The political yard signs that pepper front lawns across the country are a huge waste of time, Sean Quinn writes for the always excellent FiveThirtyEight.com. The signs don’t really have an effect on voters, especially considering the enormous amount of time and energy that campaign employees are forced to spend dealing with complaints about a lack of signs, defaced signs, or other piddly distractions. Quinn writes, “Organizers—the people out there killing themselves to win this election—hate yard signs with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns.”

Instead of focusing on yard signs, people should make phone calls, knock on doors, register new voters, write a check, or do something more useful, if they really want to influence an election. Sure, signs make people feel good, but while organizers are forced to deal with yard signs, Quinn writes, “There’s a walk list sitting in a campaign office not being walked and knocked, and a newly-registered voter who projects as .45 of a vote for Obama is not being registered.”

Image by Matthew Trump, licensed under GNU.

On Monday the mortal foes of right-wing Republicans and lefty Democrats came together to sink President Bush’s bailout bill. The result of this once-in-a-lifetime cosmic event? The stock market plummeted. Economies worldwide shuddered. And American voters collectively scratched their heads. So, to help you wade through the economic and political rubble, here’s a bloggy round-up of what happened and what’s next. 

First, a quick glance at the blame game. Here’s Josh Marshall at TPM:

There's a lot of talk out there from commentators who you'd think would know better claiming that this was basically a bipartisan failure -- that both parties, Republicans and Democrats, failed to carry their members for this bill.

But look at the numbers. 60% of Democrats in the House voted for this bill. 33% of Republicans. Face it, that's not even close.

Both parties wanted to force as few members to vote for this as possible. It's really unpopular. It's perfectly legitimate (though in the absence of any credible alternative, pretty iffy) to argue that the Republicans did the right thing by killing the bill. But there's simply no question of why and how this bill failed.

Dean Barnett over at the Weekly Standard winces at the Republican party line about Nancy Pelosi’s partisanship wrecking the bailout ball. He divvies up the Republican opposition naysayers thusly:

1) The Mike Pence doctrinaires who welcome a free market curative like a Depression for our current woes. I guess they view it as sort of the economic equivalent of that stuff you drink the night before a colonoscopy. As misguided as Pence and his minions are, they at least have a certain nobility complementing their foolishness. I would be remiss if I didn't note that a significant subdivision of the Pence camp rejects the counsel of virtually everyone who knows anything about economics and instead believes that our current situation isn't so dire. Call it conservative magical thinking.

2) A bunch of other Republicans who would have voted for the Paulson Plan had Nancy Pelosi not said some stuff that hurt their feelings just prior to the roll call. They had thought passing the Paulson Plan was an urgent national priority. Then, the Speaker said some stuff that made personal pique take priority. Outdumbing the Pence Republicans was a tall task--this coterie of GOP representatives was up to the task.

As for how things look now. Here’s the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder on the state of things, post-bailout blow-up:

Fat cats?
Still rich.
Golden Parachutes?
Still floating.
Cost to taxpayers: $1 trillion.

And Mother Jones’ Kevin Drum emerged from a “debilitating combination of fury and despair” for this prophesy:

Do you know the old saying about credit? "It's like oxygen. You don't know how much you need it until it's gone." We're about to go into financial hypoxia, and it's not the millionaires who are going to suffer most from this.

Back to Barnett, who fleshes it out more.

Here's what's been lost in the debate while people on both the right and left have offered ignorant jeremiads about "bailing out Wall Street." If the economy tilts into a deep recession or even a depression, it's not the wealthy or even Barack Obama's cherished middle class who will pay the deepest price. In any such circumstance, it's the people on the economic margins who get hurt the most. The ones without a nest-egg and without a 401(k) are the ones who have no safety net when they lose their jobs and health insurance. If unemployment goes from 6 percent to 10 percent, it won't be the investment bankers who start heating their homes at 56 degrees in January. Populist rhetoric is almost always misguided. That has never been more the case than over the past week.

And now for the look ahead to what’s next. Robert Reich hypothesizes at Politico’s Arena:

What will emerge from all this? My Prediction is a much scaled-down bill, enacted by the end of the week. It will provide the Treasury with a first installment of $150 billion. Congress will allow Treasury to use the money to back Wall Street’s bad debts with lend no-interest loans of up to two years, until the housing market rebounds. Or to invest in Wall Street houses directly, in exchange for stocks or stock warrants. There will be strict oversight. Congressional leaders will promise further installments, but with conditions calling for limits on salaries and relief to distressed homeowners.

The question is whether this less-than-hoped-for first installment will calm jittery markets, both in the United States and around the world. It's very hard to say, because so much of what's going on is psychological rather than purely economic. We're dealing with the mass psychology of investors and the mass psychology of voters -- and both groups are extremely unhappy right now, to say the least.

