The Wisconsin native was arrested in Mississippi by Secret Service agents Friday for making threats against President-Elect Barack Obama, U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton announced.

Authorities say Christopher made threats against Obama on an internet chat forum over a three day period, January 11, 15 and 16.

“Threats against the President-Elect will be taken very seriously,” said Lampton. “Use of internet chat rooms to express those threats is as much a crime as uttering the words. Threats of this nature will be pursued swiftly and vigorously.”

According to an Affidavit filed by Secret Service Special Agent Kelly Adcox, Christopher posted the following on the Web site www.alien-earth.org on January 11:

ok we have 6 days until my Presidential Assasination.

Yes, I have decided I will assasinate Barack Obama. It’s really nothing personal about the man. He speaks well, has a loving although controlling wife and two cute daughters. But I know it’s for the country’s own good that I do this. And I’m not racist either, my family is a little, but isn’t all Italian and european families? I mean how many times have you heard the word (racial slur) in the comforts of your home? I have a lot, and it really bothered me and I would confront them about it. No, it’s not because I’m racist that I will kill Barack, it’s because I can no longer allow the Jewish parasites to bully their way into making the American people submit to their evil ways. How many of you Obama supporters are now disappointed after some of his arm-twisted Jewish appointee decisions??? Make’s you think he’s not really in charge (which he isn’t). No it’s the same old, same old filthy (expletive) (racial slur) who are poisoning America, who have murdered thousands of innocent lives on 9-11-01, and are thinking that they are going to get away with it again.

Barack, I view more as a sacrificial lamb, but the sacrifice MUST take place. He had good intentions, but like the Steve Taylor song goes, “a politician next door, swore, he’d set the Washington arena on fire, thinks he’ll gladiate them, but they’re gonna make him a liar.”

So, I’m stuck here in Mississippi, and I’ll need bus fare or some way of getting to Washington. I don’t own a gun, so maybe someone can give me one. And I’ll need a leak in the secret service to get a close up shot, somewhere close to the podium, since I’ve never fired a gun, so I need to get an easy shot off. Wattdysay fellas? Any help?

You all know we can’t live with the jewscum any longer, dont cha? You got a better solution? I’m all ears.

Stevie

Also, according to the Affidavit Christopher posted the following on the day he was arrested, January 16:

To those who still think I’m a nobody, who antagonize me, who seek for my capture and arrest…..

I wll have you found, arrested and executed, if you push me too far.

Christopher faces five years in federal prison and up to $250,000 in fines.

“I Can Haz Feminism?”

Jezebel had a post today about an ongoing dispute between Ms. magazine and other self described feminists. Basically these “super feminists” are pissed that Barack Obama is on the cover of Ms. because of how he was portrayed as “Superman” which is…not feminism. Some feminists feel that, well, they could have put anyone up there other than Barack Obama. I can’t say I disagree, we as a nation had two women who made huge strides in the “feminist movement” and they chose…Barack Obama who…hasn’t really done anything outstanding for feminism in my opinion. The argument against it is a little ridiculous but I think Naomi Wolff says it best in this video by disagreeing and yet agreeing with the overall point.

I think the argument should be focused less on the fact that he’s a man (Ms. has had men on their cover before) and more because well…what has he DONE for feminism? Having the “ear of the administration” as Ms. Watts said is a huge stride after the past eight years of anti-woman policies from the Bush Administration. But does that explain how when he was a state senator he voted present on a few “horrnedous anti-abortion” votes instead of voting no? If these women who put him up there are the ones who largely define feminism by your stance on reproductive rights then they made a big mistake because while he calls himself “pro-choice” I wouldn’t say he’s voted like he’s proudly pro-choice. A feminist – male or female -  should be PROUD of it, proud of all of his/her opinions in regards to ALL women’s issues. Maybe he is, maybe he isn’t but to a lot of us feminists, maybe he hasn’t quite proven it. Overall though, Amy Siskind was right – men can be feminists.

Still though, Barack Obama’s questionable feminist status aside, how 70’s angry butch feminist of us to say men can’t be feminist, while I realize this isn’t exactly what they’re saying- I think anyone devoted to “equalizing” rights (though I personally think they’re all pretty equal as it is) or committed to electing women to office – you know the whole “breaking the glass ceiling?” and creating policies that affect women in positive ways. I think that’s feminism.

Feminism (at least to me) is not just about reproductive rights, it’s not just about the Lilly Ledbetter Act. It’s about equality and empowerment and setting goals and accomplishing them because we’re not in the 1900’s anymore and we can vote, we can run for office and we can have careers and The Man can’t stop us. We’ve come a long way since Jeanette Rankin my friends. What Sarah Palin wasn’t a feminist? She was/is a successful governor, the vice presidential candidate of a party criticized for being the party of middle aged white men and so what if she’s pro-life…she values life over choice – surprisingly a decent sized percentage of this nation is split on this issue and not as pro-choice as we think ourselves to be (much more moderate than many “feminists” would like to think- and that’s their right. But the point is politics aside, that’s the great thing about our nation, we have the RIGHT to opinions. Sarah Palin is still a woman and she broke barriers, like it or not. Hillary Clinton is no more of a feminist than Condi Rice, or Sarah Palin or anyone else I forgot to mention. 80 some-odd years ago women couldn’t even vote and now we’ve had two women run as vice presidential candidates, a woman run for the presidential nomination and lose to a black man (who made strides in his own right which is admirable). All of these women are feminist heros in their own rights. In my humble opinion at least.

