Second most if not all the Egyptian newspapers spoke about this debate more than the original debate of Obama-McCain. Most of the newspapers consider Biden a winner despite they paid their respect to the strength of Palin, no one can deny that Palin stood against the Congressman veteran more than we expected and imagine. Still all newspapers attacked Palin and Biden saying that there was no much difference between them in kissing Israel’s ass.

This is what I think both were like in bid for proving who will serve Israel the 51 state of the United States of America more , the Zionist Biden or Palin who has the Israeli flag in her office “Already this is the first time I know that a governor in a remote state would have a flag of a foreign country in his/her office !!??”

There is not big surprise here ,of course it is expected but I must highlight some points that astonished me.

I was surprised to find out that the United States and France succeeded in expelling Hezbollah outside of South Lebanon !!?? This is according to Biden the 30 years congressman veteran in foreign affairs !!

Of course he means that United States and France succeeded in expelling the Shiite Party from the South Lebanon in another life in another world !!

The man forgot that the so-democratic government now is made of Hezbollah and 14th of March !!!

Now to the newcomer.

It is first time to know that transferring American Embassy to Jerusalem will help in Peace process and establishing the Palestinian State !! As you can see all their remarks are in the sake of Israel despite their stupidity

Anyhow again the democrats believe that they won that debate and the republicans believe that their Hockey mom won it , the show is on and the whole world is watching especially us.

Part of the middle East especially the Gulf States are watching the elections for the economic reasons especially after the economic crisis , they are the Gulf countries that we will be affected where as us and the rest of the confront countries as they are called watching for the Peace Process ,Iraq,Iran and democratic reforms.

Another thing I heard a very bad rumour that Mubarak and son regime is trying to open direct channels with Obama , if this is true ,then Obama must give them cold face.

Personal, character attacks began during the weekend, when Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin accused Barack Obama of “palling around with terrorists.” She was referring to Obama’s alleged association with Bill Ayers, a founding member of the Weather Underground — not to be confused with the uber-chic '60s band the Velvet Underground. The Weather Underground, also known as the Weathermen were a left-wing terror group implicated in a series of bombings across the United States between 1970 and 1974, namely, the New York City police house, a toilet in the U.S. Senate Building, a woman’s restroom in the Pentagon, a San Francisco police station, a Marin County Courthouse and the Presidio Army base in San Francisco.

According to the Alaskan governor, both Obama and Ayers often attended the same social functions and once sat on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, an anti-poverty group. They also live within a few blocks of each other on Chicago’s north side. The Washington Post blog Fact Checker found that Ayers, who is now a distinguished professor of Education at the University of Illinois-Chicago, contributed $200 to Obama’s re-election fund to the Illinois State Senate in 2001. Ayers never served a prison sentence for his role in the Weathermen, but admitted in a memoir he didn’t regret setting the bombs.

The whole thing adds up to the Fact Checker calling the link between the two “tenuous.”

Next, it was Obama’s turn to rekindle some of John McCain’s past. Bloomberg reports that the Obama campaign has constructed a new website with videos reminding voters how McCain is a member of the Keating Five, a group of Senators accused of improperly intervening with federal regulators on behalf of their financial backer, Charles Keating, the owner of a failed Savings and Loan. When Keating’s Saving and Loan went belly up, more than 23,000 bondholders were drafauded and the U.S. government stepped in, becoming liable for $2 billion in loses. (Fact Checker hasn’t gotten around to these claims, but according to the Arizona Republic, McCain's help to Keating was in “poor judgment.”)

“I think it is safe to say this presidential campaign has thus far been cleaner than the last two, with only one truly nasty attack ad,” writes dubaiwalla, from Dubai, in his Livejournal page.

Look for that to change over the next month, as John McCain attempts to roll the dice one last time by questioning Barack Obama's character in a bid to cut into his comfortable lead. And if he does, expect to hear a lot more about his own past, and that of his running mate. My personal prediction is that the polls will close a bit, as McCain spends all the cash he has hoarded. But with the combination of a lead in cash, good poll numbers in every swing state (plus some traditionally Republican ones), and a strong ground presence, I am very optimistic about Obama's chances. The economic crisis should amount to a coffin nail.

From the Public Opinion weblog at the Thought Factory, run out of Australia, McCain’s fade in the opinion polls leave his camp with only one tactic left: personal attacks.

The Guardian reports that the economic crisis has led to a haemorrhaging of Republican support over the last two weeks. Polls and reports from Democratic and Republican campaign staff on the ground suggest that a seismic shift is taking place in the electoral map in favour of the Democrats. Obama is making inroads into states once regarded as safe Republican areas, while the number of states in which McCain is competitive is narrowing, mainly because of the Wall Street collapse.

I'm not so sure that it is that cut and dried. McCain can still win narrowly–like Bush did…So what then for McCain? A turn in tactics? To negative adverts? A smear campaign? To shift the campaign discussion away from substantive issues, such as the economy or health care? McCain needs to try and divert attention from the economy.

As Bloomberg points out that the character attacks — as they are now called — puts the Obama camp, and its message of hope, in a predicament. How can you try to preach change and be vindictive at the same time?

From a writer called CLARENCEGIRL, blogging in North Country Voices in Australia:

Both the Republicans and Democrats are naturally trying to control media spin in the 2008 US presidential election.

Cease and desist letters are flying back and forth between candidates and lobby groups (such as the National Rifle Association), as well as between media outlets and the Obama and McCain campaign machines.Legal action is apparently being regularly threatened over a broad area.

After a failed attempt to allegedly buy internet censorship, Obama has relied on a number of websites in his attempt to control this spin.
His Fight the Smears site asks for help in spreading the ‘truth' about political rumours and falsehoods.

However, his supporters appear to be going a little overboard and are apparently attempting to censor what goes up on the Internet.

However, bloggers around the world are calling into question using attack campaigning at all. From a liberal perspective, but one with political experience, Duncan Riley from Australia argues that both John McCain and Sarah Palin deserved to win their debates: They spoke more in key points, used their grand narrative well, articulated the negatives of the other candidate and lectured on their fighting spirit while their opponents conversed less in sound bites and more often took a positive approach. “Everything I’ve learnt from years in politics,” Duncan confesses, “told me that McCain won the debate.”