Matt Yglesias on what should be next:

Isn’t the most likely scenario that as the House takes the day off for the Jewish Holiday, the GOP leadership rounds up ten new votes from safe incumbents that are then routinely matched by ten new Democratic votes and basically the same thing that failed on Monday passes on Wednesday? The House conservatives who killed the bill have no plan B so I have a hard time seeing them staying firm. In the interim, folks should be exploring the possibility of writing a bill that could pass the house with exclusively progressive votes, since the progressive side does have a plan B. But it seems unlikely that it’ll actually come to that.

And finally, Ezra Klein looks even further ahead to how any bailout will affect the next president’s agenda. The prevailing wisdom is that the next guy will be hobbled by the bailout’s cost. Ezra’s not buying it. If anything kneecaps McCain or Obama, it will be politics, not economics:

When natural economic demand slackens, the need for public investment to kickstart the economy increases. Meanwhile, short-term problems do not obviate long-term threats. The looming dangers posed by health costs, global warming, etc, will not pause to politely wait out our recession. Most everyone knows that. But there's no doubt that if Obama -- or McCain -- is elected, that House Republicans and others opposed to action on these issues will pretend that the bailout somehow extinguishes our ability to act, and reduces the urgency of the problems. They will be lying. 

For months, my husband has been kvetching about how young Jews need to step to it and use either reason or the blackmail of affection to get their grandparents, particularly those basking in Florida, to vote for Barack Obama. Thankfully, Sarah Silverman’s on it now with The Great Schlep.

(Thanks, Ta-Nehisi Coates.)

The debate is back on. But McCain’s political hijinks this week tend to make a person wonder: What’s next? The ol’ Maverick is bound to have a few more headline-making, “patriotic” tricks up his sleeve. Over at Slate, they're playing the next-McCain-hail-mary guessing game, and it’s a fun one. Standouts from the list:

#1: Returns to Vietnam and jails himself.

#3: Challenges Obama to suspend campaign so they both can go and personally drill for oil offshore.

#7: Sex-change operation.

#9: Sells Alaska to Russia for $700 billion.

Image by Torsten Bolten, licensed under Creative Commons.

The insta-polls suggest McCain’s “the economy ate my debate homework” tack isn’t winning him love among twitchy voters.

Looking beyond the numbers, CQ’s Campaign Trail Mix has this video dispatch from a bluegrass roadhouse called The Coffee Pot in Swing-Stateville, a.k.a. Virginia:

We Are Respectable Negroes has a painfully hilarious running tally of euphemisms for “white voters.” Favorites among the 68 so far:

4. Hard-working Americans
10. Regular Americans
38. White Collar Voters
56. Bubba Voters

And, drumroll please...

66. My friends

The country’s recent financial crisis has left Americans panicked and angry. My prevailing thought whenever I hear the ever-climbing tab of the bailout—after a colorful expletive or two, of course—is always “Where is that money going to come from? And where is it going?”

The likely answer to the first question is unfortunate: the taxpayers, of course. The Republicans, who hate taxes and government regulation, have ensured an unprecedented magnitude of each by woefully mismanaging the country’s economy.

The answer to the second question is trickier. And it may remain vague, as Kagro X points out at Daily Kos. For the Bush administration, oversight and transparency are like kryptonite, and the president has become notorious for, as Kagro X puts it, “threatening to use his veto crayon to force Congress to pass bills exactly as he wants them, accepting no changes.”

Bush only has four months left in office, but Kagro X is worried the president will still find a way to misappropriate $700 billion. “When you're talking about a guy who 'lost' $9 billion in cash in Iraq, you kind of have to wonder whether he's even going to use the money for its intended purposes.”

That we are bailing out private institutions with public funds is deplorable enough. But Kagro X believes the situation will only be worsened if we hand over the money while Bush is still in office.

If there were any justice in the world, the price for the bailout would be Bush and Cheney's resignation. No, it won't happen, but it should. Instead, almost no matter what approach is ultimately adopted, we'll be throwing (at least) $700 billion into the hole with nothing but crossed fingers to guide us through. The best oversight regimen in the world doesn't help you with people who don't think they have to answer subpoenas.

There is hope: “Thankfully, Congressional Democrats (and some Republicans, too) have for the most part balked at the notion that the bailout should come in the form of a blank check.” Let’s hope that Congress refuses the president this sort of absolute economic power during these final dark days of his presidency.

Image by Tracy O, licensed by Creative Commons.

First the McCain campaign mined the Gustav opportunity tragedy to keep the unpopular Bush from raining on their national convention parade. Now, they’re leveraging the country’s financial crisis to postpone a foreign policy debate that McCain reportedly hasn’t spent much quality time boning up for. Oh, and there’s that other reason: To short-circuit and steal Barack Obama’s quiet efforts at bipartisanship and leadership. The AP reports:

The Obama campaign said Obama had called McCain around 8:30 a.m. Wednesday to propose that they issue a joint statement in support of a package to help fix the economy as soon as possible. McCain called back six hours later and agreed to the idea of the statement, the Obama campaign said. McCain's statement was issued to the media a few minutes later.