People are too quick to define feminism in black and white as a single issue cause. My problem with this is the”feminism is only reproductive rights” feminists.

I am pro-choice however, my feminism is not defined by my pro-choice opinion. I’m not as far left as groups like NARAL, but rather a bit more moderate. How can you be moderate and pro-choice? I value that it’s a decision we as women have the right to make. However I am not gung-ho pro-abortion as many pro-choice women are perceived to be.

This is why I think reproductive rights do not define feminism. They don’t. Feminism is about more than that. I like Amy Siskind’s idea of a fourth wave of feminism for anyone – man or woman regardless of politics – who is “focused on electing a woman — any woman — to public office regardless of her stance on issues.”

Why? Because, women deserve to represented by their peers. Women deserve to have equal representation. How many women are in the House of Representatives or in the US Senate? Certainly not 50% of either house is female – yet 50% or so of our population is comprised of women. Go figure. Women deserve to break that so-called glass ceiling. Shatter the s**t out of it if you will. But while trying to do this we should not oppress men just because they “oppressed” us. We should be equal, doing otherwise would simply make us hypocrites.

Feminism doesn’t need a face. If you say “I’m a feminist” and you know what it means to you, and you want to empower women? Then that’s freakin’ awesome. If you think you’re a feminist only on the basis that you’re pro-choice? Good for you I suppose. If you’re a feminist because you think we deserve to not be oppressed by the man and you want to do everything in your power to stop it then so be it. I don’t care if you’re a PhD, or if you don’t even have a GED. Feminism shouldn’t just be defined whether you’re pro-choice or pro-life, man or woman, Republican or Democrat. Feminism is about a cause, it always has been dating back to the Suffragists of the early 1900’s. They took a stand for a cause that they believed in. Same with the equal rights movement in the 1960’s, with Roe v. Wade and Title IX in the 70’s. Our issue now? Representation? Equality? Why shouldn’t they both be causes? And why shouldn’t we include anyone who wants to get women to higher places – be it in politics or business – in feminism?

Why not?

I’m proud to be a feminist. Feminism, despite the preconceived notion, is not a dirty word.

commentary cross posted to BlogHer and Blast Magazine

When history is written, George W. Bush’s worst critics will accuse him of everything from willful negligence in handling 2008’s economic crisis to war crimes in the context of the catastrophic mistake that is the war in Iraq. In the end, they very well may be correct, but it is possible that all of his mistakes were not of the completely sinister nature like they’re sometimes characterized, but rather can be traced back to overall tragedy that he was simply a president stuck in the wrong century. Bush’s core beliefs — that the free market could police itself, that oil is always our answer, and that we can bomb and kill others into submission without chain reactions of consequences — were dying an eventual death around the time of Y2K, but Bush made sure to keep them on life support much longer than they ever should have survived.

There is no bigger example of The Past sucking the blood out of The Future than GM, Ford, and Chrysler begging for money from the U.S. Government yet again. This past month, we saw the Big Three auto companies fly in their private jets to Washington to request billions of dollars because for the past 25 years they have steadfastly refused to look at the calendar. They defiantly rejected efforts to increase their fuel efficiency standards as every country—even China—passed us in their mandatory requirements. Because executives lobbyied Congressmen to vote against everyone’s interests but theirs, their companies made short term profits that both crippled them and damaged the country. After all, only a 7.6 mile per gallon increase in our collective car efficiency would be enough to completely free ourselves from Middle East oil, while saving the individual American consumer critical pocket money. Instead, these companies marketed trucks that could pull airplanes down a runway and consumed oil at a breakneck pace. But why would they care about those details? They could just shove SUVs down Americans’ throats by luring them through tax breaks into a choice so obviously against their interests.

This is just the most blatant example of our chronic sickness of holding onto the past. It illustrates that the worst flaw of George Bush, and in turn of the corporations he represents, may be that he simply did not realize what century we lived in. The banking crisis, car company meltdown, and failed fight against Islamist extremism can be boiled down to using 20^th century policies in a 21^st century world.

———

As tears were streaming down the faces of millions of Americans on the night of November 4, 2008, President-elect Barack Obama said, in words that would ring loudly far after the last piece of confetti had fallen, “The time for change has come.” It was a beautiful sight for more reasons than one. Many were crying because the sight of a black man winning the American presidency was possibly the most powerful symbol of American exceptionalism anyone had ever seen. But those words were much more than a symbol of tolerance and the triumph of ability. They were a prologue to the tangible changes that will dramatically alter this country in the coming months—much more change than has ever happened in our lifetime.