I was wrong. Every poll showed that Obama won. It was a triumph of substance over style, of a positive message trumping a more negative one.

If we can, let’s get beyond the partisanship of the post and focus on the nuts and bolts of the argument. Why could Obama grow his lead after these head-to-head encounters? By becoming more aggressive and resorting to more personal attacks, are the Republicans fighting the previous war?

The electorate is changing.

At a time of economic crisis, and with wars on several fronts, the American people are looking past the politics of old, the politics of negative spin and sound bites, and want something more. It can be the only explanation for Obama and Biden winning both debates among swinging/ undecided voters in particular. Intelligence and a deep understanding of the issues are less of a crime in 2008.

There’s also the defeat of narrative + negativity over positives and intellect. Notice how McCain in the first debate referred to his experience in Vietnam, and how Palin said that only McCain knows how to fight and win. Being in a POW camp deserves respect, but it doesn’t give you a special ability to run the free world over your opponent. Notice Palin’s constant references to Alaska, and hockey moms, and her disabled child, having 5 children, running a small community etc etc…great narrative that may connect on some levels, but it’s no longer a vote winner over what you are capable of delivering and what your policies are.
Change starts from the ground up. If the polls continue, and Obama wins in a landslide (or something close to it), the people of the United States will join others in Australia and the United Kingdom in finally rejecting the negative politics that became the defining factor of all three in the late 90s and into the first decade of the 21st century. We’ll only know in November.

In somewhat of the same vein, Jeremiah Haber, from Jerusalem, who writes the Magnes Zionist blog takes New York Times columnist tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3864898511958677656.post-8214046240412791903 said, referring to the Israeli political party that is generally the most hardline as regards Palestinians: "I think there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel, then you're anti-Israel, and that can't be the measure of our friendship with Israel." That statement is perfectly reasonable and uncontroversial when heard from Israel, or anywhere else in the world, but given the intensity and tone of Israelophilia in the US, it was an extremely bold thing to say. It demonstrate that, while remaining well within the US mainstream (as his speech to AIPAC later demonstrated), he has a more nuanced attitude than most senior US politicians - and many Israelis appreciate this. The recognise that if they are to eventual achieve a peaceful cohabitation with Palestinians, they need a more evenhanded approach from the US which encourages peacemakers on both sides, rather than bolstering the extremists - as Bush's disastrous policies have consistently done. Given this, it is no surprise that Obama is the favourite in Israel (and among Jewish people worldwide), while also attracting strong support among Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims. The YouTube video below gives an indication of the breadth of his support in Israel across the political and social spectrum.

From more, see coverage from Shmuel Rosner, Israeli paper Ha'aretz's Washington Correspondent. And for some opposing views, see JewsAgainstObama.org versus Israelis for Obama, jews4barack.com, rabbisforobama.org ("When 500 Rabbis agree on anything, you know that something is going on!"), jews4obama2008.net and jews4change.com]]> http://www.theworldwantsobama.org/2008/09/israelis-for-obama-video.html/feed/ http://www.mideastyouth.com/2008/10/01/in-search-of-new-frontiers/ http://www.mideastyouth.com/2008/10/01/in-search-of-new-frontiers/#comments Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:05:13 +0000 Aggregated from: Mideast Youth - Thinking Ahead » USA http://www.mideastyouth.com/2008/10/01/in-search-of-new-frontiers/ America has always been a land of new frontiers. From the time that Columbus first set foot here, to the time that pioneers set out to settle the West, to the time that Americans set out for the moon, there has always been a sense here that there are new frontiers to explore. And yet, America now finds herself somewhat at a loss, and the promise of new frontiers is becoming illusory at best. Where do we go from here? The question lingers in the public mind.

America faces some grave threats in our time, and by implication, so does the world at large. The threats we face seem to fall into three general categories: the threats posed by Extremist ideologies, the threats to the Environment, and the threats to the Economy. I call these threats the 3-E’s, for short.

Extremist thinking is not limited to groups like Al Qaeda, but exists wherever people put their personal beliefs above the needs of the people at large. It could well be argued, for example, that the meltdown in Wall Street was the result of personal greed trumping the needs of a healthy economy.

The threats to the Environment are beginning to loom large in the public mind. The Environment is quickly assuming the role of the ideological imperative. The decision, some 150 years ago, to run our economies on fossil fuels, may well have been the greatest mistake ever made, a mistake with dire consequences for the destiny of man.

The threats to our economy have been made quite clear in the last few days, with grave implications for the economic wellbeing of the entire world. The global economy, while it does hold the promise of great benefits for the world at large, also means that the downfall of one economy could trigger the downfall of others as well. What is clear is that the model embraced by Wall Street, and by other financial institutions, may need some fine tuning to say the least, if not a major overhaul.

Even to the cursory observer, the threats we face—Extremism, the Environment, and the Economy—are all inter-connected, and inter-related. They feed upon one another, and into one another. They are a package deal, of sorts. You literally can’t solve one, without addressing the other two. And since they are so related to one another, it is possible that a solution can be found which solves all three in one shot.

The search for answers to the problems which we face may well mean a search for new frontiers, for new ways of thinking, and for new actions taken pursuant to new ideas. It is as if our problems are beginning to point to a new paradigm for organizing ourselves as we make our way into the 21st century. As John Gardner put it, we face “…a series of opportunities disguised as insoluble problems.”

The cure for many of the ills which plague us may well be to usher in a Green Revolution, by which we use our technological and economic power to create jobs which are specifically designed to protect the Environment, which will help to curb the hold of extremist thinking, and which will help us to partner with nations around the world to grow our economies, but in a way that is sustainable for countless generations to come.

Think about it. If the threats we face are Environmental, Economic, and Extremist in nature, isn’t the answer to grow our economies by producing green technology goods and services, and by using the jobs created in this regard to give everyone on earth a place at the table, a stake in his or her future, and by hoping that such an outcome will automatically help to neutralize extremist thinking?

