The Candidates and Property Rights

This is the twenty-ninth post in an ongoing series regarding the major Presidential candidates and their views on civil liberties.

This post is about Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) and Senator Barack Obama's (D-IL) views on property rights.

This post was supposed to be about "privacy rights" but when I started doing the research, I realized that I had covered everything in earlier posts, particularly the Fourth Amendment.

Property rights have been constantly under attack for quite a while. When you pay your property tax on your home, you're giving up a tiny bit of your property rights. When government uses eminent domain to confiscate property for their use or for use by another, that is a large abuse of property rights.

How do the candidates stack up on property rights?

As usual, we'll be starting with Obama.

Ok, I admit to being stunned speechless.

I can find nothing, no position statements, no votes, nothing at all with respect to Barack Obama and property rights. The only thing I found is that he supports "the same property rights for gays as heterosexuals", but that's a gay right, not a property right. He's weak on the Second Amendment, and taking away your gun is definitely taking away your property. And he says that the Justices who supported the Kelo decision are his model for Supreme Court Justices, but that's all I have. I found several right wing blogs that said such things as "his record on property rights is abhorrent", but without examples as to why.

I admit, that's not much. But it's all I have.

So, on to McCain.

I have much more news on McCain and it's nearly universally good.

A speech in Iowa:

And central to our ideals is the sanctity of property rights. Without private property there can be no freedom, and without freedom there can be no America.

"Property," John Adams wrote, "is surely a right of mankind as real as liberty." Yet today property rights come under attack from regulations that affect every conceivable aspect of property ownership. Mr. Adams would be shocked to learn what both the United States Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Connecticut did to Susette Kelo, an American homeowner, in allowing the government to seize her home for economic development and gain under the guise of "valid public use."

[...]

In state after state, polls make clear that the American public understands the Kelo ruling is a disaster: 82 percent of Ohioans oppose using eminent domain to take property for economic development, 91 percent of Minnesotans, 92 percent of Kansans, 95 percent of Coloradans, and 86 percent of Missourians. The American public has spoken with one voice, and they're saying that this is not right.

I have co-sponsored legislation to forbid this kind of government taking; Congress and the States should follow Iowa's lead and pass such laws. But laws defending private property are only as secure as the judges that defend those laws. Kelo passed narrowly, supported by a five to four majority with a track record of legislating from the bench. As President, I pledge to appoint strict constructionist judges who respect the Constitution and understand the security of private property it provides. If need be, I would seek to amend the Constitution to protect private property rights in America.

This is not a one time event. He has repeatedly condemned the Kelo decision.

Both candidates have bloggers that say they'll be great/destroy intellectual property rights. I wasn't able to find anything worth quoting.

Grades:

Obama: B-. He starts with a B, since there's so little, and I docked him a little based on his views on the Second Amendment.

McCain: A. He has said a lot of good words, but he needs more actions to bump up his grade to an A+. Plus, he's not the best on the Second Amendment either.

Property Rights: Advantage McCain

Results so far:

	Obama	McCain
First Amendment	F	D-
Second Amendment	D-	C-
Third Amendment	B	B
Fourth Amendment	D+	D+
Fifth Amendment	D+	B-
Sixth Amendment	B	B
Seventh Amendment	C	C
Eighth Amendment	C	B
Eleventh Amendment	B+	B-
Thirteenth Amendment	D+	B+
Fourteenth Amendment	D+	C+
Fifteenth Amendment	B	B
Nineteenth Amendment	B	B
Twenty-First Amendment	A-	A-
Twenty-Third Amendment	A-	B
Twenty-Fourth Amendment	B	B
Twenty-Sixth Amendment	B	B
Taxes	D	B-
Abortion	A+	D
National ID	F	F
Voter ID	A+	F
Card Check	F	A+
Legalization of Drugs	D+	F
Gay Rights	A-	D
Hate Crime Legislation	F	C
Growth of Government	F	A-
Property Rights	B-	A

UPDATE: Obama's First Amendment grade lowered to F as documented in this post.

Gallup And Rasmussen 09/07

Both daily tracking polls are out. I did a good job of reading the tea leaves yesterday from Rasmussen, and of analyzing Gallup.  Gallup, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) 48, Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) 45. Rasmussen 48/48. This fits the pattern of the last couple weeks. Rasmussen has been consistently a little more "Obama friendly" than Gallup since the start of the DNC.

