Politics and race and religion and gender

The Nightly Build...

---

A Big, Wet Kiss From McCain

Dave Levinthal, on The Dallas Morning News Trailblazers blog, tells us that the planned television commercial that the McCain campaign touted as "historic" earlier this week, aired just after Obama's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. In the ad, McCain says, "Senator Obama, this is truly a good day for America...Tomorrow, we'll be back at it. But tonight, senator, job well done."

The voters don't need McCain giving Obama a "big wet kiss." And asking us to credit McCain for being "historic" in doing so. Neither do voters need McCain smearing Obama and distorting his positions the other 99% of the time. Instead of being so transparently manipulative, McCain should try just being honest...for a change.

McCain's gracious congratulatory message carries within it a historic subliminal message, a "dog whistle" message Republicans are skilled at. McCain isn't just congratulating Obama on winning the nomination of his party. He adds, "How perfect your nomination would come on this historic day." He's referring to the anniversary of Martin Luther King's famous "I have a dream" speech, reminding McCain's target voters that Barack Obama is black.

---

Religious Talk at the DNC

Jeffrey Weiss, on The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, has been keeping his ear tuned for religious talk by the candidates during this long political campaign. Regarding Barack Obama's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, he says, "Religion content? Not so much."

I guess it all depends on what you mean by "religious" content. Personally, I heard more calls in that speech to live up to Jesus' call for us to truly love one another than I hear in a month of sermons in church. This passage captures a major theme of the whole speech:

"That's the promise of America - the idea that we are responsible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation; the fundamental belief that I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper."

---

Sarah Palin. Palin. P.A.L.I.N.

Michael Landauer, on The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, wastes no time in laying out five reasons why Palin is a "laugh-out-loud" choice for Vice President.

• There goes McCain's best argument - experience.
• She has no base of support.
• The "woman card" will backfire.
• Alaska, a corrupt hinterland.
• Was this McCain's choice? Or Karl Rove's?

Landauer's analysis is good, but not without flaws. The choice of Palin is far from laugh-out-loud. In fact, it may be McCain's best chance to change the dynamics of this race and create an opportunity for him to win it.

This pick says two things about McCain. Both are signs of weakness. First, that he feels a need to shore up his base among the far right-wing of his party. He does that with Palin. Now, he can spend two months going after independents.

Second, that McCain feels a need to make a play for those disgruntled Hillary supporters who care more about gender than policy. How many are there? How many will sign on with McCain simply because he put a woman on the ticket, even though that woman stands opposed to just about everything that Hillary Clinton stands for? And how many will feel insulted that John McCain might think they'll blindly follow any woman on any ticket, just because she's a woman? We'll find out in November.

The pick is a big gamble. McCain is rolling the dice to save his Presidential chances. It may work, but his choice shows that he himself thinks the odds are against him.

Mike Hashimoto Hearts Mark Davis

The Nightly Build...

---

Mud Slinging at the Morning News

Mike Hashimoto has been acting as messenger for conservative talk-radio wingnut Mark Davis, dutifully posting his "DNC diary" filings on The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog.

When readers complained about giving space to this knee-jerk right wing extremist, Mike Hashimoto dismissed the complaints, saying other readers have a right to read Davis' far right screeds. Hashimoto didn't address why The Dallas Morning News readers don't also have a right to read local left wing commentators to balance Mark Davis. Hashimoto attempted to suppress debate by publishing one reader's IP address as a sort of threat to reveal the identity of posters who offend him. Someone at The Dallas Morning News must have had second thoughts, because Hashimoto's own comments suddenly disappeared from the comment threads on the blog. Meanwhile, Hashimoto continues to pass on Mark Davis' daily attacks on the Democrats.

In one entry, Davis lavishes praise on smear artist Jerome Corsi, who just published a book insinuating that Barack Obama is a secret Muslim and Michelle Obama is a not-so-secret black power radical feminist. Mark Davis calls Corsi "gracious" and "noble."

In another entry, Davis tells us about a Michael Jackson concert he attended in 1984, then asks, "Do you sense where I'm going here?" Reader "Grumby Deacon" does: "Shorter Davis: 'Obama=Michael Jackson, an effeminate child molester.'"

Finally, Mark Davis goes a little too far. Instead of reserving his smears for politicians who know better than to wallow in the mud with a pig, Mark Davis attacks another talk radio nut, Alex Jones. Davis writes: "in shouting 'Kill Michelle Malkin!' at a protest yesterday, [Jones] reveals himself to be not just a dismissible loon, but a despicable soul whom I would identify as a blight on my industry if I actually considered him to be a part of it."

Besides the obvious irony of Mark Davis calling another talk radio host a "dismissible loon," a "despicable soul" and a "blight on my industry", there's a more serious problem with Mark Davis' latest effort. Jones claims he never said "kill Michelle Malkin" and accuses The Dallas Morning News of libel for publishing Mark Davis' allegation.

How do I know this? Not from anything I read in The Dallas Morning News. Robert Wilonski of Unfair Park has the story. There's been no comment on the libel charge from Mike Hashimoto. Maybe his readers have a right to read Mark Davis' alleged libels, but don't have a right to know when the attack dog is accused of libel.