Obama has spent his transition months putting together what has been almost universally lauded as a cabinet filled with experience, pragmatism, and overall excellence. It is a cabinet based solely on achievement, without regard for partisanship or political and financial connections.

While all of Obama’s cabinet picks have been praised for their qualifications and temperance, none exemplifies the stark realities of the new way of doing things better than Obama’s pick for Energy Secretary, Dr. Steven Chu. Chu is a Nobel Prize winning physicist who is a professor at the University of California at Berkeley and the director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, a global warming research center whose primary goal is “to develop methods to “store” solar energy in the form of renewable transportation fuel.” There is a reason Al Gore is planning a Green Inaugural. It’s because The Age of Oil is coming to a close and Obama plans to kick it out the door.<!–nextpage–>

Bush’s pick for Energy Secretary, on the other hand, was Spencer Abraham, a Michigan senator most famous for taking more campaign donations from those same dinosaurs in the American Auto Industry than any other senator, and led the fight against corporate average fuel efficiency standards in automobiles. Change indeed.

But this is not just a Liberal president replacing Conservatives with more of the same from the other side. It’s a complete change in a philosophy that has run our government since its inception. Obama, when asked what he would do to help his “friends” in Springfield, Illinois to stem their State’s budget shortfalls,  challenged the very nature of the question.

“Part of the charge [of the budget team] is to make sure that we are proceeding on projects and investments based on national priorities and not based on politics,” he said. “Now you mentioned, sort of, ‘my friends.’ I want to be clear friendship doesn’t come into this. That’s part of the old way of doing business.

“The new way of doing business is, let’s figure out what projects, what investments are going to give the American economy the most bang for the buck. How can we protect taxpayer dollars so this money is not wasted; restore a sense of confidence among taxpayers that when we spend their money, it’s on things that are actually gonna improve their quality of life; create the jobs that are so desperately needed; help to spur on economic growth and business creation in the private sector? That’s all part of the new way of doing business.”

Being friends with the President is no longer a means to an end in any sense. Just ask John Kerry, one of Obama’s biggest and earliest supporters. He was passed over for Secretary of State in favor of Hillary Clinton, a person many accused of secretly rooting for Obama’s political destruction only months ago. While Kerry was certainly qualified, Obama’s decision underscored the notion that the age of cronyism is over. No more “Heckuva Job” Brownies or “I do not recall” Alberto Gonzaleses.

This Cult of Competence has been put in place to help Obama alter our policies as smoothly as possible, and the cornerstone to this change will come in the form of a massive stimulus package that Obama plans to sign perhaps as early as Inauguration Day, every single element of which is designed take take us out of the antiquated 20^th Century once and for all.

For a month now, Obama’s economic team has been crafting this new package, not aimed at Wall Street Banks or the crumbling car companies, but for Middle Class Americans. And it starts with the Internet. The money will be spent on laying broadband across the country, with the goal of giving every American free Internet access, a move that’s been on the FCC’s desk for years but which the Bush Administration has stubbornly tabled. As Obama has said, “we are the nation that invented the Internet, yet we are 15^th in the world in broadband adoption. It is unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption. Here, in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have the chance to get online.”

But that is just the start of what may come to be known as America 2.0. Every goal of the stimulus bill is designed to put Americans to work immediately, but even more importantly, set us up for the future. A nationwide high-tech power grid that will allow states to share solar and wind power will accelerate our ability to get off our dependence on foreign oil. Along with that universal access to the Web, a transfer of all hospital records to an electronic broadband system will eventually save the country billions of savings in administrative costs annually. Moreover, massive construction efforts to modernize public schools will encourage young Americans to learn and save massive amounts of money by making the buildings more energy efficient with new lighting and insulation.

As Obama often said during the campaign, the money that we spent on the Iraq War could have been used to rebuild every road, bridge, and school in our country — an intriguing thought that some might say is farfetched. Not anymore. This stimulus package could reach as high as $800 billion, actually approaching the number we have fiddled away in Iraq.

With all of this new technology helping the lives of people in the United States, Obama’s foreign policy will be aimed at change for everyone that lives outside of the country. He is in the midst of planning a major foreign policy speech to be given in an Islamic country in his first 100 days, through which he hopes to win the hearts and minds of everyone looking for an end to the seemingly never ending violence in the Middle East and beyond. This has never taken on greater importance than now as Israel’s War against Hamas threatens to put the region and the world on an even greater imbalance. The 20th Century was filled with religious wars and intolerance on a global scale, and as the leader of the Free World, the weight of moving not only our country, but the world in a new direction has fallen squarely on Obama’s shoulders

Our new president will face tough questions about how to bring the Iraq War to an end and how to fix a war in Afghanistan that now includes Pakistan, India, and even complications with Iran—a daunting challenge. But if we learned anything from Barack Obama on that historic November night, while the path to the future may be tough, there is only one answer to the question as to whether this country and the world can succeed. Yes We Can.

Did Barack Obama just trick every single person in the country?