I don't see any hints at all in Rasmussen or Gallup about tomorrow.

Question: How long before there's a LOUD outcry on the lefty blogs demanding that Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) be replaced with Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY)?

This will be my last day for a while at reporting on the polls.  There are plenty of places to go that are better than mine, and I have enough obsessions without obsessing over polls too.  :)

UPDATE: Ok, I'm not quite finished. I would like to point out that the three point lead in Gallup is better than I projected. I was expecting one to two points.  That means McCain has had two great days of polling in a row. It's very possible that the lead could grow to 4 tomorrow.

The Candidates and Size of Government

This is the twenty-eighth post in an ongoing series regarding the major Presidential candidates and their views on civil liberties.s

This post is about Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) and Senator Barack Obama's (D-IL) views on the size of government.

It's been over a week since I did any posts on this, and I apologize for that. I've been caught up in the Palin-frenzy, but I want to get back to this, because I'm going on vacation in a few days, and I'd like to finish it up before then if at all possible.

Anyway, to the topic at hand. Despite the beliefs of some to the contrary, the size of government has a direct effect on your civil liberties. A larger government is by it's very nature more intrusive and more controlling.

So, how do the candidates stack up here?

First, Obama:

I've previously commented on Obama's socialist tendencies, and that should be sufficient answer here, but I like to be thorough. Here are a few examples of what I found on the web.

Lawrence Kudlow had this to say:

Obama unveiled much of his economic strategy in Wisconsin this week: He wants to spend $150 billion on a green-energy plan. He wants to establish an infrastructure investment bank to the tune of $60 billion. He wants to expand health insurance by roughly $65 billion. He wants to "reopen" trade deals, which is another way of saying he wants to raise the barriers to free trade. He intends to regulate the profits for drug companies, health insurers, and energy firms. He wants to establish a mortgage-interest tax credit. He wants to double the number of workers receiving the earned-income tax credit (EITC) and triple the EITC benefit for minimum-wage workers.

From his acceptance speech:

I'll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America.

I'll make it easier for the American people to afford these new cars.

And I'll invest 150 billion dollars over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy-- wind power and solar power and the next generation of biofuels....

I'll invest in early childhood education.

I'll recruit an army of new teachers, and pay them higher salaries and give them more support....

Now is the time to finally keep the promise of affordable, accessible health care for every single American. If you have health care, my plan will lower your premiums. If you don't, you'll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves....

Club for Growth says this:

As Senators, it often seemed like Edwards, Clinton, and Obama were congenitally incapable of saying no to government spending. Both Edwards and Clinton voted against defunding pork projects^[21] and for the overbloated 2002 farm bill.^[22] Clinton and Obama voted to keep the $223 million boondoggle known as the "Bridge to Nowhere,"^[23] for the expansive 2005 Highway Bill,^[24] and for corporate welfare.^[25]

Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are proposing one new government program after another, from universal healthcare, to universal preschool, to an "education SWAT team."^[29] The proposals read like a laundry list of new and costly government programs: Obama's $18 billion education proposal;^[30] Edwards' $120 billion universal healthcare plan;^[31] Obama's $50 billion "clean technology" venture capital fund;^[32] Clinton's $110 billion universal healthcare proposal;^[33] Edwards' $13 billion renewable energy program;^[34] and Clinton's $50 billion strategic energy fund.^[35] In some cases, the candidates appear to be competing to see who can spend more taxpayer dollars. Hillary Clinton proposes $1 billion a year to expand the Family Medical Leave Act; Obama offers $1.5 billion a year, and Edwards goes a step further with $2 billion a year.^[36] Hillary Clinton put it best when she said, "I have a million ideas. The country can't afford them all."^[37] The same could be said for Barack Obama and John Edwards.

Also there's Obama's standing on earmarks:

$740 million over the last three years.

That's just a partial list, but you get the idea. He's definitely going to continue the huge amount of government growth we've seen over the last 8 years.

