There’s an interesting opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal today, entitled ”No, Iraq Wasn’t a ‘Distraction.”

I think two great points made in the article are here:

As Mrs. Palin pointed out, when it comes to foreign policy, the Obama-Biden team is backward looking. It continues to view international issues through the prism of opposition to George W. Bush. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Obama-Biden’s continuing assertions that the Iraq war was a mistake, from beginning to the end, and that, at best, it constituted an irrelevant distraction from the combat that really matters—in Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden himself called Iraq the “central front” in his fight against the United States. Thousands of jihadists operated in Iraq where, with the help of Sen. John McCain’s and Gen. David Petraeus’s surge strategy, al Qaeda was resoundingly defeated. Its standing in the Muslim world has plummeted.

As in many other conflicts in American history, our enemies in this war operate in many geographically distinct theaters. The essence of being a good commander in chief is appreciating the connections among these theaters—including the adversary’s willingness to open new fronts—rather than obsessing about where the last enemy attack originated.

and here:

The next president will likely be similarly tested by Russia and by Iran. Iranian leaders are stubbornly pursuing a policy of acquiring nuclear weapons, despite years of dialogue with Western interlocutors. The chances that they would take any more seriously diplomatic advances from a new and untried President Barack Obama are remote. Most likely, they would interpret it as a sign of weakness, causing them to accelerate their nuclear program.

The best way to create a strong negotiating position vis-à-vis Tehran, would be to alter the strategic environment in its backyard, such that the Iraqi government has stabilized that country and maintains strong military and intelligence ties with the United States, while dramatically curtailing Iranian influence. This, of course, is precisely what Mr. McCain’s Iraq strategy is in the process of accomplishing, and what Mr. Obama’s Iraq policy can never achieve. It would be the McCain-Palin team that is best positioned to engage in fruitful diplomatic dialogue with the Iranians.

That about sums it up, but if you’ve got time, you can read the whole thing here. 

After taking an absolute pounding the past few weeks, the McCain campaign seems to finally understand that they’re going to have to go after Obama if they want to win.  Fortunately, Obama is vulnerable on so many fronts, most notably his past associations (can you say, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko), that the McCain team can pick their shots.  Unfortunately, they may have waited too long, and aren’t doing a good enough job exposing Obama for the radical that he truly is.

Sarah Palin finally got things started over the weekend at a campaign event in Carson, CA:

Her comment has finally pushed this story into the MSM, now the campaign needs to use the opportunity to nail Obama and expose his radicalism to the country.

UPDATE:  The Obama campaign has now responded, unbelievably, by saying that Obama was not aware of Ayers’ terrorist past when he associated himself with the former Weather Underground leader.  See their post here.  This strange line of argument could be a big mistake by the Obama campaign.

Hot Air has a great post on this as well, here.

Many people have been opining to me lately that the race is over.  Ah, how the mainstream media works wonders. 

Let us not kid ourselves, trends are not looking good for John McCain these days.  Every day the economic situation gets worse or more uncertain is another good day for the Obama camp (funny how that works, isn’t it?). 

Well in regards to all this McCain’s done hooplah, Charles Johnson has a very relevant post entitled ”Anyone for Toast?”:

In Slate Magazine, William Saletan says the polls are so stacked against John McCain, there’s no possibility he can win. The race is over.

Oh, wait. That was eight years ago, and he was talking about George W. Bush.

Here’s the article Charles was talking about:

Since Labor Day, the media have released about 20 polls on the presidential race. Three show a dead heat, one shows George W. Bush leading by a single percentage point, and the rest show Al Gore leading by one to 10 points. In the latest polls, Gore leads by an average of five points. It’s fashionable at this stage to caution that “anything can happen,” that Bush is “retooling,” and that the numbers can turn in Bush’s favor just as easily as they turned against him. But they can’t. The numbers are moving toward Gore because fundamental dynamics tilt the election in his favor. The only question has been how far those dynamics would carry him. Now that he has passed Bush, the race is over.

Not that I’m predicting victory...but it sure would be sweet. 

Last night’s debate did not disappoint.  There was tremendous hype and the debate itself was highly entertaining.  It was certainly a better debate than McCain vs. Obama last week.

Of course, all eyes were on Sarah Palin.  Half the country was rooting for her to run off the stage crying, having cracked under the pressure, while the other half of the country was anxiously hoping she would hold her own.  In the end, she held her own and then some.

