HorsesAss.Org

The last in a series of presidential debates is on tonight, featuring President Barack Hussein Obama II (D) and former Massachusetts Governor Willard Mitt Romney (R).

This debate will focus on foreign policy. But since Willard has little foreign policy experience beyond a courtesy visit to London (plus Israel and Poland) so that he could totally avoid watch Ann’s dressage horse compete in the Olympics, be prepared for the candidates to twist everything back into domestic issues.

I’ll be at the Montlake Ale House liveblogging as I can. Please join me there, or have fun in the comment threads, if you prefer.

6:04: Romney wins!!!! (the coin toss.)

6:05: Mitt opens with a lot of babbling and proclaims, “We can’t kill out of this mess.” Uh-huh.

6:08: “Gov. Romney, you strategy has been all over the map.” Certainly is was based on his opening answer.

6:09: Mitt wants “Gender equality”. Does he really know what he is saying? But this second answer is so babbly it’s hard to know what he is saying.

6:12: Obama hits Romney HARD on his inconsistent positions on foreign policy.

6:13: Romney hits Obama back on the “after the election” comment to Putin.

6:15: After a short bicker-fest, Obama comes out with a pretty coherent positive agenda.

6:18: Romney doesn’t have a plan for Syria…he just regurgitates factoids about the situation. Then, when he gets down to “action” points, his plan is what the Obama administration is ACTUALLY DOING RIGHT NOW. Sheesh!

6:21: Obama complements Romney on supporting the Obama administration on Libya and then punches him in the nose on his “mission creep” statement.

6:23: Mitt Romney tells us what “we all hear intelligence sources saying”. Damn…I can’t say…left my national security briefing binder at home.

6:27: Mitt declares himself a peacenik

6:28: Both candidates work in domestic issues. Obama did a better job sneaking it in. Romney criticizes the sequestration cuts…as if that’s Obama’s doing!

6:30: Mitt gives a speech directed toward the Priests of the Military Industrial Complex.

6:31: Obama does it again—turning the debate into a list of his accomplishments.

6:32: Obama hits below the belt…”[Romney] praised George Bush for his economic stewardship and Dick Cheney for ….”

6:34: Romney said “teacher’s unions” and Obama looked down! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo……!!!!!!

6:36: We are now on the topic on whether class size makes a difference. In Afghanistan?!?

6:37: Obama gets surly while Romney babbles on about “his” education successes in MA.

6:39: No, Governor, we cannot afford to repeal Obamacare.

6:40: Obama gets his do-over from Debate 1: “five trillion dollar tax cuts…military spending that the military isn’t asking for…”

6:41: I’m watching NBC. Why is Obama on the right and Romney on the left? This is a conspiracy!!!!

6:42: Romney, “I balanced the budget for the Olympics”. Yes…Governor, with a little help of your taxpayer friends.

6:43: Obama finally defends himself against Romney’s bullshit of blaming Obama for sequestration cuts.

6:44: Obama lands a left hook with the “horses and bayonettes” zinger. Perhaps the best zinger of all three debates!

6:48: Mitt’s flaggey-flag pin is bigger. Obviously, he loves America more.

6:49: Mitt Romney thinks Ahmadinejad has committed more war crimes and crimes against humanity than George W. Bush and Dick Fucking Cheney???? Very curious.

6:51: We have about 20 folks at the Ale House who are, apparently, here for the debate.

6:54: Note to Obama…watch out for Tagg Romney running toward you….

6:55: Obama contrasts his visit to Israel with Romney’s…it seems pretty effective!

6:59: Mitt lets us know he has “a relationship with the Prime Minister of Israel.” No doubt he cultivated that relationship the same way he cultivated a relationship with the Prime Minister of the U.K.

7:01: Obama goes after Romney hard on his flip flopping. I noticed, he always ends those bits with a positive message. Good debate coaching.

7:04: Mitt just told all the terrorists when he will pull out of Afghanistan. Why does he hate our soldiers?

7:08: Bob: “Obama bin Laden”

7:10: I’ve heard Mitt say lots of things about Pakistan, but I am still not sure where he stands and what he would do?

7:11: Mitt drones on about his support for Drones. But, but, but, I thought we couldn’t “kill our way out of this”

7:14: Trending on Twitter (US): #horsesandbayonets

7:18: Via Twitter:

Abby Huntsman ‏@HuntsmanAbby
I’ve never heard two candidates agree more during what is suppose to be a “debate.”

7:17: Mitt wants to label China a “currency manipulator.” That will bring them to their knees.

