Pants On Fire

Rand, you and yours have been squeezing this topic very hard for a few days now and yet there is no apparent effect in the polls. No lemonade yet that is.

In fact today Survey USA shows Obama up by 15 in Pennsylvania, one of those places where this attack by innuendo should work well with all the ethnic whites and gun owners.

Why do you think that is?

Polls are manufactured news. There's also a lag of several days between a news story and a change in poll results. Let's see how the outcome from the only poll that counts end up.

Larry, one thing I've noticed is that when the polls swing for McCain, then it is part of a sustained change in the election. Rand did a lot of that with his posts on how Palin had changed the game and that her "bounce" would last to election day.

When McCain is doing badly then I see lots of comments that the polls don't count and the only one that counts is on Election Day.

Of course, the real problem for McCain is that in many places around the country, Election Day started this week.

Now, I'm hearing mixed reports, slow in Ohio, strong in other places. We'll see. Every single report I'm seeing says the Democrat Ground Game is better than in any previous election - so even with a misreported Bradley Effect AND a tightening of the polls in the next 4 weeks, I think life is going to be interesting when we hear the results.

What difference do polls make with respect to the issue of Obama lying about Ayers? It's OK that he lied so long as it doesn't effect his position in the polls? All that Obama's lead in polls proves is that many of the people polled are idiots if they still support this obvious charlatan. And evidently a lot of those aforementioned idiots have nothing better to do than troll on this blog.

Rand,
You must feel pretty good that you've got a handful of Obama spambots watching your every word and jumping in minutes after your postings.
If that doesn't validate value and credibility, what does?

I thought it interesting when Cooper jumped in at the end to reiterate the program was to improve schools but left out they didn't improve them. Contrast that with the LA Times horrible reporting about an excellent speech McCain gave about the economy. Their story didn't mention the main thrust of the speech and then had a quote from the Uno that McCain won't talk about the economy. What media bias?

Scott here's some validation:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/06/AR2008100602935.html

Check out the direction the GOP is heading in - Madame Sieg Heil for VP wouldn't make me proud. I wonder what it feels like when your crowd shouts "kill him. "

It's easy to rouse the rabble. Much harder to control the rabble when it gets going. McCain is playing with fire.

You'll have to do better then that Mike. One voice in a crowd said that and it doesn't say who or what happened after they did. For all we know it was an Obama supporter wanting to cause trouble.

When someone tries to change the subject (from The Big Zero!'s lying about his past to irrelevant polls), you know they've got nothing in response and conceding the argument.

When someone tries to change the subject (from The Big Zero!'s lying about his past to irrelevant polls), you know they've got nothing in response and conceding the argument.

Hey, it's what trolls do.

When someone tries to change the subject (from The Big Zero!'s lying about his past to irrelevant polls), you know they've got nothing in response and conceding the argument.

Shrug.

I think the entire investigation sounded spurious in the extreme. Lots of "could haves", "Might haves" etc... but little detail.

The Palmer angle could be huge, but the evidence is still lacking.

Keep it up though.

I think the entire investigation sounded spurious in the extreme.

Of course you think that.

Fortunately, as is the case with much of the affairs of the world, what you think is of little moment.

As I said, if the Alice Palmer angle is true then that's explosive stuff. Except nobody seems to have any evidence to back up his claim that this event wasn't organised by Palmer, there are several statements on line from people who claim they were invited by Palmer to the event, which makes it odd if she didn't host it. We'll see in due course I'm sure.

Fortunately, as is the case with much of the affairs of the world, what you think is of little moment.

Coming from you Rand, I'll take that as high praise.

How about that super strong Palin bounce eh? How long was that going to last again?

...nobody seems to have any evidence to back up his claim that this event wasn't organised by Palmer...

Apparently, you're unfamiliar with the meaning of the word "evidence." Hint: testimony by individuals is evidence.

...there are several statements on line from people who claim they were invited by Palmer to the event, which makes it odd if she didn't host it.

She did not host it. Ayers and Dohrn hosted it (i.e., it was held in their home). It is not necessary to be the host to issue an invitation. The actual host can delegate that to others. Apparently you're as unfamiliar with the meaning of the word "host" as you are with that of the word "evidence."

Evidence!! Heh-Heh. I'm sure this is going to be a riveting issue to the public.

Who the hell cares who hosted what when?

Were they building bombs? Were they planning to build bombs?

If not, the issue is again, what?

Daveon,

I assume you are joking when you say you think the Palmer stuff is explosive.

Really now with GOP management of the economy resulting in a 2 Trillion dollar loss in retirement accounts, and McCain's close friend and buddy Keating having screwed the retirees the last time McCain had any control in such matters, yes, sure I can see that the fact Palmer really was not the host would matter a great deal.

I can see that the fact Palmer really was not the host would matter a great deal.