And now to McCain:

Here's what the Club for Growth had to say about him:

Despite his poor record on tax cuts, Senator McCain's zealous effort against wasteful spending deserves praise. Over his twenty years in the Senate, he has been at the forefront of the battle to eliminate wasteful projects and inject greater discipline and transparency into the appropriations process, often by introducing a slew of cost-cutting amendments. While many of these measures did not pass, they served an important role in shining a glaring light on congressional profligacy. These amendments include:

• A 2006 amendment to cut $74.5 million for various agriculture programs^[17]
• A 2006 amendment to cut $6 million for sugarcane growers in Hawaii^[18]
• A 2003 amendment to reduce funding for the Yazoo Basin Backwater Pump Project in Mississippi^[19]
• A 2002 amendment to eliminate $2.5 million for coral reef mapping of the waters off the coast of Hawaii^[20]
• A 1998 amendment to cut $78 million in projects from an emergency supplemental appropriations bill^[21]
• A 1994 motion to kill an amendment to provide $40 million for the conversion of a New York City post office into an Amtrak train station^[22]

Senator McCain has also voted against a number of pricey bills, even when most of his colleagues preferred to toe the party line. These include:

• A vote against the 2003 Medicare prescription drug plan^[23]
• A vote against the Farm Security Bill in 2002^[24]
• A vote against the 2005 Highway Bill, one of only four senators to object to the pork-stuffed bill^[25]
• A vote against providing Amtrak with an extra $550 million for the fiscal year 2007^[26]
• A vote against $2 billion in milk subsidies^[27]
• One of fifteen senators to vote for Senator Tom Coburn's (R-OK) amendment transferring $223 million for the "Bridge to Nowhere" to the repair of a Louisiana bridge damaged by Hurricane Katrina.^[28] Senator McCain was also one of only thirteen senators to vote for an amendment by Senator Coburn to eliminate $950,000 for a parking lot for the Joslyn Art Museum in Nebraska^[29]
• A vote for welfare reform^[30]

While Senator McCain's opposition to wasteful pork-barrel projects and government subsidies is impressive, it should be noted that he cast an uncharacteristic vote for No Child Left Behind which oversaw a massive increase in government spending.^[31]

He's denounced the growth of government over the last eight years.

"Why has our party, the party of small government, lately adopted the practices of our opponents who believe the bigger the government the better? I'm afraid it's because at times we value our incumbency more than our principles," the Arizona Republican said in a speech to be delivered at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

"We came to office to reduce the size of government. Lately, we have increased the size of government in order to stay in office," McCain said. "Soon, if we don't remember what we were elected to do, we will lose both our principles and our office and we will leave as part of our legacy a mountain of debt and bankrupt entitlement programs that our children's grandchildren will be suffering from."

Surprisingly, he has a reputation as being pro-government growth. A reputation that does not appear to be based upon fact. He does want to spend a ton of money to fight global warming, though.

His website pledges to limit annual government growth to 2.4%. I've read this on numerous sites, but I can't find a link myself. Will update when I do.

Grades:

Obama: F. As the Club for Growth said, Obama's never found a spending program he didn't like.

McCain: A-. Really, the only thing holding McCain back is No Child Left Behind and Global Warming. His acceptance speech shows a renewed commitment to small government.

Size of Government: Advantage McCain.

Results so far:

	Obama	McCain
First Amendment	F	D-
Second Amendment	D-	C-
Third Amendment	B	B
Fourth Amendment	D+	D+
Fifth Amendment	D+	B-
Sixth Amendment	B	B
Seventh Amendment	C	C
Eighth Amendment	C	B
Eleventh Amendment	B+	B-
Thirteenth Amendment	D+	B+
Fourteenth Amendment	D+	C+
Fifteenth Amendment	B	B
Nineteenth Amendment	B	B
Twenty-First Amendment	A-	A-
Twenty-Third Amendment	A-	B
Twenty-Fourth Amendment	B	B
Twenty-Sixth Amendment	B	B
Taxes	D	B-
Abortion	A+	D
National ID	F	F
Voter ID	A+	F
Card Check	F	A+
Legalization of Drugs	D+	F
Gay Rights	A-	D
Hate Crime Legislation	F	C
Growth of Government	F	A-

UPDATE: Obama's First Amendment grade lowered to F as documented in this post.

Vetting Sarah Palin

The mainstream media has been telling us that Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) was not vetted properly by Senator John McCain's (R-AZ) campaign. There's a term in psychology for this. It's called projection.

the attribution of one's own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people or to objects; especially : the externalization of blame, guilt, or responsibility as a defense against anxiety

Make no mistake, the mainstream media (I prefer "old media" actually) was snookered by John McCain and even though Palin's name has been mentioned several times during the VP search, they didn't do their homework on her. Now they see that this pick may turn the election around and they're feeling guilty about it and in a state of panic.
As I write this, it's been about 10 days since we first learned that Palin was McCain's choice.  And in those 10 days every lefty in America with an internet connection or a phone has been trying to get the dirt on Palin. Let's see how they've done.