7:21: Obama pushes the “Romney has bad political instincts” meme: outsourcing, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt”, etc.

7:23: Mitt: “I would do nothing to hurt Detroit.” Obama calls him out on that bullshit.

7:25: “Governor, you keep on trying to airbrush history.” Look up history here.

7:28: Romney keeps bringing up the same old bullshit about how much worse things are now then they were when Obama came into office. Two words: “Bikini Graph”

7:31: Mitt: “I want to see growing peace in this country.” Huh? This is the kind of thing that is said when politicians are on autopilot.

7:38: Promoted comment from Michael:

Moderate Mitt’s plans all seem to come down to being just like Obama, only white.

7:47: Debriefing: Michael nails it. Romney etch-a-sketched so far back to the center that he was, essentially, agreeing with Obama more than he was disagreeing. That ends up being a huge problem for him. After all, the power of incumbency is that given identical choices, the devil you know is better than the identical devil you don’t.

But, of course, the other problem is that by becoming The White Obama, he contradicts his past “non-Kenyan” self. You know, like most of the stuff he said in the G.O.P. primary. His strategy depends on potential moderate supporters not being disturbed by his total abdication of past positions. That may have worked 20 years ago, but in the age of The Twitter and a plethora of other social media…maybe not so much.

– Right now Thurston County voters have a real opportunity to vote for change, for what stands to be a better way for all rate-payers.

– UW people, here’s a chance to ride in the rain.

– RIP George McGovern and praise the lord if you’re paying high taxes.

– The most important endorsement ever.

– News Corp’s shareholders are not particularly happy with the way the company is being run.

– I’m not as big a sriracha person as the author of this piece (how could anyone be?), but by coincidence I was having some soup when I started reading it, and immediately decided to add some. It was exactly what it needed.

Almost five years ago, a small group of individuals began to call for a Presidential candidate Science Debate. The idea quickly gained momentum, with support from dozens of Nobel laureates, the leaders of over 100 major universities, prestigious scientific organizations (among them AAAS, the National Academies of Science and Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine), and tens of thousands of American citizens. From thousands of submitted questions, a list of 14 was eventually developed. Science Debate 2008 had bipartisan Congressional co-chairs, a television deal with NOVA, and even rented a venue. Unfortunately, although both the McCain and Obama campaigns produced written answers in 2008, neither side agreed to make science the topic of a debate.

The story in 2012 has been very much the same — tremendous support for a colloquy on the important scientific issues to be faced in the next few decades, a set of 14 serious questions, written answers but no debate. This cycle, the editors of Scientific American graded the Obama and Romney responses:

To make our determination, we invited readers to send us leads and solicited input from our board of advisers and other subject-matter experts. We scored the candidates’ answers on a five-point scale (with five being best), using the following criteria: how directly and completely they answered the question; scientific accuracy; feasibility (including economic viability and clear accounting for both revenues and costs); potential benefits to health, education and the environment; and sustainability (meaning how well the proposed solutions balance the needs of current and future generations).

While SA‘s evaluation found Romney to be more specific in his plans, and to have greater feasibility, Obama greatly exceeded Romney in scientific accuracy. In particular, Romney’s responses on climate change, ocean health, and freshwater “revealed an unfamiliarity with the evidence that shows how urgent these issues have become”. Also, as an opponent of Net Neutrality, Romney scored 0 on the question about the Internet.

The Science Debate people presented a subset of their questions — those particularly relevant to the Evergreen State — to the candidates for Governor of Washington. The issues on that list were:

• Innovation
• Climate Change
• Education
• Ocean Health
• Vaccination and Public Health
• Science in Public Policy

As would be expected from the author of a well-received book on green energy, Jay Inslee provided extensive and detailed answers to the six queries.

Rob McKenna’s responses, in full, are displayed below:

 
 
 
 
 

McKenna was invited to answer the questions on six different occasions. He failed to reply to any of the invitations. Even on what is allegedly his signature issue — education — his silence was deafening. In his typical weaselly fashion, McKenna opted to say nothing whatsoever instead of revealing his Republican anti-scientific orientation. He’ll do anything not to offend the teahadist GOP base in Washington while passively thumbing his nose at the reality-based voters in the Puget Sound environs.

Playing mute has worked for McKenna in the past; it worked well (and may almost have been appropriate) when he was running for a statewide service position. But after Dino Rossi’s twin failures to fool enough people in gubernatorial — that is, executive — elections, we the people of Washington are onto these barefaced attempts by conservative Republicans to bamboozle us.

