Senator Evan Bayh bails out

After judging his seat to be secure against any challengers, Senator Evan Bayh has elected NOT to run for re-election, anyway. There is considerable speculation about why Bayh - who was on the short list to serve as Barack Obama's Vice President - has decided to bow out. It is unlikely to be related to the anticipated Congressional housecleaning in 2010. But it could well have to do with a presidential run against Obama in the Democratic primaries in 2012.

Congratulations, Mr. President

We here at Mod-Blog wish to offer our congratulations again to President Barack Obama, here on the day of his inauguration.

The Process of Choosing a Candidate

I suppose this article is about 6 months late in coming. But watching the outgoing George W. Bush and the incoming Barack Obama, it has become more and more clear to me that it is nearly impossible to get the measure of a man while he is campaigning. George W. Bush was one man before 9/11, and a completely different man after 9/11. Pre-9/11 GWB would have been horrified to see some of the abridgments of personal liberty and extreme extension of government power that Post-9/11 GWB embraced and now defends as the finest accomplishments of his presidency. Pre-9/11 GWB saw tax cuts and government reductions as job 1. Post-9/11 GWB saw tax cuts as an engine to drive the economy, to allow government expansions which was really job 1. Pre-9/11 GWB was focused on social themes - education, faith-based initiatives - while Post-9/11 GWB saw social themes as an afterthought.

But how was it possible to see a Post-9/11 GWB while Pre-9/11 GWB was running?

We see the same thing now. I am not a supporter of Barack Obama's policies (though I do see him as a man riding the wave of history, whose time has come) but during the campaign he ran on getting us out of Iraq ASAP. Now, he is talking about doing the draw-down in line with GWB policies - 16 months or more. Obama ran on "changing government" but is now hiring the only people qualified to fill his posts - Clinton and Bush officials who are anything BUT "change". Pre-election BO and post-election BO are turning out to be two different men.

So the question is, HOW DO WE REALLY CHOOSE A CANDIDATE? We have known since before Mark Twain that you can never trust what a politician says. Since the advent of television and special effects, we can't even trust what we see a politician looking like. Make-up, double-talk, and special effects can lie convincingly in our day and age as never before. So, how do we really get down to the core of a candidate and understand who he/she is and how s/he will govern?

I am open to your thoughts on the subject. I am struggling with my own now.

Congratulations, President-Elect Obama

Congratulations from all of us here at Mod-Blog to President-Elect Obama. He appears to have won with a narrow popular vote victory, but a significant electoral college victory. It was hard-fought battle.

May God bless the next four years, for all of our sakes. My politics may not mesh with yours, but I hope that God can use you to do great things nonetheless.

Vote for Lando Calrissian?

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

What if Obama loses?

After a nearly euphoric month for Barack Obama, signs are now beginning to show up that John McCain may be competitive after all. In early voting, turnout among new voters is light and this is a major demographic that Obama is counting on. Likewise, many poll show a tightening race overall with a significant number of undecideds still out there. If Obama were to lose next week, it will raise many questions amongst Obama supporters (including inevitable charges that the "election was stolen"). If that does come to pass, here are a few thoughts I think are worth remembering.

• Despite perhaps the worst since Nixon for Republicans, due to the War and the Economy, Obama has rarely held a commanding lead. This should have been a warning sign from the start.
• Obama took on a risky strategy for this race, running on his personality (and his "inevitability") more than issues. Yes, he has been strong on opposing the war, but otherwise has cloaked specific policy goals under the banners of "Change" and "Hope." Voters like a big thinker, but also want one who actually can articulate a plan.
• Americans like divided government, where one party can keep a check on the other. Perhaps all the talk about a one-party system in Congress and the White House has reminded people that unrestrained government (Right or Left) is a dangerous thing. But if so, expect a massive win for the Democrats in Congress.
• Electronic voting failures should not be laid at the feet of just one party. The Democrats have been in power in Congress and in many State governments for years, and have had plenty of time to debug the process.
• America is still a center-right country, by and large. While they want to throw out the bums who got us here, they may not be ready for a wholesale lurch the the Left.

I have no inside info here, and to my mind I still think Obama is going to win with Bill Clinton-style margins. And you all know I am no fan of John McCain. But it is worth getting these out here now, before the heat of the moment arrives.

Do Mod-Bloggers think we should add anything else to this list?

WV Vote-Flipping Explained

Finally, we have an expert who can explain the charges of vote flipping (you vote for Obama, it shows as assigned to McCain) in West Virginia and elsewhere. The good news: it appears there is no conspiracy, but rather a technical glitch related to calibrating the touchscreen. The bad news: It looks like this is a very easy problem to have occur, which probably means we'll be hearing about a lot of reports of vote flipping in the days to come.