She certainly passed the test, showing herself capable of handling the tremendous pressure and proving a healthy grasp of the issues.  Joe Biden did surprisingly well, at least I was surprised.  Yes, he lied his butt off (nothing new there) but you’d have to say he did a fine job under the circumstances.  The first half of the debate I thought it was all Biden.  On economics, he hammered John McCain mercilessly while Palin still seemed a bit shaky and unnerved.  As the debate progressed, however, Palin settled down and started having fun, at which point she got the best of most of the exchanges.  More so than winning individual debate skirmishes, she did a superior job of connecting with the average American.  That is, after all, her gift.  Her folksy demeanor and confident yet down to earth approach must have been attractive to millions of women throughout the country.

In case you missed the debate, Politico has performed a fine service to all of us in capturing many videos of the debate.  They can be found here:  Politico Debate Video

Some highlights:

“Can I Call You Joe?”

Palin on the Media “Filter”

Biden Attacks McCain on Economy:

On Iraq and Afghanistan:

Palin’s Closing Statement:

Biden’s Closing Statement:

See the rest of the videos here:  Politico Debate Videos

One thing I noted yesterday while watching the Veep debate was how smooth and fluent Joe Biden sounded, at least in the beginning.  Then it dawned on me.  The reason he could keep on talking is because every now and then when he didn’t know where to go, he just made stuff up. 

For example, Barack Obama never said he’d meet without preconditions with Ahmadinejad:

Biden tries to cover up this lie by saying that it’s not Ahmadinejad that’s in charge, it’s the Mullahs.  Two things...one, nice try covering Obama’s tracks, and two, that’s even worse. 

Another example is that he never said he was not in favor of clean coal, and he was taken out of context...well it’s hard to take this out of context:

And Biden went so far as to lie about Barack’s not backing Palestinian elections:

‘Part of the opportunity here with this upcoming election is to consolidate behind a single government with a single authority that can then negotiate as a reliable partner with Israel,’ said Obama.”

There’s more.  Apparently Joe Biden thinks that Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama voted to raise taxes on people making $42,000 a year.  Again, a complete lie:

Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to raise taxes on people making $42,000/year.
That’s a lie. McCain didn’t vote on either bill

There’s much more on Biden’s list of lies at Ace of Spaces and JohnMcCain.com.

Hat tip Little Green Footballs for much of the video in this post. 

UPDATE: Here’s Karl Rove on Biden’s serial lying, via Gateway Pundit:

There may be a bit too much yelling going on, but at least someone is giving it to Barney Frank:

(In case the video isn’t working, here’s a link to it: O’Reilly vs. Frank)

Some of Sarah Palin’s many talents:

Debating Talent:

Musical Talent:

God-Given Talent:

I have no idea how he comes up with this stuff:

Video doesn’t seem to be working, here’s a link to it instead:  Dennis Miller on VP Debate

Today, the Wall Street Journal picks up on the power of the Democrats’ own words in this article:

House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 10, 2003:

Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.): I worry, frankly, that there’s a tension here. The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see. I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disaster scenarios. . . .

House Financial Services Committee hearing, Sept. 25, 2003:

Rep. Frank: I do think I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness that we have in OCC [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] and OTS [Office of Thrift Supervision]. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing. . . .

And there’s much more, read the whole thing, it’s shocking.

And in case you missed it, here’s video of similar statements:

Hollywood types have--for the most part--always been notoriously liberal.

I’m not sure if it’s the piles of money they make or the result of constantly being in the global limelight, but long-time celebrities seem to develop colossal egos and assume an aloof, arrogant snobbishness toward those less fortunate who have to live in the real world.

This has never been truer than in the ongoing presidential election where media celebrities-including actors, singers, TV newspeople and talk show hosts-are lining up by the dozens to demean/belittle/besmirch/turn their back on John McCain in the cheapest, most gutless ways imaginable.

Let’s take a look at the list:

By now, everybody knows that Oprah, after touring with her black brother Barack on the campaign trail, refused to have McCain on her show because she didn’t want to “influence the election”. She might be the darling of day-time television but down deep she’s a two-faced hypocrite.

Then comes Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews—two long-time, card-carrying liberals, who were blatantly demeaning/belittling/besmirching McCain on the air.  Long ago, they had forgotten that the reporter’s job is to present facts and not the reporter’s personal political views.  As a result, they were bumped down a notch in the broadcaster pecking order.

In the take-them-down-a-notch conference, the studio heads told them something like:

”Look guys, we expect you to quietly promote the liberal candidates on air because we’ve been doing that for years, but you’ve got to be more subtle in your approach. Professional broadcasters know how to use indirectness, innuendo and carefully-selected keywords to promote liberals. You guys were too in-your-face with your promotions.”

