blamed for a pipe bomb that killed a San Francisco policeman.

Can you spot the world’s biggest straw man in that highlighted sentence'

The Associated Press seems to sense, in some dim way, that they may have gone a little over the line with that ludicrous “analysis” by Douglass Daniel that tries to accuse Sarah Palin of racism for mentioning Barack Obama’s association with former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers.

In the latest revision, they’ve changed the headline from “Analysis: Palin’s words carry racial tinge” to: Analysis: Palin’s words may backfire on McCain.

Maybe not as much as this nasty bias will backfire on the Associated Press.

But the story also includes this unbelievably crass statement from “Democratic strategist” Jenny Backus:

“It’s a giant changing of the subject,” said Jenny Backus, a Democratic strategist. “The problem is the messenger. If you want to start throwing fire bombs, you don’t send out the fluffy bunny to do it. I think people don’t take Sarah Palin seriously.”

In an article about Sarah Palin’s subtle subtext of racism, this very unsubtle sexist slur against the Governor of Alaska goes unremarked, reported straight, as if it were a simple observation, nothing more. These people are completely beyond shame, both the Democrats who say these things and the Associated Press who enables them.

But remember, not all fluffy bunnies are as harmless as they seem.

(Hat tip: Sharmuta.)

The latest change behind the scenes is huge, but hopefully you won’t even notice.

Ever since LGF began, back in the Paleostinky Era, our main template has been based around a simple HTML table with three columns. No nested tables (gasp!) or anything like that, but in the world of web wonks, this kind of table-based design is akin to walking around with a piece of spinach stuck between your front teeth.

So at long last we’ve ditched the tables, flossed our web choppers, and deployed a modified version of the three column floated layout described in this excellent book: CSS Mastery: Advanced Web Standards Solutions: Andy Budd, Simon Collison, Cameron Moll.

There may still be some bugs to work out, but the worst of them have been crushed. The layout looks the same in Internet Explorer 6 and 7, Safari 3, and Firefox 3.

One big advantage is the increased accessibility. Using this sort of floated layout allows us to have the main content column actually appear first in the source listing, before the left and right sidebars; this means that visitors with impaired vision who use screen readers no longer have to wade through the whole left sidebar just to get to the real stuff.

There’s one area left in the template that still uses a table: the navigation panels that appear at the top and bottom of the middle column. But that’s due for an exorcism too.

UPDATE at 10/5/08 6:24:16 pm:

Main template exorcism completed, and I didn’t even need to call in Bobby Jindal (sorry, couldn’t resist). The navigation panels now use an unordered list, with everything floated, including the opening <ul> tag, which keeps all the floated <li>s from overflowing their containers. Because we all know how painful that can be.

And that leaves us with one more area of table abuse: the top line of each comment, with the commenter’s information, rating buttons, etc.

The Associated Press article on Sarah Palin’s comments about William Ayers is a Category 7 jaw-dropper. Apparently, now even criticizing Obama’s associations with white violent radicals is racist: Analysis: Palin’s words carry racial tinge.

Palin’s words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee “palling around” with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn’t see their America'

Her reference to Obama’s relationship with William Ayers, a member of the Vietnam-era Weather Underground, was exaggerated at best if not outright false. No evidence shows they were “pals” or even close when they worked on community boards years ago and Ayers hosted a political event for Obama early in his career.

Obama, who was a child when the Weathermen were planting bombs, has denounced Ayers’ radical views and actions. ...

In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers’ day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.

Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as “not like us” is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.

This really is the election in which the mainstream media have thrown all their claims to impartiality right into the sewer. It’s sickening to see.

(Hat tip: Jorline.)

Barack Obama was much older than 8 when William Ayers was photographed stepping on a US flag in 2001, for an article in which Ayers said he had “No Regrets” for his violent actions in the Weather Underground.

In fact, at the same time Ayers was in a Chicago alley desecrating the flag, he and Barack Obama were serving on the board of the Woods Fund together: PolitiFact | Obama served on board with Ayers.

Deborah Harrington, president of the Woods Fund, a philanthropic organization in Chicago, said Obama was a director from 1994 through 2001. That overlaps Ayers’ time as a director by three years. It also means Obama served with Ayers for the final months of 2001, after Ayers made his comments to the New York Times.

A great piece by Michael Malone at PJ Media: The End Of An Era.

Living out here in Silicon Valley, the heartland of American innovation, it’s hard not to be appalled by the events taking place 3,000 miles away in the seats of American finance and government - and hard not to fall back on the ‘pox on both their houses’ attitude that polls say is increasingly common among American voters.

From where I sit, the United States government has embarked on two pieces of social engineering in the last few years. One was to make oil expensive as expensive as possible to drive people to greater use of alternative energy sources - because anything less would be irresponsible and destructive to the environment. The other was to enshrine home ownership (i.e., easy-to-obtain mortgages) as a new American right - because anything less would be unequal and racist.