• She lied about the “bridge to nowhere”. FALSE. And FALSE. And FALSE. And FALSE. And FALSE.
  The worst you can say is that she was for it before she was against it.
  
  

  She changed her mind, he said, when "she saw that Alaska was being perceived as taking from the country and not giving, and that impression bothered her and she wants to change it. … I think that Sarah Palin is someone who has the courage to reevaluate situations as they developed."

  I added more links to this one because it refuses to die.
  
  
• She lied about Trig. He isn’t really her baby! FALSE.
  
  
• She was a member of a secessionist party. FALSE.
  And unsourced. Good job here, old media. And now retracted.
  
  
• Troopergate. DEAD END.
  To be fair here, this is only news to mainstream America. Most bloggers and the media, left and right, knew about this "mini-scandal".
  
  
• She hired a lawyer to help her with Troopergate. FALSE.
  This is a legal proceeding, and typically the Governor would be represented by the Attorney General. He felt he had a conflict of interest, so directed the state to hire a lawyer for her.  All perfectly reasonable and above board.
  
  

  The state has hired a private lawyer to represent Gov. Sarah Palin's office in the Legislature's investigation into the firing of former Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The lawyer already has challenged whether lawmakers even have authority to oversee the inquiry.
  
  The state Department of Law hired Thomas Van Flein, an Anchorage attorney with expertise in employment law and professional liability, because Attorney General Talis Colberg has a potential conflict of interest and shouldn't represent the governor, Van Flein said Monday.

• She has refused to testify in Troopergate and is blocking the investigation. FALSE.
  The only investigation she has refused to cooperate with is the one that has no legal jurisdiction. She has made it quite plain that she is more than willing to follow AK's laws in this matter. So, the left is criticizing her for obeying the law. This whole "investigation" is a witch hunt and is based upon a crime without a victim. The supposed victim is required by law to file a formal complaint if he feels he has been the victim of of an ethics violation. He has not done so. In fact, he has repeatedly stated that no one pressured him to fire the trooper. This really should be the end of the story. The fact that it isn't shows that this is all about politics and not about reality.
  
  
• Archives of her newspaper aren’t available online and haven’t been accessed by anyone locally. FALSE.
  
  
• She is a supporter of "Nazi Sympathizer" Buchanan and anti-Israel. FALSE. And FALSE. And FALSE.
  It's worth pointing out that this smear comes directly from the organization of Mr. FightTheSmears himself.  Classy.
  
  
• She is tight with corrupt and indicted Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK). FALSE. And FALSE.
  Yes, I know she directed a 527 for him in 2003. But that was before she got fed up with corruption and ran for Governor against Stevens' pal former Governor Frank Murkowski (R-AK). Stevens has never forgiven her for that. He endorsed her a mere 3 weeks before the general election, long after Murkowski had been defeated in the primaries, and frankly, when it was obvious she was going to win.
  
  
• She's in the pocket of "Big Oil". FALSE.
  
  
• She cut funding for teen mothers. FALSE.
  
  
• She pushed to have creationism taught in schools. FALSE.
  
  
• Peggy Noonan said that the campaign is over and that McCain has lost. FALSE.
  
  

  But, I argued, that's over, those assumptions are yesterday, the party can no longer assume that its base is utterly in line with the thinking of the American people. And when I said, "It's over!" — and I said it more than once — that is what I was referring to.

  Now, it's true that Noonan thinks that Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) would be a better choice, and she's entitled to her opinion. But, as she has said already about Palin:
  
  

  [H]er candidacy will be either dramatically successful or a dramatically not; it won't be something in between.

  As far as I know, the only "right-wing" pundits that has come down hard against the Palin selection are Charles Krauthammer and Mort Kondracke. Mort often takes the "liberal" side on Fox (I get the impression his heart isn't really in that), so his criticisms should be taken with a grain of salt. Krauthammer has been consistently negative on her selection. I'd link, but he's written about it numerous times, and continues to do so, so the links would quickly become out-of-date. Use your favorite search engine on "Krauthammer Palin" if you're curious.
  