Well, at least you're consistent. Since you seem to be a Democrat, and after Bill Clinton, it's no surprise that your candidate being a bald-faced liar is no big deal. Which is, after all, the subject of this post, despite your trollish attempts to hijack it.

Hey, hey, now Rand, if lying disturbs you, let's add one more for the lady from Alaska:

The Darfur Lie:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shannyn-moore/palins-darfur-lie-alaskan_b_132125.html

Basically she has lied so much that the media has almost gone numb: how could so much lying come from just one person?

Hopefully this bother you, especially since, unlike the fundraiser at Ayers, lots of real people are dying.

You totally misunderstand. What Rand is saying is that he thinks the Vietnam war was a just and legal war, and that the entire Vietnam anti-war movement, with all its riots, bombings and property damage, was a vast commie liberal terrorist conspiracy to overthrow the United States of America. That's why these evil terrorists had to be shot down without a trial at Kent State and Jackson State, and that's why all the war deserters and draft dodgers had to be locked up on gulags without habeas corpus, instead of being granted amnesty. Why don't you understand this?

One thing that we have clearly lost moving from USENET to blogs as a medium for discussion is the concept of kill files. I miss those.

You totally misunderstand. What Rand is saying is that...[idiocy elided]

There's nothing more that I enjoy at my blog than drive-by morons putting words in my keyboard buffer. It makes me really glad that I allow comments.

Since this obviously isn't our Jane, let me add:

JANE, YOU IGNORANT SLUT!!!!!

That felt good, because she(it) deserved it.

Daveonacid,

You do understand that Democrats increased the amount of bad risk paper and Fannie and Freddie had powerful friends like Dodd and Frank in their pocket and running interference along with the Uno whenever he decided to show up? You do understand that Bush and McCain warned of problems that the Dems poo-pooed until it blew up in their faces? Because if you are so intellectually challenged that you won't or can't follow the public record, you're just a drooling Obamabot without anything to offer. I'm still waiting for one of you to tell us what he's done that makes him qualified. Specificly, a list, bullet points, something. Pointing to Palin won't do. She's the VP candidate. I repeat, what has Uno done?

I'll try to answer your question Bill.

How about Uno was a rock of calm as the market crisis unfolded while McCain flipped from stunt to stunt, making a jackass of himslef in the public eye? Not really the antics America wants from it's next President.

That's recent enough of an action for you I hope. It's very likely why Uno's numbers have improved so much.

If you have to choose between someone who hurls himself in agitation from one stunt to another vs. a steady calming presence, who by the way was on the phone daily with all the major players in the crisis but didn't want to make it Act 1 in a Comic Play about a Hero, it looks like most people will choose the latter, even if the rock of calm isn't lily white, even literally speaking.

It's probably why Charles Krauthammer in his column after the initial market brouhaha, and no fan of his, referred to Uno as a first class intellect with a first class temperament.

After 8 years of George Bush I think I can take that.

Nice spin. Short on facts but nice spin. How about McCain was called to help and went. Obama was too busy trying to get elected and phoned it in. Becaise what you're saying is by doing nothing, offering nothing, Obama looked better.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): “We Need The Republican Nominee For President To Let Us Know Where He Stands And What We Should Do.” Reid: “We need, now, the Republicans to start producing some votes for us. We need the Republican nominee for president to let us know where he stands and what we should do.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Press Conference, Washington, D.C., 9/23/08)

Also, here,s the whole quote: "Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously said of Franklin Roosevelt that he had a "second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Obama has shown that he is a man of limited experience, questionable convictions, deeply troubling associations (Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko) and an alarming lack of self- definition -- do you really know who he is and what he believes? Nonetheless, he's got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament. That will likely be enough to make him president."

Hardly an endorsement and you still haven't answered the question. Like I said, nice spin and parsing too.

Here's one for you Mike and Daveon. What do Obama and Osama bin Laden have in common?

They both know people who bombed the Pentagon.

Oh yeah Bill.

That sounds really good. Maybe Palin can use it in her next speech.

You guys aren't going to rest until you get Obama killed.

You guys aren't going to rest until you get Obama killed.

Great. Now we not only have anonymous trolls, we have completely insane anonymous trolls.

Mark Halperin has a senior Obama spokesman on video admitting Obama knew about Ayers past and stayed on the CAC board.

If that joke wasn't true, it wouldn't be funny.

Mike Gerson said:

"If you have to choose between someone who hurls himself in agitation from one stunt to another vs. a steady calming presence

________________

You mean like the George Bush acted when he found out about 9/11. Oh wait, no, I recall everyone seeming to have a problem with calm and steady at that point.

> You guys aren't going to rest until you get Obama killed.

Huh? The political assassins (successful and unsuccessful) of the 20th Century were almost all leftists....

