Dear Andy Card: Get A Life.

While the flames of the Bush Recession continue to rage ever higher, Andrew Card is on a rant about how President Obama should be wearing coats and ties more often. Here's an excerpt from an interview Card did with Inside Edition.  You'll love it.

There should be a dress code of respect," Card tells INSIDE EDITION. "I wish that he would wear a suit coat and tie."

Card is the first member of the Bush administration to bash Obama personally, and he's going after him for forgoing a coat and tie.

"The Oval Office symbolizes...the Constitution, the hopes and dreams, and I'm going to say democracy. And when you have a dress code in the Supreme Court and a dress code on the floor of the Senate, floor of the House, I think it's appropriate to have an expectation that there will be a dress code that respects the office of the President."

Card continued, "I don't criticize Obama for his appearance, I do expect him to send the message that people who are going to be in the Oval Office should treat the office with the respect that it has earned over history."

Respect for the office?  Symbolizes the Constitution?  These Bush guys are still clueless about respect. Maybe it's because they gained so little respect from the American public while they served the country. 

Respect?

Pointing these dandies out will never convince Bushies (all eight or nine of them), but here was the example of respect they showed over the last eight years.  Do we even have to mention the shape of the nation's economy?  How about DOJ chief and Bush hack, Gonzalez, covering up the politically motivated firing of US attorneys?  No respect there.  Preemptive war on Iraq (for the wrong reasons)?  War On Terror?  Osama's Bin Hidin' since Bush left Afghanistan. The fourth amendment? Shredded.  Guantanamo Bay?  American citizens arrested...never detained, never brought to court.  Habeus Corpus?  Warrantless wiretapping?  Zero respect.

As Moody quickly pointed out, "If I were Andy Card, I would find a line of work other than fashion advisor to the Obama administration.  George W. Bush's presidency is the most spectacular failure in American history.  It's sole beneficiaries are the descendants of James Buchannan whom Bush has lifted from dead last amongst the worst Presidents ever."

I agree. 

Get a life Card. 

H/T:  Taegan Goddard

Olbermann: Bush's Eight Years in Eight Minutes

This is must see TV: 

Liberation On A Shoestring

Only if you think a trillion dollars is a shoestring.  

Reminds me of this Austin Powers moment.  "Who throws a shoe?"

CNN Poll: Obama Ratings At Historic High

Public approval ratings of President-elect Barack Obama are sky-high according to a poll released this morning by CNN/Opinion Research Corporation. The survey found that a staggering 79% of those queried approve of the way Obama has handled the transition so far. A mere 18% disapprove. President-elect Obama's approval mark is 14 points higher than the comparable number for Bush in 2000 and 17 points higher than former President Bill Clinton's approval rating in 1992.

CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider said: "An... approval rating of seventy-nine percent [is] the sort of rating you see when the public rallies around a President after a national disaster. To many Americans, the Bush administration was a national disaster." 

Amen to that, Mr. Schneider.

Status of Forces: A Mutually Agreed To Agreement

Only a few days after President Bush admitted making a mistake in 2003 by claiming "Mission Accomplished," White House Press Secretary, Dana Perino, cited the approval of a new security agreement between the US and Iraq as a reason to celebrate.

"This is a mutually agreed to agreement (sic). And that is one of the things that is different about an arbitrary date for withdrawal, when you want -- when you say you're going to leave, win or lose. We believe that the conditions are such now that we are able to celebrate the victory that we've had so far, and establish both a strategic framework agreement, which is a much broader document and talks about all sorts of cooperation that we'll have with Iraq from here on out -- from trade and health care and exchanges on science, and a real strong bilateral agreement that you would hope we would have with any of our allies."

Is this the English translation?  The mutually agreed to agreement?  This as opposed to the unilaterally unagreed to agreement or the agreed to non-agreement? But are we surprised? These are the same people who brought us the Iraq War (WMD and links to al-Qaeda).

