Knowing how much I enjoy editorial cartoons, my brother Ken sent me a folder full featuring lady of the hour Sarah Palin. Here’s one…

This video from Michael D is a representation of a letter purportedly published July 7, 2008 in the Richmond Times Dispatch.

Having grown up in Miami, I appreciate the feelings of Cubans who fled their homeland for America following Fidel Castro’s military coup and I understand how they might see alarming parallels between the changes promised by Castro and Barack Obama. I don’t know whether the letter was or wasn’t published or how accurately the video portrays its sentiment, but as Michael points out, it’s something to at least think about.

Thomas Hawk used the texts of John McCain’s and Barack Obama’s acceptance speeches to make wordles of each. McCain’s wordle is on top, Obama’s is on the bottom.

A “wordle” enables you to see how frequently words appear in a given text, or see the relationship between a column of words and a column of numbers. You can tweak your word “clouds” with different fonts, layouts, and color schemes. Though not intended to provide reliable analytic insight, many people have found unexpected uses for wordles, from presenting the “gist” of a text to displaying personal identity.

What do McCain’s and Obama’s wordles tell us? I dunno, but wordle users are bound to find something meaningful buried within them.

Make your own.

Okay, the conventions are over and now the candidates will likely show their true colors. Two months of bitter fighting is sure to ensue.

Meanwhile, the rest of us can lighten up a bit and poke fun at both sides. Soooo…

In his well crafted acceptance speech last night, John McCain described his perceived mission: to shake up the Washington status quo and redirect its gridlocked “me first” divisiveness toward the “Country first” purpose to which he believes we need to return. In the process, he accepted his and his party’s share of blame, acknowledging “we were given the chance to change Washington but instead let Washington change us.”

I found that admission profound because we all should realize by now that we can’t set about correcting our failures without first accepting our share of responsibility for causing them. Too often candidates simply point at their predecessors, blame them for all our problems, and pledge to lead us to the promised land. You and I know that it isn’t the incumbent President or his administration that put us behind the proverbial eight ball; it’s Congress. So it’s refreshing to see a candidate admit that, as a member of Congress, he’s been part of the problem.

In case you missed the speech last night, I’ve included MSNBC’s video of it for your consideration along with a link to the complete transcript. I especially appreciated the last ten minutes. It’s worth a watch regardless of your ideological or political preferences.

You know, there are certainly issues on which I vehemently disagree with McCain. But I think his record of taking on both parties for the benefit of his country and fellow Americans makes him an overall better choice for President. And I think Sarah Palin, another maverick, is a breath of fresh air sorely needed in Washington. The alternative? Two more Congressional lawyers who, like those before them, promise to sweep away all the problems caused by the previous administration. It’s been done before with little success. It’s time for a decidedly different approach.

If you missed Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s speech last night at the RNC, you missed a rare treat. After Rudy Giuliani fired up the delegates, Palin delivered an introduction to who she is, what she’s made of and gave notice to her Democratic opponents that it’s “game on.”

I’ll admit that I was more than a little curious how she would come across. After all, Sen. Barack Obama is a gifted speaker and has mesmerized the media for months with his artful rhetoric, and I hoped Palin’s speech would compare favorably. But Palin set my mind, and that of much of America, at ease with a fiery speech that spanned more than 35 minutes and had the crowd on their feet for much of it.

If you’re a veteran, you had to shed a tear during the last five minutes. If you have, or know someone with a special needs child, you shed a tear when she talked about her four month old baby boy, Trig, born with Down Syndrome. And if you were hoping to learn where she comes from, what she believes and what she wants to bring to the White House with John McCain, you had to feel satisfied when she left the podium. Her one-liners alone were worth the price of admission!

So far, I’m impressed. I realize Americans have become callous and distrustful of anyone associated with politics and for good reason. But if ever there was someone like you and me — an everyday hockey mom who goes to work every day, a Washington outsider who’s administered and balanced a state budget, fought corruption and bucked the system — it’s Sarah Palin. If you watched her speech, you know what I mean. She’s what we all wish we had in government but didn’t believe exists.

I’ve linked to the Wall Street Journal’s transcript and provided MSNBC’s video of her speech for those of you that missed it or want to watch it again.

I’d say the Republican base — along with Hillary supporters, women and a lot of Independents — are energized and looking forward to her debate with Joe Biden! Impressed? I am.

Some of you were stunned by McCain’s choice for his running mate and asked how Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin can bring anything positive to the ticket. Well, it’s going to have to play out some before we know for sure. I have to say, though, I’m impressed that McCain pushed away from the recommendations of his party (to choose a more seasoned old school lawyer-politician) and chose instead a Washington outsider.

But McCain isn’t a cookie-cutter politician. In that respect, he’s exactly what the country needs. He’s gone against the grain to pick a running mate he thinks will help him fight (and a fight it will be!) to fix our broken political system and hopefully restore public trust in government. I for one would love to see that happen. But McCain’s choice brings with it some obvious risks and some perhaps less obvious benefits.

For example, Palin has served less than two years as Governor of Alaska which tends to eat into the experience message on which McCain has so far relied. At 44, she’s three years younger than Obama. She’s served as a mayor and as the Ethics Commissioner on the state board regulating oil and natural gas for a total of eight years political experience before her election as governor. That’s slightly less than Obama with seven years in the Illinois legislature and three in the US Senate.

But let’s take a look at the positives she brings to the ticket:

Click to read more ...

John McCain picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, a conservative who shares his maverick streak, as his vice presidential running mate this morning in what some are calling a “startling” selection on the eve of the Republican National Convention. In doing so, he surprised the media and “insiders” by passing over “more prominent” contenders like Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge.

McCain said that Palin is “exactly who I need. She’s exactly who this country needs to help us fight the same old Washington politics of me first and country second.”