It would seem on the surface that President-elect Obama stirred up his first controversy with his supporters this week, after announcing that Rick Warren, pastor of the Sattleback Church and arch-villain of gay marriage in California, will be giving the opening prayer at Obama’s inauguration on January 20th. Criticism ranged from Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) calling the move a “mistake” to a Time Magazine columnist stating, “Obama has proved himself repeatedly to be a very tolerant, very rational-sounding sort of bigot.”

But let’s take a step back for a minute and take everyone’s strong opinions about Warren out of the equation. Policy-wise, his prayer before the swearing-in is meaningless . He is not part of the Obama administration in any capacity, and in fact, Obama is stridently against Warren’s views on gays. Not to mention, Warren certainly will not being saying anything even coming close to the subject at the inauguration.

Selecting Warren was simply, in Vice President-elect Joe Biden’s words, “a showing of unity,” further inoculating Obama from any criticism from Republicans that he never bucks the party line. Liberals might be frustrated, but they aren’t going anywhere, and as a bonus, every conservative evangelical in the country will smile and nod when hearing all this, not realizing Obama never actually changed his position at all. As a pure political move, it makes perfect sense.

Much more critical, though, is the fact that the criticism leveled at Obama is only vaguely directed at him. The real venom and sting has been reserved for Warren’s words and deeds over the last few years, from which the preacher has avoided taking any flack for at all. The beating Warren is taking in the national news this past week is much larger than it would have been had he been left out of the January 20^th lineup, regardless of his infamy in California. For the past week, the press has been digging up all the ridiculous things he’s said over the years, such as comparing gays and lesbians to pedophiles. As a consequence, he is now forced to go on TV and give interviews and press conferences emphasizing how he “loves gay people,” and “has many gay friends,” effectively killing the message of the most famous anti- gay marriage messenger in the country.

Essentially, Obama’s imaginary insult to the Left caused Rick Warren to completely change his tone about the issue, thereby advancing the Left’s cause, while making sure to pick up some Conservative votes along the way and never actually changing his position on anything.

And to think — he’s not even president yet.

The economic crisis has literally changed the rules of government. The executive branch has overseen an injection of trillions of public funds into the private sector — and without admitting it, has essentially conceded that American-style capitalism, which has been viewed as holy writ by economists, journalists, academics and politicians for 30 years, is not sustainable.

As a result, the Obama administration’s first six months will be dominated with plans for a massive (though many say, not massive enough) $850 billion stimulus plan that, while not yet fully crafted, will involve a major public works project, large amounts of aid to state governments – most of which are running large deficits and are in or near recession — increased aid to homeowners and endless other possibilities for major reform and ambitious programs.

Obama is also taking the reigns of two wars and the largest military in the history of humanity just as the country faces complicated geopolitical conflicts in India, Pakistan, Palestine, Israel, Africa, Lebanon and elsewhere.

While few presidents aspire to take office while the country is in war, the economy is sputtering and the quality of life for Americans is expected to decrease dramatically, it does give the president enormous power.  “You never want serious crisis to go to waste,’” said Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.

But what Obama makes of the opportunity remains to be seen. Obama has continued to trump the idea that his recovery package will serve the interests of “Main Street” as well as Wall Street; however, like all U.S presidents, Obama was put into office with the help of elite, moneyed interest – he received more money from the finance sector than any other candidate in presidential history.   And despite his rhetoric of helping out the regular guy, Obama, while in the stretch run of the 2008 campaign, elected to support a $700 billion bailout to the financial sector which was opposed by virtually the entire population and, unlike packages implemented by other developed nations struggling with recession, was practically toothless in regulating these businesses and in limiting executive pay.

On the other hand, Obama could implement something akin to a new “New Deal” which could shape American governance for decades.  He has amassed a mountain of good will from his supporters, as well as the media; and a weakened Republican party will be unable to kill most of his proposals, as the electorate is yearning for wide scale changes.

So many are left to wonder what Obama’s first six months in president will look like. Here, we seek to assess the possibilities. But before we do so, it is important to understand the ebb and flow of the power structure of the federal government. For it is not only the economic crisis that has afforded Obama such immense power, but also and eight-year campaign to expand the power of the executive branch by the office of his predecessor.

The precedent of power

During the last few years of George W. Bush’s presidency many speculated power the executive branch would be diminished when a transfer of power took over.  Bush went as far as any president in recent history – maybe ever – in expanding the power of the executive branch.

His unrivaled use of signing statements, which undermined legislation behind the scenes in lieu of making a far more visible veto, were condemned by legal groups and politicians alike. In his first six years a Republican-controlled Congress, gave him a blank check on foreign policy issues: torture, wiretapping, rendition, troop escalations and unconditional funding for two brutal military campaigns. When the Democrats took over in 2006, things did not change much; Democrats continued to fund the war in Iraq and refused to prosecute executive branch officials for their clear abuse of powers.

Warren backed the recent California ban on gay marriage, doesn’t believe in evolution and once publicly told a Jewish woman she would go to hell because she isn’t Christian.