The proposed Status of Forces Agreement is not a done deal yet.  The Iraqi Parliament will vote on the agreement next week on whether or not to set a firm deadline for American troop withdraw by December 2011 as well as place restrictions on the US military and their location within the country. A U.N. resolution which expires on December 31st would make it illegal for American soldiers to occupy Iraq unless the Parliament ratifies the deal.

Not everyone is happy about the proposal however. Thousands of Moqtada al-Sadr followers rallied in the streets of Baghdad yesterday protesting the new agreement, calling it a "surrender to American interests." Some were seen holding signs that read, "No, no to the agreement of humiliation." The protesters also stomped and burned an effigy of President Bush in Firdos Square(top picture below), the same location where American soldiers toppled the statue of Saddam Hussein five years ago (bottom picture).

So much for celebrating the victory, right? Not that Bush would take advice from anyone, but maybe he should have listened to Petraeus when he said this back in September. 

Worsening Bush Recession Drives DJIA Below 8000

Investor worries over the deepening recession of Republican President George W. Bush caused the Dow Jones Industrial Average to shed more than 400 points today. 

The bellwether market index ended the day below the 8,000 level for the first time in more than five years.

You're doing one heckuva job, Bushie!

Bush Recession Gets Much Worse In October

As reported by Bloomberg News, retail sales in the US declined 2.8% in October, the largest one-month drop on record. Even worse, the decline in consumer buying was broad-based, cutting across virtually all segments of the economy.  Coming on the heels of the September collapse of the financial industry and the sharp rise in the unemployment rate in October, today's bleak economic news leaves little doubt that the Bush Recession is very bad and getting worse by the minute.

The current Republican Administration's reckless spending, irresponsible tax cuts for super-wealthy individuals and big corporations and its gross lack of regulatory oversight have finally yielded the inevitable -- and totally predictable -- results. The American economy is in shambles and sinking ever closer to depression-level territory with each passing day. Very tough times lie ahead.

President-elect Obama will no doubt be facing an even more dire economic situation when he takes the oath of office in the third week January next year. There is no real hope that the lame-duck Congress and the lame-duck President can, or will, take the tough measures necessary to begin a recovery. With only a one-seat Democratic majority in the Senate (and that's counting Mr. Unreliable, Joe Lieberman) and a disengaged, unresponsive Republican President, nothing of any real substance is likely to be enacted into law before February or March of 2009. It is going to be a long, slow crawl back from the edge of the economic abyss.

As progressives, it is important that we keep the mainstream media honest in their reporting about how we got into this mess and who is responsible for it. The chattering classes will, I fear, be all too willing to parrot the right wing wackos' efforts to blame the Democrats and President-elect Obama. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have already started down that path. They will certainly soon be followed by other wingnuts. Many in the mainstream media will be sorely tempted to take the bait because it is easy (no work involved) and simplistic (requires no real understanding of the issues).  

We can't let that happen.

Gas Prices Then...Now

How's this for a screaming picture?

Record Low: Bush's Job Approval Ratings

Gallup is showing a 25% job approval rating for President Bush, a personal best worst. Still, more than half of Republicans approve.

Where Are They Now?

The on-going meltdown on Wall Street may have jogged the memories of more than a few investors about all those heady predictions, only a few years back, of a soaring stock market in the 21st century. For example, this bestseller from 1999:

Makes you kinda wonder what ever happened to the financial geniuses who wrote this tripe.  Well...  let me help with that:

James K. Glassman is now a senior State Department official in the Bush administration. He has the job previously held by long-time Bush buddy from Texas, Karen Hughes. Sweet, huh?

But wait, it gets better:

Kevin A. Hassett is now a senior economic advisor to the McCain campaign! Now that explains a lot.