  
• She claimed that the Iraq war is 'a task that is from God'. FALSE. 
  
  
• She cut the budget for Alaska's special needs children by 62%. FALSE. 
  
  
• As Mayor of Wasilla, she tried to get this list of books banned, and then attempted to fire the librarian for not doing so. FALSE.
  It's TRUE that she did ask the librarian about censoring some books, and I admit that's not one of Palin's better moments, but it's not the list shown, as some of those weren't even published at the time. I'm unable to find a real list.  Some time later A few days before that, and again later she did ask the librarian to resign, along with other holdovers from the previous administration, so it's hard to claim the "censorship question" as the cause here. She later withdrew the request for resignation and no books were ever banned. As I said, this is not one of Palin's better moments, but it's not nearly as bad as the left makes it out to be. FactCheck.Org has more on this. My speculation was originally that the question may have been hypothetical. The FactCheck.Org article makes that seem even more likely as they have some more details that I had not read before. And here's still more from the city of Wasilla. It appears that during Palin's entire tenure as Mayor, the library received only one book banning request, from an unlisted person. I think we can officially put this smear to rest now.
  
  
• Sarah Palin is being hidden from the media. FALSE.
  
  
• She lied about putting the plane for sale on e-Bay. FALSE.
  We shouldn't even have to deal with this one, and it's obviously a smear rather than an attempt to get at the truth. This event made all the national news at the time. I remember hearing about it long before I ever had any clue who Sarah Palin was. The people claiming this know their claims are FALSE.  It's TRUE that it didn't sell. It was sold later offline though.
  
  
• She didn't do anything as Commander-in-Chief of the AK National Guard. FALSE.
  Look, I admit that Republicans really ought not to trot this out. It's weak compared to the C-in-C role as President. Of course, her experience there, no matter how weak, is still stronger than Obama's, who has none. As I said, her subordinate was impressed with her work there.
  
  
• Willow and Piper are named after witches! FALSE.
  Apparently the timeline is wrong for Piper, and it is possible that she was named after a character in Charmed.
  
  
• She believes in abstinence only education. FALSE.
  
  
• She was nearly recalled as Mayor of Wasilla. FALSE.
  
  
• She raised AK sales tax by 40%. FALSE.
  AK has no sales tax.
  
  
• She raised the state motor fuel tax. FALSE.
  
  
• She's an extremist on global warming. FALSE.
  
  
• As Mayor of Wasilla, she made rape victims pay for their medical exams. FALSE, and ludicrous. The "smoking gun" article that started this smear doesn't even mention Sarah Palin.
  
  
• She would ban all abortions. FALSE.
  
  

  I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor's determination that the mother's life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent's life.

• She caused Trig to have Down's Syndrome by jetting to Texas in the 8th month of her pregnancy. FALSE.
  Down's Syndrome is a chromosome disorder. The disability occurs at the moment of conception (or very near thereafter).
  
  
• Her son, Track, is being forced to join the military to escape prosecution from various juvenile charges. FALSE.
  
  
• She cut funding for AK's Special Olympics by $275,000. FALSE. In fact, she increased funding by $25,000.
  
  
• She was the Queen of Federal Funding Requests as Governor of AK. FALSE. Analysis here, and too complex to put succinctly. The short version.  Quite a difference between earmark requests and normal legislative appropriations.
  
  
• On a similar note, AK is the largest "welfare state" under her administration. FALSE. Yes, AK receives quite a bit of federal funds, but it's also owns 60% of the land, and has 20,000 troops stationed there. In addition, there's a significant indigenous population. Calling it a "welfare state" is more than a tiny bit disingenuous.
  
  
• She made a "huge gaffe" on the campaign trail by saying Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had "gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." Mostly FALSE.
  She did say it, but it's a TRUE statement, so therefore not a gaffe. In fact, Congress approved a "blank check" for the two mortgage giants back in July. McCain came out with a warning about it then. If anything, Palin's words appear to reinforce what McCain has been saying for months.
  
  
• She had an amniocentesis to test for Down's so she could decide whether or not to abort. This shows she's not as "pro-life" as she'd like to pretend.  SPECULATION and likely FALSE.
  I know several parents who have had the amniocentesis done who never had any consideration of getting an abortion. They just wanted to be the most prepared. There's little reason other than blatant partisanship to suspect anything different of Governor Palin.
  