What is more important, ideas or leadership ability?

This race is not over yet. Not by a long shot, no matter what the day-to-day polls say. John McCain has made a career out of comebacks in the final seconds of the political game. But still, I think it is wise to look at the implications of an Obama win.

During my ruminations, I came across this video about an interview with Obama. It is NOT the interview, just one reporter's thought ABOUT the interview. It talks about Obama's character and not his ideas - his thoughtfulness, his seriousness, and his decisiveness. And it raised a question for me. What is more important in a president - a leader in general - his (or her) ideas or their ability to lead?

Of course, to a point, this is a foolish question, because any "good" leader will lead people in the direction s/he wants to go in. But if we look deeper, it is important. Ronald Reagan lead strongly and united a world against Communism - the great threat of his time - despite the fact that his ideas were at odds with much of America. Bill Clinton lead America to a balanced budget and economic prosperity, despite ideas which might have saddled us with massive new entitlements instead. George W. Bush has changed America, but his finest moments were not around an ideological speech, but rather around his responses to 9/11 and his leading America in the days following.

This gives me hope for an Obama presidency. If he truly can lead and unite us, he may be a man who can unite and lead to great things, even if I believe his ideas are wrong. A united American can do great things, even in hard time - especially in hard times. Perhaps having the character of a leader is the most important thing. What do Mod-Bloggers think?

Irony approaching Overload!

Original from Townhall.Com.

Third Party Debate Tonight

Unfortunately, nothing that has happened in the last few weeks has changed my decision to vote for a third party in this election. If you are still interested in exploring the beliefs and approaches of the third party candidates, consider tuning into the third-party-candidate debate tonight on CSpan at 9 PM EST. We usually tune into these third-party debates, and they are always interesting, as they provide a view into a side of politics that we rarely see on the major networks. Even if you are already committed to a major candidate, consider tuning in as an educational exercise.

Powell endorses Obama

In a move that should only surprise those who don't pay attention, Colin Powell has endorsed Barack Obama for President. This is unlikely to sway a large number of voters, but it is sure to be a major news story the next few days.

He said he had watched both Obama and his Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, for many months and thought “either one of them would be a good president.”

But he said McCain’s choices in the last few weeks — especially his selection of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his vice presidential running mate — had raised questions in his mind about McCain’s judgment.

The other point worth mentioning is that this likely confirms that Powell has no interest in running for President himself in the future. If he had, he would have looked to avoid alienating other Republicans. Then again, if some of the stories told about his time on the Bush cabinet at true, he may feel they have already alienated him.

Updated 10/20 with video of the endorsement

Vote Switching in West Virgnia

Between these charges and the widespread allegations of voter fraud by ACORN, I am expecting we are in for a rash of after-election lawsuits about the results.

Three Putnam County voters say electronic voting machines changed their votes from Democrats to Republicans when they cast early ballots last week.

This is the second West Virginia county where voters have reported this problem. Last week, three voters in Jackson County told The Charleston Gazette their electronic vote for "Barack Obama" kept flipping to "John McCain".

In both counties, Republicans are responsible for overseeing elections. Both county clerks said the problem is isolated.

They also blamed voters for not being more careful.

"People make mistakes more than machines," said Jackson County Clerk Jeff Waybright.

I am betting on of the first things the next President/Congress will have to tackle is a way to restore faith in our electoral system. That may require abandoning the electronic machines that they mandated only a few years ago.

Secret Service: "Kill" Claims Are False

Hat tip to Nick on this one. I posted an article yesterday decrying the antipathy and extremism that is gripping some corners of the GOP, as they look defeat square in the eye in the presidential election. Among those signs were multiple reports of people yelling "Kill" at McCain/Palin rallies. The Secret Sevice is now saying the claims are wrong. They have investigated them, and so far the only witnesses to the cry are the reporters who posted the stories. Something that made such a splash at the debate last night should be better investigated.

Honestly, I would have liked to hear McCain be a little more strong in his condemnation the allegation, either way. There has been too much extremism on both sides the last 4 years.

Want To Watch The Debate? Watch It Here On Mod-Blog!

Or you can watch it directly on Hulu in a separate window here.

Reminder: We are in a Democracy!

I have been saddened and angered by recent reports of people shouting "Kill!" regarding Obama at McCain/Palin rallys. It is also becoming more and more common to hear disappointed or angry Republicans (or Libertarians or Green Party people) saying something to the effect of "Obama won't be *MY* president." There seems to be some sense going around that the choice for President is a personal issue, and that if your preferences are not met, then you have no obligation to offer respect and support to the man in the office. This site has up an excellent write-up that reminds us we that under our system, the man with the most (electoral) votes wins, and thus ends the argument.