“Choosing a man like Rick Warren to deliver the invocation isn’t just a slap in the face to gay supporters, but a slap in the face to several of Obama’s supporters,” said a gay Obama supporter who requested to remain anonymous. “The choice only satisfies the right-wing. It’s like Obama is saying ’sorry for beating McCain guys, here’s your consolation prize.”

Gays have been the most public of the outraged American population; several organizations have organized protests and sent letters urging Obama to reconsider his decision.

“Your invitation to Reverend Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at your inauguration is a genuine blow to LGBT Americans,” reads a letter to the President-elect from the Human Rights Campaign. “You have tarnished the view that gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans have a place at your table.”

Obama’s decision to invite Warren, a man who is already such a powerful pastor and has been deemed by many as America’s “unofficial pastor,” may come at the expense of several important groups in the U.S., including many politically knowledgeable religious minorities and gays.

Knowing that many liberals see the choice as utterly insulting, Warren defended himself in a recent speech at his Saddleback Church in Southern California.

“You don’t have to see eye to eye to walk hand in hand,” Warren told the crowd, according to Fox News.

In defense over allegations that he is homophobic, he cited his relationship with gay rights activist Melissa Etheridge, saying he is a fan of her music and that the two enjoyed a great conversation one evening.

However, in an interview with BeliefNet, a spiritual site owned by Fox, he likened redefining marriage to include gays to incest, child abuse and polygamy. In the same interview he told BeliefNet that he has “many gay friends. I’ve eaten dinner in gay homes.”

“Every step Warren takes forward, he falls back twice,” said Jason Howell, a conservative who voted for McCain. “He says something to better his public image, then starts talking about gay homes.  He does work in Africa fighting HIV/AIDS, but teaches abstinence and prayer instead of sex education to a society where rape is a common cause of the disease. He always says things to satisfy those he’s speaking to, and we can expect the same pabulum in his invocation speech.”

Whether Warren spews pabulum or not, he will deliver the speech as millions around the world watch one of the most historic presidential campaigns come to an official end. Unfortunately, for many, the pastor’s preaching will mar this historic day.

However while countless Americans are insulted, some believe Obama’s willingness to have a man with whom he disagrees on many issues at his inauguration shows his commitment to unifying the country and sets an example all Americans should follow.

“You can look at it that way too. Just because he chose Warren doesn’t mean he supports Warren’s ideology,” said the anonymous Obama supporter. “He’s getting people from all ends of the political spectrum to join in his celebration.”

“He is reaching across the aisle. Warren and Obama disagree on a lot of things, but so do a lot of Americans,” said Howell. “But that doesn’t mean they all aren’t happy about change.”

As is the case with many political decisions that involve religion, this is wrought with controversy. However while analyzing this selection is of grave importance to several liberals, Howell believes January 20 should be about something else.

“The day is about Obama and his historical inauguration not about Warren’s political views. People shouldn’t let that overshadow an accomplishment by a man so deserving of all the success he has received in life.”

Timothy F. Geithner, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, will serve as Secretary of the Treasury. Lawrence H. Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury under President Clinton, will serve as Director of the National Economic Council.

Christina D. Romer will serve as Director of the Council of Economic Advisers, Melody C. Barnes will serve as Director of the Domestic Policy Council, and Heather A. Higginbottom will serve as Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Peter Orszag, currently Director of the Congressional Budget Office, will serve as Office of Management and Budget Director, and Rob Nabors will serve as Deputy Director.

“Barack is bringing together some of the best minds in the country to make swift progress on the economic challenges we face,” said David Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager, in a statement. “While we can’t underestimate the challenge we face, we also can’t underestimate the opportunity we have to bring the change our country needs.”

Former President Jimmy Carter, who has been spending the last few years trying to help forge a just peace in the Middle East, said Obama will “not wait for even a month after he is president to start working on the peace process, where as you know, the previous two presidents waited till the least year they were in office before they began the peace process.”

Carter was criticized by Obama during the campaign for meeting with members of Hamas, a political party that took power in the 2006 Palestinian elections.

“I think is a very important issue, I don’t have any doubt in my mind that to find peace and security and human rights for the Palestinians and also for Israel would be a major factor in reducing the threat of terror,” Carter told CNN.

Sam Adams is currently the most popular beer with a name based on a historical figure. With “Brew-rack Obama,” Duncan Remage-Healey and Brian Gravel are looking to change that.

There are plenty of people who brew their own beer, but far fewer of these industrious individuals attempt to use people’s love for the beverage to try to make a difference in their community. That is just what Remage-Healey and Gravel, the people behind Thunder Boomer, are attempting to do with their operation, though.

Remage-Healey and Gravel both work for Habitat for Humanity, and both are lovers of beer. They have combined these two elements into one idea, where the brewing and distribution of beer can be used to earn money for more socially oriented and charitable purposes. The brewery-which has no official base outside of the member’s homes-has not quite reached that stage yet, but they are working towards the goal.

Gravel is well aware of the hurdles in front of them, in trying to combine the sale of beer with charity, and they also would need to try to focus on creating a beer to establish themselves with rather than spending their time experimenting on creating new products. That has not stopped the flow of ideas on how to use their brewing skills to the advantage of the community. Gravel mentioned that they could use profits from beer sales to fund small-scale community projects, such as revamping a plot of land and turning it into a park to play in, or a dog park for your canine companions.