This afternoon, Mike Hashimoto announced on the blog, "A portion of [Mark Davis'] commentary has come under fire as being inaccurate. Accordingly, we have taken that post down." That's it. No hint of what the alleged libel was. No admission of error. No correction. No apology for posting a reckless charge in the first place. No comments allowed. No explanation why. Just delete a day-old post and, poof, pretend there's nothing more to see here. Move along.

Hillary Clinton at the DNC

The Nightly Build...

---

Hillary: "You Always Keep Going"

Paul Burka, on the Texas Monthly blog, pretty much pegs Hillary Clinton's speech to the Democratic convention. "It was, as everyone knew it would be, all about her. She did not say one positive thing about Barack Obama, except that Democrats should unite to support him." According to Burka, what does this say about Hillary Clinton? That she's an egotist? We knew that already. That she always keeps going? We knew that, too.

Those who expected her or wanted her to effusively praise Barack Obama and pretend his weaknesses have morphed into strengths, maybe they learned something else from this speech. Maybe Hillary Clinton will present the best case she can, but she won't say things she doesn't believe. During the primaries, she persistently argued that Obama's relative lack of experience is a weakness, not a strength. How could she now argue otherwise at the DNC without being hypocritical?

Instead, she gave the best argument she has for electing Barack Obama. He stands for all the same things she does. If you want the America that Hillary Clinton stands for, you have no choice in this election. It's now Obama or no one, no matter what you might think of his inexperience. "You haven’t worked so hard over the last 18 months, or endured the last eight years, to suffer through more failed leadership. No way. No how. No McCain."

DNC

The Nightly Build...

---

All Hillary, All The Time

Rod Dreher, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, takes time out from bashing Obama to bash Hillary Clinton, saying he's "getting awfully tired of all this penny-ante psychodrama around what Hillary needs ('needs') to keep her happy." Well, so am I, but if it's irritating Dreher, I might have to rethink my own irritation.

Colleen McCain Nelson asks "What should Hillary say?", referring to her featured address to the Democratic National Convention tonight. What Hillary *should* do is get past the Hillary vs Barack debate. She's already conceded and endorsed Obama. Repeating that won't change her diehard supporters' minds. It would be a waste of prime time. She ought to tell the country the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans and why it's important to elect a Democrat and not give John McCain a chance to serve out George Bush's third term. It's not about Hillary. It's not about Obama. It's about our country. That's what Hillary ought to say. But what she will say is another matter.

Mike Hashimoto has had his attention to Hillary distracted by a report that the convention center has sets of three trash cans, labeled "Recyclable," "Compost," and "Landfill." Apparently, recycling is not familiar to Flower Mound residents yet, or still in the ridicule stage of public acceptance in the Hashimoto household.

P.S. I suspect I'm being blocked by The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog. My comments lately haven't been posted immediately, but instead have been held for moderator review. Sometimes, they eventually show up (too late for anyone to notice), but sometimes they don't. I guess you'll have to keep checking my blog to read the uncensored Ed Cognoski!

McCain on Georgia

The Nightly Build...

---

"We are all Georgians now"

The title quote is John McCain's support for Georgia. (No, not our Georgia, but that country in the Caucasus. You do know where the Caucasus is, don't you? You don't? No matter.) Rod Dreher, in a Viewpoints column in The Dallas Morning News, lays into McCain for "reckless anti-Russian huffing and puffing." Barack Obama doesn't escape Dreher's criticism. The Democrats are either "so afraid of being baited by the Republicans as cowards that they sign on to any foolish policy proposed by GOP jingoes" or "on national security matters, there's no fundamental difference between the parties."

Ouch. In a way, I don't blame McCain or Obama. Americans themselves are a jingoistic people. Politicians are just representing their constituents. Leadership would be nice, but it's so, so rare in American history. We've had 43 presidents and you can count the historic leaders on one hand.

Why be a Christian?

The Nightly Build...

---

One Good Reason, Other Not So Good Reasons

Sam Hodges, in The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, posts in its entirety an essay by United Methodist Church Bishop Timothy W. Whitaker titled "Why should I be a Christian?" His reasons are threefold.

First, "Jesus is alive." He generously concedes that because this claim is so audacious, "we owe it to ourselves to test it. The main way to put it to the test is to read the Gospels in the New Testament. They must be read with an open mind and heart." OK. Jesus is alive because he's got a book that says so. He admits that you have to willingly suspend your disbelief to buy into the claim, but if you're willing to do that, then, Jesus, like Tinkerbell, lives.

Second, "It's the best way to live." He claims that Christian values of "honesty, hospitality, kindness, charity and courage to confront wrong" give our lives meaning or substance. OK. The bishop scores with this one, although he really ought to provide evidence that other religions don't share these values to back up a claim of Christianity being "best" and not just good.

Finally, it's "the way things are." By this Whitaker means that Christianity is consistent with scientific findings. For example, he says that the Big Bang theory is consistent with Christianity's belief in God creating the world out of nothing. I think he misunderstands the Big Bang, which was the singularity out of which everything in the universe emerged, including the universe itself and space and time. The concept of "before" the Big Bang is logically non-sensical. There was no "before" in which a God could have existed waiting for the moment to create the universe. The Big Bang leaves no room for a God, no time for God.

With generous scoring, I'll give Whitaker one out of three. Christian values do offer a good way to live, maybe the best, maybe not, but better than many alternatives. In baseball, a .333 batting average makes you an all-star. In religion, Christianity is probably an all-star, too. But it's a team sport, so leave room for the Hindus and Buddhists and a few other all-stars, too.

