Spire Spike

I hate to say "I told you so," but I told you so.

Even my economic predictions were remarkably prescient, although perhaps I hedged my bets a bit too much in terms of the the downturn's severity. But in fact, my worst prediction appears to have come true: Kelleher actually managed to build some of the Spire before having to stop. The accompanying photo, along with many other fine shots, can be found here on the Boca del Mar Chicago Spire page.

The Indignant Citizen

Live Blogging the Last Presidential Debate

We had so much fun the last time, we're trying the live blogging again. Same rules apply, all times Central Daylight Time.

8:04 p.m. - Good start, John McCain remembered Barack Obama's name. But before that, this is two out of three debates that McCain has felt the need to give us a medical update of a prominent political figure. During the first debate, it was Teddy K., tonight it was Nancy Reagan.

8:06 p.m. - The debate comes on the evening of one of the worst days for the stock market since 1987. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 733 points, about 7.8%, the S&P 500 was down 9% and the Nasdaq was down 8.5%. Mostly this was due to bad economic numbers in terms of retail spending and the realization that consumers are cutting back. So now we open with a question about the two candidates' economic plans, and naturally the conversation comes around to tax policy. It's pretty straightforward: Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich and on corporations and McCain wants to cut their taxes.

8:13 p.m. - John McCain: He wants to cut everyone's taxes! Cut business taxes! Cut, cut, cut. Of course, that sounds good but the reality is you do have to pay for stuff eventually. Maybe Bob Schieffer is going to get at this with this next question about the deficit.

8:14 p.m. - Obama is talking about "pay as you go" spending. McCain has a look on his face that's a combination of a smirk, bowel discomfort and anger that he's got to sit next to this guy.

8:16 p.m. - McCain: "We have presided over the largest increase in spending since the Great Society." Um, dude, that's you you're talking about when you say "we."

8:18 p.m. - Good grief, the "overhead projector" line again. It's not an overhead projector. Is he really an idiot, or does he just play one on TV?

8:21 - McCain: "Senator Obama, I'm not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago." It took him this long to come up with that? Try as he might, though, he'll never be able to run away from that photo of him hugging George Bush. And try as he might, he can't change the reality that he's voted with Bush 95% of the time.

8:27 p.m. - Schieffer asks about negative campaigning. McCain talks about Obama's spending and the John Lewis commnents. Obama says "one hundred percent" of McCain's ads are negative. McCain has completely misconstrued what Lewis was saying and I seriously doubt that all of McCain's ads are negative.

8:35 p.m. - McCain: Acorn is on the verge of perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in the history of the country? You mean bigger than the subprime mortgage fraud? (Addendum: OK, upon further review, he said voter fraud. But that begs the question: bigger than the voter disenfranchisement at the hands of Republican administrations in Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004?)

8:36 p.m. - Why is John McCain smiling? Because he's got Barack Obama defending himself against Bill Ayers, Acorn, negative campaigning, etc. "The fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, John, I think says a lot about your campaign."

McCain: My campaign is about getting this economy back on track, creating jobs and not raising taxes like Senator Obama wants to do. Kind of a weak exit there. He's got some fight in him, but the rumble road runs out pretty quick when it comes to facts. The important thing here tonight seems to be to engage in a kind of "political terrorism" that the old Bill Ayers would be proud of: throw bombs at your opponent, run away and hope some damage is done in the process.

8:46 p.m. - Talking about energy now. McCain is clearly taking a chance tonight. Every answer includes an attack on Obama of some kind. This is an all-or-nothing strategy at this point. McCain's body language, his facial expressions, the tone of his answers all point to direct confrontation. His goal tonight is to tear down Obama at all costs. Seventy-five percent of his answers, to me, are about discrediting what Obama has said or proposed, with a 25% "and I'll do it differently and better" thrown in somewhere almost as an afterthought. Even on the energy issue, it's all about tearing down what Obama says about offshore drilling ("we have to look at it," as opposed to we can do it now) and free-trade agreements ... very little on what his position is, other than "we can do nuclear, we must drill now and I'm a free-trader."

Also, just an aside, conservation, anyone? Anyone?

8:55 p.m. - McCain: Senator Obama doesn't want to sit down and negotiate a free trade agreement with our best ally in the region and yet he wants to sit down across the table, without preconditions, with Hugo Chavez. It's clear he wants to restrict trade and raise taxes. Balls-to-the wall. It'll be interesting to see how McCain responds to this next question about health care. Obama is talking about the merits of his plan now.