You just couldn't make this stuff up.

h/t: PamsHouseblend

McCain Abandons Michigan

Jonathan Martin, writing for Politico.com today, reports that the McCain-Palin campaign is pulling out of Michigan. Martin says that the Republican presidential ticket will end television advertising, stop all direct mail and relocate its paid staff to more competitive states. A campaign event scheduled for next week in Plymouth MI has also been cancelled.

Once considered competitive by key Republican strategists, Michigan has moved steadily into safer and safer territory for the Obama-Biden team in recent weeks. Polls over the past two weeks have given the Democrats anywhere from a seven to ten point lead. Senator John Kerry won Michigan in 2004 by three points, 51% to 48%, over George W. Bush. Then Vice-President Al Gore bested Bush in Michigan in the 2000 election by five points, 51%-46% (third party candidates got 3% of Michiganders' votes in 2000).

The abandonment of a serious effort in Michigan further complicates an increasingly difficult challenge for the McCain campaign to garner the necessary 270 electoral votes for a victory on Nov. 4th. Now more than ever, both Florida and Ohio have become must-wins for the GOP ticket.

Debate Win Should Add to Obama's Momentum

As noted in our latest Electoral Vote projection, Senator Obama was already picking up steam heading into last night's Presidential debate. Three tracking polls out today  - Rasmussen, Gallup and Diageo/Hotline - confirm that assessment. 

Obama leads McCain by five points in the Gallup and Diageo/Hotline surveys and by six points in Rasmussen's tracker. None of these daily tracking surveys reflect the impact of last night's debate. Note that Obama's lead is outside the margin of error in all three tracking polls.

Then comes the debate. According to flash polls by CBS, CNN and others, Obama won last night's encounter handily. Numbers from various real-time focus groups (Luntz, GQR, etc.) show the same results. Assuming these snapshots are accurate, we will almost certainly see Obama's lead increase in the days ahead. Without a doubt, the Democratic Presidential nominee now has what Bush The Elder famously called "Big Mo" (momentum).

There must be a bunch of very worried ex-lobbyists at McCain Headquarters today. Stay tuned for the next gimmick from McCainWorld. Given the trouble they're in, you can bet it's coming.

Lest We Forget

While the dire economy has rightfully dominated recent conversation, I humbly submit the following lest we forget the second tragic aspect of the Bush legacy.

International aid organizations estimate that 4 to 5 million Iraqis have fled their country due to the violence since 2003. Add those killed in the war, occupation and by sectarian violence and this number climbs to between 5 and 6 million. This is approximately 1/5 of the pre-war population of Iraq. http://www.refugeesinternational.org/content/article/detail/9679

On a percentage basis, this is equivalent to almost 60 million people being removed from the U.S., a number roughly equal to the combined populations of our 28 smallest states. http://www.census.gov/population/projections/PressTab1.xls

Just imagine totally emptying Alabama, South Carolina, Louisiana, Kentucky, Oregon, Oklahoma, Connecticut, Iowa, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kansas, Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, West Virginia, Nebraska, Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Montana, Delaware, South Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming.

Kind of makes you think.

Oregon's Merkley: "Gordon Smith Has Been Part of the Problem"

As the meltdown on Wall Street continues and the solvency of more and more financial institutions is in doubt, Democratic candidate for the US Senate in Oregon,  Jeff Merkley, lays part of the blame on his Republican opponent, incumbent Senator Gordon Smith. 

In a statement on the nation's worsening economic crisis, issued late yesterday, Merkley blasted Smith for his role in supporting Republican Bush's economic policies.  Mr. Merkley's statement reads:

Events of recent days underscore that the Bush economy, supported by Gordon Smith, has been built as a house of cards. That house of cards has included retail mortgage practices and mortgage-backed securities that have undermined our economic security.

At the retail level, families have been devastated by subprime – and even non-subprime - mortgages. Practices including pre-payment penalties, steering payments and exploding interest rates have often turned the dream of homeownership into a nightmare for American families. Deceptive and damaging mortgages should never have been allowed.