"We must meet as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans, and we must meet until this crisis is resolved," McCain said. "I am confident that before the markets open on Monday we can achieve consensus on legislation that will stabilize our financial markets, protect taxpayers and homeowners, and earn the confidence of the American people. All we must do to achieve this is temporarily set politics aside, and I am committed to doing so."

The Left has voiced plenty of criticism of McCain and Palin’s policies, but one facet of the Republican ticket that has been tragically left alone is its anti-science stance, says MIT researcher John Tirman.

Tirman reiterates the Republican candidates’ resistance to stem-cell research and evolution, and their support for offshore and ANWR drilling. But he takes things one step further, going beyond the moral implications of these policies to look at the problem from an economic point of view.

First of all, in order to compete with flourishing markets like those in Asia, the United States must continue its tradition of innovation and scientific excellence. Without it, “hopes for creating the new technologies and processes that fuel sustainable economic activity will surely decline.” Secondly, scientific research offers solutions to crucial problems such as disease and fossil-fuel dependency, and without the necessary funding for advances in technology, our ability to solve these problems would come to a standstill (a dilemma about which Utne.com has previously blogged). Lastly, scientists from other countries would eschew an anti-science United States in favor of a more tolerant community in which to conduct their research, circling back to the author’s first point about scientific excellence being “the font of prosperity.”

We ignore these issues at our own peril, insists Tirman. “The McCain/Palin shakiness on science issues is not just another occasion for SNL skits or jokes about the U.S. being the laughing stick [sic] of the world. They're life-and-death issues for global health and ecology, as well as our own well being.”

Yesterday at the United Nations, France’s Nicolas Sarkozy held out the carrot of immunity for Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir if he implements “radical and immediate change in Sudanese policies.” Britain is reportedly in agreement with staying the International Criminal Court’s war crimes investigation. (China, Russia, the Arab League, and the African Union were already on board with the immunity deal.)

And so the organ of blind international justice is being reduced to just another political bargaining chip in a disastrously long conflict that’s proven immune to such wheeling and dealing. Just as bad, the approach could be completely misguided by removing what might prove to be one of the few effective pressure tactics on Sudan to date. An interesting piece in Britain’s new Standpoint magazine argues that ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo’s much-maligned campaign for war crime charges against al-Bashir may actually be rattling Khartoum toward change.

Here’s Justin Marozzi, who spent the summer as a communications adviser for the joint U.N.-African Union force in Darfur, writing for Standpoint:

Many commentators fear [Moreno-Ocampo’s] decision will wreck any chances of peace, failing to note that there is no peace process to spoil. With his back to the wall, there is no accounting what Bashir might do, they argue, ignoring the fact that he has had carte blanche to do what he likes in Darfur since 2003. In fact, although it is early days, the fallout from the ICC’s landmark move towards the indictment of Bashir looks positive. A friend with access to the highest levels of the regime reports unprecedented conversations at the presidential palace.

“The government’s in meltdown,” he reports. “They just didn’t think it would ever happen. They can’t believe it. The four or five people who run Sudan are now saying to Bashir, look where your policies have got us. They’re telling him, you can go to your rallies and demonstrations, you can shake your fist and rattle your walking stick, but you shut the hell up.” ... 

Now a national cross-party committee has been created to address the Darfur issue and end the conflict. Bashir has suddenly rediscovered an interest in Darfur, promising security, schools, roads and water. Window-dressing while the ICC judges ponder Moreno Ocampo’s evidence? Quite possibly, but these are suddenly interesting times. “There’s going to be a real push now for peace,” my palace mole reports. “Bashir’s got nothing to lose.”

Far from emboldening the Sudanese president and destroying a peace process that doesn’t exist, in other words, the ICC’s potential indictment may have been the best news for Darfur in years. Sudan watchers wonder whether Khartoum will finally ditch the president, who came to power in a 1989 coup, noting that the regime dropped the Islamic ideologue Hassan al-Turabi in the late Nineties in a bid to end its international isolation. Turabi, they note, was a far more important figure to the ruling National Congress Party then than Bashir is today.

Late last month, the Institute for War & Peace Reporting noted “rumblings of dissent” in Sudanese media and among fringe political circles in the wake of Moreno-Ocampo’s announcement to seek an arrest warrant for al-Bashir. Marozzi, however, goes further, placing dissent in the mouths of those with influence. Removing this key instigator of dissent—the threat of prosecution—could very well restore the status quo, which translates to more death and disaster for the people of Darfur.

Side note: If you’re interested in reading one of the best pieces written on Darfur in recent memory—yes, the genocide has tragically gone on long enough to justify that statement—check out this piece from Richard Just in the New Republic. A snippet:

No genocide has ever been so thoroughly documented while it was taking place. There were certainly no independent film-makers in Auschwitz in 1942, and the best-known Holocaust memoirs did not achieve a wide audience until years after the war. The world more or less looked the other way as genocide unfolded in Cambodia during the 1970s, and the slaughter in Rwanda happened so quickly—a mere hundred days—that by the time the public grasped the extent of the horror, the killing was done. But here is Darfur, whose torments are known to all. The sheer volume of historical, anthropological, and narrative detail available to the public about the genocide is staggering. In the case of the genocide in Darfur, ignorance has never been possible. But the genocide continues. We document what we do not stop. The truth does not set anybody free.