8:58 p.m. - McCain's response: OK, he's starting with stuff he wants to do. About 20 seconds, maybe 30. Now it's on to attacking Obama's plan.

9 p.m. - Christ, enough with Joe the plumber.

9:02 p.m. - Obama responds, sort of, to McCain and then starts criticizing McCain's plan. Maybe it's time during this last half-hour to start ballin' with McCain.

9:05 p.m. - McCain: "Senator Government ... Senator Obama." Senator Government. That's funny.

9:06 p.m. - McCain says he never has had and never will have litmus tests for judges. That's not going to make the Roe opponents happy. "I will consider anyone and their consequences." Obama: I would not provide a litmus test, but I am someone who believes Roe v. Wade was correctly decided. I will look for those judges that have an outstanding judicial record, the intellect and a sense of what real-world people are going through.

9:16 p.m. - I'm still intrigued by McCain's tactics. He's even done some eye-rolling during Obama's responses. It still seems like a 70-30 ratio of attack Obama-promote his own policies. We could have saved a lot of time if McCain had just said at the outset: "Obama wants to spend more of your money, raise your taxes and control your health care. He pals around with ex-terrorists, which I don't care that much about but it speaks to his judgment and the fact that he's a dangerous man who we don't know much about. He doesn't understand how the world works and would be a foreign policy disaster. He's agaisnt all forms of alternative energy and drilling for more oil and wants you to ride mules to and from work." It would have taken about 60 seconds and then we could have spent the rest of the time talking about the issues.

9:23 p.m. - Vouchers. McCain supports them, and cites as the example the Washington, D.C. school system where apparently parents love them. Obama doesn't support them. Personally, I think the best remedies for education are improving schools so that there aren't such wide disparities between them, and encouraging parents to be more involved in their own childrens' education.

9:26 p.m. www.mydebates.org, to watch this debate and the previous debates.

9:28 p.m. - I think McCain just snort-laughed when he was mocking Obama's response on vouchers.

9:29 p.m. - Only Obama in his closing statement said simply and plainly, "I ask for your vote." McCain said we need "a new direction" and that he is that new direction. Unfortunately saying it often doesn't make it so.

9:31 p.m. - On pure raw politics, I'm tempted to give the debate to McCain. He attacked relentlessly, and backed up his promise to lay into Obama. But in the end Obama just comes across as more dignified, more composed, more diplomatic, more presidential. McCain dragged him through the mud, beat him repeatedly, and Obama smiled the whole time. Did Obama play it too cool? I don't think so. But McCain's only play was to lay it all on the table, to be exasperated, to be angry, to roll his eyes and sigh and constantly point out Obama's faults. It was his only move and he made it strongly.

In the end, though, I don't think that's going to change the momentum for him. Or rather against him. But as I've said my mind is made up. I like my presidents to act presidential, not like a crotchety old man.

The Indignant Citizen

Live blogging the town hall debate

Tonight we are hunkered down on the couch with a plate of pasta watching this second of three presidential debates. Thoughts follow below. All times are Central Daylight Time.

8:02 p.m. - Looks like I missed my opportunity to submit my question online. For the record, here it was: Senator McCain. Last month, as the financial crisis was beginning in earnest, you gave a speech in which you said the fundamentals of the economy were strong. Without falling back on the assertion that you meant workers when you said "fundamentals," how would you describe the state of the economy now. I'm referring specifically to the fundamentals of the capital economy, not the workforce economy, since without capital workers do not get paid. How do you view the state of the capital markets and what if anything do you think needs to be done to shore them up? Please be specific and do not ply us with empty campaign rhetoric. The same question to Sen. Obama, minus the reference to the fundamentals being strong.

8:04 - A question on the economy, about bailing out regular folks. Obama says this is a verdict on the last eight years of free market policies. You can't regulate greed, Barack.

8:06 - McCain tells Obama it's good to be at a town hall debate with him. He says this without looking at him.

8:07 - Is McCain going to sit in the questioner's lap? He knows how to get the economy going for working Americans.