None of us voted on these decisions - indeed, neither was even spoken about directly, much less debated. But nevertheless, both became national policy... and both have sparked national, now international, crises. Then, once they became crises, both were blamed on ‘greedy capitalism’, instead of what they really were: legislative interference into market forces.

Fine. We’ve been through this before, and no doubt we will see similar, government-induced crises again - inevitably accompanied by Administration officials and our elected representatives pointing at everyone but themselves.

But what makes this particular economic crisis so appalling, at least from this vantage point, is the sheer scumminess, corruption, short-sightedness and general incompetence of everyone involved. At least in the business world, especially in the take-no-prisoners world of high-tech that kind of venality and ineptitude either gets you fired or kills the company; by comparison, in Washington, it puts you in charge of the recovery effort.

Just a reminder: in 2001, for an article in Chicago Magazine, Barack Obama’s friend William Ayers proudly allowed himself to be photographed stepping on a United States flag:

The article was appropriately titled: No Regrets, and I’ve saved a copy of it in case it suddenly disappears, as articles exposing Obama’s associates often do.

This disgusting photograph was first published at LGF in May of this year: Obama’s Employer Desecrated Flag.

Following Sarah Palin’s debate performance, Kathleen Parker has crow for dinner: Bridge to Somewhere.

What did they do with the other Sarah Palin'

I mean the one who bases foreign-policy experience on the proximity of Russia to Alaska and who speaks cutely about Vladimir Putin poking his little head into American airspace. Where did they put her'

The Palin who performed so miserably in one-on-one media interviews was nowhere to be seen during Thursday night’s debate with Joe Biden. Instead, the affable, tough, determined pit-bull-hockey mom presented to the GOP convention was back with a jaw-jutting, happy-warrior vengeance.

So, yes, I am relieved. I had been concerned that she would stumble badly and humiliate herself. No fair-minded person wanted that. In fact, she managed to control the debate in many respects by bridging from the question asked to the talking point she wanted to hammer.

Sarah Palin goes where John McCain refuses to tread: Palin Hits Obama on Ayers.

Our opponent though is someone who sees America it seems as being so imperfect, imperfect enough that he’s palling around  with terrorists who would target their own country. Americans need to know this. Talk about taking the gloves off, I too being that outsider and only being a part of this for  5 weeks now, I think ok we gotta get the word out. This is in fairness to the electorate we gotta start telling people what the other side represents.

I’m just afraid that the time to “take the gloves off” may have already passed.

The last time we posted a thread about O.J. Simpson, it got a record rating of -265: The Inevitable OJ Thread.

So let’s go for another personal worst: Simpson convicted of robbing memorabilia dealers.

LAS VEGAS – Thirteen years to the day after being acquitted of killing his wife and her friend in Los Angeles, O.J. Simpson was found guilty of robbing two sports-memorabilia dealers at gunpoint in a Las Vegas hotel room.

The 61-year-old former football star was convicted of all 12 counts late Friday after jurors deliberated for more than 13 hours. He released a heavy sigh as the charges were read and was immediately taken into custody.

Simpson, who went from American sports idol to celebrity-in-exile after his murder acquittal, could spend the rest of his life in prison.

Coming soon to the most jihad-friendly university in America, UC Irvine: a leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, to spread disinformation about the Muslim Brotherhood’s efforts to achieve “democracy.”

It’s an odd form of democracy they want—the freedom to vote in a regime that would end voting forever.

And notice: this isn’t being sponsored by the Saudi-funded radical Muslim Student Union. It was organized by the UC Irvine Department of History and two UCI research centers.

What the hell is wrong with these people'

Title: Religion and Democracy in the Middle East
Office: International Studies
Event Date: 10/8/2008 - 10/8/2008
Details: The Department of History, Middle East Studies Student Initiative (MESSI), Center for Research on International and Global Studies (RIGS), and Center for Global Peace and Conflict Studies (CGPACS) present:

“Religion and Democracy in the Middle East: A New Generation of the Muslim Brotherhood Takes the Stage”

with Ibrahim El Houdaiby, leading young member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Cairo

Wednesday, October 8, 2008,
1:00-2:30 p.m.
Humanities Instructional Building, Room 135

El Houdaiby will discuss the history and current positions of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the situation of democracy in Egypt today, the rise of a new generation of secular and religious cyber-activists, the challenges and successes they’ve encountered in struggling for democracy, and the role of U.S. policy in furthering or stifling democracy in the Middle East.