Image of displaced mother and child in North Darfur from USAID.

A French philosopher might not be the first person a politician would turn to for advice. But Bernard-Henri Lévy, France’s premier public thinker, has written an open letter to the future US president that should be required reading for this year’s candidates. Writing in the Huffington Post, Lévy offers a step-by-step guide on how America can maintain its leadership while building healthy international relations and regaining the respect of the rest of the world. No small task, of course, but the ideas he presents make it seem possible.

Lévy begins by asserting that the United States can hang onto its position as the world’s foremost superpower by investing more time and energy into preserving scientific advancement, higher education, and financial services.

As long as the world continues to rely on America in the areas of scientific innovation, training the elite and allocating its assets, the important elements will be safe. This from now on will be your task. And your very first priority.

He goes on to outline ways in which the American president can reach out to Muslim communities, deal with international aggressors such as Russia, and restore faith in politics itself. He acknowledges that these goals will be difficult to reach, and we may not even see their results in the next four or eight years. But the important thing for the next leader is to try “to speak with the language of truth and courage.”

As Mr. Levy puts it, “Anti-Americanism, Mr. Future President, has become a new planetary religion.” Rather than chastise the mistakes of the past, though, Levy’s eloquent letter focuses on healing rifts and making positive steps for the future. The suggestions he makes are both ideological and practical; suggestions that the next commander-in-chief, be he Republican or Democratic, should seriously consider.

For Utne Reader's take on how to redeem the United States in the eyes of the world, take a look back at our July-Aug. 2007 issue.  

“My name is Gianna Jessen, born 31 years ago after a failed abortion. But if Barack Obama had his way, I wouldn’t be here." So goes the ad from a nonprofit 527 group called BornAliveTruth.org, which produced the 30-second spot (via PrezVid) amidst a swirl of confusion and controversy surrounding Barack Obama’s voting record on “born-alive” legislation before the Illinois State Senate.

The history of Obama’s actual stance, available via FactCheck.org, requires careful parsing. Essentially, Obama opposed “born-alive” bills at the state level in 2001, 2002, and 2003 that he says would have weakened Roe v. Wade. But he says he would have supported a federal version of the legislation signed by George W. Bush in 2002 because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.

Jess Henig’s article for FactCheck notes inconsistencies in the reasoning behind Obama's votes: The Obama camp contended that there were differences in language between the state and federal versions of the bills, even after the 2003 state bill's language was revised so as to be identical to that of the federal one. The 2005 version of the state bill, which passed, included a protective clause stating that “Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affect existing federal or State law regarding abortion,” and Obama spokesperson Tommy Vietor says Obama would have voted for that bill, had he still been in state office at that point.

Henig goes on to suggest that Obama's stance on these bills may hinge on fine semantic distinctions:

The main bills under discussion, State Bill 1082 and the federal BAIPA [Born Alive Infant Protection Acts], are both definition bills. They are not about what can and should be done to babies; they are about how one defines “baby” in the first place. Those who believe that human life begins at conception or soon after can argue that even a fetus with no chance of surviving outside the womb is an “infant.” We won't try to settle that one. What we can say is that many other people – perhaps most – think of “infanticide” as the killing of an infant that would otherwise live. And there are already laws in Illinois, which Obama has said he supports, that protect these children even when they are born as the result of an abortion.

While there may be discrepancies in the reasoning behind Obama's votes, his support of abortion rights has never been in question. “Obama's critics are free to speculate on his motives for voting against the bills, and postulate a lack of concern for babies’ welfare,” Henig concludes. “But his stated reasons for opposing 'born-alive’ bills have to do with preserving abortion rights, a position he is known to support and has never hidden.”

It’s a complex matter whose emotional pitch is only raised by the use of freighted terms like infanticide and born-alive. Such videos are especially prone to glossing over the political nuances of an issue, which means the facts of Obama’s actual position will most likely be lost in the din. 

AlterNet’s got a rowdy round-up of the 10 most talked-about viral videos of the campaign season. They're worthy of a wee work break. I had missed this one and thoroughly enjoyed it: 

Jews in Pennsylvania and Florida have been receiving deceptive political phone calls asking: Would it affect your voting choice to learn that “Barack Obama called for holding a summit of Muslim nations excluding Israel if elected president?” What if you learned that “the leader of Hamas, Ahmed Yousef, expressed support for Obama and his hope for Obama's victory?”

Jonathan Cohn of the New Republic received one of these misleading calls and tried to dig up who was behind the smear. The supervisor gave the name Central Marketing Research Inc., but would give little information beyond that. Ben Smith of the Politico got reports that the phone calls came from "Research Strategies" and were directed at people in the traditionally Jewish Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, and in Key West, Florida.  