Brokaw follow-up - who will you appoint as Treasury Secretary? Warren Buffet. Meg Whitman. Someone who inspires trust and confidence. Actually a good answer. Obama agrees about Warren (another agreement with McCain). Now Obama is talking about middle-class tax cuts. "Senator McCain is right that we have to stabilize housing prices, but...." But Obama didn't answer the question.

8:14 - Obama: The biggest problem is deregulation of the financial system. Again, you can't regulate greed. The derivatives themselves weren't the problem; it's much more complex than that. And additional regulation will require additional resources for the regulatory agencies, which equals more government spending.

8:20 - Obama says he's proposing a net spending cut, in response to a question about why we should trust either candidate with our money given both parties' roles in the current financial crisis. McCain beats the reform gong. He suggests people visit "watchdog organizations" such as the Citizens Against Government Waste, National Taxpayers Union. CAGW is a conservative organization, while the NTU advocates for a flat tax.

8:26 - Obama's spending priorities: energy, healthcare, education. Also have to prioritize income, including tax cuts for the middle class but not continuing the Bush tax cuts.

8:29 - So far I can't say that any of these people are learning much about either candidate that they didn't know. All the familiar themes are being echoed, the same little potshots taken. Both men know how to move around the stage, address their questioners, show empathy. Both men are also going way over the agreed-upon time allotments, which is clearly getting on Tom Brokaw's nerves. But Obama is by and large being much more clear with specifics, as opposed to McCain's "I know how to do it" answers. The only question McCain has answered directly and clearly was who he would appoint as Treasury Secretary.

8:33 - A good follow up question from Tom Brokaw about what as president Obama would do about the culture of easy credit is an opportunity passed. Obama is talking about reining in Washington spending to set an example. That's a Beltway-centric viewpoint. McCain responds by accusing Obama of wanting to raise taxes on small business, more discussion of his tax own tax policy. More D.C. rhetoric. Why not talk about using the bully pulpit to encourage people to be more fiscally responsible. Washington didn't create the mortgage securitization industry, and aside from the suggestion by then-Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan that homeowners seek out adjustable-rate mortgages, Washington didn't make homeowners take out mortgages they couldn't afford or buy houses that were doomed to lose value. My mortgage isn't in danger of default, and I don't have oppressive credit card debt. I've been fortunate to have a good job but more importantly I've kept my spending under control. I don't buy things I know I can't afford and if I do have to buy a big-ticket item I cut spending elsewhere. It's about personal responsibility. Government regulation and bailouts won't change behavior in any real or lasting way.

8:45 - I wasn't listening to the question, because I was typing the previous entry, but the candidates are talking about energy policy. One thing nobody has mentioned yet is that we could, you know, use less. We can drive less, live closer to work and school and shopping. This is one place where government actually could be helpful - in terms of more strict land use planning policies that encourage density in urban areas and redevelopment of suburban areas into less zoned, more dense developments and the funding of public transportation initiatives as opposed to highways.

8:47 - Tom, if you're so worried about the time limits, cut the microphones. Shit, at the Academy Awards they cut the mike and start the music.

8:50 - "Should health care be treated as a commodity?" What does that even mean? The questions are, how do we cover all Americans with healthcare and rein in healthcare costs? McCain: What's at stake here in terms of healthcare is the fundamental difference between myself and Senator Obama. No, actually what's at stake is how it is that the United States does not ensure that all its citizens are covered by healthcare. And it's not about choice. Those covered by private healthcare should be able to choose their doctors and their level of coverage. Those consigned to a government healthcare plan should still receive high quality care but will probably have less of a choice.

9:06 - I hope someone is keeping a running "my friends" count. Can we get a dollar donated to the U.S. Treasury every time McCain uses the phrase "my friends?" We'll solve the credit crisis in about an hour.

9:11 - First McCain "Teddy Roosevelt" reference. I think there was a Reagan reference earlier. I love McCain's answer on this Pakistan issue. He accuses Obama of threatening to attack Pakistan, which he believes is a dangerous mistake. First off, Obama isn't threatening to attack Pakistan at all. Second, even if he was his rhetoric wouldn't be any more threatening than Sarah Palin telling Charles Gibson that we might have to go to war with Russia.

9:18 - Did McCain just say Obama was "correct" on some things with respect to Afghanistan? Hey, there's a unicorn in my living room....