Personally, I like his choice. In fact, I said so back in January before I think she was even a blip on McCain’s radar, and again in a comment reply in June (Embrace the Suck). Maybe McCain reads this blog…. Yeah, right!

Anyway, ever the maverick, McCain picked another maverick. He’s shown that he’ll take on either side of the aisle, which I find refreshing, and he’s chosen a running mate who’s done the same. In that respect, I think they would make a great team in Washington, one that would actually seek “change” and really mean it. Story

Sen. Barack Obama will portray himself tonight as an agent of change for mainstream America, but his eight-year voting record in the Illinois Senate shows the Democrat was on occasion an agent of isolation who took stands — particularly on anti-crime legislation — that put him to the left of his own party.

He was the only member of the state Senate to vote against a bill to prohibit the early release of convicted criminal sexual abusers; was among only four who voted against bills to toughen criminal sentences and to increase penalties for “gangbangers” and dealers of Ecstasy; and voted “present” on a bill making it harder for abusive parents to regain custody of their children, a Washington Times review of Illinois legislative records shows.

The pattern has continued since Mr. Obama joined the U.S. Senate, according to National Journal magazine. Its respected legislative scorecard rated the Illinois Democrat, based on his 2007 voting record, as the most liberal member of the Senate, even more liberal than Sen. Bernard Sanders of Vermont, a self-described “democratic socialist.” Mr. Obama ranked No. 16 and No. 10 in the previous two years. His running mate, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, ranked third in the 2007 National Journal survey, with only Sen. Edward M. Kennedy between him and Mr. Obama.

Left of the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, an admitted socialist? Is that possible? Isn’t Obama being packaged and marketed as a moderate? I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: No. Hell no!

Should you care, or are you just enjoying the party atmosphere? Of course you should! At least be informed for crissake! Read the man’s voting record, some of which is spelled out for you in the Washington Times article. Then, if you really want to drink the KoolAid and vote for an empty suit socialist, go ahead. Just don’t whine when your liberal Congress and liberal President work hand in hand to turn the country into the United Socialist Republic.

Another Cam Cardow political cartoon. And don’t pretend you didn’t wonder about the potential risk (heh)…

If you’ve been following recent press coverage of Obama’s “energy plan”, you’re probably left with the same impression I was - that it’s a utopian generalization that, like much of what he says, sounds nice, yet on closer examination, offers few specifics.

Aside from the fact that a sitting president lacks the power to implement the steps conceivably needed to accomplish the “plan’s” stated goals, it doesn’t even include sufficient specifics to be called a “plan”. Maybe a list of lofty sounding “wishes”, but hardly a “plan” any more than the one proposed by Dilbert’s PHB in one of my recent posts.

That’s not to say that the one actual “plan” he has put forward - inflate our tires - isn’t a real plan. It is. But, like Obama himself, it won’t solve much.

Here’s something to ask ourselves: Are we being held hostage by foreign oil as we’re been told? Or is Congress the real culprit?

I remember when the Republican led Congress passed a bill to drill, only to have it vetoed by Bill Clinton. Well, here we still are. So in this video clip, Newt Gingrich suggests three things we should do now to dramatically lower the cost of oil.

Is anybody listening?

James sent this Cam Cardow political cartoon from The Ottawa Citizen. Given the apparent success thus far of Obama’s “All Sizzle” campaign strategy, it’s a natural!

I’m trying to stay in tune with the presidential campaigns but, like many, I find myself dozing off. The things I’ve been waiting to see — some “sizzle” from McCain and some “steak” from Obama — should have become more evident by now, yet remain obscured behind the media’s love affair with Obama.

As John Dickerson wrote in an article more than a year ago, the perception that Obama was “all sizzle and no steak” remained despite efforts by his handlers to change it.

“The huge crowds and stirring but vague reform rhetoric don’t give voters anything they can take home in their pocket. This has lead to some high-profile failures—at a health-care forum in Nevada and with firefighters in Washington—in venues where audiences wanted to hear specifics about ideas that will change their lives. Obama’s rhetoric makes this task more difficult. He presents himself as a paradigm-shifting candidate, which means people are expecting to be floored not just by his charisma but by his ideas.”

Dickerson pointed out that, in the polls, Clinton did far better than Obama on questions of experience, leadership, and capacity to handle a crisis, trouncing him by more than 30 points among Democrats looking more for strength and experience. Worse for Obama, when voters were asked the question in the abstract whether he had enough experience for the job, only 30 percent of respondents said yes in a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll. On the same question, Clinton scored in the 70s. Yet Obama received his highest marks in polls from people who thought he was new, fresh, and inspiring. In the end, Democrats chose the latter.

And not much has changed. Obama’s skill at eloquently “reframing the question” to convince Democrats that charisma trumps experience seems to be keeping his ball in the air. But an empty suit—albeit a charismatic one—is still just sizzle and no steak.

Which leads me to my latest bumper sticker, sent to me by James. It pairs well with my McCain sticker, don’t you think? Maybe I’ll stick them both in my side bar. Hmmmm…Reminds me of the 80s Wendy’s television commercial. “Where’s the beef?”

Regular contributer Hugh Atkin from Down Under makes videos, some of which are comedic spoofs featuring the U.S. presidential candidates, and posts them on YouTube. Says Hugh in an email the other day:

“I’d taken a bit of a break from election videos, but if you’re interested, I’ve just posted a mock interview with Barack Obama based on the word association game he played on Fox News. I hope you like it.

Best regards,

Hugh Atkin”

In this spoof, Obama struggles with the concept of word association. I found it pretty funny. See what you think.

Here are a couple more of Hugh’s videos I particularly enjoyed: “What Voters Want Is…” and “Clinton and Cruise - On the Campaign Trail”