  
• She believes that we're in a "holy war" in Iraq. FALSE. AP did some really sleazy reporting here.
  
  
• She's a member of the John Birch society. FALSE. Although, in this day and age, that might be a compliment rather than a smear.
  
  
• She wasn’t vetted. PROJECTION, and FALSE.
  Old media has an ego problem. They honestly believe that if they didn't report on it, it didn't happen.
  
  
• She's Pentecostal! MAYBE.
  But, so what? Is there something wrong with that, particularly when compared to the Trinity United Church?  The New York Times says she's definitely NOT a religious extremist. (Pentecostals aren't, anyway, just in case you were wondering).
  
  
• She "Hired Friends and Lashed Foes" once elected. MAYBE.
  However, this is hardly a scandal, even if true. Think about it a moment. She campaigned on reform and as a corruption-buster. So, once elected, she fired people from the previous corrupt administration and hired people she knew she could trust. Shocking.
  
  Another point worth making here is that Sarah Palin has about an 85% approval rating in her home state. Now, I know that AK is over 50% Republican, but even if every single one of them likes Palin, that stil means that she's polling better than 50% approval among Democrats and Indepents. Keep that in mind when you read an article in the New York Times or Washington Post telling you how bad things are in AK or full of criticisms of her. It's obvious that they're only presenting the views of the 1 in 7 that dislike her rather than the 6 in 7 that like her.
  
  
• She went to five different colleges before graduating. ELITIST.
  Is it TRUE? Apparently.  Is it relevant? I don't see how, except in a "my candidate went to Harvard" sort of way. I'm really not interested in people's college careers. I'm not even interested in Obama's grades. I'm just curious as to why they haven't been released, and why the press hasn't pushed for them.
  
  
• She should stay home with her family in this time of need. SEXIST.
  
  
• Her daughter getting pregnant reflects poorly on her. Oh God…if this is what you have to settle for, then you’re in deep trouble. There’s not a family in America that hasn’t had similar issues. Somehow I don’t remember Gore’s son being treated this way when it was discovered he had some drug issues. What the H***, I’ll go with SEXIST.
  
  
• The mayor of a town with only 9,000 people doesn't have the experience for the Presidency. Somehow forgetting that she is currently the Governor of AK. Even Community Organizer Barack Obama (D-IL) has gotten into the act:
  
  

  Well, you know, my understanding is that, uh, Governor Palin’s town of Wasilly [sic] has, uh, 50 employees, uh, uh, we’ve got 2500, uh, in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. Uh, uh, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. Uh, so I think that, uh, our ability to manage large systems, uh, and to, uh, execute, uh, I think has been made clear over the last couple of years.

  If that’s your tactic, I’m going to call Obama a “community organizer” from now on and forget all about his Senate job that he doesn’t do anyway. It's worth mentioning here that there was a lot of talk about Governor Tim Kaine (D-VA) as Obama's running-mate. He has no more experience than Palin, and yet I don't recall hearing these kinds of complaints about him. I'm going to have to go with SEXIST again.
  
  BTW, someone please remind Obama that he's not running against Palin. He's running against McCain. And while you're at it, let him know that when he compares her experience to his all that does is remind us that he doesn't have any.
  
  
• Her husband got a DUI 20 years ago. TRUE.
  SO?  If we're going to start eliminating politicians because of substance abuse problems with them and their families, the halls of Congress would be empty. I checked for similar things in the past of some prominent Democrats, but Mary Jo Kopechne was unavailable for comment.
  
  
• She got federal money for her city as a mayor. TRUE.
  But isn’t that what mayors are supposed to do?
  
  
• She implemented a plan to have wolves killed from the air. TRUE.
  But, the left is attempting to make a smear out of this, when in fact, it is a good thing. They claim that the wolves are needed to cull the populations of moose and caribou and keep their population from getting out of hand. But, in fact, the wolves are the ones who have gotten out of hand, and threaten the existence of the caribou and moose. This position is pro-environment, NOT anti-environment. This has only been implemented in very limited areas where the wolf population is out of control. Yes, it's controversial, and if you have a better idea for how to handle the wolf population, I'm sure Governor Palin would love to hear from you.
  