9:19 - Russia discussion. McCain gets off his Putin-KGB line. Yawn. Moral support should be provided to Georgia and the Ukraine. Obama: Russian resurgence is the central issue we'll have to deal with in the next presidency. Russia's "resurgence" is transitory and dependent totally on energy prices, which fluctuate with the global economy. If the world enters a global economic downturn, Russia will find its finances sorely crimped. This could actually make it more dangerous, driving popular discontent and possibly a resurgence of communism or even some kind of civil war that puts Russian nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists.

9:24 - Six minutes to go, two more questions. Good effing luck, Tom.

9:29 - The Iran discussion has taken up five of the remaining six minutes. Nothing new offered.

9:30 - What don't you know, and how will you learn it? That's the last fucking question? Jesus, well that's a fitting question on which to end this debate. Predictable questions, predictable answers, the same rhetoric we've been hearing. I guess that's the town hall format. Predictably, Obama talks about what he does know - the opportunity of America - and uses it for his closing statement. McCain says what he doesn't know is what will happen at home and abroad. "What I don't know is what the unexpected will be." Somehwere Kant is scratching his head. And now McCain moves into his closing, after a transparent attempt at answering the final question.

9:34 - And so endeth the least informative debate I've ever seen. I'm biased, but I think Obama won in terms of completeness of his answers and his insistence on clearing the record when McCain would mischaracterize his positions. McCain kept his answers shorter, but largely because they were meaningless and empty.

Now the pundits and spinmeisters will take over and tell us who won. Me? I've already made up my mind, so this debate wasn't about convincing me or even reinforcing my decision.

On MSNBC, Chris Matthews is telling me what I think ... I mean, what he thinks, and he makes an interesting point: McCain never brought up Bill Ayers and how Obama is a terrorist, which Matthews thinks indicates he's backing away from it and is embarrassed by it. I doubt it. These attacks are all about context, and the proper context to accuse a mainstream political candidate of being a terrorist is not in a nationally televised debate, but on the campaign trail, in sound bites. And that drumbeat will no doubt continue, safely out of the reach of questions from ordinary citizens.

Weapon of Mass Folksiness

I’m getting that uneasy feeling that in the person of Sarah Palin, we are seeing the folksy hijacking of the presidential election by the same gang of political terrorists who managed to install the illiterate George Bush as the leader of the free world and destroy the American Dream.

The Palin Phenomenon shows no sign of letting up, now nearly a week after she burst on the scene with a rollicking speech at the Republican National Convention. The main characteristic of this self-proclaimed hockey mom’s meteoric rise in popularity among hard core Republicans and even independents seems to be her ability to deflect any and all criticism back onto her critics. She’s not just the Teflon candidate, she’s rubberized, and if you sling something at her you’d better be prepared for it to come right back at you. Take the truth, for example.

In Palin’s standard stump speech, she claims she “told Congress ‘thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere.’” Only problem is she supported funding for the bridge, and a host of other earmarks for Alaska. Her opposition to the bridge started about the same time Congress removed it as a possible project. They still sent the money to Alaska, though, and Palin spent it.

She also claims, along with McCain, to be anti-lobbyist. But her campaign (can John McCain really claim it at this point?) employs dozens of lobbyists, and as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Palin employed the town’s very first lobbyist to help secure funding for local projects. And she claims she had no role in firing an Alaska state trooper who was also her brother-in-law (and apparently a wife beater), but an investigation into that is ongoing.

But because the Obama Kool Aid-drunk left immediately lashed out at Palin on blogs and elsewhere shortly after McCain selected her, claiming her pregnant teen daughter showed Palin’s hypocrisy in advocating abstinence-only sex education, mocking her daughter’s decision to have a baby at 17 and marry the father, criticizing Palin’s decision to seek the vice presidency despite recently giving birth to a special needs child (and some even suggested it wasn’t her child but her daughter’s) and insinuating she was a book-banner, among dozens of other questionable assertions and critiques, the left ended up fueling a new McCain campaign strategy: link Obama and the liberal media.

It was only a matter of time before the media’s deification of Barack Obama backfired. For months we’ve had Obama shoved down our throats. His campaign rallies were like rock concerts—teens screamed, women swooned, men wept … and it was all shown on nightly on the news and slapped on the front pages of daily newspapers. It was as if Obama was a steamroller on a mission of change.