And whether Obama wins – if he wins – by one vote or millions shouldn’t matter. It doesn’t matter if you believe the reason he won was because the press was in the tank for him, or ACORN cheated, or McCain didn’t get a fair shake, or any other legitimate or illegitimate reason you can think of. At the very least, Barack Obama will deserve our acknowledgement that he is the legitimate elected president of the United States.

That doesn’t mean we have to slavishly follow him or join his cult like groupies. What it means is that where what he proposes to do is reasonable and doesn’t conflict with our principles, he should expect our support. It means that we don’t have to delegitimize his presidency to oppose him either. People of good will and good conscience can disagree without tearing each other and the country apart. And in this day and age, such an outcome would be unbearable.

I hope to hear statements from both candidates decrying and condemning the "Kill" shouts at the rallys. And I hope that people on both sides can tone down their personal rhetoric and realize that if Obama is elected, he is the President and is due our respect. Even Nancy Pelosi stood behind President Bush on 9/11. If, God forbid, there is another attack during an Obama presidency, we need to stand behind him then.

Refuted? Obama tried to delay Iraq Agreement

The Iraqi Foreign Minister has refuted claims that Barack Obama tried to delay the latest Iraqi agreements until after the election. This claim was reported here on Friday, so I felt it important to report this ASAP. Things still seem to be somewhat confused as to what did happen, but it appears the worst accusations are untue.

(I am) Voting for John McCain

Much has been said on this Blog on why people are not voting for John McCain this election and are instead trying to find a 3rd party candidate to vote for. I am voting for John McCain and the main reasons have more to do with Barak Obama than with John McCain. I am no fan of John McCain (Some of you will remember the post I wrote during the primary season of why I was not voting for John McCain then.) but the thing he wants to accomplish can be reversed if they do not work. Barak Obama is proposing things that will fundamentally alter our country and the expectations of its citizens in the future. This is why I can not vote for Obama.

The first and most important issue that Obama wants to change in America is Healthcare. If elected along with a Democratic controlled congress, Obama will enact a Universal Healthcare system. It may not start out as all encompassing, but no one can dispute that government entitlement plans only get bigger and more costly as time goes on. (See Social Security and Medicare.) Once the government is providing healthcare, employers will most likely make the choice to stop providing health insurance to their employees as they won’t have to worry about hearing how they took away this coverage and left millions of people without health insurance available. So the program will grow. Eventually, the cost of the program will grow so big that there will be calls to overhaul or end it. But just like social security, no one will have the guts to really either tackle the problems with the system or to abolish it. At that point, health insurance will be looked at as a right, not a benefit or privilege. In America, we already have the right by law to health treatment. Anyone, regardless of the ability to pay, can go to an emergency room and be treated for illness or injury. We should be very careful before enacting any plans that will be almost impossible to get rid of if things go badly.

The second issue important issue is taxes. I know my taxes will go up under Barak Obama and a Democratic controlled Congress. Bill Clinton raised taxes in his first 2 years as President before the Republicans took control of the House and Senate. Obama and Congress will do the same. There will be little incentive for Obama to stand up to the Congress on taxes as long as they enact his other major initiatives in return. And when Obama and congress increase taxes on corporations, that cost will be passed on to consumers as that is how it always works. Working for a small business, I know that when our costs go up, we pass that cost on to our customers as we need to do that just to keep our margin of profit at its current level.

The third reason I am voting for John McCain is that I think he will do a fine job. I do not think he will be a great president, but I also think he will not be a failure. That is all that is required for him to be a reasonable alternative to the other candidates running for president. By voting for John McCain in 2008, we are not locked in to him being the nominee in 2012 if either his has lost some of his ability to govern or has done a poor job as president.

John McCain may not be the perfect candidate, but his policies do not lead us down a road of no return.

Claim: Obama tried to delay Iraq agreement

Okay, I was going to make today a "politics-free zone" here at Mod-Blog, since we have had some contentious debates this week. But I don't see how I can NOT post this one. The Washington Times, an admittedly right-leaning paper, is claiming Obama tried to delay a deal to begin phasing out U.S. troops until after the election. Presumably, this would be to echo the Iranian situation with Jimmy Carter where the hostages were released only after Ronald Reagan was elected, handing him a political bonanza.

"In the conversation, the senator urged Iraq to delay the [memorandum of understanding] between Iraq and the United States until the new administration was in place," said Samir Sumaidaie, Iraq's ambassador to the United States.