You do understand that Democrats increased the amount of bad risk paper

Actually no, I don't. I'm assuming here you're referring to the CRA related loans.

So far the CRA related loans and similar are doing pretty well, relative to other sub-prime lending.

The nightmares of bad debts are turning up in nice
"wealthy" middle class areas where the new plasma screen, the new boat and the cruise were bought using equity released.

I looked at a foreclosed place the other day in Seattle where the loan was purely got through equity release, the place was bought for $100K 7 years ago and the bank want $450K. It's a nice area too.

Not only can I follow the record, but I also follow what was going on in the banking and trading sector where this blew up.

There was a way to game the system and nobody cared. Fanny and Freddie didn't help, but it wasn't limited to the US markets - Northern Rock (Google it) wasn't a US mortgage provider either.

For that matter, nor were Iceland.

The trouble is the toxic sludge that Wall St and the City of London were allowed to peddle and pretend they were AAA bonds is really really hurting everybody.

Now if you want me to rant loudly about dumb ideas from dumb land. How about buying up crap mortgages (ignoring that we're already buying them) at a notional market value which may or may not relate to what the market is doing. Nice one John, you deserve to get hammered for that idiocy.

I can't vote, I was a fan of McCain in 2000. I'm not a huge Obama fan (reminds me that REAL student radical and commie Tony Blair) but of the 2 options, he's the best you've got.

The nightmares of bad debts are turning up in nice
"wealthy" middle class areas

I'm sorry, you're telling me the people with higher incomes and more credit -- along with more things they can sell (plasma TVs, boats) to make ends meet -- are defaulting more than those with low incomes and poor credit? Color me very skeptical. That utterly defies common sense.

The trouble is the toxic sludge that Wall St and the City of London were allowed to peddle and pretend they were AAA bonds is really really hurting everybody.

I dunno, Daveon. The "toxic sludge" was only a problem because lots of smart and well-off people bought it, with their eyes open, thinking they could make big bucks real fast. Do you blame prostitutes for men cheating on their wives with them, too? Seems a little priggish.

Furthermore, hindsight is wonderful, but the tricky bit is foresight. We can all see that the dot-com and mortgage bubbles were, well, bubbles. But how do we know which of our present-day imaginations are similarly vaporish dumbass fantasies, doomed to go up in smoke? How about -- just to pick something at random -- a massive social investment in "alternative energy," meaning solar cells and windmills and electric cars? How do we know that isn't going to turn out to be just as much of a stupid dead end? That Daveon in 2025 isn't going to be saying Now if you want me to rant loudly about dumb ideas from dumb land how about those millions of tons of toxic dead batteries littering the landscape...the rise in childhood mental retardation from the mercury released from a billion CFCs replacing reliable old incandescent bulbs...

Maybe the spectacular failure of previous predictions of what the glory road is to wealth and happiness should make you more cautious about any present predictions?

Finally, if the car mechanic attempts to fix my car and breaks it worse instead, do I then phone up a doctor or schoolteacher to take a crack at it? Or do I find another mechanic? If the wizards of Wall Street fucked up in their understanding of these financial instruments, do I invite a bunch of clueless showboating lawyers from Congress to set them straight? Er...that doesn't really make me feel better. Everyone agrees airport security was a pain and a joke in the 1990s. So government took it over. Anyone like the TSA more? Consider that, before you send Congress in to second guess Mr. Smarty Pants arbitrageur, corrupt and foolish as the latter might be.

I'm sorry, you're telling me the people with higher incomes and more credit -- along with more things they can sell (plasma TVs, boats) to make ends meet -- are defaulting more than those with low incomes and poor credit? Color me very skeptical. That utterly defies common sense.

Well as my old economics teacher used to say. Common sense isn't all that common.

Google for the performance of CRA loans compared to other sub primes, and, also the locations where the really nasty stuff is and get back to me. (There's a lot of links here to play with: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act#Relation_to_2008_financial_crisis)

The trouble with "things" you can "sell" is they (a) most of them depreciate pretty quickly. Your $4000 52" Plasma from 2 years ago isn't going to get you that now, nor will your boat, and the carribean cruise is history, and (b) you need people who can actually buy them.

The real problem with bubbles is that we usually know they're bubbles all the way along. You're seriously telling me you didn't think we've been in a housing bubble since 2001? Come on, you're not that daft.

BTW - what makes you think I'm a fan of hybrid cars, low energy (LOW FRIGGING LIGHT IF YOU ASK ME) light bulbs, or, for that matter particularly against petrol. Love cars me. Of course, what the US needs is more high performance 1.8L 16v's and a LOT more turbo diesels.

I'm hoping we'll get super capacitors in the next 5 years so we can resolve the car problem, and I'm hoping we build a LOT more fission power stations world wide.

Nuclear is the only sane way to go at this point.

Oh, and I'm looking forward to the South and North Atlantic Oil booms.