But folks don’t like to feel they’re being steamrolled, especially by the media. And so when McCain chose this unknown Alaska governor and former small-town mayor, who also happens to be an evangelical Christian, to be his running mate, well, as they say, it was On.

And so here we are, less than a week after the RNC and fewer than 60 days until the election, and Obama and Palin … er, excuse me, Obama and McCain … are virtually tied in the polls. Meanwhile, Sarah Palin continues to claim she opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, was uninvolved in the firing of her brother-in-law. She also claims she fired the Governor’s chef when in fact news reports indicate the chef was reassigned.

So far, Palin’s only exposure has been through a carefully choreographed rollout by the Republican Party. She’s taken no media questions. That will change on Wednesday when Palin is interviewed by ABC News’s Charlie Gibson. Liberals waiting eagerly for Palin to be “exposed” as a northern rube in her first TV interview are, I fear, going to be sorely disappointed. You think Charlie Gibson … “Good Morning, America” Charlie Gibson is going to fluster Palin after she’s had a week to prepare? You think they put her on the ticket knowing she’d get knocked off message so easily? No way. I can see the exchange now….

Gibson: “Governor Palin, can you respond to those who say you supported the so-called bridge to nowhere before you opposed it?”

Palin: “Charlie, you know the liberal media has said a lot of things about me since I was fortunate enough to be asked to run with Senator McCain. I’ve always opposed the bridge. When my grandmother came to America on the Mayflower to seek the American dream, she told me never compromise what you believe in. I think those are small-town values, and they are my values.”

Gibson: “Well, Governor, of course you know it’s impossible for your grandmother to have come over on the mayflower, as that occurred nearly 400 years ago. And there was no ‘America’ then, of which to dream.”

Palin: “Charlie, you know I really can’t believe you and Senator Obama would criticize the American Dream in this way. I mean, I know that you’re both Muslim, but….”

Gibson: “Governor Palin, what are you talking about?”

Palin: “I’m talking about the American Dream, Charlie. I’m going to Washington to fight for that dream on behalf of all Americans.”

Gibson: “Governor, I’m afraid we’re out of time. Thank you so much for not stomping on my balls and unleashing your Republican Feministas on me and my network. God bless you and all your folksiness.”

That’s it, isn’t it? Sarah Palin comes across as folksy, and therefore relates to everyday Americans.

Well, folks, I don’t want a folksy president, or even a folksy vice president. I want my president and vice president to be the smartest people in the room. I want to feel stupid next to them. I want my president and vice president to be the fucking president and vice president, not my goddam drinking buddies.

Obama’s not perfect. But to me he’s a lot less imperfect than McCain and the Obama-Biden ticket has more gravitas to it than McCain-Palin.

Do both sides fudge the truth sometimes? Yes. But Palin and McCain are outright lying right now about their record of “reform.” It’s outside the bounds of what’s acceptable, even politically. This isn’t just stretch a few facts and let the people sort it out. These bastards are speaking plain untruths about important shit and then attacking anyone who calls them on it. It’s absurd!

What’s more absurd, though, and frankly more worrying, is that it seems to be working. A certain segment of the population is eating this stuff up. I guess if nothing else, this election will answer an important question: how stupid are we, really? The answer, I’m afraid, is too close to call right now.

The Indignant Citizen

A Payne in the….

Turns out I am not the only one who noticed WGN-TV anchor Allison Payne’s disturbing behavior (for a journalist, anyway) this week at the Democratic National Convention in Denver. On Monday I mentioned that Payne gave Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin a hug when he landed at the Denver airport on Sunday.

Today, Sun-Times media columnist Roger Feder noted the surprise among other Chicago reporters covering the convention when they saw Payne “cheering and applauding for speakers Wednesday night while she was seated with the Illinois delegation at the Pepsi Center.” (Second item, "Anchor's cheering section.")

This is the kind of shit the Republicans will dig up and gleefully use during this election. Few things could better illustrate conservatives’ point that the media is ga-ga for Obama. No doubt you’ll be voting for Obama in November, Allison, but maybe you should stop to consider how many potential Obama voters you’re driving away by abandoning your journalistic integrity alongside the road. Please, for all of us, stop yourself.

Crazy Karl

As part of my Democratic National Convention watching, I will sometimes tune over to Fox “News” after important speeches. I know that MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews will be slobbering all over themselves praising whatever speaker has just finished. I know this. I want to hear what conservatives think, how this convention is playing on the right, or if you prefer, how the right is playing this convention.