The money does not necessarily have to come from sales either; as Gravel mentioned, donations would suffice in lieu of paying for what is essentially a beer tab if Thunder Boomer ale was used to cater a party or gathering. As the operation has been done entirely out of the pockets of Gravel and Remage-Healey, this does not seem like too much to ask when there is a greater good involved.

This socially conscious line of thinking has taken strong hold of the northeastern United States as of late, with the influence of a market ready to accept those trends seen everywhere you look, from grocery choices such as Trader Joe’s to what Gravel and Remage-Healey hope their as of now small enterprise can develop into. With this region and the rest of the country more and more aware of how their actions influence the environment around them, and how even doing the little things can make a significant difference, the time is right for Thunder Boomer to try its hand at a market that clearly exists-beer drinkers who also double as socially conscious individuals.

If you have purchased alcohol lately, or even if you have just walked by the windows or your local distributor, you know what kind of money is involved in the business. Now, if that money could somehow be injected into the community, not only would you improve your surroundings, but you would be doing your part to help simply by cracking open a cold one, and that’s a good feeling to have-one Thunder Boomer hopes to capitalize on in the future.

The pair has developed a beer in time for election season as well, and they have named it for their candidate of choice, Barack Obama. The double IPA was dubbed “Brew-Rack Obama”, a nod to the Democratic Convention’s nominee-he was anointed thus the night Thunder Boomer brewed and bottled the brew. Whether the bottles will be opened in celebration or in mourning will be seen this coming Tuesday evening, when the winner of the general election is announced and the next President known.

Keeping the name Brew-Rack Obama could pose a problem eventually with licensing, but for now, it’s a tribute put together by a pair who hold both their love of beer and charity dear to them-the hope is that there are enough people out there with the same mindset that can help these Habitat employees make a difference in a community they care about.

Here are all of the polls released yesterday, the last day that the major polling firms collected data. Obama’s aggragate average is approaching 52%, but I believe these polls under report the youth vote because of they generally don’t call cell phones, and we will probably see a disproportionate amount of the African-American vote judging by the early vote counts in many states.

We will have to look out for the Bradley Effect, which may or may not be a myth. Even if it’s true, I have a feeling it might be off se by the Reverse Bradley Effect. Paraphrasing Bill Maher, the Reverse Bradley Effect theorizes the pseudo racists are telling their buddies down at the Moose Lodge they’re voting for McCain, but when they get in the voting booth they might start thinking, “Hmm, well my kids teeth are falling out… and Obama is the only one that will give me health care. Maybe I will vote for the black guy.”

As far as the electoral college, Obama should get 338+ electoral votes, putting him well over the 270 needed to win. He will almost definitely flip Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, and Iowa from Red States to Blue, and I think he squeak out Ohio, Florida and North Carolina, as well. Missouri and Indiana will be tough but if either fall for Obama, it will be over by 9 o’clock.

If McCain has any chance, he absolutely needs Pennsylvania. The east coast bellweather state is one of the first to close their polls, so if it is called early for Obama, it will be a good indicater of how the night could turn out. If Obama’s lead is 8 to 10 points and its over shortly after the polls close, then there will be no need to sweat. Barack Obama will be the President Elect. If we are still wondering who won Pennsylvania after a few hours, it might be a long night.

Check out CNN’s interactive map and make you’re own predictions.

For the past five national elections, Rock the Vote, a non-profit organization founded in Los Angeles in 1990, has partnered with musicians and actors to inspire young people to take an active role in politics.

Among the artists supporting the 2008 Rock the Vote campaign (the list includes Madonna, Good Charlotte and Tim McGraw) is Florida punk outfit Against Me! Known for their politically-charged material (see: “From Her Lips to God’s Ears,” an anthemic skewering of Condoleezza Rice), the band partnered with Rock the Vote in April to film a video for their single “Stop!,” from their latest record, “New Wave.”

Singer Tom Gabel recently took some time out from touring to offer his thoughts on the impending election and Against Me!’s participation in the Rock the Vote campaign.

BLAST: What prompted you to make your Rock the Vote video?

TOM GABEL: We were approached by Rock The Vote about working with them as they were interested in using the song for their campaign. At first I was hesitant because the song isn’t really a political song, but after talking with (them) about it, I saw that the chorus did really work well for their cause. It’s important to me to be involved in this election. If shooting a PSA is a potential way we can motivate young people to vote, then I’m up for trying.

B: Which candidate are you supporting in the election and why?

TG: Barack Obama for sure. I’m certainly not a Republican, but I’m also not a Democrat. I think that Obama would be a breath of fresh air for the country and would change the rest of the world’s views towards us in a positive way. I think Obama is a very intelligent individual; I think he “gets it.” Whether or not that means he’ll be able to change anything, I don’t know. I believe he’ll try though.