McCain's houses

The Nightly Build...

---

"How Many Houses Do You Own?" Should Not Be a Tough Question

Michael Landauer, on The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, reports on John McCain's gaffe answering a simple question: how many houses do you and your wife own? McCain didn't know.

This is the kind of gotcha question that the press and the public love, something that embarrasses a candidate without revealing much about his policies or character or fitness to be President. We all knew already that McCain and his wife are filthy rich. His wife is heir to a beer distributorship fortune. McCain joked just days ago that you have to earn $5 million a year to be considered "rich" in his book. The McCain's income puts even them in the "rich" category.

On the other hand, if played and replayed relentlessly by the Obama McCain, these gaffes could begin to define McCain as being an elitist who is out of touch with real, working Americans. McCain's campaign has painted Obama that way, and polls indicate it's working. Obama has generally stayed above this old-style kind of politics. We'll see if McCain's progress in the polls forces Obama down to McCain's level.

What I find funny are the comments by the McCain supporters. Most of them defend McCain by pointing out how reasonable it is for the very rich not to know how many houses they own. One said it's like the rest of us not knowing how many shares of a particular stock we own in our 401K. Another says that if you own bond mutual funds that hold mortgage-backed securities, you "own" a small piece of thousands of homes. Yeah, that helps McCain. Saying that he owns houses like you own shares of stock in a mutual fund makes him just a regular guy. Like everyone even has 401Ks and bond mutual funds to relate to. His supporters better hope that McCain himself is not as out of touch as they seem to be.

Veepstakes

Who it ought to be: Clinton for Obama, Rice for McCain.

Who it won't be...

The first rule of picking a running mate is "do no harm" to the ticket. So, pick the candidates for vice president by a process of elimination. Here are the leading possibilities, along with the most important reasons they will NOT be chosen:

• Ted Strickland: his own Shermanesque withdrawal
• Jim Webb: sexist; Confederate sympathizer; withdrew
• Mark Warner: picking him sacrifices a Senate seat pickup; withdrew
• John Edwards: preening loser; adulterer; liar
• Sam Nunn: 70; conservative; Georgia
• Mike Bloomberg: independent elitist
• Chuck Hagel: RINO
• Wesley Clark: shopworn; lousy campaigner
• Tom Daschle: South Dakota; weak
• Janet Napolitano: Who? Arizona
• Brian Schwietzer: Who? Montana
• Al Gore: Only James Carville thinks this could work
• Sherrod Brown: no one's talking about his at all
• Ed Rendell: too independent of Obama, too close to Clinton
• Kathleen Sibelius: Who? Kansas; bland; no national security experience
• Bill Richardson: boring loser; gaffe-prone; would alienate Clintons
• Jack Reed: Who? Nobody is talking about him. Must be a reason.
• Chris Dodd: unknown loser
• Joe Biden: verbose loser
• Tim Kaine: opposed to abortion; no national security experience
• Hillary Clinton: divisive; old-politics; Bill

The following possibilities are still looking for a reason to be excluded from consideration: Evan Bayh. Apparently, dull is not reason enough for disqualification this year.

For the Republicans:

• Fred Thompson: another grumpy old white guy
• Rick Perry: everything except his hair
• Mark Sanford: rock-solid GOP South Carolina
• Tom Ridge: pro-choice
• Haley Barbour: Mississippi; Washington insider
• Charlie Crist: Florida skeletons
• Rob Portman: Bush, Bush, Bush
• Mike Huckabee: taxes; immigration; Arkansas skeletons
• Bobby Jindal: an unknown young guy
• Condoleezza Rice: pro-choice; service to Bush
• Kay Bailey Hutchison: pro-choice; Texas; Washington insider
• Sarah Palin: Who? Alaska
• Mitt Romney: religion; flip-flops; hair
• Joe Lieberman: Democrat; Democrat; Democrat

The following possibilities are still looking for a reason to be excluded from consideration: Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina. Not much to choose from. Whitman or Fiorina would cast McCain as a real gambler. Thune would shore up his base. Pawlenty? Can he deliver Minnesota?

Teachers and guns

The Nightly Build...

---

Texas Lets Teachers Carry Guns

The Harrold ISD near Wichita Falls, Texas permits teachers to carry guns in schools. Rodger Jones, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, asks readers if that's OK with them. Readers respond with expected escalation.

Tod Robberson, an editorial board staff member, criticizes the practice:

"If schools have concerns about security and safety, they need to hire personnel whose specific job is security and safety. It is ludicrous to think of empowering teachers or principals to carry guns and potentially have them in the classroom. It is a disaster waiting to happen."

Reader Zachary Hilbun says whenever gun laws are relaxed, gun control advocates predict there will be blood in the streets. Hilbun says they have yet to be right. Apparently, he is ignorant of violent crime statistics in the US that show that there is, indeed, blood in the streets...and in stores and offices and homes.

Reader Trey Garrison asks "What good is a right when it's thrown out the window at the first mention of safety or necessity? ... A human's job is to exercise human rights." For Trey, the right to bear arms morphs into a citizen's job to bear arms.

Reader "big_melvin" carries the argument to its logical conclusion: "If you arm the teachers, then students must have the right to carry weapons also. Some teachers are known to be child molesters. How are these innocent teens to protect themselves from armed perverts without an even playing field?" Maybe this is satire, maybe not. Regardless, many readers will nod approvingly.