  
• She laughed on a radio show when another woman, a cancer survivor, was called a bitch. TRUE.
  But there's much more to the story than just that, and in fact, she does appear to be a bitch.
  
  

  A radio interview with Palin surfaced in which she discussed a petty, last-minute attempt by Lyda Green — the Republican state Senate leader and Palin’s political enemy — to change the time of this year’s state of the state address. The schedule had been set well in advance, but Green cited a transparently bogus scheduling conflict in an attempt to force the speech to a time that would have prevented Palin from attending her son’s graduation. In that context, Palin let loose a small giggle when the radio host called Green a “bitch.”

• Her daughter is pregnant. TRUE.
  Oh, but the media didn't find that one, the Palins released that information in response to the trash I've noted above. It's worth noting that Palin apparently feels that the child is a "blessed event" and doesn't feel that her daughter is being "punished with a baby".
  
  
• She billed the state for nights spent at home. TRUE.
  People that are upset about this don't understand AK's politics or grasp the size of the state. They've been working for years on being the first state to institute "virtual government" allowing the state legislators to form a quorum and vote on issues from their legislative offices back in their home district. Just about every state official, including the Governor spends quite a bit on travel expenses. It's more than legitimate for the Governor to expense travel to and from home. In fact, the Governor could apparently expense far more than she has, and has expensed far less than her predecessors.
  
  
• She should drop out, or McCain should kick her out.  This one has been really picking up steam the last couple of days.  My question: WHY?  The implicit answer is "because we're going to keep making up stuff about her for as long as it takes." Certainly there's no other reason.  Nothing that's TRUE that's been brought up so far even rises to the level of a gnat bite. I'm not sure if this is SEXIST or just SLEAZY, but it's certainly BIASED.
  
  
• The National Enquirer is reporting that she had an affair with a businessman in AK. UNKNOWN.
  I don't discount it automatically because it came from the Enquirer.  Sometimes they get things right.  John Edwards is a recent example.  On the other hand, how many times have they reported that Dr. Phil's marriage is on the rocks?  The Bush's marriage is on the rocks?  Here's what the story says:
  
  

  Another incredible allegation emerging from the family war is that Palin, a mother of five, had an affair with a former business associate of her fisherman husband, Todd.
  “Todd discovered the affair and quickly dissolved his friendship and his business associations with the guy,” charges an enemy. “Many people in Alaska are talking about the rumor and say Todd swept it under the rug.”

  Seems pretty thin, even by Enquirer standards. But, it is possible that this is the only TRUE and relevant story out there. We'll see. The Smoking Gun has more info on this, and at least the main reason behind this speculation is FALSE. The status of the entire story is still UNKNOWN.  This blog has more. My FALSE meter's starting to get twitchy.
  
  
• She called Obama "Sambo" and Hillary "Bitch". UNKNOWN and likely to remain so.
  This comes from the LA Progressive, apparently a "news" site. They have one source, a waitress named "Lucille". Unless other sources are found and can confirm it, then it will likely stay UNKNOWN, as it will be nearly impossible to disprove. I'm going go to with "innocent until proven guilty" here, especially given that there's only one source. I suppose Governor Palin could be a big jazz fan, but she's only two years older than me, and that's not a reference I'd make. I had to think on it a minute when I heard it to realize what the article was talking about. In the same vein, I could call up RedState and tell them that I heard Obama threatening to bomb the Pentagon if defeated. It would carry the same weight. Of course, one difference is that RedState probably wouldn't believe me and therefore wouldn't publish it.
  

Ok, so after probably tens of thousands of man-hours of research what have our best and brightest on the left come up with that's relevant and TRUE?
Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zippo. Also, this seems to belie the statement that she wasn't vetted properly.
Now, if only the press was so interested in vetting Obama. But I’ve given up on that.

This post will continue to be updated as long as more "vetting" occurs.

UPDATE: Many updates have occurred in-line.  I'm not going to post that an update has occurred every time I do one.  Too much trouble.  However, I wanted to point out that Charles Martin at Explorations has another list. He's done some impressive work and it's worthwhile checking out. I have some things that he doesn't have, and he has some things that I don't have. I'm working to bring mine up to compatible with his.
UPDATE: People who have contributed to this list, either knowingly or unknowingly are too numerous to mention. But I thank you all, and most of you are linked.
UPDATE: I'm having a hard time keeping up. Let me know if you know of any others.
UPDATE: It was getting hard to read, so I added in more whitespace. Unfortunately, this has the effect of making this post even longer (by the scrollwheel count anyway).
UPDATE: More on SEXIST attacks against Governor Palin can be found here.

