Crossposted at [REDACTED]

Well...it was bound to happen.  

The Palin pick has changed everything...with Dittoheads.

I had an interesting encounter yesterday with an colleague who is, in fact, a raging Dittohead.  I knew that he listened to right-weird radio, (here in Portland, we get our "Lars Larson" and "Bill-O" on 750am), but I didn't think he was delusional.  

For the most part, he appears normal...he comes to work clean every morning, with his hair combed and his underwear on the inside.  This would tend to eliminate him as a "Standard Issue" Dittohead, so I never had any real concerns for his sanity.

The Palin pick has changed everything...with how I view HIM.  

Volunteering is going to make or break this election.  And like it or not, some states are more important than others for the next 60 days.

I've been asked many times "where should I volunteer to make the biggest difference?"  To answer that question, I've made an easy-to-use Google map using data from 538.

Just click where you live on the map below and it'll tell you where you should volunteer to maximize your ability to help elect Obama.  (It'll open a google map in a separate window because I can't embed maps here.)  Below the fold I'll tell you why the map is the way it is.

The New York Times is presently reporting that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are going to be nationalized.  The mortgage giants purchase home mortgages roughly 50% of all home mortgages, and 80% of all new mortgages have been purchased by them due to the fact that the truly "private" mortgage companies are running for the hills in the midst of this true crisis.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt created these "companies" in 1938, but as federal agencies, as part of a way to spur economic development; the companies were wildly successful and contributed to the homeownership boom of the 1950s.  LBJ privatized them in 1968.

However, now the New York TImes is reporting that they will be nationalized again, although they politely refer to the plans as a "rescue."  However, the federal government will "assume control" of the pair.  I think we can safely call that what it is - nationalization.

I have once mentioned and quoted the feedback of one of my former classmates who lives in Alaska, and his thoughts on Sarah Palin.  Well this email if from one of his friends, who is a school Principal and has experience working with and advising Governors and others in Alaska.  This is the email he sent to those who were asking him about Sarah Palin.  

It's enlightening for sure.  

Please enjoy and share!

Hi Friends,

My brother sent this note regarding his impressions about  Sarah Palin
(McCain's baffling VP choice).  I thought it was interesting  coming from
his inside-Alaska perspective, and worth passing along.  For  those who
don't know my brother,  he is a principal of a school up in  Alaska,
where he and his wife also teach.  THey've been Alaskan transplants  for
about 10 years.

Alice

From: Peter     Date: August 29,  2008 11:58:15 PM PDT
To:

Good evening, lots of friends and relatives  have been asking me (as an
Alaskan) what I think of Sarah Palin, our  Governor, and new choice for
McCain as a VP candidate.

Here it  goes:

This pick floored me.  Sarah Palin is a nice person.  I've met her,  I've
even talked to her for a few minutes at a principal's conference  a
couple of years ago.  She has lots going for her superficially.    She
speaks from the heart, like a spitfire mother; she can even be sort  of
funny sometimes.  She is quite beautiful;  athletic, and has  that
radiant glow of someone who actually spends time doing things  outside.
Unlike many politicians, she has lived a 'real life' and done  things
that few living and working in DC could ever do....like dipnettin'  fish,
shootin' stuff and eating it out on the tundra, and havin' 5  kids.

Personally, I'd never vote for her. She has an extremely simple  view of
the world.  I don't even think she has ever been abroad.  As  governor
she has repeatedly shown us that she is unable to grasp the demands  of
leadership.  She is very prone to cronyism of the worst kind.   Every
cabinet level political appointment she has made she has  over-ridden
suggestions of our state advisory boards, and instead promoted  those who
had granted her direct political favors.  Not that other  politicians
don't do this, they do, but most of them are able to balance  their
appointments to ensure that at least a few people with real skill  and
experience are running big state agencies.

She also has been  unable to pay attention to her Alaskan constituency.
Personally, I've written  several of our previous gov's and been asked to
comment publicly on education  policy.  All the previous gov's have
always acknowledged that contribution,  criticism or comment; sometimes
by direct reply, or at least by that of a  staff member.  Palin's office
has been a zone of silence.  Not I, nor one  person I know commenting has
ever gotten any sort of reply.   Her claim of  running an open or
transparent government is totally false; the public simply  has no role
in her administration.