Every day, dozens of people die from gunfire in the United States. And the gun rights advocates believe the answer is... more guns. America is awash in guns. Gun control advocates can't do anything about it because the Constitution grants Americans the right to bear arms. If gun possession is protected, there's no way to keep guns from criminals. To defend themselves, law-abiding Americans buy more guns. Americans are caught in an arms race from which there is no way out.

Health care

The Nightly Build...

---

McCain and Health Care

William McKenzie, in The Dallas Morning News, argues that McCain should push his health care edge. You didn't know McCain had a health care edge? Listen to McKenzie:

"Mr. McCain would give all individuals the means to buy insurance on their own. Families would receive a $5,000 tax credit to buy insurance. (Singles would get a $2,500 credit.) Everyone would qualify for the credit, although critics suggest Mr. McCain's $5,000 credit wouldn't help them meet today's average family premium. Fair enough. Hike the credit."

Tax credits do poor people, who have little or no tax liability, no good. So McKenzie's claim that McCain gives "all" individuals the means to buy insurance on the own is false.

McKenzie himself conceded that $5,000 is insufficient. McKenzie's glib solution? "Fair enough. Hike the credit." Unless McCain himself hikes the credit, it's not McCain's plan. And if it's not McCain's plan, then McKenzie is disingenous in repeatedly saying that McCain's plan gives "everyone" the chance to buy their own policy.

The one thing McCain's plan has going for it is portability. The credit does not depend on your employer. You can take your insurance (if you can afford it) to your next employer or wherever you go. That's good. But until McCain funds it properly, his plan makes things worse. Employers will drop their own insurance benefits and workers will have to retreat to a plan inadequately funded by President McCain's system.

Georgia in NATO

The Nightly Build...

---

McCain and Obama Want Georgia in NATO

One issue Senators John McCain and Barack Obama agree on is NATO membership for Georgia. That makes The Dallas Morning News editorial against NATO expansion remarkable. It's not often the newspaper puts itself in opposition not just to one candidate, but to both.

In this case, The Dallas Morning News is right. Georgia is a small country bordering Russia, Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Until its recent independence, it was part of the Soviet Union. The breakup of the old Soviet Union is apparently not settled yet. Georgia itself has provinces that want to break away from Georgia and align with Russia. Russia is insistent on exerting its power and influence in the region.

I can't imagine a situation where the US has less leverage and more risk. The US needs to recognize what is and what isn't in its strategic interest. Going to war against Russia over its dispute with Georgia is not in the US national interest. It is not the responsibility of the United States to defend every country in the world from invasion.

Some say that if Georgia were in NATO, Russia would have never dared invade. That is dangerous thinking. If Georgia were in NATO, the US would be obligated to defend Georgia. A miscalculation by Russia, a misjudgment that the US is bluffing, and the US would find itself in a hot war with a nuclear-armed Russia.

Unless the US is willing to go to war with Russia over Georgia, the US should not accept Georgia membership in NATO. And if the US is willing to go to war over Georgia, it can do so whether or not Georgia is a member of NATO. Neither John McCain nor Barack Obama is urging war. They shouldn't be urging NATO membership, either.

Big Foot; Heaven; A Purpose-Driven President

The Nightly Build...

---

A Slow Day on the Religion Blog

Jeffrey Weiss, on the The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, dutifully keeps us up-to-date on the story about the two men in Georgia who claim to have Big Foot in a freezer. Weiss tells us that today's news conference, at which the men promised to reveal all, revealed...nothing. Like that came as a surprise to anyone.

Weiss, in a second post, speculates whether an executed murderer, who professed his faith in Jesus and remorse over the killings that sent him to death row, might now be in heaven. Lots of reader comment on that one. The question is as meaningless as speculation about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but somehow modern readers don't quite get it yet.

Finally, Sam Hodges brings us a backgrounder on tomorrow's appearances by John McCain and Barack Obama at Pastor Rick Warren's Saddleback Church to discuss "pressing issues that are bridging divides in our nation, such as poverty, HIV/AIDS, climate and human rights." The number of reader comments? Zero. The number of readers wanting to discuss Big Foot and murderers in heaven? Twenty-seven and counting. Sigh.

Rod Dreher; Melting Pot

The Nightly Build...

---

Rod Dreher and His Obsession with Sex

Rod Dreher has posted seven blog items in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog in the last few weeks concerning John Edwards' extramarital affair. Another topic covered well by Dreher is Barack Obama's celebrity. "Obama overexposed -- just like Paris Hilton!", "McCain pounces on Obamessiah", and "Britney, Paris, Adolf and Barack" tell you all you need to know about Dreher's fair and balanced approach to that topic.

Yet neither Dreher nor any other editorial board member of The Dallas Morning News has seen fit to say a word about Pulitzer Prize-winning author Ron Suskind's report that the Bush administration ordered the CIA to forge documents linking the 9/11 terrorists with Saddam Hussein and Iraq.

When this is pointed out to Dreher, he defends himself by saying "This is such a lame dodge. You could say that about any story." But an alleged criminal and impeachable act by the President of the United States is not just "any story." And no one suggests that the John Edwards' story shouldn't be covered. It's the balance that's in question. The only lame dodge here is Dreher's defense of his obsession with John Edwards' sex life and total lack of interest in alleged criminal acts by the President.