Yesterday Rasmussen, today Gallup

Gallup today has Obama's lead shrinking to 2 points, 47-45 over McCain. This is very good news for McCain.  This is based on polling on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. My analysis of the three day tracks (and it's hard to do--I admit I'm guessing a little) leads me to believe that Wednesday was a very good day for Obama. Unless I'm wrong about that (quite possible), or today is a very bad day of polling for McCain, I would expect McCain to be leading when the three day track is released tomorrow.

Now, before I get accused of cherry-picking polls, let's look at Rasmussen too. Rasmussen has it 49%-46% Obama. This is a one-point uptick for Obama since yesterday. I haven't done an analysis of the daily tracks from Rasmussen yet, so I can't say much about it, but Rasmussen gives us some clues as to what to expect in their analysis (both Gallup and Rasmussen do that often--they see the trend coming and hint to us about it before they have a three day track that verifies it).

As McCain has begun to chip away as Obama’s convention bounce, most of his gains have come among women voters. Obama still leads 51% to 44% among women, but that seven-point edge is just half the fourteen point lead he enjoyed last Tuesday.

This is obviously a Palin effect. Palin's speech is only in two days of this poll. You would expect that gap to shrink more when it's in all three days.

McCain is now viewed favorably by 58% of the nation’s voters while Obama earns positive reviews from 57% (see trends). McCain earns favorable reviews from 91% of Republicans while Obama is viewed favorably by 87% of Democrats. Among unaffiliated voters, McCain’s favorable ratings are at 64%, Obama’s at 54%.

Rasmussen is hinting here at expectations of a bigger McCain bounce on the horizon.  And that last sentence is very bad news for Obama.  McCain has a ten point edge in favorable ratings among unaffiliated voters. In the end, unaffiliated voters choose the person they find most favorable.

Interesting Numbers From Rasmussen's Daily Track for 09/05

The race is exactly the same as it was on 8/23. Obama: 48, McCain: 46. This is a three point swing from yesterday which means that today’s numbers are roughly nine points than the day that rolled off, Tuesday. Don’t be surprised if tomorrow’s numbers are even better.

Here’s a great quote:

However, following the Wednesday night speech, voters are fairly evenly divided as to whether Palin or Obama has the better experience to be President. Forty-four percent (44%) of voters say Palin has the better experience while 48% say Obama has the edge. Among unaffiliated voters, 45% say Obama has better experience while 42% say Palin.

What’s the real problem with this? Obama isn’t running against Palin!!!

God, I would hate to be a pollster this year. After months of me worrying if they might be under-polling Democrats, they now have to worry if they’re under-polling Republicans.

During August, the number of Americans who consider themselves to be Republicans increased two percentage points to 33.2% while the number of Democrats was little changed at 38.9%.

That gives the Democrats a net advantage of 5.7 percentage points, down two points from a month ago and down significantly from the double digit advantage they enjoyed in April and May.

[...]

These new results have very little to do with recent news events such as the Democratic National Convention or selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be John McCain’s running mate. Interviews are conducted throughout the month and the vast majority were completed before these events dominated the news cycle.

Ok, so the new uptick in people calling themselves Republicans doesn’t include any Sarah Palin effects in GOTV yet. Assuming that she has energized the base (yeah, like that's a risky assumption) and will continue to do so, you would expect this to continue to slide towards Republicans. This represents possibly a fundamental shift in the electoral picture.

 

UPDATE: Gallup Track Similar. Obama 48, McCain 44. Two weeks ago in Gallup it was 45/45, so not quite as good, but again a three point difference from yesterday, meaning that yesterday's numbers again were about nine points better than Tuesday's. Gallup doesn't ask the "extra" questions that Rasmussen asks, and just breaks the poll down by demographic groups. And, unfortunately, those are aggregates by week, so to really gauge how the race stands post convention, we'll have to look at NEXT week's numbers. This week's aggregates have not yet been released.

Newt in Smackdown on MSNBC

 

Pardon my "all Sarah Palin, all the time" coverage of late, but this deserves to be seen. And Newt knows a bit about unfair smears on Republicans.  That's why he's Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA).