I think that these last several days we have been hearing the death rattle of McCain.

Obviously, the economy was not a subject that was good for his chances, but I think either He or his campaign figured out how to turn it around. Dropping everything and going to DC to help broker a deal was brilliant. I know a lot of people here made fun of it because he trumped Obama but all your rationalizations are feeble attempts to justify what Obama was not doing.

Then he gets there with no plan. If he worked to get a deal he really would have been the hero. All the talk of Frank about how McCain screwed up the negotiations were going no where as there was more than ample evidence that he rarely interjected himself in the discussion.

It seemed to me almost like a comedy where the characters go on some grand exploit and once arriving having no idea what the next step is.

Then he goes to the debate, in total contradiction to what he had earlier said. Not only that he goes there not trying to win. Again not being able to say how he helped broker a deal. Obama did nothing either but McCain really needed to show the contrast. Instead I think he is so close to becoming president he lost his nerve and now only takes stands that are totally innocuous and politically safe. Those willing to accept that already are voting for Obama.

So Obama opens the door for McCain to drive home some great points and he either did not see them or he was trying to stay out of a conflict.

The deal dies and McCain says it is terrible that it died. Same view as Obama. Great way to win an election. But to make it worse he was there assumable trying to get a deal struck. Obama had his cell phone on Vibrate and McCain got no edge from his action.

Now they are out campaigning. McCain saying we need a deal. Obama says the same thing but tosses out an idea. All McCain had to do was come up with a framework that would be more agreeable to the congress and to the public.

I heard several ideas that puts the public less on the hook yet works to resolve the problem. McCain could not come up with a few of these ideas and work to get a deal. Some of the ideas Obama could never support and some he could. Put him on the spot. McCain never got close.

I still think that Obama will be a disaster but McCain had to run a great campaign to win and I think he did pretty good to keep it so close but unlike Hillary who really went for it at the end McCain seems more concerned with making a mistake than with putting it out there. I think this is the third or fourth time that Obama was in a position where McCain could have made some strides toward winning and he either gave the advantage back to Obama or did nothing.

Oh well just like Hillary I think that the media hurt his chances but both did enough on their own that blaming the media is only part of the story. If you lose a football game 40 to zip the loss is not because of the defense.

I think some of the failings of McCain matched those of Obama but all Obama had to do was not be W. There are enough people out there who want to vote for anything but a Rep so once Obama got the nomination that group was in the bag.

McCain had to prove he was not W, which he partially did but he also had to demonstrate why and how he knows what to do by explaining what he wants to do and why that is a good course of action. He never really did that last part.

So unless someone out there has a video of Obama burning a flag, a tap of him calling for the destruction of America or a group of young boys saying he took advantage of them as a community organizer he can relax and just not make a mistake.

You have to pay your own rent or mortgage or automobile loan....

No wonder you hate McCain.....................

McCain had to prove he was not W, which he partially did but he also had to demonstrate why and how he knows what to do by explaining what he wants to do and why that is a good course of action. He never really did that last part.

Having the complete support of all of the major and cable networks (except one) plus the national print media taking turns supporting you and/or smearing your opponents doesn't hurt either.

Hey, when one of your opponents is a book banning creationist that is completely unqualified for the office she's running for, the networks and the print media don't have to do anything except let her hang herself.

ShieldaPutz,

You still don't get it...the media started this long before Governor Palin got into the race-just ask Hillary. And in actuality, no one person could survive the brutal attacks the media put on her even before any interview. If they couldn't attack her positions, they attacked her as a person, as a mother, and her family. It's been shameful, and you should be ashamed for perpetuating it now. It's over...the media destroyed her...mission accomplished...now move on or move out.

So unless someone out there has a video of Obama burning a flag, a tap of him calling for the destruction of America or a group of young boys saying he took advantage of them as a community organizer he can relax and just not make a mistake

Then why isn't Obama winning by a commanding lead in the polls.. from what you said he should be up by more than 20 points

Part of it does have to do with the rumors of his Muslim faith, the false ads of his vote for explicit sex ed for kindergarten kids, the Karl Rove tactics employed to attempt to focus voters on Ayers and Wright instead of the war, the economy and McCain's voting record or Palin's lack of capability. Part of it has to do with, as one woman told me, having a nigger in the White House.