Dreher goes on to say, "OTOH, once Barack Obama becomes president, reverses the rise of the oceans, and heals the planet, then we'll all have more time to pay attention to the minor things." WTF?!? Non-sequitur, straw man, ad hominem, what other logical fallacies does Rod Dreher display with that childish and petulant comeback?

When reader "harvey lacey" asks Rod Dreher where his outrage is that John "McCain dumped his family for a society girl whose daddy gave him a job" Dreher responds, "Harvey, your silly comment brings out the Latin in me. You have not only engaged in non sequitur, but also the ad hominem fallacy. You're a grown man, and not a dumb man. Why not argue logically?" All of which shows Dreher is not ignorant of his own logical fallacies, he just doesn't hold himself to the same standards he demands of those who challenge him. Rod Dreher, why not argue logically yourself? Start by answering harvey lacey's simple question? What do you think of John McCain's own admitted extra-marital affairs?

Finally, Dreher warns, "nasty ad hominem posts will be unpublished." Evidently, Dreher means nasty ad hominem attacks other than his own will not be published.

---

A Majority-Minority Nation by 2042

William McKenzie, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, reports on new census data that predicts the U.S. will become a majority-minority nation as early as 2042, when the number of Americans who identify themselves non-Hispanic whites dips below 50% of the whole population. McKenzie asks what can the U.S. do to prepare for this change?

The tone of McKenzie's blog post implies that this demographic shift is undesirable, a threat, a problem to be fixed. Reader comments certainly see it that way, with suggestions to limit immigration, "CLOSE THE BORDERS" and "git rid of all 'em."

McKenzie himself claims to believe "that our country is enriched by having so many different cultures" but even he seems uncomfortable with the census trends. He promotes assimilation as the answer.

Americans have a mistaken notion of how assimilation works. The famous metaphor for America is a melting pot. But how does a melting pot really work? When a new ingredient is added, it isn't magically transformed into the ingredients already in the pot. Instead, the whole mixture is transformed. Assimilation works both ways. The newcomers lose of lot of what made them different, but the nation is subtly changed as well.

Over time, those changes build up. The America of today bears little resemblance to the America of 200 years ago. Then, the challenge was to assimilate the Methodists and Quakers and Catholics into a whole. A hundred years ago, it was the Irish, the Germans and the Italians who resisted assimilation. Today, it's Americans with ancestors from Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America who seem impossible to stir into the melting pot.

What keeps people wanting to come to America and jump willingly into that melting pot is the shared belief in the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. As long as we keep teaching the children the importance and value of those principles, the differences in language, cuisine, entertainment and religion should rightly be viewed as a strength to be preserved, not a problem to be solved.

Death penalty; Marriage and health insurance

The Nightly Build...

---

Criminals and Accountability

Mike Hashimoto, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, finds irony in a convicted killer seeking and welcoming the death penalty. In an interview with the AP, the killer says, "At some point in our lives, you have to have some sort of accountability. I can't see how people in my situation deny that."

Hashimoto doesn't explain why this news is ironic. Personally, I fail to see how granting a killer's preference for the death penalty over life in prison helps make the case for the death penalty. Maybe the irony is that Hashimoto and other supporters of the death penalty, thinking they are carrying out the ultimate penalty, sometimes play right into the killers' hands, giving them exactly what they seek.

---

Til Death Do Us Part...Or Until You Lose Insurance

Joanna England, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, cites a New York Times story about the growing number of Americans who are staying married solely to preserve access to the spouse's health insurance. Or who are divorcing solely to qualify for Medicaid without impoverishing the spouse.

Joanna England considers this "a pretty blaring indicator that our health care system is broken." Well, sure it is. It's long past time to recognize that our health insurance system is broken and time to start fixing it. There's no reason why one's marital status should influence the kind of health care one gets.

P.S. I submitted a comment to The Dallas Morning News blog, but it appears to have been rejected. Trey Garrison challenged the notion that the government should pay anything towards health care. He operates on the notion that if we aren't forced to do something, we ought not to do it. He asks, "Why should we do anything to make sure that more people don't go without?" I replied we do something not because we are obligated to but because we are a generous and caring nation. The notion is foreign to libertarians, but not to most Americans, which may be why libertarians have such trouble achieving electoral success.

Russia's war in Georgia

The Nightly Build...

---

Neocons Saddle Up

Nicole Stockdale, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, summarizes the neo-conservative reaction to the Russian invasion of Georgia.

Dick Cheney: "Russian aggression must not go unanswered."

William Kristol: "Surely we cannot simply stand by as an autocratic aggressor gobbles up part of -- and perhaps destabilizes all of -- a friendly democratic nation."

John McCain: "We should immediately call a meeting of the North Atlantic Council to assess Georgia's security and review measures NATO can take to contribute to stabilizing this very dangerous situation."

Maybe Cheney and Kristol's reactions are meant to recall George H.W. Bush's response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Bush Senior said, "This will not stand, this aggression against Kuwait." He adroitly enlisted the international community to support the US position. The US then went to war to ensure that the invasion didn't stand.

But neither Cheney nor Kristol say unequivocally that the US cannot let Russia's invasion stand. Only that the US must answer in some unspecified fashion. McCain's reaction is similarly toothless. Russia goes to war and he says the US should call a meeting. He tells the Georgian president "that the thoughts, prayers and support of the American people are with that great little nation as it struggles today." You can forgive the Georgian president if, instead of prayers, he might want to see the American cavalry coming over the hill.