The phone calls have been called “push polling” by a number of news organizations. Some have pointed out the similarities between the phone calls against Obama and the smears that hurt John McCain campaign in the 2000 election. David Kurtz, writing for Talking Points Memo, points out that the polls seem to be part of a real opinion poll “testing the effect of fear-mongering about Obama on Jewish voters,” rather than a traditional push poll. In either case, the smear seems to indicate that as distasteful as things have gotten in this election, they’re probably going to get worse.

UPDATE (9/17): The Politico’s Ben Smith reports that the Republican Jewish Coalition, a group behind other Obama attack ads, has taken responsibility for the poll.

Fact checkers have been all over John McCain lately, exposing a bevy of fibs, half-truths, and straight-up lies emanating from his campaign. Even Karl Rove, the king of political dirty tricks, scolded the campaign (and Obama’s) this weekend for going too far. But McCain’s troops have paid their critics little attention.

Why? Because lying works, according to Farhad Manjoo, writing for Slate. Manjoo calls facts “a stock of faltering value.” He says the increasingly fragmented media landscape “lets us consume news that we like and avoid news that we don’t, leading people to perceive reality in a way that conforms to their long-held beliefs.”

Blogging for the Nation, Ari Berman looks back at a 2004 Ron Suskind piece from the New York Times Magazine that noted the irrelevance of facts in the Bush administration:

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

The McCain camp seems to agree. Berman quotes the campaign’s response to stories about their truth-stretching: “We recognize it's not going to be 2000 again. But he lost then. We're running a campaign to win. And we're not too concerned about what the media filter tries to say about it.”

Andrew Sullivan, for one, doesn’t think it will work. From his blog:

Reading the "press" in this surreal climate right now, one is tempted to despair. I'm not giving in to it, because I still believe that the actual truth matters in the world. If propaganda could win in the end against truth, then Bush's approval ratings would be somewhere in the high 80s. They are in the lower 30s. In the end, the American people are not fools. And facts are facts.…

…We cannot control these despicable liars in the McCain campaign. We can only tell the truth as fearlessly and as relentlessly and as continuously as we can until November 4. We must do our duty. And if the American people want to re-elect the machine that has helped destroy this country's national security, global reputation and economic health, then that is their choice. But I am not so depressed to think that they will.

Image by RiverBissonnette.

After lavishing praise on John McCain for his military service, Republicans took the opportunity to ridicule Barack Obama’s work as a community organizer on day three of the GOP convention.

Rudy Giuliani, George Pataki, and Sarah Palin all took turns kicking dirt on Obama’s early days on Chicago’s South Side. Pataki said, “What in God’s name is a community organizer? I don’t even know if that’s a job.” Giuliani chimed in, “He worked as a community organizer. What? Maybe this is the first problem on the resume.” And Palin drove home the point, “I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, expect that you have actual responsibilities.”

These were sharp jabs at Obama meant to stoke doubt about his readiness to be president. But the comments left any details about what Obama actually did as an organizer to the imagination. So what in God’s name did Obama do on the South Side and does it matter?

Writing for the New Republic, John B. Judis argues that the important thing to understand about Obama’s time as an organizer is not what he did, but why he quit. Judis describes Obama as “a disillusioned activist who fashioned his political identity not as an extension of community organizing but as a wholesale rejection of it.” His essay details how Obama’s organizing work led him to believe politics, not organizing, was his best opportunity to produce broad-based change. An article published last year by the Nation and another at the New Republic also take stabs at fleshing out Obama’s organizing days.

In response to the convention speeches, the Nation quotes Obama as saying, “I would argue that doing work in the community to try and create jobs, to bring people together, to rejuvenate communities that have fallen on hard times, to set up job-training programs in areas that have been hard hit when the steel plants closed, that that's relevant only in understanding where I'm coming from, who I believe in, who I'm fighting for and why I'm in this race.”

Weigh in: How is Obama's community organizing experience relevant in this election?

Image by Ari Levinson, licensed under GNU Free Documentation License.

Hello? Barack? Are you still out there?

I was a bit skeptical that John McCain would be able to completely steal the media spotlight from Barack Obama last week. But on that account, he hit a home run by giving Sarah Palin the VP nod. (Unfortunately for McCain, she’s doing a pretty good job of stealing the limelight from him, too.)

So what was Barack up to while the country turned their attention away from the Democrats to buzz about teen pregnancy, mommy wars, Republican disdain for the media, and experience versus narrative? After some digging, here’s what I came up with:

Entered enemy territory: Obama appeared on the O’Reilly Factor Thursday night (more of the interview to air this week), and he sent troops into the Republican trenches of St. Paul for the RNC.

Took a swing through Pennsylvania. Obama and Biden attempted to court a state they believe could win them the election.

Asked supporters to help Hurricane Gustav victims.

Told reporters to leave Bristol Palin alone.

Kept mum on Sarah Palin.

Raised $10 million after Sarah Palin’s acceptance speech.

Stood up for community organizers.

Repeated the refrain: “With John McCain, it’s more of the same.”