So I turn over to Fox “News” and lo and behold there’s Karl Rove, hooked up to a microphone and spewing his bilious views into my cable box and onto my set. And I thought to myself, “Rove, you sick pervert. You and your band of stupid religious zealots and flag sucking fear mongers hijacked the American Dream. You beat honest people over the head with the cudgel of white-knuckled greed. You suffocated reason and enlightenment in the embrace of symbology. You substituted ideology for history. You replaced culture with cultishness. You don’t belong in the broadcast booth you smug bastard; you belong in jail. And we … we let you get away with it. Twice. We deserve what we got. But not any more. Fuck you, Karl Rove.”

Stick a Fork in It, Part 2

Here’s a scary glimpse into a bleak future for newspapers: Crain’s Chicago Business, citing Editor & Publisher, is floating this possible redesign for the Chicago Tribune. I would have posted the E&P story, but the site wasn’t opening this afternoon.

Note the exaggerated “Trib” in the flag at the top of the page, playing off the paper’s nickname in a hopeless grasp at hipness; the extensive use of oversize images, text and graphics aimed at the short-attention-span crowd; and the absolute dearth of actual copy, a clear nod to the fact that TribCo believes there’s money to be made catering to the illiterate.

All you need to know about TribCo’s approach to journalism can be found in Chief Operating Officer Randy Michael’s order, as quoted by Crain’s, to cut editorial output and staff at the same time it’s considering these comic book-inspired redesigns. It’s all about saving money and making things look cool, look more like the vapid RedEye free tabloid (above). The flossers in charge over at the Tower think this is the future of journalism: flashy graphics, celebrity-ized “news bits” and a sense of tragic hipness. “Content” replaces “stories” as the stuff that fills the (shrinking amount of) space between the ads. The theory seems to be readers don’t necessarily care what they’re reading or where it came from, so long as it looks nice.

And maybe TribCo is right. Maybe they’re just giving the people what the people want. If so, this next decade or so is going to be pretty miserable. It might be anyway, with financial Armageddon hanging over us and common sense on holiday at seemingly every level of society. But without an informed Fourth Estate to provide context, check the power brokers and shine light into the dark cracks of apathy we will be left prone in the path of the spin machine. That’s not the way I want to go, but if the best I can do to inform myself at the local level is pick up some comic book version of what a newspaper used to be, or watch the local “Entertainment Tonight” masquerading as the local newscasts, how do I fight my fate? How does anyone?

If This is Journalism, Stick a Fork in It

The closing gavels haven't even fallen at the two major political conventions yet and already the presidential campaign has degenerated into a tit-for-tat about who owns more houses and who is associated with more unsavory characters. Barack Obama and John McCain have both allowed their campaigns to be hijacked by political hucksters racing to find the lowest road, to serve the lowest common denominator. Until the candidates actually take control of their campaigns and insist they be run in a manner consistent with the timber of a presidential race—as opposed to a school board race—we'll continue to have this kind of trash.

Meanwhile, over at WGN, anchors Mark Suppelsa and Allison Payne are "covering" the Democratic National Convention in Denver. I use quotes around the word covering mainly because of Sunday night's segment, which featured lots of gushing about how it was really an "Illinois convention." Payne even took time to wax poetic about that hack Emil Jones, "… a gentleman who calls himself Obama's godfather…. Emil Jones always such an affection and affinity for Obama, and it would be hard … be difficult to imagine that the audience wouldn't get a chance to hear the story from Emil Jones on just how he and this young man hooked up and had a great success together," Payne said.

Eew. If I were Obama, I'd be holding Emil Jones at arm's length right about now. Jones has become the latest in a disturbingly long line of Illinois politicians to announce their retirement and quickly install their offspring in office. There's not much about that move that says "change" to me.


More disturbing, however, was Payne's segment on her interview with Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. The fawning nature of the Durbin profile was bad enough, but it got off to a particularly odious start when Payne met him downstairs at the Denver airport and gave him a hug … on camera … thus shedding the last threads of journalistic integrity that were covering the Chicago press corps' otherwise naked glee at the prospect of an Obama presidency.

More Kool-Aid, Allison?

The Indignant Citizen