The neocons are backed into this corner because the US has no leverage over Russia. The same run up in oil prices that saps the US economy makes Russia grow stronger. The US and NATO are over-extended in Iraq and Afghanistan. Russia flexes its muscles while the US has no military power to project into this corner of Russia's back yard.

The neocons were irresponsible in encouraging Georgia's pro-Western government in its overtures to NATO and the European Union and its suppression of separatist movements in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Bush and Cheney and McCain and the neo-cons overreached. Georgia pays the price.

John Edwards; Olympics opening

The Nightly Build...

---

Spin Morphs Into Accepted Fact

Mike Hashimoto, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, gives yet another spin on the John Edwards' affair. He is still steamed that the so-called mainstream media failed to investigate or report the rumors regarding Edwards' affair for over nine months. He states as fact not needing any evidence, "This never would have happened had the candidate in question been, oh, Giuliani or Thompson or Huckabee -- you know, Republican also-rans." He may be right, he may be wrong. Conjecture is conjecture. But the conservative wingnuts have already set this particular spin into concrete.

As usual, reader "Rawlins" offers the best perspective about this story and what it says about mainstream bias. He points out that "this is the 6th thread in a row posted on the blog about the Edwards affair and it is feeling a little like when the Dick Cheney shooting was the butt of one too many jokes for one too many days."

---

Newsflash: Olympic Entertainment is Computer-Enhanced

Reporters reflexively look for an angle to a story. Sometimes they reach too far. Jeffrey Weiss, in The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, expresses his surprise to learn that the Olympic opening ceremony display of fireworks in the shape of footprints marching across Beijing were aided by computer special effects. Weiss calls it a "fraud." Sigh. In the comments section, readers quickly told Weiss that the NBC announcers pointed out that the visual effect was computer-generated. No fraud. No story.

We should keep in mind that the Olympics opening ceremony is pure entertainment spectacular. It is television. Computer-enhanced entertainment is becoming ubiquitous. Movie-goers take not only special effects but computer-generated characters for granted. Couch-potato football fans no longer can get along without the computer-generated first-down line. Viewers have come to understand that not everything they see on their TV screen is "real." The story this time is the sheer spectacle of the Olympics opening ceremony. Even if the announcer sometimes fails to point out exactly how all the tricks work, a magic act is not necessarily a fraud. This year, the Olympics opening ceremony was nothing less than magical.

Politics and religion and poverty

The Nightly Build...

---

Interfaith Leaders Want Conventions to Focus on Poverty

Sam Hodges, in The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, reports that prominent Catholic, Jewish, Muslim and Protestant leaders have asked Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama to use the presidential nominating conventions to talk about poverty.

"Interfaith leaders." The term strikes me as an admission of failure. If these people were gifted leaders, wouldn't we see more progress on resolving the arguments and divisions that afflict religion? And if they can't manage to do that, isn't it presumptuous for them to be laying a guilt trip on the political parties?

The answers are, respectively, yes and yes. That said, I, too, would like to see politicians, political parties, and government, do more to reduce the number of needy in this country. And reduce the extremes of inequality between the needy and the truly wealthy, which not only leaves too many stuck in poverty, but risks social upheaval if patience runs out for those on the bottom. Everyone loses if that happens. I just think religion's voice would have a better chance of being heard if the religious leaders quit bickering over theology.

Pickens' energy plan; Obama or straw man

The Nightly Build...

---

Energy Independence Or Self-Serving Scheme?

Alex B., in Pegasus News, tells us that T. Boone Pickens' energy plan may be just a self-serving scheme. A natural gas company Pickens founded is promoting a ballot initiative in California to put $5 billion of California taxpayer money towards alternative energy initiatives. Natural gas figures to be one of those alternatives, which would benefit Pickens financially.

Two reactions. First, d'oh. Why should it be surprising that a businessman promotes public investment in areas in which he himself is invested? We've done that for decades with the oil business. Why should the natural gas business be any different? You can't do away with conflict of interest. The best you can do is regulate it and police it. So, Pickens is in the clear here.

Second, natural gas is a distraction. The strategic problem our country faces is our addiction to fossil fuels. Oil is a fossil fuel. So is natural gas. We need to focus our attention and our investment on alternative sources of energy - solar, wind, nuclear - and on conservation - public transportation and electric and hybrid vehicles. This is where Pickens misses the target. At best, you can say natural gas can help tide us over as we transition to alternative sources of energy. At worst, Pickens lures us into a trap, swapping one fossil fuel for another.

---

Do You Recognize This Man?

Tara Ross, in a Dallas Blog opinion column, tells us she's at a loss for something to say, then spends a thousand words proving it. She's not happy with her choices for President this year. She dislikes John McCain and she hates Barack Obama. At least she hates the straw man she puts up and calls Barack Obama. The fictional candidate she hates:

"seems to think that he can simply sit and talk with these dictators and make the problems of the world go away. Just as naively, he believes that terrorists should be treated no harsher than the average felon in the U.S. justice system. Oh, sure. That will work."

Of course, Obama doesn't believe any such thing. It's too bad that Ross has sunk to this. She probably has intelligent objections to Obama's actual foreign policy positions, but she concedes the debate by default by not challenging any position Obama himself actually holds.