Then comes smooth-talking, placid-faced Charles Gibson and his sweetly-vicious twin sister Katie Couric who went above and beyond the call of duty to prove that Sarah Palin is not another Henry Kissinger.

In his interview with Palin on the Bush Doctrine subject, Gibson--with typical holier-than-thou arrogance—was staring down his nose at her and questioning her as if he were a political science professor conducting an oral exam on one of his students.

Gibson pretended to KNOW--after all, this is the high and mighty Charles Gibson—everything there was to know about the Bush Doctrine, when, in fact, he didn’t know jack crap about it. Check out Charles Krauthammer’s (THE expert on the Bush Doctrine) article if you’re interested in the truth!

Of course, Katie Couric—in the same mold as Charles Gibson—brought forth her holier-than-thou, know-it-all attitude and furthered the liberal cause as much as she possibly could by pushing harder and harder on a KNOWN vulnerability. Of course, her presentation and gouging technique was a bit more innocent and certainly more feminine than Gibson’s.

Everybody knows that Sarah Palin is not another Kissinger, but Gibson and Couric had to rub it in. They wanted to thrill the souls of their fellow liberals by smearing it in her face to the point of embarrassment.

Sarah Palin in not a seasoned Washington veteran.  Everybody knows that. That’s the reason she was chosen for the slot in the first place. She has never been conditioned to the good old boys network in Washington like McCain, Biden and Obama. We all know that Sarah Palin is NOT another Madeline Albright….. at least not yet.

By the same token, nobody has bothered to understand where Palin is coming from with this Russia/Alaska thing. It’s too easy to dismiss her with sarcastic derision than to take a moment and reflect on what she is saying.

Basically, what Palin is saying is that proximity is information. If you live next door to an Asian family and see and observe them day after day after day, you become keenly aware of their existence and have a much more intimate knowledge of that group of people than someone who has never lived near Asians. And, you must remember that Alaska has a long history of cultural/political interface with Russia down through the years.  Remember that the U.S. bought Alaska from the Russians. Many cities in Alaska were settled, named and remain inhabited by the descendants of native Russians. No other state in the U.S. can make that claim!

I’ll lay odds that, while Sara Palin has never met ranking dignitaries in official diplomatic talks, she has known and interfaced with more on-the-ground Russians and has a better understanding of the Russian culture/heritage and their daily lives than anybody else in the race.

Of course, the essence of what Palin was trying to say will never be broadcast to the outside world because the liberals and the leftist-soaked media control such information. They only have time in promote their own candidate. They certainly aren’t going to promote yours. 

Now late night talk show host David Letterman--the boyish-grinning, baseball cap wearing comic with his phallic symbol cigar, has joined the fray against McCain/Palin.

After McCain told Letterman he would not appear on his show, Letterman launched a flurry of on-the-air personal attacks against McCain. Of course, all were designed to promote the Democratic cause and belittle/demean/besmirch McCain.

He made light of McCain’s age with a “Metamucil” joke and quipped that Sarah Palin “sometimes calls John McCain ‘grandpa.’” Then he suggested that McCain would not win with the comment: “We might not see you on inauguration day!”

But you can’t blame McCain.

After Bill O’Reilly went on Letterman’s show and was told he “was full of crap,” McCain probably felt he would get more of the same because Letterman is cut from the same cloth as Oprah, Matthews, Olbermann, Gibson, Couric et al.

Why expose yourself to a ravenous shark?

Letterman is just another rich celebrity soaked in liberalism who thinks he owns the world and expects everyone else to bow down to him and his opinions. Of course, he’s made his millions making fun of other people so I guess it’s pretty easy to poke personal jabs at the person he would hate to become president.

Earlier this month, some 300 members of Hollywood’s elite gathered at the posh Greystone Mansion in Beverly Hills and paid $28,500 a head to hear their darling Barack Obama speak and dine on the finest, most lavish food that the most talented chefs in Hollywood could prepare.

They are the aristocrats in our society who have achieved success beyond the wildest dreams of the average person. They are the privileged, those who live above the heads and means of the so-called working, common man. They are the sweet cream of our society and they can do anything they like and they are so rich and powerful that there is nothing you can do about it.

Like the French Queen Marie Antoinette—the most famous aristocrat of all—they are looking down their noses at the common, workaday Joes in this world and saying sarcastically: “Let ‘em eat cake!”

This piece was written by John I.  John regularly blogs at Global Nook.