It is as if the position that America finds herself cries out for a new frontier to be found and explored. However, this frontier is not about embarking on a journey to a distant land. This frontier is about looking at our current situation, and fashioning a solution which addresses all that is wrong with our world, and with our nation.

Many around the world still look to America as the last remaining super-power, and as the last best hope for mankind. By all means of measure, America has much to be proud of: the most successful democracy, the guarantor of freedom and personal liberties, the strongest economy, the most powerful military, the most renowned academic institutions, the leader in technological advancement and research, the leader of the free world, the cultural trend setter of the world, the country that others look up to and depend on. But looking at America’s many accomplishments, the question still remains: To what end did America achieve her greatness, and to what purpose will she put her strength?

In the past, even in the darkest of times, America has risen to the occasion, and has cast her light on the right path, for all to see, and for all to follow. Like the Statue of Liberty in the New York harbor, America has often been a beacon of hope for countless people around the world. But having been a light unto the nations in the past, many now fear that America may have lost her way. And it is precisely at this time, and under these dire circumstances, that America is once again called upon to assume the mantle of leadership in the world, and to show by example the best way forward. Failure to do so could not only undo the fabric of our nation, but could well mean the undoing of the destiny of man.

Newman’s entry titled, “on deleting palestine and other debate observations” first discusses the factual errors made by Biden, including his misuse of the word Arabic word “madrassa.”

Biden’s mistake #1: If you’re going to use an Arabic word, don’t you think you should learn what it means first?:

There have been 7,000 madrasses built along that border. We should be helping them build schools to compete for those hearts and minds of the people in the region so that we’re actually able to take on terrorism and by the way, that’s where bin Laden lives and we will go at him if we have actually intelligence.

المدرسة, or madrassa, literally means school in English. Religious school, private school, public school: it does not matter. Like the word school in English, madrassa applies to all sorts of schools including Islamic religious schools. Oh, and as Fisk, thankfully, makes it clear that there are not 7,000 schools on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

Newman then points out that other problems arose during the debate including Palin’s “fabrication.” One fabrication included Palin stating she was middle-class; Newman cites a The Independent article stating that Palin and her husband Todd are worth “at least $1.2m, including a $500,000 lakefront home, a Piper float-plane and two holiday getaways.”

Newman also ties in her current home, Palestine, stating that both candidates failed to mention the country during the 90-minute-debate; however, both repeatedly pointed out their love for Israel.

Can you imagine any country with a leader whose brain is bigger than the size of a pea lending its support for any state without reservations? Without question? Moreover, not only did we never hear the word Palestine mention. By not mentioning Palestine, Palestinian people, a Palestinian context many other things were deleted as well. Occupation. Illegal settlements. The 60th anniversary of an nakba. Palestinian political prisoners. Palestinian refugees. The siege on Gaza. The hyperbole Palin invokes with her reference to a so-called second holocaust and Israel as a “peace-seeking nation” is preposterous and shows the level of myth making involved in their Israel love-fest. Israel is a war-seeking nation and has been so since before its creation.

Newman further addresses Palin’s stance on Israel and her continuous use of the word “energy.”

I take Palin at her word, unfortunately, when she expresses her affection for a nation-state that practices state terrorism on a daily basis. At the same time when she mentioned her love of Israel (about six or seven times) for her American Jewish voting audience (most of whom, by the way, do not support the state of Israel unconditionally), she made it clear that she doesn’t really know or understand the issues at stake. Likewise, there were many moments when she clearly did not understand the words, the language, the question, the concept and in turn either ignored it or injected the word “energy” into her response. It seems that this energy crutch of hers was the only subject she seemed to feel comfortable with (of course, only in the context of “drill, baby, drill”). She used the word “energy” 29 times.

The post is completed with Newman addressing other issues including: the Iraq War and the number of casualties, Henry Kissinger, Afghanistan and Pakistan and essentially, her disappointment in both candidates.

Just as Palin (and Biden) seems to be woefully clueless when it comes to historical matters affecting our current realities…

In a later entry titled, “why i love rosa clemente,” Newman posts what Independent Vice Presidential Candidate Matt Gonzalez and Green Party Vice Presidential Candidate Rosa Clemente (also the vice presidential candidates of Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney, of whom she is supporting) stated in regards to Palestine.

just a taste of how that Israel love fest would have gone if vice presidential candidates rosa clemente and matt gonazalez had been included. here is what they have to say about palestine (yes! they actually are able to say that word and speak about it in an informed and moral way! imagine!). and there are many reasons why i love clemente: her position on the prison industrial complex, the military industrial complex, queer rights, the environment. you can watch the entire debate or read the transcript at democracy now!

MATT GONZALEZ: Well, I think, you know, both of these candidates pay lip service to the notion that we need a two-state solution. They don’t tell you any specifics around that. Do they support 1967 borders, for instance? Joe Biden did not repudiate Barack Obama’s earlier remark about Jerusalem belonging to Israel.

And I think their sort of over-the-top repeating of how much they love Israel—I think, in that, they lose an opportunity to support peace movements in and outside of Israel, joined by many Jews, both in this country and in Israel, that want to see an end to the violence in the region, that don’t believe, for instance, the way Palestinians are being treated is fair.

And I think when Joe Biden starts repudiating elections in the West Bank and elsewhere, you see that these guys are pretty much in step with the current administration. You know, they either—you either have to be a supporter of democracy and deal with the right of people to self-determine, or you repudiate that. And if you repudiate it, you’re going to go down a path that can be very dangerous.

AMY GOODMAN: Rosa Clemente?

ROSA CLEMENTE: Well, I mean, I think it’s not even a question of fairness. The Israeli government, every day, kills Palestinian people in their own homeland. I think it is about the right to self-determination, but it’s also—I think it’s more than a two-state solution.
Many Palestinian groups are calling for a one-state solution, and that’s how it should be.

And the United States, we need to stop sending any type of military aid to Israel. I think what’s going on in—what’s been happening in Palestine, you know, is an indication of forty years of complete terror amongst another group of people, aided by American tax dollars, you know.