These, in turn, provided the basis for mortgage-backed securities - built on the shaky foundations of the subprime loans. The hollow, Bush-Smith economy has been devastating for American families and now, as we’ve seen, for American banks.

The current Bush-Smith economy is stripping wealth from families, shipping jobs overseas and putting opportunity out of reach. We need an economy that builds wealth for families, creates living wage jobs here in America and restores opportunities for American families.

Gordon Smith has been part of the problem - it's time for a new direction, and it’s time to put Washington to work for working Americans.

Tennessee's Bob Tuke Blasts Republicans on Financial Crisis

In his weekly message to Tennessee voters, Bob Tuke, Democratic candidate for the US Senate, lambasts Republican economic policy. Tuke is challenging incumbent Republican Lamar Alexander in the November election. Mr. Tuke writes: 

We all have been reading about something I never thought I would see - the failure or takeover of three of the largest and most venerable investment banks in America, together with the failure of several commercial banks and mortgage lenders across the United States. Add to those catastrophes the threats to the financial viability of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and the insurance giant AIG, and we face a financial industry crisis we have not witnessed since the Great Depression. 

Of course this crisis does not necessarily mean there will be a world-wide financial collapse, but such a collapse is possible unless there is substantially better financial governance in the next several weeks than we have had in the past several years. CEO's and Boards of Directors in the private sector need to rein in the aggressive and reckless risk-taking that has weakened our financial markets and the public confidence in them. Government regulators need to enforce the laws and regulations that already are on the books, and they need to write and enforce new regulations that will require more sensible lending and investment policies and that will hold accountable those who fail to obey the rules. Congress, especially the Senate, needs to do its job of oversight. 

I have been practicing law in the financial services industries for more than 30 years, and I have never seen such willful incompetence in both the private and government sectors. On the private side we have witnessed grossly exorbitant salaries and benefits claimed by executives (and awarded by ineffective Boards of Directors), greed in investments in subprime mortgage loans with losses that were entirely predictable, and failure to manage portfolios and people the way good business executives generally have in America for decades.

On the government side, the regulators of the financial services industries simply abdicated. Led by our historically incompetent President and Vice President, and influenced by lobbyists and massive campaign contributions, the Bush-Cheney-Alexander Republican approach of letting the financial markets govern themselves has resulted in this debacle. It did not have to happen. Proper regulation and Congressional oversight could have - and should have - curtailed subprime mortgage lending. The unsound housing investment bubble could have been prevented. Reckless investments by traditionally conservative institutions could have been stopped. 

This is another reason I am running for the U.S. Senate: To offer Tennesseans a Senator who understands the financial industries and who will not be influenced by massive campaign contributions and cozy relationships with lobbyists. Lamar Alexander has voted lockstep with the Bush administration's economic policies and has voted to strike down legislation to protect consumers and to eliminate adequate oversight of our nation's financial system, which has led to the disaster we face today. At the same time he has received approximately $3 million in contributions from executives and PACs of banks, realtors and securities companies for his ardent opposition to government oversight that would have protected borrowers and consumers.

I will look after the interests of the people of Tennessee and America instead of giving in to the interests of big money and their cronies. Together, let's Take the Hill.

Norm Coleman Made Me Laugh Today

"What do you think about the last eight years of George Bush?"

Coleman's answer, or lack thereof, is a classic.  Have fun watching Al!

The State of the Race and Dispelling Media Myths

With the Democratic National Convention set to kick off in Denver, polls are being released galore to provide a baseline before the most condensed and eventful two weeks in recent political history commences. One poll that caught my attention today was the Washington Post/ABC News poll that was conducted late last week, it provides many details on a host of questions and shows that much of the media narrative is non-sense.

Let’s first get down to the pure brass tacks of the poll, which I consider one of the more reputable ones out there, mainly because they’re more transparent about their methodology and release detailed information broken down by demographic.