There are a certain number of people who would vote for the republican no matter who the democrat was. Then there are some who would vote for McCain because he is a veteran, in spite of his record. Some will vote republican because of Palin, but my bet is those people would never have voted democrat.

Obama is winning and after Palin's performance on Thursday, my bet is the gap will be getting bigger.

Despite your condescending response, as well as your mispelling of the first part of my name, I do agree with you on one point. The attacks against her as a mother -- meaning people criticizing her for running for VP when she has a family to raise -- were completely out of line and I never agreed with that line of attack. That was completely uncalled for. However, there are many other issues that need and deserve the attention they have received.

This is a woman who tried to get books banned from the Wasilla public library. Book banning! It's 2008, not 1954! This raises a huge red flag and says that we have someone running for VP that is in favor of censorship! And even though the GOP spin is that she only inquired about banning books, the fact that the thought even entered her head is appalling. The only reason it didn't go any further is because the librarian stood up to her, and the town revolted when Sarah Palin fired her for not acceding to her wishes. And journalists are supposed to just ignore this and be nice to her because she's a mom with 5 kids? As President, what would stop her from trying this again? Would she come right out and call it book banning? Of course not. It would have a much more innocuous sounding name like the Literary Qualifications Act or something, and it would quietly lay the framework to begin dismantling the Constitution by first limiting our access to information deemed unacceptable by someone else. After that, who knows? It's a slippery slope. And once we relenquish our rights, we'll never get them back.

This is a woman who has publicly stated that she believes creationism should be taught in schools -- never mind that whole pesky separation of church and state thing that is one of the foundations our country was founded upon -- alongside science. Journalists are just supposed to ignore this?

Don't be pissed at the media. Be pissed at McCain and the GOP for choosing someone so completely and totally unqualified for the job with so many strikes against her in her background. They're the ones who allowed this to happen. Had they done 10 minutes worth of vetting on this woman, the GOP would not be in the situation it's in now. And McCain might actually have a shot in hell of winning the election.

I think the book banning thing has been pretty much disputed. She said she grew up in a house where her parents were science teachers and of course she believes in evolution. I think everyone should question every proof out there that supports their cause. When you just repeat things that are clearly a distortion then everything else you say becomes invalid.

I do not hate McCain. He probably will get my vote but for him to win he had to pretty much do everything right. I think he did a lot of things right and very often I think he had Obama dancing like a puppet but then he never really capitalized on it.

Pretty much every conclusion I came too has been repeated on the news and radio. I am not talking about MSNBC but Fox, and Levin and other shows where the bias is very much toward the right.

I totally agree that the media has been incredibly biased and I am outraged at how often distortions are repeated as facts. It goes both ways but imagine the outrage if a comedy skit portrayed Obama's wife as someone who practices incest if only it could be proved.

I am in no way suggesting that Obama will be who I vote for or that he is good for the country but he did what he had to do and McCain did well but where he really needed to strike when the iron was hot he did not. So many windows of opportunity left unexploited.

Lastly what they are doing to Palin is a disgrace. I guess that applies to both those running the McCain campaign and all the people out there that somehow find a reason to hate her. Think as I might I cannot see a single reason for hating her. Disagreeing with her I can understand but what does she stand for that is worthy of hate?

Lastly, those who blast Fox for their biased reporting should watch it for a while. Yes there is bias for the Rep and cons but they do present the other side and they are very willing to be very critical of McCain.

Much of the media biased for Obama rarely say a word critical of Obama. What is most disappointing is when people who represent that they are providing us the new give a totally biased view. No one is going to suggest that Hannity is providing the news.

So those of you who want to believe I am bashing McCain still think that I am well I suggest that you try to find some objectivity. If you insist on buying into everything that a candidate does is great someday you will be run over by a train that they told you really was the light at the end of the tunnel.

I think Obama wins and those who bought into what he says 100% are going to have their own run in with that train. I guess my hope is that virtually all of what he said was BS and his actions will make some sense. If that happens all those pie in the sky dreamers with their hands out waiting for a check are going to be very disappointed.