And I think younger people, particularly through hip-hop, it’s been interesting that we can have cultural exchanges and actually have people in Palestine, like the hip-hop group DAM, that let us know what’s happening every day right there on the ground and that the issue for a lot of Palestinian people would be that they deserve their homeland back and that the right of return is fundamental to them as a people.

AmiraalHussaini, from Bahrain, balked at Sarah Palin's use of the familiar:

She then questioned how Palin managed to bone up on her public speaking skills so quickly:

She also wondered about Palin's promises regarding Wall Street:

Much of the Twitter commentary was in reference to Palin's gaffes and mispronunciations. Israeli gilgul remarked upon her pronunciation of “nuclear”:

He also remarked upon Palin's “O'Biden” gaffe:

lrakoto, from Madagascar, enjoyed Palin's “O'Biden” remark:

He also eschewed Palin's use of “doggone”:

AmiraalHussaini chose to comment on Palin's repeated mispronunciation of Iraq and Iran:

Many viewers were also appalled at Palin's response to the question on oil and energy. Danish-Puerto Rican Solanasaurus didn't quite agree with Palin:

By the end of the debate, it was clear that this segment of the Twittersphere favored Biden. lrakoto made his preference clear:

On the humorous side of things, eunice007 (Philippines) remarks upon the bipartisan US:

Australian rachelhills is a bit torn on the winner of the debate:

Colombian blogger Neocon Latina writes despite the Couric interviews, “underdog” Palin can still win.

“But given Palin's rather uninspiring recent performances with Couric and elsewhere, I'd say she's now a solid two-touchdown underdog. How will she do? I predict she covers the spread, but that may no longer be enough. Indeed, with the recent Obama surge, we may need a flat-out win from Palin to get back into this thing.

Will it happen? Ya never know — the Giants were nearly two touchdown underdogs heading into the Superbowl against the Pats. I'll certainly be watching to see if Palin can pull a Tyree.”

Chauncey DeVega also writes that Palin winning is a possibility.

“I have to be honest folks, my spidey sense is tingling on this one because either Palin and the Republicans are playing us all and she is a genius who will emerge to greatly surprise and embarrass Joe Biden in a manner akin to the movie the Ringer, where an “able bodied” and not mentally “handicapped” person participates in the Special Olympics to rig the games for the Mafia.”

Writing at Mideast Youth, Palestinian Ray Hanania adds to this, stating that Palin is a great speaker.

“Although in all honesty as I watched her read without any slipups her moving conservative perspective on the world, I kept thinking it was a monologue on Saturday Night Live and Palin was “news roaster” Tina Fey. Oh for the old days of entertainment, which is what American political conventions have become. It is not about issues any longer. It's about how great you sound delivering your speech. How you “spin” the issues to draw on the emotional strings of the American people, who, despite all the promises made over the years by candidates, face the same old challenges.”

On the other hand, despite her talent of giving speeches, Moroccan blogger Laila Lalami writes about her lack of press interviews and conferences.

“What does it say about our political culture that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the nut job head of state of Iran, can travel to New York, give an open press conference, and face reporters in unscripted questions, while Sarah Palin, the VP candidate, still hasn't?”

An expat from Taiwan isn’t expecting much from the Republican candidate.

“Palin is the dumbest thing to ever attempt American presidential politics. Dumber even than Dubya, and that’s saying something.”

While, Mexican blogger Baron Vitelius of Estera writes that he is unsure if he can make it through 90 minutes of Palin debating.

“Do I need to stay home and live-blog tonight's debate? I don't see how any of us can keep our sanity through 90 minutes of it unless we have a Sarah Palin Drinking Game to fall back on. Any ideas?”

Puerto Rican Liza points out in Culture Kitchen that some McCain admirers are still upset about his VP choice.

“Jack Cafferty is really mad at John McCain for his VP pick. I don't know which way Cafferty swings politically but I know he's been a Capitol Hill journalist for a hell of a long time; making me believe he may even know McCain personally.

It must be such a betrayal for guys of his generation to see this “Maverick” who they admired and propped up, throw everything away for what's looking like a desperate attempt at a power grab. A rather pathetic power grab, that is.

With this “bail out crisis” we can see that not even members of his own party want him.”

Despite some pessimistic thoughts, Israeli blogger Sultan Knish writes that Palin’s negative image should be blamed on the media and doesn’t define her.

“The liberal media after all are the masters of playing Catch 22 with conservative candidates and Cheney\Palin are a perfect example of the game. Nominate an old pro and he's an evil puppet master. Nominate a fresh face and he's a moron. The media is playing the Dan Quayle game with Palin and some conservatives are falling for it. But lest conservatives forget the media have played the same game with Bush himself for nearly a decade and they've gotten nowhere because Bush clearly showed how to beat the media at their game, show confidence, laugh off any mistakes you make and keep a down home attitude about everything because it's a manufactured campaign that will pass.”

He adds that if she does become the next vice president, all she needs is a little adjustment.

“Palin has suffered from hysterical overreactions on both sides. Hysterical hatred from liberals and hysterical adoration from conservatives and now a hysterical backlash from some conservatives. She has an interesting story, but she isn't superhuman, she can't fly or change the nation in 5 minutes. Like every Governor who wends his or her way to the White House, she'll need time to learn and adjust, but she has proven that she's capable of taking on big jobs, which frankly is more than Obama has proven.”

Lady Artist, an American living the “a subtropical paradise” adds to this, writing that she wouldn’t be surprised if Palin became president someday.

“I’m looking forward to tonight’s VP debate with enthusiasm and a bit of nervousness. Yea Palin is young and inexperienced, but I think she can hold her own if she doesn’t trip up or get exasperated.

On the topic of inexperience, okay … it’s important to have experience, but I also think, being a woman of faith, that a bit of trust and stick-behind-it-ness is warranted in Palin’s case. I think she’s got unbelievable potential as an effective politician.”

Finally, for Lebanese American blogger, AK, health care is still an issue when voting this election.

“I couldn't help but wonder how her family would have been be able to afford health care had she not been governor. A child with Down Syndrome and an unemployed and pregnant 17-year old daughter, would break any middle class family.