Balloons and confetti couldn’t save John McCain from the letdown of the Republican National Convention’s final night. Sarah Palin’s introduction to the American public last night left delegates buzzing with excitement. Even before she went on stage, a countdown created anticipation for her appearance. Tonight, delegates were drinking coffee minutes before Senator McCain’s speech, trying to stay awake for their chosen candidate.

I asked a few delegates to compare the two nights, and most agreed that this evening was more subdued. “Wait until Cindy gets on,” said a delegate from Georgia. A delegate from Iowa said, “I think we have to wait until for the man himself.”

That promised excitement never came. After McCain’s speech, delegates used words like “sober” and “on message” to describe the proceedings. Even the ultra-conservative blog Powerline called the talk, “a little flat and unstructured.” Words like “personal responsibility” garnered huge applause at the Ron Paul rally yesterday, but the Republicans tonight couldn’t get quite as excited.

Many in the crowd tried to interject some enthusiasm to the speech. One man behind me yelled “Wooo, John” after nearly every applause line. When McCain mentioned Senator Obama, one person in the crowd started to boo, anticipating a harsh attack. Senator McCain, however, wouldn’t oblige.

The only real excitement came when two separate groups of protesters were dragged out of the hall. The crowd tried to chant down the protesters by yelling, “U.S.A., U.S.A..” After the second group was subdued, Senator McCain pleaded with the crowd saying, “please don’t be diverted from the ground noise and the static.” That ended up being one of the biggest applause lines of the night.

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here. 

Tensions run high at the party nominating conventions, especially when the speeches are filled with as much vitriol as Rudy Giuliani’s and Sarah Palin’s last night. People get pushed, views are blocked, harsh words are exchanged, and deep-seated resentments tend to be exposed. I ended up stuck inside a throng of people taking photos of Sarah Palin’s family, which also happened to be where the US Virgin Islands were supposed to sit. One of the delegates from the Virgin Islands had some harsh words for the organizers of the convention. You can watch a video of that below:

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here. 

Sarah Palin delivered a rousing convention speech that will no doubt add to her likability quotient among the not-yet-saved. Plus, she’s really good with a sarcastic flourish. So what’s a jittery Democrat to do? Here are four strategies the Democrats should take away from last night:

1. Ignore the condescending impulse to go easy on a woman. Unleash Joe Biden on the self-proclaimed hockey-mom pitbull in the VP debates.

2. Repeat the following over and over: “Parents: If your daughter is raped, Sarah Palin wants to force her to give birth to her assailants’ child.” Another rendition goes like this: “Sarah Palin wants to force victims of incest to give birth to their sibling/child.”

3. Last night showed that the Republican strategy for dealing with the country’s woes is to rail against big government, blast taxes on the rich, and wave signs reading “Prosperity.” On the Palin front: Remind voters that her state’s economy runs on two things: federal funding largesse and record oil prices that are draining Americans wallets at the pump.

4. Remind voters what happened the last time they went for the likable, folksy option with a sarcastic jab behind every smirk, a wedge issue to dodge every policy discussion, and the right wing of the Republican party in pocket. George W. Bush may have been nixed from the Republican National Convention’s stage, but his spirit (and Rove’s) was alive and well in the presence of Sarah Palin.

Watch Palin's speech:

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here. 

Inside the Republican National Convention hall, I ran into a man calling himself John Sboy (say it fast), a member of a group known as Lobbyists for McCain (formerly known as Billionaires for Bush). I asked Mr. Sboy why he supports John McCain, what he thinks of Sarah Palin, and his predictions for the next four years. You can watch a video of that below:

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here . 

Responding to a call that journalists were being abused by police, Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman was arrested yesterday during the protests against the Republican National Convention. Walking into the Republican National Convention hall, I ran into Goodman and asked her what happened. She quickly told me the story of her arrest. You can watch a video of that below:

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here .

There were far fewer arrests and detentions on Day 2 of the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota, but the evening wasn’t without its drama as riot police and protesters played a tense cat-and-mouse game all over downtown. Here’s some behind-the-scenes video footage of a phalanx of police rolling in and setting up to contain protesters coming from the Minnesota State Capitol at about 7:30 p.m. It’ll change the way you think about minivans:

And here’s footage of the main protest procession as it passes the intersection of Cedar and Seventh streets:

The protesters had just marched from the State Capitol after police prevented political rockers Rage Against the Machine from playing a widely leaked “unannounced” set at the Ripple Effect concert. The demonstrators ended up marching to the Xcel Energy Center, site of the RNC, and then back to the Capitol.

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here . 

Sauntering on stage yesterday at Ron Paul’s Rally for the Republic, former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura—dressed in a Navy SEAL tee shirt, a sport coat, and a baseball cap—knew he was in a friendly room. A small group of people rushed toward the podium at the Target Center in Minneapolis, as the crowd tried to jockey for a better position to see Ventura speak. Citing his experience as a professional wrestler, Ventura encouraged everyone in the room to boo him when they felt like it. He said that boos give him encouragement. 