Obama leads McCain 48-42% in a four way contest (With Nader and Barr) among likely voters, which is basically where the race has been, sans some minor ebbs in both directions, for months. Despite the much talked about negative (and allegedly, effective) attacks by John Sidney McCain III, Obama still sports a 62-34% favorable rating (McCain’s is a robust 59-37% as well). In comparison, at this point in 2004, John Kerry’s favorable rating was only in the +10% range and never did exceed a 55% favorable rating…while Obama, after a much more bruising primary, is flirting with 2:1 territory and one that is extraordinary stable.

Let’s talk about some other myths that this poll puts to rest:

Obama isn’t connecting on the economy

He leads McCain on the economy by a 50-39% margin.

McCain is killing Obama on the drilling issue!

Obama leads 49-42% on Energy issues.

Additionally, Obama is keeping McCain’s advantage among terrorism to a mere 52-38% margin, is tied with him with Iraq and taxes; and sports a double digit lead in social issues.

Here’s another myth:

Obama is underperforming the usual Democratic strength among whites, women, and Hispanics.

While John Kerry lost whites by a 41-58% margin (From 1992-2004, the Democratic nominee ranged from 39-42% of the white vote), Obama only trails McCain 49-43% among whites; and that’s with a decent amount of undecideds and at least a fraction of those will break for Obama. Obama leads among women 55-37% over performing John Kerry, Al Gore, and Bill Clinton’s margin among females, sometimes by significant margins.

Of course, married women are a real weakness for Obama, right? All those angry Hillary supporters will harm his candidacy fatally, no? He leads 48-44, a group that voted for Bush by 11 points four years ago.

Well then, naturally whites making less than 50K are a weakness for Obama? Well he leads by a 49-40% margin, where Kerry lost this group by 7 points.
As for Hispanics, he overperforms Kerry by a significant margin as well, leading 61-27% among the group that Kerry only got 57% with. A particular strong showing against a Southwestern Senator from a border state, who is a moderate on immigration.

Obama has even made significant strides among traditionally Republican voters. While George Bush won White Evangelicals by a 78-21% margin, Obama has cut the GOP advantage to a 65-27% margin; a near twenty point swing. He is also polling double what John Kerry did among self-described Republicans. While he still faces insurmountable deficits among those groups, in a close election those are significant number of votes gained.

While I know the storyline of working class white Americans and other groups that Obama underperformed with in the primary not supporting a black candidate is intriguing, it just isn’t based in the data.

While, it is still a tight race, it is a static one and one that still favors Senator Obama. This race has potential to be fluid soon though, with two conventions in the next ten days. But for now, the media coverage is fundamentally not honest. No wonder, since the media is in the tank for John Sidney McCain III. And why wouldn’t they be? He cooks BBQ for them at his retirement estate in Sedona, AZ.

But let’s be honest about the state of the race.

The Here and Now of Oil

Drill here, drill now! Drill here, drill now! Kinda catchy, huh? Well, maybe... if you don't think about it too much. After a little reflection, however, you start to worry. What exactly does John McCain mean by 'here' and 'now'? 

Is 'here' down the street, or right off the beach from my timeshare in Destin? Just precisely where is 'here'? And is 'now' like right now, today, this instant? Are drilling rigs and a bunch of roughnecks gonna turn up in my neighborhood at any moment?

Not to worry. Here's an idea that should ease everyone's mind and make the McCain energy plan a no-brainer. (Ok, I know some of you already thought the plan was a no-brain-er, but bear with me.) Why not drill where we know there will be no opposition from the locals? You know, some places where the big oil companies are already bought in, so to speak. Fully a dozen prime drilling sites come to mind immediately:

-- McCain's nine (nine!) homes;

-- George W. Bush's ranch in Crawford, TX

-- The Bush Compound, Kennebunkport, ME

-- The Dick Cheney family spread in Wyoming

It gets better. At least two of these locations offer the additional possibility of off-shore drilling (McCain's Laguna Beach, CA, house and the Bush family Kennebunkport estate). So there we are: a good fourteen drilling options... and we're just getting started. 