For that, it was interesting to me that she has never broached the issue of health care. Instead, she has been using her family to prove points about abortion and conservatism, as seen by the religious right.”

If I didn’t say otherwise, wouldn’t you guess this statement would fit the description of John McCain’s political career? A consummate Washington establishment figure–even if slightly iconoclastic–with decades of foreign travel meeting oodles of foreign leaders. So isn’t it odd that this is how Sarah Palin chose to attack Joe Biden? Wouldn’t you say it’s a bit of the pot calling the kettle?

Not to mention that it’s terribly convenient for someone who’s never heard of the Bush doctrine and never met a foreign leader to argue that her ignorance is actually a political plus for her ticket. But will Americans buy this pig in a poke? Oops, there I’ve said it–that nasty word “pig.” She’s not one–at least not literally.

For the Jewish community, one of the small revelations of Sarah Palin’s ABC interview was her stance on an Israeli attack on Iran:

Mr. Gibson…asked Ms. Palin whether she would back Israel if it were to seek to eliminate Iran’s facilities militarily.

“We are friends with Israel,” Ms. Palin said, “and I don’t think that we should second-guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.” Pressed, she twice more said she would not “second-guess” Israel.

One should add that her position is a flat-out contradiction of current Bush policy, which has clearly discouraged Israel from attacking Iran. We’ve sent both State Department diplomats and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to make clear our view that Israel should not attack.

There has been much scuttlebutt, a good deal of it generated by the neocons, that John McCain feels otherwise; and that Israel would take advantage of this by attacking Iran after the presidential elections but before the next president takes office. If that person is McCain, they will have acted as he tacitly would’ve wished them too. At least that’s the argument I’ve heard.

Now, one can argue that Palin’s bellicose position is a political one that doesn’t reflect real policy deliberations. Or one can argue that John McCain wouldn’t allow her to say something like this unless he actually believed it. I’m inclined to believe the latter is the case. Which further reinforces the likelihood that Israel will indeed attack Iran.

The American electorate should know this and factor it into their deliberation about whom they vote for. Vote McCain if you want a new front in the war on terror. If you haven’t had enough of quagmire in Iraq and Afghanistan, McCain-Palin have a new war to sell you. And make no mistake–an Israeli attack will not be a single discrete military action. It will be responded to by Iran, who may attack not only Israeli targets but American as well. So I say to Americans, if you want to stick your hand in a hornet’s nest, then by all means vote McCain. Just make sure you have the antidote to wasp venom near at hand. Otherwise, you’re in for a nasty time of it.

Aipac must be rejoicing at this new development. They couldn’t have articulated her position any better if they’d written it themselves. And come to think of it with Joe “Mr. Aipac” Lieberman coaching her–they DID. Does anyone need further evidence of the noxious influence of this organization on U.S. Mideast policy?

The Democratic veep candidate told CBS's Katie Couric last night he thought a campaign ad that stingingly mocked John McCain for being a computer bonehead was “terrible.”

“I didn't know we did it and if I had anything to do with it, we would have never done it,” Biden said.

Atlantic.com noted the biting ad stated:

“He admits he still doesn't know how to use a computer, can't send an e-mail, still doesn't understand the economy, and favors 200 billion in new tax cuts for corporations, but almost nothing for the middle class.”

It reminds me of how the Israeli Labor Party lost whatever support they had of Israeli's “amcha,” the “ordinary, non-elite” Israeli. This was when Menachem Begin was PM and running for re-election. At a Labor rally, someone made fun of the “riff-raff” who supports Begin.

Just recently I mentioned to someone that there really are people who don't own or very rarely use computers. She was amazed, insisted that I was wrong. But I'm not. I mentioned it among neighbors, and was told that even when there's a computer in the house, it's not used by everyone.

It's important for us to remember that there are other ways of communicating and not everyone is online.

Back to this miscalculation by the Obama camp. I just wrote that he's elitist. I doubt that all of his supporters are, but the people running the campaign are making mistakes. McCain and Palin are of the American “amcha,” and even black “amcha” may feel alienated by the time they have to pull the lever.

Let's get it straight, nothing Palin has said is in a league with any of Biden's whoppers. Pointing out that your state borders the second largest world power resulting in trade relations and border issues is perfectly reasonable, except when the media turns it into an unfriendly soundbite to ridicule in order to fit the narrative that she is unqualified, a narrative that they coined hours after McCain picked her.

The same media that found this so absurd have never questioned Obama's claims of foreign policy qualifications based on

A. Having traveled as a child to Indonesia

B. Making a highly publicized tour of Europe and the Middle East complete with a pointless speech to a German crowd drawn by free beer

C. Picking a Vice President who knows foreign policy so Obama doesn't have to.

Is Palin ready to be President tommorow? The real question is by comparison to whom? She's not as ready as McCain is, but as ready as G.W. Bush or Clinton were who went from State governors to the White House. But more to the point Obama isn't ready to be President today and since when have we actually taken the qualifications of VP candidates seriously? About the only Vice President in a while who was ready to be President is Dick Cheney and in return he's gotten nothing but obsessive accusations of being Bush's puppet master.

The liberal media after all are the masters of playing Catch 22 with conservative candidates and Cheney\Palin are a perfect example of the game. Nominate an old pro and he's an evil puppet master. Nominate a fresh face and he's a moron. The media is playing the Dan Quayle game with Palin and some conservatives are falling for it. But lest conservatives forget the media have played the same game with Bush himself for nearly a decade and they've gotten nowhere because Bush clearly showed how to beat the media at their game, show confidence, laugh off any mistakes you make and keep a down home attitude about everything because it's a manufactured campaign that will pass.

Just to put things into perspective, the last VP candidate the Democrats nominated was an inexperienced but very wealthy and charming lawyer who turned out to be a sleazeball and using campaign money for his affair and he will be lucky to kep his Senate seat.

The VP candidate the Democrats nominated before that is currently an honorary Republican and persona non grata in Democratic circles.

The sitting Democratic VP before that lost his mind after losing a narrowly disputed election, grew a bearrd and returned as a doomsday prophet and is currently urging the forced shutdown of coal plants.