Her previous claim to fame was  being mayor of Wasilla, a growing town
about 40 minutes from Anchorage of  about 15,000 people.  Wasilla is a
hellhole, even by Alaskan standards, where  there are plenty of hellhole
towns and villages. Wasilla is an ugly place  that shows a complete
absence of planning, design, or sense of public  vision.  Gov't agencies
and services are completely overrun in this town;  things are so bad that
they can't even track their population or build  schools in the right
place, because most parts of the town don't require  building permits, so
the only clue about where people are settling are  utility receipts.
Imagine trying to be an emergency responder in this kind of  place:
Houses don't just catch on fire in Wasilla, they burn to the  ground,
because by the time the fire department has figured out which road  to
take (no signs) or whose house it is (no directory), the place is  done
for.  Palin was mayor this town for at least 2 terms
before being  elected gov. a year and a half ago.

Her moral sense is simplistic and not  inclusive.  She is the sort of
person who is used to using their 'faith' to  divide and isolate minority
groups of human beings instead of uniting them.   To her credit as Gov.
she has kept out of this arena pretty well, but when in  comfortable
company (i.e the Matanuska Valley Republican Women's Club), she  lets her
moral cat out of the bag.

I will do what I can to ensure her  defeat and that of her running mate
as well.  :)  Please share this  information with those who can use it
well.

Cheers, Pete

I saw this today and that was my first thought. I wonder who thought this would "cleanse" the place and make it would make everyone forget the crimes committed in our name and on our dime.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg i?f=/c/a/2008/09/05/MN5G12O9L8.DTL&h w=abu&sn=001&sc=1000

In Sarah Palin's interview with People magazine, it is reported that she had amniocentesis, and that she knew that her son Trig would be born with Down's Syndrome.

Why did she have this test performed?

She is opposed to abortions in ALL circumstances.  If her position became the law, there would be no point in having amniocentesis done for anyone, as it would be illegal for the women to terminate the pregnancy.  Indeed, the test itself carries with it the small risk of triggering a miscarriage or spontaneous abortion.

By having this test, she put the fetus at risk for no reason at all.   She took a chance at ending an otherwise "normal" pregnancy in order to get information which she is completely opposed to acting on.

It makes no sense, and her physician wouldn't have recommended a procedure that was ultimately pointless, and was a small risk to the fetus.

It makes no sense, unless...  When she agreed to have the test done, she was willing to consider the option of terminating the pregnancy. An option she wants to prevent other women from having the opportunity to consider were they in a similar circumstance.

We of course don't know her thinking at the time, but it would be interesting to hear her explain why she had this procedure done.  There is certainly the suggestion of profound hypocrisy going on here.

Let's just stop for a moment and parrot what mccain, palin and the repubs say - "the surge is working" (actually it should be called the escalation).

Now why don't the Democrats and Obama/Biden try responding with something like this...

"Ok, let's say that the surge or escalation is working.

Is the surge working because al-sadr decided he wanted to be an ayotollah, told his army to stand down and took off to Iran for training and schooling?

Is the surge working because we are paying off militant groups to stand down?

Is the surge working because some Iraqis have had enough and are standing their ground?

We know our troops are part of the reason the surge or escalation is working, but is the surge why we went into an unjust and illegal war?

Does anybody remember the reasons why we went to war in Iraq?

Was it WMD? Was it terrorism? Was it to track down the killers and planners of 9/11? Was it to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here?

Or... was it so that we can have a successful Surge?

What is the reason, this month, for over 4,000 of our brave United States soldiers being killed?

What is the reason, this month, for over 30,000 of our brave United States soldiers being wounded, maimed and disfigured?

What is the reason, this month, for the trauma and PTSD suffered by the tens of thousands of our brave United States soldiers?

What is the reason, this month, for the death of some of our brave United States soldiers that feel their only escape is suicide?

What is the reason, this month, for the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians?

What is the reason for all of this needless death, destruction and suffering....?

What is the reason for the Surge or escalation?

It does not matter if we disagree on if the surge or escalation is working or why, what matters is WHY do we need this surge in the first place.

What Is The Reason for This WAR in Iraq?!"