The Writer's Poke

Christopher Buckley, son of National Review founder William F. Buckley, has decided to jump the sinking McCain ship to support Obama! Buckley who still writes for National Review himself notes that he decided to post his endorsement to thedailybeast blog rather than in the conservative magazine because he didn't have the stomach for the amount of hate mail he knew it would generate. (That's probably the longest sentence I've ever written without any controlling punctuation marks.) It's time for more Republicans to attempt that McCain's ship is sinking. More importantly, it's time for more Republicans to come out for Obama. Click on the link below to read the Buckley piece. http://thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-10/the-conservative-case-for-obama/

For the past few days, McCain and Palin have been calling Obama a plethora of things as I've noted in a previous post. Not surprisingly, impressionable Republican minds have been soaking up these warnings like sponges. Friday night McCain seemed to understand that his campaign was taking things too far. He actually took the unusual step of defending Obama's character! Yes, McCain told his crowd that Obama was an honorable man, and a good American. He told them that they had nothing to fear from Obama as president of the United States. Incredible. Question: Will McCain now tone down the rhetoric in his stump speeches and in his commercials? Will he put a leash on pitbull Palin? Or, will he continue taking the low road, while attempting to take the high road simultaneously? Pundits on MSNBC tonight suggested that perhaps McCain knows that he's fighting a losing battle, and perhaps the so-called "old McCain" is coming out. Perhaps the McCain that really does believe ...

McCain is angry. A University of Wisconsin study found that 100% of McCain's TV ads are negative. In comparison, only 34% of Obama's ads are "negative." And in his desperation, it looks like McCain has nowhere to go but deeper into the gutter. He will continue to attack Obama and try to make his "character" an issue. Great move, McCain. Don't attack Obama on the issues. Just try to attack him personally. Yeah, I'm sure that will work for you. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/09/uselections2008.johnmccain4 Interestingly, Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman announced today that he will pull all negative ads in his race against challenger Al Franken. He's also going to skip a McCain rally today... "to 'dedicate his time to implementing his suspension' of negative ads. " http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/10/10/coleman_ads/?refid=0 Hmmm... interesting... This indicates to me that Coleman is no dummy. McCain is a s...

I say, you just gotta love capitalism, don'tcha? http://www.cafepress.com/palinfear.311403650 After Nov. 4 when Palin goes back to her igloo in defeat, this shirt will be worth what your stocks are currently. But at least the shirts will still make good cleaning rags. :)

John McCain claims that he can "work across party lines." Really? This man's campaign offers no sense of working collaboratively with people. Look at how he and Palin (and their ads) have described Obama: 1. Liar 2. Hypocrite 3. Naive 4. Terrorist 5. Dangerous 6. Liberal 7. Dishonorable Those are just the first seven descriptors that easily come to my mind. Let me ask you: If someone described you in these terms, would you be willing to work with that person with a smile on your face? Of course not. Name-calling is not the way to form alliances and to work with people that disagree with you. Now look at the other side. Has Obama and Biden (and their ads) described McCain in the same ways? For the most part, clearly not. Yes, they have tried to tie McCain to Bush, but they've never criticized him as a person . McCain's tactics bother me. Yes, he's just playing the political game, but Obama is showing that you don't have to play that game. For the most part,...

You cannot win a metaphorical war. The next time you hear someone say "We must stay in Iraq and win the War on Terror," please remind them: The War on Poverty started in 1964 -- and there are still poor people. The War on Drugs started in 1971 -- and there are still drugs. Terrorism as a term has been around since at least the French Revolution (that, by the way, began in 1789). The point is: There is no such thing as "The War on Terror," and therefore, there is no "front" to this war -- not in Iraq, and sorry, not in Afghanistan, either. Further, there really is no "enemy" for our military to attack. Can you defeat terrorism by dropping bombs and locking up people in Cuba? Nope.

For some reason, I found yesterday's Zits comic (above) a lot more funny than my wife did. But it made me think: what's the best way to read Elizabethan poetry? Amazingly, someone has posted an article on the Internet to address that very question: http://www.ehow.com/how_2094353_read-elizabethan-poetry.html?ref=fuel&utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=ssp&utm_campaign=yssp_art Pulleys are optional.