Finally there's Joe Biden, a one man gaffe machine that the media either refuses to report on or simply laughs off his endless stupidities. Is a man who comes blind stinking drunk to a campaign rally really qualified to be President? What about a man who contradicts himself from day to day.

Or better yet is a man under the impression that his term will be 8 to 10 years and that America has 57 states even qualified to be a White House intern, let alone the President of the United States.

The media would have you believe that Obama is qualified and Palin isn't. And that assesment is beyond indefensible.

If we were living in some sort of ideal world, political offices would be filled by honest, ethical, intelligent and qualified people. Also vending machines would dispense free sodas, all wars could be settled with a computer game of chess and bread would never fall on the buttered side. We don't live in that world though, we live in this one. And in this world the McCain-Palin ticket is the best qualified and the least destructive when compared to Obama-Biden. There can be no serious argument in that regard.

Yes I'm sure it would be swell if the candidates we support could deliver orations that rivaled the Cicero, could organize a nation like Churchill and looked like George Washington. On the other hand we arguably get the candidates we deserve, reflections of ourselves and our shortcomings, and maybe that's what really bugs some of the conservative pundits and bloggers– because while Obama-Biden are an all too accurate reflection of the progressive left, McCain-Palin are a reflection of the Republican party as it is today, rather than as it should be.

Palin has suffered from hysterical overreactions on both sides. Hysterical hatred from liberals and hysterical adoration from conservatives and now a hysterical backlash from some conservatives. She has an interesting story, but she isn't superhuman, she can't fly or change the nation in 5 minutes. Like every Governor who wends his or her way to the White House, she'll need time to learn and adjust, but she has proven that she's capable of taking on big jobs, which frankly is more than Obama has proven. She's facing an unprecedentedly hostile and biased media climate which means there isn't going to be smooth sailing. But she is the VP pick which makes the potshots from people who supposedly don't want to see Barack Hussein Obama in the Oval Office counterproductive at best and a betrayal at worst.

The bottom line is that the VP candidate has never mattered a whole lot. Few people paid attention to Bush Sr or Quayle or Gore or for that matter Cheney except in a deragatory or negative way. The job of Vice President is a thankless task that doesn't win you plaudits. Palin's ability to weather the hostility now is the best sign of whether she has what it takes for that job, the one she's actually running for.

Earlier this month, Libyan blogger on the edge of something remarked upon Obama's selection of Biden, saying:

They say that Senator Obama isn't qualified because of his lack of foreign policy experience but he does have Senator Joe Biden who is the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in the US senate .This is the balance the Democratic ticket needs .

Last week, bloggers around the world watched as presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain debated on television. Tonight, they will have a chance to give Joe Biden a second look, as he debates Sarah Palin in the first and only vice presidential debate. Some bloggers, like Veritas Nihilum Vincet in Taiwan, are concerned about Biden's debate skills. The blogger says:

Over to Biden. I predict lengthy wind, a gaffe here and there, and the moderator having to ring the bell on his inability to finish within the 90 seconds allotted.

IF Palin stutters something nonsensical, it would be perfectly appropriate to take a full 10 seconds or so for a WTF? Face.
But in the face of heavily prepped, fairly delivered, folksy down home common sense platitudes mixed in with the most vicious, ugly, racist, xenophobic and fear-mongering attacks on Obama, Biden will be forced to say something.
I just hope he doesn’t take the bait and try to defend Obama. Obama’s a big boy and can stand up for himself…has done so exceptionally well over the past two years. He predicted withering personal attacks - Biden should let him be right about that.
The only road for Joe is to state facts: Republican misfeasance, malfeasance and nonfeasance (specifically, in order, the economy, Iraq and New Orleans); John McCain’s flip-flopping pretensions to competence; the Obama/Biden plan: Details and good judgment…far better than the alternative presented by Ms. Palin and her running mate.
If Caribou Barbie can manage to stick to the script Karl Rove writes for her, good for her. Give her a gold star and buy her a fuckin’ ice cream cone. Just don’t engage the blithering twit. She hasn’t earned the right to be on that stage, and ought not be given the credit of a direct response to anything that spills out of her incompetent Miss Congeniality trap.

Spanish-American Claudia, writing for PoliGazette, is concerned that Biden won't be able to hold his feelings about Palin inside. The blogger muses:

At this point, the VP debate is creating the expectations of a monster truck rally. It will be watched purely for the spectacle, to see big cars errupt in flames. The narrative is basically set in stone that this VP debate exists to see if Biden can actually achieve putting his whole leg in his mouth and to see if Palin can actually achieve speaking for upwards of an hour without saying anything coherent.

The expectations are so low for Palin, after these disasterous few weeks, that if she comes accross as even vaguely hominid, she may well be declared the victor, especially if Biden manages to go haywire (and he tends to) and Palin can be portrayed as being bullied by a sexist and condescending Biden. Expectations have never been lowered so much, not even for President Bush. Palin WILL exceed expectations if only because it’s almost physically impossible not to.

Sultan Knish, based in Israel, is equally unimpressed with Biden:

Finally there's Joe Biden, a one man gaffe machine that the media either refuses to report on or simply laughs off his endless stupidities. Is a man who comes blind stinking drunk to a campaign rally really qualified to be President? What about a man who contradicts himself from day to day.

And barbarena.us, feels even more strongly about Biden, claiming that his “real American” image is false. The blogger, originally from Nicaragua, says:

Those silly Dumbocrats think that they can fool all of the people all of the time. They introduced Joe Biden as a regular guy from Scrampton, PA who lives like the rest of us.

But not every blogger takes an anti-Biden stance. The England for Obama bloggers feel that if the debate is kept to major national issues and international affairs (as opposed to, perhaps, social issues), Biden will do just fine. They say:

If the VP debate focuses on these two big issues, I think Biden will do just fine - and Palin will hopefully come across as the clueless no-hoper she is. And if she goes on the attack, and Biden keeps cool and generous (as Obama did in the face of McCain’s sneers and body language), then hopefully she’ll receive as negative a public reaction as McCain did. And either way: if she just keeps talking for her 90 seconds without pausing for breath - as she seems to do above - then maybe America will just be sick to death of the sound of her voice by the end of the debate, and be unable to contemplate four more years of it? (In simple oratorial, cadence tones, McCain and Palin are an utter nightmare compared to the voices of Obama and Biden).