Most of Ventura’s speech, however, was met with thunderous applause. During his time on stage, words like “personal responsibility” and “the Constitution” were met by enthusiastic screams. At one point Ventura said that the 2nd Amendment is “not about hunting and fishing… [it] is there so that we the public, if our government gets out of control, we have the ability to rise up and change it.” It was the only rally I’ve ever attended where the idea of armed struggle against the US government could elicit such an enthusiastic response.

After the part about gun rights, Ventura began asking questions about what happened on September 11, 2001. The official government story didn’t hold water, according to Ventura, who questioned whether or not Osama bin Laden had carried out the attacks on the World Trade Center. Ventura said that many people wouldn’t like what he had to say about September 11, but his remarks were met warmly by the sold-out crowd at the Target Center.

His reception with Ron Paul supporters is so warm that Ventura overtly referenced his presidential ambitions for 2012. He said that the motivation for a campaign would have to come from the people, but if they worked hard enough, he would run for president. Short on specifics, Ventura’s announcement was met with cries of “Run Jesse, Run.”

You can watch part of his speech below:

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here . 

Yesterday’s rejiggered line-up at the Republican National Convention delivered a meek improvement over the energy level of Monday's kickoff. The attack level, on the other hand, was amped up.

In keeping with the finely honed messaging tack of saying one thing, repeatedly, and doing another, the Republican speakers worked in their patriotic jabs at Barack Obama, despite earlier talking points about ditching partisan attacks at the convention to put on their “American hats” and support those weathering Gustav in the Gulf Coast.

Michele Bachmann—the Minnesota U.S. representative best known for ogling George W. Bush at his 2007 State of the Union and, more recently, explaining that we don’t need to save the environment from global warming because Jesus already saved the world—grinned big as she told the delegates:

Service isn’t a political trait—although some Presidential nominees certainly know more about service than others.

Joe Lieberman woke up from his keynote to call Obama a scaredy cat:

When others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle, which would have been a disaster for the U.S.A. When colleagues like Barack Obama were voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield, John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion, advocate the surge, support the surge, and because of that, today, America’s troops are coming home, thousands of them, and they’re coming home in honor.

And, perhaps most indicative of the Republican line of attack to come, former Senator Fred Thompson noted:

It’s pretty clear there are two questions we'll never have to ask ourselves [about John McCain], “Who is this man?” and “Can we trust this man with the presidency?” 

Translation: Do we really know who this Barack Hussein Obama character is?

Tonight promises a higher energy level. The Republicans will get their own version of the “What will she do?” moment that buzzed the Democratic convention with dramatic anticipation before Hillary Clinton took the stage. In the Republicans’ rendition, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin will step up to the podium amidst a swirl of recently unearthed backstories. How will she address her daughter’s pregnancy? Any word about sitting through a sermon about how Israeli Jews bring terrorist attacks on themselves for not accepting the Christian path? Or her own take that the United State’s escapade in Iraq was “God’s plan”? Or her affiliation with the Alaska Independence Party, whose founder hates America? And then there’s that Bridge to Nowhere she supported before she rejected it... and her status as a crusader against earmarks who brought in $27 million in earmarks for the town of 6,700 she governed? 

In his convention speech, Obama plucked off each of the Republican talking points against him in rapid fire succession. But he had the time to craft that strategy. Given Palin’s hasty vetting process, it’s unlikely the Republicans will be able to put together such a comprehensive counter-offense. We’ll see tonight. 

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here. 

Contrarian Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul’s Rally for the Republic just got underway over at the Target Center in Minneapolis. MSNBC anchor Tucker Carlson kicked off the event just under an hour late, though Carlson was ready and waiting in the wings before he was scheduled speak. One Ron Paul supporter, who asked not to be named, suspected that the planning for the slow-moving event may have been turned over to the hemp activists—a reference to Paul’s opposition to the “war on Drugs”—a few of whom I saw smoking a joint outside the building. (Maybe they're also responsible for turning me into a journobot with a name tag reading "Bennton.")

Paul, a staunch anti-war advocate, organized the event as a contrast to the official Republican National Convention. His supporters did not seem dissuaded by the lack of institutional support, lining up outside the arena in the rain to get a chance to see the politician. I talked to one supporter named Michael Marasco who had walked 300 miles from Green Bay, Wisconsin, to Minneapolis to spread Paul’s message of “honesty in government.”

Generally, the rally was an anti-government demonstration in support of a politician. I asked many of the supporters, “What can government do right?” Some supporters yelled, “Nothing.” Others got hostile with the questioning. In general, though, most people gave me one unified answer: “as little as possible.”

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here. 

The march began roughly on time, with a slow but determined mass moving down the capitol’s hill toward downtown Saint Paul. I began walking next to an anti-capitalist black bloc. An exuberant young man with a megaphone led protesters in chants of “No war but the class war!” and “A … Anti … Anti-Capitalista!”—after which last chant I heard a Bloc member behind me confide to his friend, “I don’t even know what that means.”