As to the meaning of now... I'll just take the old-fashioned, dictionary definition, 'at this moment'. That sounds pretty soon to me. No need to wait for new legislation or environmental studies or such. Just have at it and ...drill here, drill now! 

In case you needed one more reason...

For those few remaining voters in Alaska who haven't quite made up their minds about the upcoming US Senate race, here's a tidbit for you.  

On his way to the opening ceremonies of the Olympic Games in Beijing, George W. Bush made a brief stop over at Eielson Air Force base near Fairbanks. While there, he addressed a group of military personnel assigned to the base. In his short remarks, Mr. Bush found time to heap praise on incumbent Republican Senator Ted Stevens: "The United States military has had... no better friend and supporter than Ted Stevens", he effused. 

Mr. Stevens, who was in attendance at the event, must have been as surprised as everyone at such kudos from W. under the circumstances.  After all, the six-term Senator was indicted just last week on seven felony counts of making false statements about his finances. When questioned about Mr. Bush's comments, the White House issued a statement saying the remarks were "perfectly appropriate". 

Well alrighty then...  I guess if your approval ratings are as low as Bush's and Stevens', any company is good company.

The Democratic candidate for Mr. Stevens' seat, Mayor Mark Begich of Anchorage, must be delighted with his on-going good fortune.

Reagan, Carville and KISS

I think it likely that the 2008 presidential contest will hinge on the ability of one side or the other to reduce the campaign to one simple, clear message. This was the case in two other recent change elections where the underlying dynamics favored the challenger, but the incumbent candidate (or party) attempted to raise voters' doubts about the risks of voting for change. 

Consider Reagan versus Carter in 1980 and Clinton versus Bush the Elder in 1992. The political environment of those races favored the change candidates, but it was only when the challengers reduced the choice to the simplest of terms that they were able to close the deal with the electorate . Voters wanted change but were hesitant to cast their lot with the relatively riskier challenger until the contest was reduced to a single overarching theme. Reagan and Clinton took the White House by exploiting their opponents' most obvious and simplest weaknesses. 

Reagan made it look easy when he asked: are you better off now than you were four years ago? Day after day, speech after speech, ad after ad, Reagan pounded away at Carter with that simple question. Once voters accepted the notion of  a President Reagan, that simple, focused question almost guaranteed his election. In a similar way, Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign manager, James Carville, latched on to Bush the Elder's greatest weakness with a pit bull-like determination. He kept the Clinton campaign focused like a laser on a very simple theme:  It's the economy, stupid! 

Such is now the situation, I think, for Barack Obama. The Illinois Senator has established his presidential bona fides, both on foreign affairs and domestic issues. In order to win this election he must now Keep It Simple, Stupid (KISS).  How to do that? In my view the answer is very straightforward: the Obama campaign must tie John McCain, hand and foot, to the failed presidency of George W. Bush.

On jobs, health care, gas prices, energy policy, Iraq, Afghanistan, Europe, China, trade policy, education and every other issue, the message must be clear and relentless: John McCain = George W. Bush.  A vote for John McCain is a vote for four more years of the same. TV ads must have McCain morphing into Bush and then morphing back again.  Day after day, week after week, with no distractions allowed, Obama must run against Senator McSame.

If Obama allows McCain and the Republicans to make this election about anything else, he runs the very grave risk of losing. It cannot be about race, or about Obama himself, or even about John McCain.  The Obama campaign cannot, or course, allow outrageous attacks to go unchallenged, but it must - at all costs - avoid being drawn off its central, simple message of change from the disastrous policies of Bush/McCain.

So, Senator Obama, let's hear it, all day, every day, from now until November: a vote for John McCain is a vote for more of the same. It is a vote for four more years of Bush failure and incompetence.  America cannot afford that; it is the riskiest course of all.