To wrap things up and get us excited for the debate, a blogger from New Zealand writes for Lucire magazine's blog:

As the debate between Gov. Palin and her rival, Sen. Joe Biden, begins tonight in the US, one only hopes that it will get to the substance. The Republicans and Democrats are opposed on so many things and in some respects, Gov. Palin is a divisive figure. But the American media’s sexist performance of late does not give me much confidence in the fairness of their post-debate evaluation.

If you are located outside of the United States and don't know how to find the debates on TV, tune into MyDebates at 9:00 pm EST.

Today Sarah Palin gave a softball interview to Hugh Hewitt. It was part of the McCain campaign’s reintroduction of Sarah Palin on friendlier turf. Most of the interview focused on the mean media’s unfair attacks on the Governor. Toward the end of the interview, Hewitt asked her a "foreign affairs" question.

Here is the exchange:

HH: Governor, let’s close with some foreign affairs. It is reported that you had an Israeli flag in your governor’s office. You wore an Israeli flag pin occasionally. One, is that true? And two, why your support for Israel? 

SP: Well, it is true, and I ran into Shimon Peres recently at a meeting, and he even pointed that out. He said I saw a picture of you on the internet, and you had an Israeli flag in your state government office, and I said I sure do. You know, my heart is with you. And all of those trials and tribulations throughout history that Israel has gone through, not only does that allow me to want to support that country, but Israel is our strongest and most important ally in the Middle East. And they are a democratic country who I believe deserves our support, and I know that John McCain believes as I do that Israel is our friend, and we need to be there to support them. They are there for us, and I do love that country. 

In this telling of her Israel flag story, she asserts that Shimon Peres asked her about the flag after seeing a picture of her on the internet.

In the previous telling of this Israel flag story, it went like this:

Upon meeting the Israeli president Palin told him she has wanted to meet him and get to know him for years. She added that the only flag in her office, aside from the American flag, is the Israeli flag, stressing that she wants Israelis to know that she’s been a longtime friend of the Jewish state, and will remain such.

Another published account of the Peres meeting also was similar:

President Peres of Israel yesterday met for the first time with Governor Palin and with Senator McCain, who called the veteran Israeli statesman "my old friend." The warm handshake and exchange of broad smiles occurred during an international gathering known as the Clinton Global Initiative, hosted by President Clinton. "I wanted to meet you for many years," Ms. Palin told Mr. Peres, according to an aide to the president. "The only flag at my office is an Israeli flag," she was quoted as saying, "and I want you to know and I want Israelis to know that I am a friend."

Never mind that the "only flag" statement from her is itself a lie. Consider now that she is claiming it was Peres who asked her about the barely visible flag. The earlier news accounts of the meeting are that she volunteered the information about her Israeli flag.

You have to start shaking your head at all the lies, big and small, Sarah Palin tells. Some are simply inexplicable, like the one about her visiting Ireland when she had done no such thing. Some are whoppers like her "bridge to nowhere" lie.

Now we have another that we can add to the long and growing list.

Below are some of the responses, translated from Russian.

Russia-based LJ user ohtori:

“Both are worse” (a quote)

U.S.-based LJ user igorre25:

For Obama. Because I'm for the Democrats. Because I'm against the Republicans. Because they've been in power for too long and have done much harm, which I don't like.

LJ user aster_x86:

The latest Daily Show episodes have basically equalized the weight of both in my view… But I'm more for Obama than McCain, because now it's the Democrats' turn.

LJ user whichferdinand:

For Obama, because it's less likely that he'll start another war somewhere, and because the money not spent on yet another war will be invested in something wise, like medical insurance for the poor or prevention of global warming. And also because he isn't going to try to make it so that women find it harder to have an abortion.

U.S.-based LJ user madeinmoscow (ENG):

obama

because i do not want ignorantly malicious idiots running this country anymore.

U.S.-based LJ user cema:

For McCain. First, he's much closer to the center. Second, he is not afraid to act the way he feels necessary, not just useful, rare for a politician. Third, he's not as [full of crap] as Obama. Unfortunately, I'm not a citizen here yet.

Russia-based LJ user fedor_s:

For Obama.

1. The war in Iraq and the crisis have started under Bush. Let the other team rule. Isn't that the point of a two-party system?
2. Last time the Republicans won in a somewhat [dishonest] way.
3. It's just that having a [black] president is fun.

Russia-based LJ user svilar:

For Obama. I don't follow the U.S. politics regularly and perhaps I've missed something, but every time I tune in, I get an impression that the Democrats are serving the rational demands of the electorate, while the Republicans serve as a channel for irrational outbursts. I've no opinion on comparative advantages of specific candidates.

Russia-based LJ user illyn:

McCain-Palin.

Since I'm not going to be directly affected by America's internal affairs - I'm first of all for what's “our own.” For the intended right-wing foreign policy. A tough position of the right-wing couple on the Putins-Medvedevs - this is already clearly defined (the way I see it, but I may be wrong, of course). […]

U.S.-based LJ user kblcbka:

Turns out Avva's audience is full of Democrats! Well, here's one more. For the same reasons, more or less:

1. Let the other team rule
2. Don't want them to regulate my private life
3. Let them take and divide, I'm not greedy
4. Obama is fun

[…]

I didn't make myself clear: in item 2, I meant personal liberties, and in item 3, taxes. Exactly how much they'll be taking from me personally doesn't matter, because they won't take away all of it (in this case).

Israel-based LJ user toyvo:

If I were American, I'd be for McCain. I'm not familiar with his personal qualities, but a conservative economic platform is a lot closer to me, and their international [platform] will be the same, IMHO. But abortions and same-sex marriage don't allow me to decide for sure… Though it seems as if McCain is liberal enough in this respect… But this [woman] from Alaska… It's good that we aren't Americans, no? We've got a cute premier [Tzipi Livni] since Sunday, [a woman] :)

U.S.-based LJ user yuly:

For McCain!