I do believe that McCain can change things as well, but in a completely negative direction. Read McCain’s book, listen to him talk about how excited he was as a young man to start flying combat missions in Vietnam, ‘cause that’s what he was “trained” to do. He comes from a family with a long history of military service; war is bred into him. You’re fooling yourself if you think he wouldn’t be just as excited to sit in the Oval Office with the power of the big red button under his finger. He wants to command.

B: Why is it important for people of any age to vote, and to keep up with politics in general?

TG: Well, I think it’s important to be an educated person. I think it’s important to realize the effect your actions have on your immediate surroundings and on the world in general. It’s important to know how completely connected we all are. Politics are an extension of that. The people (we) elect into office have a very direct effect on our lives. Don’t you think it’s important to be aware of how other people affect your life? Don’t you think it’s important to have some kind of say in the decisions being made? It’s your world too.

B: What is the most important issue for you in this year’s election and why?

TG: I don’t think I can choose just one. The environment, the war in Iraq, America’s foreign policy in general, education, health care, women’s reproductive rights, marriage rights, etc. All the issues are equally important.

B: Why do you think so many Americans are disillusioned with politics?

TG: Because most politicians are fucking liars. The system is corrupt. It’s hard to actually effect change because of these factors. Most Americans are too busy worrying about how to pay their rent.

B: Does politics have a role in music? If so, what is that role?

TG: Everything is political. You don’t have to sing about politics to be politically involved. You could be a band that gets up on stage every night and sings exclusively love songs and still be the most political band in the world. At the same time you could be a band that gets up on stage every night and shouts their heads off about “Revolution” this or that, and have it mean nothing politically. Words and actions are two different things. How does a band treat their fans? What kind of shirts do they print their shirts on? Do the companies have fair labor policies? Are they environmentally aware? How do they treat their employees? What about on a personal level? Where do they shop? What companies do they support? There’s a million different angles.
I don’t think artists have a responsibility to sing about political topics. But I do think that people in bands have just as much responsibility as anyone else to be aware of the effect their actions have on the world around them.

For more information, visit www.rockthevote.com or www.myspace.com/againstme.

Dear Members of the 4th Estate:

Having spoken to numerous reporters and some editors with the national media (as distinguished from the local media) about the blackout or near blackout of the Nader/Gonzalez presidential campaign, striving to challenge the two party, exclusionary duopoly, (debates, ballot obstacles, etc.) I must ask a general question:

What journalistic criteria have you been employing in this presidential year that guides your pronounced non-coverage of the number three campaign that advances majoritarian agendas based on long experience, involvement, and accomplishment. These agendas are either opposed or ignored by McCain and Obama (see www.votenader.org) and are often rooted in the very investigative reports by your reporters?

It is puzzling how editors and publishers who oversee these prize winning stories seem to lose interest in covering Americans who are trying to do something with that information for a better country.

We asked one top editor of a major daily why his paper was not covering us at all and he said, “Because you can’t win.” Besides being a catch-22 that he quickly acknowledged, that is not a supportable newsworthy judgment. News Media have covered many stories outside the electoral arena of people “who can’t win” and such coverage extends to both the import of the struggles and the reasons why “winning is not possible” given the stacked deck against them.

There has been a witting or unwitting political bigotry against third parties and independent candidates, as there was years ago against minority voters. Against the status of such candidates obstructed through ballot access laws by the two parties that dislike competition they present other rigged ways to secure their domination over the electoral landscape, including gerrymandering each other in the majority of Congressional Districts, for example.

This is meant to be a short letter. Journalism scholars, reporters, and other post-election writers of books and articles will be chronicle, no doubt, the quantity and quality of media coverage (see the previous analysis by such scholars as Stephen Farnsworth and S. Robert Lichter).

For now, please verify for yourselves your own non-coverage or coverage and inform us what your journalistic criteria standards or policies led you to this definition of your readers, listeners, and viewers rights to know.

Thank you for responding, even though there is obviously no obligation to do so.

Sincerely,

Ralph Nader

From the early days of George Washington’s home-brewed ales and James Madison’s attempts at creating a national brewery, patriots and early American leaders relied on beer for nutrition and inspiration.

In more recent history, Jimmy Carter’s brother, Billy, promoted his own brand of brew, Billy Beer, shortly after the Georgian peanut farmer was elected. During the last presidential election in 2004, polls found that Americans would rather have had a beer with George W. Bush than John Kerry.

Throughout the country’s existence, the humble hopped beverage has lubricated the wheels of democracy by sparking debate or resolving conflicts. And the beverage has come up in some pretty interesting ways this year on the campaign trail.

Senator John McCain faced criticism after the Associated Press highlighted the candidate’s extensive fundraising connections to Anheuser-Busch through his wife’s fortune and high-powered position in Hensley and Co., the nation’s third-largest A-B distributor. Although McCain’s financial connections to the brewing giant may be close, don’t expect the White House to replace the stemware with Pilsner glasses. McCain’s campaign manager Jill Hazelbaker told the Associated Press that he “very rarely, if ever, drinks alcohol.”

But who could forget Governor Sarah Palin’s now infamous appeals to “Joe Six-Pack”?