If he actually does what he says he wants to do well the disappointment will come when they realize that none of it results in the utopia that they believe is waiting for them. How they could believe that the government will actual take control and make things better is such a leap of faith that to me it borders on total insanity.

So my view is that Obama wins, in 4 years all you loyal followers will be acting like you have no idea how he got elected. He may be more unpopular than W. His really loyal followers will say that he was destroyed by racism in the country. The world will be just as dangerous and the US involved in just as many if not more wars.

Google: Palin fork done

565,000 hits

All junk. Perhaps the link would work better.

In any case I think that the Reps have really screwed themselves when it comes to Palin. I have seen interviews of her from before she was selected and was very impressed.

All their assistance have taking away her soul. I think to some extent they have destroyed McCain too. In an early town hall meeting held in PA he spoke in a manner that would have helped him much more than the nonsense he is trying to get out now.

When you are behind you need to take chances. That means really laying it out there. Sound bites are never going to win someone over. Well maybe some people but when Obama's main weakness is inexperience, socialist tendencies and a perception of being an empty suit, you need to show why you are none of those.

Standing there and saying over and over that the other person does not understand, never takes the next step to explain that you do understand.

I think what he did with this bailout is such a clear example of this type of failure. So many of the ideas being tossed around now should have been presented by him. They were not that much of a secret. If he came out Saturday and said the bill needs to be passed but these are the things that need to be carefully considered or put into the bill he would have demonstrated that he was there to lead the way to a plan. He may have done some things but it never was made public and all the new ideas surfaced through others.

It was a chance that if he acted on it, would have insured he was the president. Sure there was a risk that it would have blown up in his face but doing nothing is leading to the same results.

I'm sorry, but I disagree with you on the book banning. According to the article below -- published in an Alaska newspaper after the incident -- she did try to start the wheels turning on getting books banned. The only reason she was unable to follow through with it was the resistance from the librarian and the ensuing uproar from the community when the librarian was fired. And furthermore she did this just 2 weeks into her mayoral term. 2 weeks! Was there really nothing more important to do right after she took office than to try to ban books from the library?

<link>

I don't hate Sarah Palin; however, she frightens me with her extremist agenda, her desire to take away a woman's right to choose, the questionable beliefs and practices of the church she attends, and her complete lack of understanding about global and economic issues. I'm in no way an expert either, but I'm not running for Vice President. This woman has absolutely no business being within 1000 yards of the White House, much less serving as the VP. And the idea of her being President should (God forbid) something happen to McCain if he wins, truly keeps me awake at night. I intensely dislike McCain and think he's nothing but a pathetic sellout, but I would never wish for any harm to befall him. The thought of Sarah Palin representing me and making decisions on my behalf -- decisions that would not only affect me but my children as well -- is truly appalling.

You're either blinded by your own partisanship or badly in need of a reading-comprehension course.

The story you link to doesn't even come close to supporting your claim with any kind of objective reading.

I think you give too much credit to what the president can do. Yesterday I heard her say that she does not belong to any church.

You really need to look for articles that dispute some of the issues you are accepting as facts. Maybe they will turn out to be facts but in my experience, every so call fact about either one of them or the positions they take only has a little bit of truth in it.

For the most part they lay out a smoke screen hoping you do not see the whole picture.

Lastly with a Dem Congress how extreme do you think she would be able to go? She needs approval to get a SC judge appointed so no witch doctor is going to the SC.

The constitution was written so one person does not make all the decisions. It also insures that those who are not in the majority have some say.

I think I would suggest that you worry less about Palin and look at what is going on in the congress. Now how they operate is really something to be afraid of.

OK, here are a couple excerpts from that article. Explain to me how this doesn't spell out Sarah Palin attempting to ban books from the library:

But on Monday, Oct. 28, Emmons said Palin asked her outright if she could live with censorship of library books. This was during a weak when Palin was requesting resignations from all¦nbsp; the city's department heads as a way of expressing loyalty.

“This is different than a normal book-selection procedure or a book-challenge policy,” Emmons stressed Saturday. “She was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can't be in the library.”

“She asked me if I would object to censorship, and I replied 'Yup',” Emmons recounted Saturday. “And I told her it would not be just me. This was a constitutional question, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) would get involved, too.”