If you haven’t already mailed in your ballot, what are you waiting for? Vote for Inslee (and Obama, Cantwell, Ferguson, Drew, Goldmark, Kreidler, McCloud, et al.), seal it up, and drop it in the mail!

On Monday there will be a third and final presidential debate. And that sounds like a good excuse to get together for a pint and an opportunity to watch and discuss the debate with a veritable binder-full of fellow liberals. So please join us for another Debate Edition of Seattle’s Drinking Liberally at the Montlake Ale House on Monday evening.

Important Note: We will have sound and video for the debate. But the bar and restaurant has other customers, so the sound may not be as loud as you want, especially with the background of a busy tavern and peripheral conversations. If you are intent on hearing every word, I recommend you bring an FM radio and headsets or earbuds. Additionally, the Ale House has free WiFi for streaming audio. Ask your server for the password.

We will meet at our usual place, the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.

The Montlake Ale House opens at 5:00pm, and the presidential debate begins at 6:00pm.

I’ll be liveblogging the debate here.

We’ll still have or regular Tuesday evening gathering of liberals this week, as well. I hope you can make it to one or both events.

Last week’s contest was won by milwhcky. It was Birmingham, Alabama.

This week’s is somewhere in Washington state, good luck!

[HA Bible Study is on hiatus through the November election as we honor Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney by studying the scriptures of his Mormon religion.]

Doctrine and Covenants 38:32
Wherefore, for this cause I gave unto you the commandment that ye should go to the Ohio; and there I will give unto you my law; and there you shall be endowed with power from on high;

Discuss.

Dear Person who left this in my yard:

It’s gone now…got in the way while I was raking.

But before you put up a new one, please have the courtesy to fill out the application in the box by the door. Please print legibly, and pay particular attention the the section labeled, “Next of Kin.”

Love and Kisses,
—Darryl

Jon does Barack.

Mark Fiore: microtargetting undecideds.

Sam Seder with a new edition of Random Rush.

The Candidates Have Dinner Together:

• Obama and Romney joke at Al Smith dinner (via TalkingPointsMemo).
• Young TurksAnalyzing Barack’s jokes at the Al Smith charity dinner.
• Young TurksAnalyzing Mitt’s jokes at the Al Smith charity dinner.
• Maddow: Romney camp embarks on misinformation campaign to hide extremist policy.

Sam Seder: Breaking down Benghazi; the G.O.P.’s scandalquest.

White House: West Wing Week.

Newsy: Another appeal’s court finds DOMA unconstitutional.

Sam Seder: FAUX and Fiends lose their minds over BASIC MATH.

Obama: Commit to vote.

Pap: The continuing G.O.P. war on voting.

Willard (and friends):

• Stephen switches positions (via DailyKos).
• Mitt Romney’s problems with women.
• Young Turks: Romney to CEO’s—‘Help’ employees vote ‘right’ way
• Thom: Romney encourages employers to tell employees how to vote
• Stephen reveals Mitt’s plans for Day One
• Romney recorded asking employers to sway worker’s votes.
• Obama explains Romnesia (via Crooks and Liars):
• Bashir: Diagnosing Romnesia (via The Political Carnival).
• Jennifer Granholm: How Romnesia took the nation by storm.
• Sam Seder: Paul Ryan’s pathetic soup kitchen photo op.
• Kimmel: Mitt’s new women’s ad
• Mitt’s math-challenged tax plan.
• Maddow: Bush foreign policy infects Romney campaign
• ONN: Mitt’s leaked Google search history!
• SlateTV: Romney boys can’t contain their Obama debate anger
• Tagg Romney jokes about taking a swing at the President.
• Ed: Tagg shows disrespect.
• Lawrence O’Donnell: Your dad is a liar…so take a swing at me (via Crooks and Liars).
• Sam Seder: Tagg wishes he could punch the President
• Sharpton: Tagg Romney’s ‘Take a swing at Obama’ comment is a symptom of GOP disrespect & racism
• Zina Saunders: Pick-a-Prez:
• Mitt Romney’s condescending views toward women

Maddow: Maricopa County Elections puts wrong election date on form—in Spanish only.

Sam Seder: Federal Appeals Court rules DOMA unconstitutional.

Jennifer Granholm: Debunking conservative myths—what your Republican uncle needs to know.

Liberal Viewer: FAUX News or CNN less biased on Romney politicizing death of ex-SEAL.

SlateTV: The Boss is back!

Maddow: Party differences apparent in donor list.