I really, really hoped he was kidding. After Megaphone Guy announced that protestors had smashed the windows of a bus full of delegates and the people around me cheered, claustrophobia began to set in and I decided to peel away from this group and observe other portions of the march.

The Revolution will be exhaustively photographed …

 … and merchandized.

Police in riot gear appeared at several intersections to control the flow of the march. I overheard one policewoman in the front line say to a protestor, “I’m sorry for the inconvenience.”

 
As the march neared the Xcel Center, it was herded through a metal fence.
 

After emerging from the fencing, the march appeared to be doubling back on itself. From the median in front of Mickey’s Dining Car, I was able to observe it headed both ways.

Code Pink and the Backbone Campaign along with some other very theatrical groups, lending the march a parade-like aspect.

What I saw next had a way of putting everything in perspective. On the other side of the median, marching past Mickey’s, I was suddenly confronted by a huge delegation from Iraq Veterans Against The War, joined by older veterans of other wars in a powerful and dignified procession.

Not to diminish the efforts of the many protest groups which turned out in powerful numbers, but this segment of the march seemed the most—well, real. And certainly the most moving.

I was not witness to the clashes between police and protesters that occurred; from where I was standing, things proceeded in an orderly fashion. There was, however, another Utne writer caught up in the commotion and tear gas, and her perspective is unfortunately very different from mine.

Images courtesy of the author.

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here. 

While reporting from a protest at the Republican National Convention, Utne Reader intern Chelsey Perkins captured footage of police launching gas canisters at protesters and chasing them down the banks of the Mississippi river in St. Paul. You can view videos of that below. 

Having seen protesters and police clash in the distance, Perkins asked an officer how to get away from the conflict zone. She was directed toward a river walk with a large group of people including both protesters and bystanders. The police followed closely behind, until multiple groups of officers on bikes, horses, and on foot surrounded and detained everyone in the area.

Once surrounded, Perkins was told to get on the ground with her hands on her head. Some of the people were placed in plastic cuffs, and a large bullhorn announced that everyone in the area was under arrest. Members of the media were eventually told to leave, because the area was deemed a “crime scene.” Perkins tried to explain that she was a member of the media, but without credentials, she was unable to leave.

After some 45 minutes of being detained, Perkins was told that she was no longer under suspicion and could leave if she wanted. When she agreed, she was surrounded by a group of police who escorted her away from the area.

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click  here .

The Republican National Convention lumbered to a start Monday with a business-only agenda, a Hurricane Gustav damper, raucous demonstrations, and fresh family drama from Sarah Palin.

St. Paul’s Xcel center was none-too-densely populated, but the delegates who showed up for the quorum wore their happy faces. If some folks were disappointed that Bush & Cheney were tending to Gustav and weren’t going to speak as planned, party leaders probably heaved a sigh of relief. (If only the RNC was held in 2005, maybe New Orleans would have gotten their attention. Three years later, things are much more attuned to looming natural disaster tragedy: The convention even opened with an appeal for everyone to donate to those affected by Gustav via text message, a tack the Obama team scooped by minutes via a text message appeal of their own.)

And the business about Palin's pregnant, 17-year-old, unmarried daughter was not going to get delegates down. In fact, these party loyalists saw nothing but the bright side:

“As a grandmother, I can tell you the governor is excited,” said Texas delegate Kathie Whitford-Freeman. “The most exciting thing in this world is to be called granny.”

As for the protests, things got rowdy and messy. Utne.com’s Bennett Gordon and Chelsey Perkins has some great video dispatches from the frontlines, as does the UpTake. For some of the finest coverage of the weekend’s preemptive raids and Monday’s ongoing shenanigans, check out the Minnesota Independent.

For more of Utne.com’s ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click here.

The anarchists trying to stop the RNC are organized. Many, though, still don’t know what to do. They’ve got maps, code words, and a system of text messages that tries to coordinate blockades and gives updates on arrest numbers. Many of the activists seem to know sign language, and have a coded system of communication set up. Some wear the black masks and makeup, but others are wearing preppy, non-descript clothing chosen to throw off the police and blend in. One young woman I talked to said that today was “the first time I’ve brushed my hair in years.”

The blockades, however, seem to happen at random, sometimes at inopportune times. I saw one group block an empty delegate bus, stopping a group of anti-McCain, Ron Paul delegates in the process. The most successful action that I witnessed was a young man in a black mask who slashed the tires on a Fox News truck and then escaped safely into a crowd.

Tear gas has been used and arrests have been made. A video of a protester roadblock can be seen below:

For more of Utne.com's ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click  here . 

Walking up to the RNC demonstrations this morning, passing by the Barack Obama supporters, the Truthers, and the Code Pink protesters, the first person I ran into was Jeremy Scahill. He’s an investigative reporter for Democracy Now!, the Nation, and author of the book Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. He gave a great intro to what he thinks these protests are all about.

You can watch a video of that below:

For more of Utne.com's ongoing coverage of the Republican National Convention, click  here .