He fits basically all the parameters: the economy, security, international terrorism, relations with Russia, energy independence. Social/medical insurance program seems somewhat weak to me, but at least it's achievable. And of course, his undeniable honesty.

Drawbacks:

1. His age, unfortunately.
2. His choice of Sarah Palin as VP, but in my opinion, she is better than Obama/Biden/

Obama - too much lies and empty promises. […]

U.S.-based LJ user yenissey:

A fantastically lousy selection to choose from. Alas, the only thing left in such conditions is to [unite against].

Obama. Why? On the one hand, much of the Republicans' program is better. But “if Yevtushenko is against collective farms, I am for them” (c) [Joseph Brodsky on Yevgeny Yevtushenko, quoted by Sergei Dovlatov] - an old warrior and a redneck in a skirt, a bunch that under no circumstances should be allowed to run anything more complex than a bike.

U.S.-based LJ user nagunak:

For Obama. For many reasons. Because I don't want to send taxes to Iraq anymore, when roads and bridges are collapsing in the United States, because “drill, baby, drill” is a slogan of idiots, because there is a slight hope that they'll cancel all the unconstitutional changes adopted by the “imperial presidents” Cheney and Bush.

Canada-based LJ user dragon_ru:

For Obama. I'm not expecting anything good from him, but under McCain we'd miss Bush as a very intellectual and thoughtful politician.

LJ user _rowan_tree_:

For Obama. He's a good organizer (to defeat [Hillary Clinton] isn't an easy task), and the Democrats' program is closer to me, especially in its centrist version :-) McCain is also okay, but if something happens to him, Palin would become president, and [everyone would regret it]. Biden, by the way, is also a rather dangerous character, but at least there fewer chances that he would become president.

U.S.-based LJ user marusja:

I'm not a citizens, but McCain isn't an option. He and [Sarah Palin] are kind of jumpy - may go to war with Russia all of a sudden.

U.S.-based LJ user yucca:

For Obama. He's got the brains and education, and he knows how to negotiate an agreement with people from different parties, and this is important for a president. The medicine part of his program is much better developed, McCain's medical program is no good. In education, I like it that he emphasized the importance of pre-school education. Also, they say he's picked a good team for himself.

I used to like McCain, but he has moved to the right significantly before the election, and a real enough perspective of having Sarah Palin as president makes me shudder.

Russia-based LJ user valery_pavlov:

If you look at the whole process from Russia, I think there's no difference whatsoever. It's like choosing between [United Russia and Fair Russia parties] […].

Russia-based LJ user imfromjasenevo:

great work :)

this is, by the way, the main goal of our propaganda machine - to convince [everyone] that in other countries the election is also a fiction.

LJ user dzz:

If I lived in the States, I'd vote for Obama. Neocons are too convinced that they are right and this has already created many problems. Besides, McCain is terribly predictable, and [with Obama], it's interesting to see what'll come out of it ;)

Russia-based LJ user amarao_san:

We are for a [color revolution] in the United States. We'd like for McCain to win and for Obama to start a [Maidan] over there for them, with [roses], oranges and other colors of life.

Israel-based LJ user emdin:

If I lived in the States, I'd be for Obama, but for Israel and Europe McCain is way better.

Israel-based LJ user pilpilon:

For McCain. Normally, Republicans don't interfere with Israeli affairs that often. And when they do, it's at least understandable what they want and why, often.

U.S.-based LJ user azbukivedi:

I'm actually for McCain, but I want to say something else here. Everyone is writing that we should choose the lesser evil, while I think that America hasn't had such an interesting choice in a long time. This is a new page in history, and it's not about race/sex. They are both bright, talented, love their country and want to change something in it. Their worldviews are different, and McCain's view is closer to mine, but I think America has nothing to be ashamed of in this election. Both are decent candidates, very little dirt in this election, almost everything is to the point and respectful.

Russia-based LJ user awas1952:

McCain - it's a worldwide economic crisis.

That's why I'd prefer McCain: a horrible end is better than a neverending horror.

The crisis is inevitable because too many economic contradictions have accumulated in the world. But Obama can postpone it and thus contribute to the accumulation of additional contradictions, making the crisis even tougher.

Russia-based LJ user very_thin_train:

Of course, for McCain. Because the worse it is for America, the better it is for Russia!

LJ user qaraabayna:

A plague on both your houses.

U.S.-based LJ user syarzhuk:

I'm for Ralph Nader.

Anonymous:

undecided voter

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert brought up the subject of a possible airstrike against those facilities in a private conversation with Bush. Bush then informed Olmert that he could not support such a strike.

©2008 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

According to the puzzle database maintained by Cruciverb.com, ever since that game-changing day in 2005, OBAMA has appeared regularly as an answer in New York Times crossword puzzles. With its wonderfully convenient alternating series of commonly used vowels and consonants, OBAMA has been the answer to the clues “Senator who wrote ‘Dreams From My Father,’” “Future senator who delivered the 2004 Democratic convention keynote address” and “Presidential candidate born in Hawaii.”

But what about MCCAIN? Shockingly, not once has MCCAIN been an answer in a crossword in the New York Times, The Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times. No MCCAIN, no JOHNMCCAIN, no SENATORMCCAIN, not even his most recent sobriquet, the presidential-sounding JOHNSMCCAINIII.

...Diane McNulty, a New York Times spokeswoman, said, “The answer is obvious for anyone who does crosswords. It is because ‘Obama’ is a five-letter name that alternates vowels and consonants. It’s got three vowels out of five letters, starting and ending in vowels. So it is much more crossword-friendly than ‘McCain,’ which is a harder word to put in a crossword. If McCain’s name was Obama, then his name would have been used many more times in crosswords.”

Is there any indication that crosswords can “right” themselves in the generations ahead? I’m not so sure. In perhaps the shrewdest political move of his career, the Democratic presidential nominee and his wife gave their oldest child another crossword-friendly five-letter name containing commonly used vowels and consonants: Malia.