Her bitterness about the Republicans is just absurd. She says John McCain wouldn't be the Republican candidate if

"Mike Huckabee, in a display of false modesty, refused to bow out gracefully for the good of his party, leaving conservative voters split between him and Mitt Romney."

Ross doesn't consider the possibility that it was Mitt Romney who left the voters split. Or maybe that Mike Huckabee preferred McCain to Romney. Or that candidates have a right to run for president and let the voters decide, not drop out to appease wingnuts like Tara Ross.

But don't start thinking that Ross won't loyally traipse to the polls in November and pull the lever for John McCain. She will. In the end, she and the conservatives have more in common with George W Bush and John McCain that she cares to let on in public.

Texas executes Mexican; Tire inflation

The Nightly Build...

---

Blood Lust

Bruce Tomaso, in The Dallas Morning News Religion blog, reports that the state of Texas executed convicted rapist and murderer José Medellín. Tomaso explains what made this case an international controversy:

"The case drew international attention from critics of the Texas criminal justice system because Medellín, a Mexican national, was not allowed to talk to a consul after his arrest. A 1963 treaty requires foreigners accused of crimes to be given that opportunity."

International treaties, the rule of law, rape and murder and the death penalty, this story has lots of angles to foster spirited debate. And it did. Within a few hours of the story being posted, it had attracted over 400 reader comments, perhaps a record for this religion blog.

That's right -- religion blog. You might think the discussion would include at least someone expressing moral opposition to the death penalty. Or some expression of hope that the dead man made peace with his God before the execution. If you thought that, you'd be wrong. The comments were a steady stream of what I can only describe as blood lust.

"Good Work state of Texas!!"
"One less criminal in the world to worry about."
"He got what he deserved, should've done it quicker!"
"Good effing riddance."
"This guy needed to take a dirt nap."
"I'm glad they put this rabid animal down."
"good bye, waste of human sh**!"
"Don't mess with Texas, OK?"
"Texas Rocks!"

And, finally, a couple comments that do touch on religion:
"Thank God This Man Is Dead."
"May he burn in hell for his crimes."

All this on a religion blog. It's an Old Testament God who is worshipped here. If that. There's not even a call to repent here. Just a mob mentality to stone the sinner. The compassion and forgiveness of Jesus is nowhere present. I don't know what this says about the state of religion, but it can't be good.

---

Hot Air From McCain

The blogosphere continues to debate John McCain's ridicule of Barack Obama's advice to the voter who asked what consumers can do themselves to help with the energy crisis. Obama suggested proper tire inflation and regular tuneups.

The McCain loyalists defend McCain's ridicule. On the The Dallas Morning News Trailblazers blog, a reader says:

"I'll type slowly for those of you all trying save Obama from himself here. The DOE article says we can save about 3.3% by properly inflating tires. Not all tires an all vehicles are improperly inflated, but let us assume half are. The EIA DOE site says we use about 10MM barrel of gasoline/distillate for vehicles. Under these worst case conditions, proper tire inflation would save about 165,000 barrels per day. A single large offshore platform, never mind the whole coast, can output 250,000 barrels per day (ref. Thunder Horse, Wikipedia). Obama is just plain wrong on this one."

More mainstream sources have a different story:

"The Bush Administration estimates that expanded offshore drilling could increase oil production by 200,000 bbl. per day by 2030. We use about 20 million bbl. per day, so that would meet about 1% of our demand two decades from now. Meanwhile, efficiency experts say that keeping tires inflated can improve gas mileage 3%, and regular maintenance can add another 4%. Many drivers already follow their advice, but if everyone did, we could immediately reduce demand several percentage points. In other words: Obama is right." -- Time Magazine

Go ahead, McCain loyalists, quibble with the figures. Change this number or that until you tip the scales. The criticism of Obama's answer to the question, what can individual consumers do to help with the energy crisis, is still silly. NASCAR, the AAA, even John McCain himself now acknowledge the benefits of proper tire inflation. McCain is rallying his base, which, as this incident demonstrates, includes those who, in Obama's words, "take pride in being ignorant."

Racial politics

The Nightly Build...

---

Dialog on Race Will be Difficult

William McKenzie, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, posted an item explaining "Why Obama's good on race and why he should talk about it." McKenzie argues that "More than McCain, his biracial heritage gives him an unrivaled ability to talk to many different corners of America about race."

It occurred to me that ever since JFK's election, the issue of Catholic as president has been buried. The country is the better for it. If Obama is elected, the issue of African-American as president will be buried. The country would be the better for it.

Rod Dreher didn't see it that way. He believes "The last thing anybody in this country, black, white and otherwise, wants is an honest discussion about race."

This is a sad indictment of America. In effect, it says we're a nation of racists, white and black, and none of us want to overcome it. That's almost certainly hyperbole. I sincerely believe Obama himself wants an honest discussion about race. I sincerely believe that millions of others do, too, black and white. Sadly, there are many who don't. And, in public discourse, those who don't have veto power over those who do, by mocking, belittling, and shouting them down.

One reader's comment was "So McKenzie and Cognoski recommend Obama because he is black," in effect labeling as racist those who want to see a racial dialog and those who want to see America narrow its racial divide. No hope of discussion with that reader.

Another reader's comment was "Everyone who dares criticize [Obama] is immediately called racist," in effect making a sweeping denial of any and all racism. No hope of discussion with that reader.

