You know, I don't think people on this site really appreciated how much John McCain would work for them. Ordinary, normal people. But he gave solid, concrete examples of the people he would work for in his speech last night.

It's time to focus on what matters.  Palin should not distract us from where the election will be won or lost: the economy.

The unemployment rate soared to a nearly five-year high in August as employers trimmed jobs for the eighth straight month, the government reported Friday.

The unemployment rate rose to 6.1%, the highest level since September 2003. That's up from 5.7% in July and 4.7% a year ago.

In addition, the economy suffered a net loss of 84,000 jobs in August, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, compared to a revised reading of a 60,000 job loss in July.

The U.S. economy has lost 605,000 jobs so far this year.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/05/news/eco nomy/jobs_august/index.htm?cnn=yes

Barack Obama on the report  

Today's jobs report is a reminder of what's at stake in this election - John McCain showed last night that he is intent on continuing the economic policies that just this year have caused the American economy to lose 605,000 jobs.  John McCain may believe that the fundamentals of our economy are `strong,' but the working men and women I meet every day are working harder for less, the typical working age family's income is down $2,000 since George Bush took office, and their purchasing power is as low as it's been in a decade.  John McCain's answer is more of the same:  $200 billion in tax cuts to big corporations and oil companies, and not one dime of tax relief to more than 100 million middle-class families. If I am President, I will cut taxes for 95% of all working families and provide an immediate $50 billion to struggling states so that they don't have to cut back on health care and education and can rebuild roads and schools. That's the change working families need right now.

Statement from Senator Obama on August Jobs Report

It's about jobs and houses.

Welcome to RNC Puppet Theater!
Special Performance for the next 60 days!

McCain will preform a Ventriloquism act with his doll Palin.
Watch how he pulls the strings, makes her dance and makes her talk out her ass.

I read a story on ABC News’ website regarding McCain's pick for VP. It concerns her education history. It seems that, before graduating from college in 1987, the person McCain chose switched colleges more frequently than Cher changes costumes during a concert. Well, maybe not that frequently. Apparently, she switched colleges at least six times in six years. In the fall of 1982, she attended the University of Hawaii at Hilo, but left after just a few weeks because of the constant rain. This is according to the author of "Sarah" by Kaylene Johnson. Strangely, you’d think McCain would have discovered that the Hawaii-Hilo registrar has no record of his VP candidate ever attending. I would think it would have at least thrown up a red flag.

McCain judgment is at question. His choice for VP traveled, with a friend to Honolulu, enrolled at Hawaii Pacific University, but only attended during the fall of 1982. Then, she switched to North Idaho College for the spring and fall of 1983. It seems she didn't go to school in the spring of 1984, but attended classes at the University of Idaho for fall 1984 and spring 1985. I wonder what happened to their candidate in the spring of 1984.....hmmmm. Again, what does this say about McCain’s vetting process. By McCain’s on admission, the only reason the VP exists is to step into the shoes of the President upon his/her demise.

I've heard many people, including my partner, say that one of the main reasons a person moves to Alaska is to get away from something. Before I get beat up, I'm not saying everyone who moves to Alaska is trying to escape. However, after a missed spring 1984 session, McCain’s VP choice moved to Palmer, Alaska where she attended Matanuska-Susitna College in the fall 1985.

After that, she switched back to the University of Idaho for the spring and fall 1986, and spring 1987 when she graduated. Oddly despite her journalism degree and self-professed curiosity and love of writing, she did not work for the college newspaper or college television station.

Because of privacy laws, none of the colleges are allowed to release her grades, and at least two of the colleges claim McCain’s campaign did not make any sort of inquiries. Her "official" bio only mentions three schools. I believe there could be an "interesting" back story to explain the frequent school changes, missing block of time (spring 1984), omission of half the schools she's attended, and not practicing her self-professed love of journalism while in school. I think there's a story here. I believe McCain has a serious problem with judgment considering how important the VP could be under his proposed presidency. I guess we'll just have to stay tuned.

Crossposted from MY LEFT WING

My fellow Americans,

I me my,  I, I, I Me my; I. I. I, I, I -- I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my, I, I, I.  I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. P.O.W. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. P.O.W.  I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. I, me, my. P.O.W. I, I, I. Me, My, I. I, I, I.

Slowly the CW is spreading, but it is a bit sad that people haven't taken the cue from Obama.

when asked about Palin what did he do? well as MSNBC: noted

Obama and his surrogates have repeatedly argued that McCain does not understand the economy in general and that the Republican convention this week was ignoring economic issues. The senator has been saying for weeks that he is best-suited to tackle the problems hardworking families are facing.

exactly they put it back to Obama vs. McCain.

we play into McCain's hands when blogs use front page posts about Palin. I think we did our job the press and the public know there are questionsto ask about Palin. Time for us to get back to our main job.

The Democrats need to realize that they should just keep it simple. It is unbelievable that McCain and Palin just get away with the false "Obama will raise taxes for EVERYONE" line of attack despite Obama's clear pronouncement about reducing taxes for middle class and poor americans in his acceptance speech. That's because Democrats never give a consistent unified "We also try to minimize taxes" message. Have you ever noticed that property taxes in republican areas are really not any lower than the Democratic party controlled areas for comparable locales? I have not done any serious research on it, but it seems that way to me.

Even freaking Obama will say that he will reduce taxes in one breath but then give equal emphasis in time and tone to "i will increase capital gains". Why the hell do you do that? Just mention it quietly on rare occasions. Just keep it simple. Make your message "I will reduce taxes for nearly everyone" and do the little footnote thing about higher taxes for only certain segments. I have seen Obama get a little more forceful in recent weeks in emphasizing the lower taxes thing. But over the years, the DEmocrats have done a lousy job in fighting for lower taxes that it is ingrained in people's mind that we stand for higher taxes even when the Presidential candidate has veered away from such a tired old approach.

It doesn't help that quite a few democrats have advocated higher taxes in the past making it easier for Republicans to confuse the people with distortions.  Hell, even on this blog, I differ with many of the readers on this issue. Let us get this straight. The deficit will not be cleared by just raising taxes. Congress will just find a way to increase spending with the new found money. The key is to drastically cut spending.

NOw where do we cut spending? The republicans serve their constituents well by fighting for their causes and enrich Halliburton. The DEmocrats do the same with their constituents, many of who are not as rich or fortunate as Halliburton and the assistance is to a lesser degree. But there is one HUGE difference. Republicans will not ask for higher taxes in most cases. They will do their best to kill off the Democratic Party programs. IN an ideal two party system, the Democrats should be doing the same with the other party's programs. Instead, they offer meek resistance and then turn to the tired old "well we need more taxes" mantra. So what ends up happening is the republicans get away with their programs with very little going to much needed liberal programs.  How about curbing spending to the minimum(and with the predicted majorities, make most of the cuts in useless areas such as oil subsidies, war on drugs and other useless bullshit wars). Once you have proven to the taxpayers that you can spend responsibly, raise taxes if you must. Do not ask for higher taxes whe you do not fulfill your duties as responsible representatives that care about how our taxes are spent.

P.S.: Sorry for posting this accidentally on the front page. I realized it and made it a diary instead of an entry.

Time is reporting that the McCain campaign believes that it's unimportant that Sarah Palin do media interviews, that people do not care if she does them, and is laying the groundwork for a process in which she won't:

According to Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. According to Wallace -- in an appearance I did with her this morning on Joe Scarborough's show -- the American people will learn all they need to know (and all they deserve to know) from Palin's scripted speeches and choreographed appearances on the campaign trail and in campaign ads.