Debate, Town Hall Style:

• Stephen: On Megyn Kelly’s town hall debate analysis
• Who won?
• Key & Peele: Luther on Obama’s town hall debate win.
• Thom: Myth Master Mitt Romney.
• Sam Seder: Obama smacks Romney’s Libya accusations as offensive
• Ann Telnaes: Biden helps Obama prepare for debate 2.
• Romney’s way: He talks…you listen.
• Sam Seder: Mitt Romney’s Libya FACE PLANT!
• Bashir: Right-wing “act of error” on Libya
• Right wing debate delusions: An ‘act of terror’ is NOT really a ‘terror attack’?!?
• Ed: Right-wingers still blame Candy Crowley for Romney’s poor performance.
• Newsy: Romney’s binders full of women
• Conan: Obama impresses the judges.
• Jon on binders full of women.
• Sam Seder: Did Romney make his case for affirmative action with his binders?
• Susie Sampson’s Tea Party Report: Romney’s Binders
• Ann Telnaes: Another Romney binder.
• Young Turks: Binders full of women—great story because MITT LIED
• SlateTV: The “Binders full of women” meme
• Jonathan Mann: Binders full of Women.

Young Turks: “Lowlife Scumbag”…Congressional debate gets heated.

John Fugelsang: The week in amnesia—a tale of two 9/11s:

Mitchell and Maddow: Obama touts advocacy for women.

Thom with The Good, The Bad, and the Very, Very Ugly.

Jennifer Granholm: Issa’s sensitive document dump jeoporadizes security.

Sam Seder: Rep. Joe Walsh opens up new front on the War on Women™.

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.

I’m not a fan of our nonpartisan election system here in Washington where we don’t have to register by party to vote in the primary. But I had thought when the national scandal about GOP operatives dumping voter registrations.

A campaign worker linked to a controversial Republican consulting firm has been arrested in Virginia and charged with throwing voter registration forms into a dumpster.

The suspect, Colin Small, 31, was described by a local law enforcement official as a “supervisor” in a Republican Party financed operation to register voters in Rockingham County in rural Virginia, a key swing state in the Nov. 6 election. He was arrested after a local business owner in the same Harrisonburg, Va., shopping center where the local GOP campaign headquarters is located spotted Small tossing a bag into the trash, according to a statement Thursday by the Rockingham County Sheriff’s office. The bag was later found to contain eight voter registration forms, it said. The arrest was reported Thursday night by WWBT-TV in Richmond.

But maybe not as tough as I’d thought.

In Virginia, where the Pennsylvania man working for the state GOP was arrested Thursday, Chesterfield County’s General Registrar Larry Haake was seen explaining to Richmond’s CBS 6 in late September that he had received complaints of Strategic employees discovered doing the same thing in a library last month.

“They were responsible for people that appeared in some libraries in Chesterfield County, supposedly to conduct voter registration drives,” Haake said, “but they were asking voters for whom they are going to vote.”

Haake says he informed the GOP of the incident at the time, but, apparently, no action was taken.

If, in fact, Small, or the workers he is said to have supervised, were using the same technique of misrepresenting themselves to voters about being a pollster, rather than being a registration worker, it’s likely he would have been able to glean whether those registrations he was allegedly seen tossing into a dumpster were for Democratic or Republican-leaning voters.

I think this is what you get when people keep screaming ACORN, ACORN, ACORN. They think they’re just leveling the playing field.

That Seattle Times staffers are upset about The Seattle Times giving Rob McKenna free advertising. But honestly, this would be a lot more meaningful if the newsroom felt like it had stood up to Frank Blethen on newsroom issues.

It threatens the two things we value the most, the traits that make The Seattle Times a strong brand: Our independence and credibility.

Ultimately, The Seattle Times’ independence and credibility are harmed more by, for example, Truth Needle segments that say things that are true are false if Democrats say them and ignoring things GOP candidates says that aren’t right. The newsroom has an obligation to independence and credibility. They’d be better able to withstand any fallout from their publisher being in the bag for McKenna if their paper hadn’t been in the bag for him and much of the GOP.

When the paper reads like a free ad for a certain type of GOP elected official, it’s tough to complain that there’s a free ad for a certain type of GOP elected official.

– This story about puppy mills in Lewis County will break your heart.

– The Burden of a Black President

– Before spending millions on Initiative 1240′s unproven charter schools that admit only a tiny fraction of students, with no guarantee of improved performance, let’s do what the state Supreme Court has told us to do

– Charming people watching the previous debate.

– I love this XKCD piece on presidential election conventional wisdom.