Ibrahim El Houdaiby is a leader of the emerging generation of political and social activists associated with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, the oldest religiously-founded group of its kind in the Middle East. He is a board member of ikhwanweb.com, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Official English Website. A graduate of the American University in Cairo, he holds a B.A. in political economy, and is currently working towards an MA in Islamic Studies at the High Institute of Islamic Studies in Cairo. He is a freelance columnist and researcher, with published articles and research papers in Arabic and English periodicals and journals. His Arabic works were published on IslamOnline.net, IkhwanOnline.com, Weghaat Nazar Monthly, Contemporary Muslim Quarterly, Al Badeel Newspaper and Al Dostoor Newspaper. His English works were published in th Guardian, Daily News Egypt, Jewish Daily Forward, World Politics Review, CommonGroundNews.org, Conflics Forum and CEPS.

Unfortunately, reports of the death of chubby Al Qaeda traitor Adam Gadahn have been greatly exaggerated.

Here’s a terrific, detailed review of one of the textbooks created by the Discovery Institute in order to sneak their “intelligent design” creationism into American science classrooms. John Timmer precisely identifies the slippery tactics of this dishonest organization: A biologist reviews an evolution textbook from the ID camp.

The Discovery Institute, as indicated by its wedge document, wishes to eliminate science’s focus on natural causes. The group views this focus as the source of society’s increasing materialism, which makes it anathema in the belief system of Discovery’s members. Stephen C. Meyer, the lead author of Explore Evolution, heads the Discovery Institute and is mentioned by name in the wedge document, as is coauthor Paul Nelson.

Evolution has been singled out for special ire by Discovery, as it provides an explanation for the origin of humanity based solely on natural processes. Although the ID movement has not developed a research program or even proposed a scientific formulation of its ideas, it has gotten a surprising amount of traction with its attack on the science of evolution. Tapping into a rich vein of American thought that dates back roughly a century, the group’s members have used popular books and appearances in the press to argue that the scientific theory of evolution is on the verge of abandonment, having been pushed to its most recent “inevitable” collapse by new molecular evidence.

More significantly, however, Discovery Institute fellows have been attempting to have their arguments against evolution incorporated into the US public school system. They testified in favor of education standards in Ohio and Kansas that targeted evolution for special criticism—Kansas’ standards went even further and eliminated reference to science’s search for natural causes. In the wake of the Dover case, however, both states have reversed these policies, leaving Discovery without a foot in the door of the US education system.

EE appears to be part of a strategy to change that. In June, Louisiana became the first state to enact a law specifically enabling the use of supplemental materials for the critical evaluation of evolution; similar legislation has been introduced in several other states. EE appears to have been intelligently designed to be the sort of supplemental text that’s appropriate under the Louisiana legislation, and so it’s likely to be making an appearance in classrooms there. But EE may appear in other states, as the approval process for supplementary material is often far less strict than that governing textbooks.

Read the whole thing. Timmer’s review completely tears this so-called textbook to shreds.

This is the kind of craziness promoted by the Discovery Institute:

Another PhD the authors found is Christian Schwabe, who apparently has established a career studying a protein called reflexin, along with its relatives. But every couple of years he publishes a paper in which he argues in favor of his belief that the genomes of all modern and extinct species originated during the formation of life billions of years ago. According to Schwabe, those genomes have continued to exist, hidden underground as stem cell-like entities. Whenever these cells sense a favorable environment above ground, they head for the surface and self-organize into a fully formed, multicellular animal. No, I am not making this up.

This isn’t simply evidence-free (although it is); it’s borderline deranged. And yet, in the hands of Discovery’s authors, it becomes a serious scientific controversy about the existence of the tree of life. And, if there’s any controversy, then students should apparently think twice before accepting that science actually knows anything about the evolution of life on earth.

“Borderline deranged.” Couldn’t have said it better myself.

And guess who’s taking another bash at me' Sacking Little Green Footballs’ Outrageous Claim That ‘Discovery Institute Is in League With Islamist Creationists’.

Earlier this year, the popular blog Little Green Footballs (LGF) made an outrageous attempt to link Discovery Institute to the Muslim creationist Harun Yahya (a.k.a. Adnan Oktar). Their post claimed, “Discovery Institute is in league with Islamist creationists, a fact that is indisputably true,” specifically referring to Yahya / Oktar.

A perfect example of the lies and distortions in which this organization trades. I neither said nor implied that the Discovery Institute collaborates with Harun Yahya (although one of their Turkish associates, Mustafa Aykol, is a former volunteer for Harun Yahya), and to say that I was “specifically referring” to him is simply a lie.

Read it for yourself; here’s the post to which DI shill Casey Luskin is referring, with an audio clip featuring one of the Discovery Institute’s Senior Fellows, David Berlinski, boasting about their collaboration with Islamic creationists: When Disco Dudes Attack.

And yes, it is indisputably true that the Discovery Institute is collaborating with Turkish creationists. Clearly, that little “discovery” of mine has hit a very sensitive nerve at the Dishonesty Institute.