Rod Dreher says, "I also believe that if Obama is president, any criticism of him will be framed by certain of his supporters as racist." Instead of looking to open a dialog with open-minded Obama supporters, Dreher takes aim at the closed-minded Obama supporters. No hope of discussion with Dreher, either.

If there's any positive in this, it's this. Once, "playing the race card" referred to white politicians signalling to voters to vote against a candidate because of his race. In a sign of progress, white candidates can no longer play the race card openly. Now, they are forced to do it subliminally, using code words and subtle images with plausible deniability as to meaning. And when the target of the racist message objects, the attacker accuses the victim himself of "playing the race card." Today, everyone at least pays lip service to the notion that "playing the race card" is bad. Maybe in another generation or two, they'll really mean it.

Perhaps wishing for an open and sincere dialog on race was too much to ask for. I don't recall the nation ever having an open and sincere dialog on Catholicism, but after JFK, Catholicism just wasn't an issue in Presidential politics anymore. Perhaps what we should wish for instead is a maturity where a dialog on race isn't necessary. We haven't reached that stage yet, but Barack Obama's historic candidacy holds out the hope that by the time the next African-American candidate is nominated, a dialog on race won't be necessary anymore.

Obama's energy plan

The Nightly Build...

---

Substance From Obama On Energy

Michael Landauer, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, challenged the myth that Barack Obama gives good speeches but lacks substance. The same day Obama himself was giving more evidence that the myth is a lie by revealing a plan for emergency energy rebates and a $50 billion stimulus package to drive job creation. Commenters on the blog weren't interested in talking about these substantive proposals, only in redefining "substance" to exclude them as substantive. One said Obama's proposals were not substantive but the "same old tired failed socialist ideas." Another warned not to confuse being detailed with having substance. I think this was a grudging admission that Obama does, in fact, have detailed proposals while trying to make it sound like having details is a bad thing. Sigh. OK, if others don't want to talk about Obama's substantive energy proposals, I'll talk to myself.

A "Gang of 10" in Congress has proposed a comprehensive plan that includes allowing more drilling on the continental shelf as well as increased requirements to support alternative fuels in automobiles. The key word in this plan is "comprehensive." When I heard about it, I thought... finally. Almost all solutions require comprehensive plans and comprehensive plans require both sides to give a little. I thought to myself, why doesn't Obama sign on to thinking like this? Lo and behold, I then read that Obama, in an interview in Florida, signaled his willingness to consider such a plan. Hallelujah! My faith in Obama is sustained. The man is open to comprehensive solutions instead of seeing every issue as a wedge issue to keep open in hopes of dividing the electorate and appealing to the base.

What I like best about Obama's substantive energy policy is that he's open to a comprehensive solution, a package deal that brings in the drillers without taking our eye off the real need, which is breaking our addiction to oil.

I like his plan for emergency energy rebates paid for by a tax on oil profits. This recognizes that consumers need some immediate relief. It's paid for instead of just running up the federal deficit. And it doesn't interfere with the market forces that are encouraging conservation instead of consumption.

Long-term, it's his plan to invest $150 billion over 10 years in clean energy that holds the greatest promise that America will finally solve its energy problem. This summer's debate about drilling for more oil off Florida is a distraction from real solutions.

P.S. Today, Obama recommended tapping the strategic petroleum reserve. I'm less inclined to support that. The reserve should be for strategic emergencies, not normal market fluctuations, however severe.

Race and politics; Farmers Branch layoffs

The Nightly Build...

---

McCain Uses Race

All hell has broken out in the presidential campaign this week, as John McCain first accused Barack Obama of wanting to lose a war to win the Presidency, then accused Obama of hating the military, then associated Obama with young, untalented, airy (and white) starlets Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

James Mitchell, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, was the first to raise the question of race in regards to this ad. For him, it was an insult to African-Americans:

"The comparisons to a couple of airheads whose celebrity status is due only to this nation's fascination with all things Hollywood is a deplorable, deceptive putdown of Obama's accomplishments and indirectly the achievements of millions of African-Americans who have worked hard, really hard, and often against long odds for impressive gains."

When McCain first used the Obama/Britney/Paris ad, I thought it was silly, not racist. I've changed my mind. Others have pointed out the similarities to the television ads used against Harold Ford, the 2006 Senate candidate, ads that paired the African-American with white women in sexually suggestive contexts. The same people responsible for that ad now work for John McCain. Then, the McCain campaign accused Obama himself of playing the race card "from the bottom of the deck." That phrase became famous during the OJ Simpson murder trial. Using it in the context of Barack Obama serves to remind voters of OJ Simpson.

The people who craft these images and words are professionals. They are paid to elicit these subliminal messages. Moreover, they celebrate when the subliminal messages are received and become openly talked about in the press because now their message is delivered openly by others while the candidate himself can deny any such thoughts.

The more I learn about the history of negative ads, the more convinced I am that McCain and the Rove lieutenants working for his campaign have dived deep into the mud to run what may turn out to the most dishonorable presidential campaign ever.

---

Farmers Branch Cuts 28 Jobs

Eric Celeste, in Frontburner, tells us the rest of the story behind the announcement by Farmers Branch:

"The city of Farmers Branch is cutting 28 jobs because of rising fuel costs, reduced revenue, and $424,000 in 'special legal fees' -- which, translated into lay terms, means 'Tim O’Hare’s insane anti-immigrant campaign.'"

I like a journalist who can write clearly.