He said Mr. Zebari replied that any such agreement would not bind a new administration. "The new administration will have a free hand to opt out," he said the foreign minister told Mr. Obama.

I really hope this is false, or at least greatly exaggerated. I'd like to hope both Obama and McCain are more honorable than this. But I hope the facts come out quickly, rather than leaving us with 4 weeks of charges and counter-charges. One can't help wondering if this is the "October Surprise" for this cycle.

(Not) Voting for John McCain

As I indicated, I have sent a letter to the RNC and John McCain's campaign on the reasons I do not plan to vote for him. I have done so, and thought I would enclose it here.

To whom it may concern at the Republican National Committee and the Campaign to elect John McCain,

After much soul-searching and observation of recent events, I have decided not to vote for Senator John McCain and the Republican ticket. Instead, I currently plan to vote for the Constitution Party Candidacy of Chuck Baldwin as a protest vote. I have been a faithful Republican voter since George H. W. Bush ran against Bill Clinton (my first election in which I could vote for president). But I find Senator McCain wanting as a presidential candidate, even though I also find myself unable to support Democratic candidate Barack Obama due to his views on abortion and consistently Left-wing voting record.

Rather than simply cast my vote in silence, which would be emotionally satisfying but ineffective, I thought it wise to send an e-mail in which I lay out my reasoning. This might be useful in guiding the Senator in reaching out to voters like me, or to the GOP in a post-election world.

First, let me start with the straw that broke the camel's back for me - the Bailout/Rescue Bill. This bill was concieved with little public scrutiny, rushed to two separate votes, and was passed with no real explanation beyond "We have to do something." While I was always skeptical of the Bill, I was waiting for the Senator or the President to lay out a clear and argued case for why these maeasures were the right ones to address our economic meltdown. Economics is complex, but the causes of the current crisis were not. The solution itself should be explainable and defendable, and the Senator had multiple opportunities to directly address this. He did not. Instead, we were told again last night that "We had to do something" and to trust the machinery of government to work it out. When the machine has already proven itself to be broken - hence the economic turmoil - you simply can not assume the same machine can fit itself. Proof needs to be offered. None was.

Second, the Senator has yet to enunciate a clear and specific philosophy for his campaign. Say what you will about President Bush, he had a fairly clear philosophy and guiding principles coming into each election. It was clear what he planned to do, how he planned to do it, and what his priorities were. Senator McCain is proud of being a "maverick who crossed party lines", but as often as not this has meant going against the apparent philosophical underpinnings of the Republican party. This means that I am never sure which principles are near and dear and which are negotiable. I do know what the Senator plans to do: work on earmarks, focus on reducing corruption, and work towards energy independence, among others. But I am unclear what his priorities are, and when push comes to shove what is his #1. That came across painfully last night in the debate.

Third, the Senator has yet to give a clear explanation of why this is his moment in history. Senator Obama may be inexperienced, but he has made a clear case for why he deserves to be in the White House: returning dignity and dliberation to the process, correcting the wrongs of slavery, and pulling us back from the excesses of Post-9/11 reactions. Senator McCain, on the other hand, has offered a good resume of skills for the office, but has never explained how history points to him being the next logical link in the chain of executive leadership. I strongly respect his record of wartime, his record of service in the Senate, and his record as a man in his personal life. But at the moment, I do not see why he deserves to be president aside from a sense that it is "his turn".

Please note, none of my concerns have to do with the vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. But I do not vote based on who is up for vice-president.

I hope you find this useful, or at least enlightening, in the day ahead.

Thank you for your time.

Alright, folks. Go ahead and tear it apart. And if you have also decided to go third party, I encourage you to compose, send, and post your own letter. This way, at least the major candidates have a chance to respond before the election.

If I recieve a non-form-letter response, I will post it here.

At Least Anderson Cooper Tried

After watching the debate last night I flipped over to CNN to watch some commentary. Anderson Cooper was having a special edition of his program. He wanted to begin his program with CNNs journalists who were not affiliated with a political party or campaign in an attempt to get some fair analysis. Dispite his best effort this is how it began. This is not word for word, but very close to what was said.

Anderson Cooper "We'll get to our partisan panel in a minute, but let's start with our non-partisan panel. Suzanne, what did you think of the debate?"

Suzanne Malvo "Well Anderson, I was just e-mailing with an Obama spokesman and they said they were very happy with the way it went and said that Obama showed why he should be President."

I don't think Suzanne Malvo understood what Anderson Cooper was trying to accomplish. Instead of seeming "Fair and Balanced" (as Fox News would say) the first thing they said during their analysis was the official reaction of the Obama campaign.