In August, Democratic candidate Barack Obama’s taste for beer was challenged during an interview on CBS’ 60 Minutes. During a discussion of his campaign’s attempts to court blue-collar voters, Steve Kroft, the interviewer, remarked to Obama, “You tried really hard to reach these people. You went and sipped beer, which I know you don’t particularly like.” Obama promptly told the reporter that he had a beer the previous night and then said, “Where does the story come from that…I don’t like beer? …C’mon, man.”

Though politicians may use beer as an image to appeal to the common person, some breweries and drinking establishments have long abided by the folk ethos of not combining politics and alcohol, while others embrace the mix. With the heightened energy of the upcoming election, many brewers and barkeeps around the country are getting into the spirit of the election season.

“What better way is there to celebrate the diversity of ideas and thoughts that come out every four years during our election process with something that goes way back to our founding fathers, that’s beer and ale,” said Wayne Mayer, director of marketing for the Half Moon Bay Brewing Company.

The northern California based brewery’s ALECTION lets customers “vote” for a candidate by buying either the “Obama Ale,” or the “McCain 2008,” re-labeled versions of their English-style light ale. Each week the results are tallied on the brewery’s website.

While encouraging their drinkers to show their preference for the candidates, the style of the beers themselves is the same.

“We did that for political reasons so no one could say that we were trying to favor one over the other,” explained Mayer.

Currently the Democratic candidate is in the lead “by quite a bit,” according to the brewery. When Blast contacted Half Moon Bay in mid-October, Obama had 4,991 bottles over McCain’s 1,274.

“We’ve seen a huge jump in our incremental beer sales,” said Meyer.

Unlike the real upcoming vote this November, Mayer jested, “This is the only election where you can vote early, often, and legally.”

Magic Hat Brewing Company, based in South Burlington, Vt., released a politically themed Participation variety 12 pack, containing a few of their normal offerings and a special pre-prohibition style “Participation Lager.”

“Beyond the political packaging and beyond the beer itself, which is also politically themed, we actually as a sales team go into our bar promotions and register voters,” said Krissy Leonard, spokeswoman for Magic Hat.

Magic Hat partnered with HeadCount, a non-partisan, not-for-profit organization to register people to vote. On the night before the election, the brewery is sponsoring a concert at the Highline Ballroom in New York City to benefit HeadCount featuring Robert Randolph, Joss Stone, and other artists.

Winter variety packs are now being shipped but there should be more of the politically-themed 12-packs in stores until Election Day, Leonard said.

Below the Mason Dixon line, the Flying Saucer Draught Emporium, a chain of beer bars, is conducting another presidential poll. Patrons at the bars can buy a pint glass for $5 bearing either Obama or McCain’s face drawn as a cartoon, which is counted as one vote.

With 13 locations in Texas, Arkansas, North Carolina, and other traditionally red states, some might find the current standings a bit surprising. Obama’s 11,420 bottles leads McCain’s 9,220 as of Oct. 28, according to the company’s website.

Fort Worth, Texas and Cordova, Tenn. are the Flying Saucer’s only locations where McCain is holding a lead.

In New York, one of the strongest Democratic support bases, Sixpoint Craft Ales located in Brooklyn created the “Hop Obama” in honor of the democratic candidate’s grassroots campaigning style.

“We were tossing it around as far back as late September last fall,” said Jeff Gorlechen, one of founding members of Sixpoint. “Then his campaign started steam rolling. At the time it was all word of mouth, and we identified with that.”

After Obama won the first few primaries, Gorlechen and the other four workers at the brewery decided to brew the ale.

While the brewers may admire the candidate, Sixpoint stopped short of fully endorsing him, as their label points out: “Although we do not intend this beer to be a direct Sixpoint endorsement of Obama, we do believe the delicious and refreshing quality it represents reminds us of the Senator’s successful grassroots campaign.”

There are “many parallels” between the rise of craft and micro brews and Obama’s style of campaigning, he said.

“There was no marketing, no advertising dollars behind it. It’s hard not to admire him,” explained Gorlechen. “In the last five years the craft market segments exploded. It kind of caught the major breweries off guard. I think [Obama] did the same thing when he won Iowa.”

Available on draft in N.Y. and Mass., Gorlechen described the Hop Obama as a hybrid ale “sort of like a British session ale, sort of like an amber, sort of an ESB [Extra Special Bitter]” that uses Scottish, English, and German malts and three different hops from the Pacific Northwest. Also, a part of the profits go to Get Out The Vote, an organization that registers voters.

Of the seven ales produced by Sixpoint, it is currently their second best seller and the brewery sold its stock of the beer faster than any other single batch released for the first time.

Although one of Sixpoint’s best selling products, some bar managers have refused to serve their beer because it is mixing beer and politics, he said.

The “Ale to the Chief” by Colorado’s Avery Brewing Co. has hit shelves in the 32 states. “Instead of an Imperial Pale Ale we’re calling it a ‘Presidential Pale Ale’ because it’s a democracy here, it’s not an imperialistic nation,” mused Matt Throll, beer manager for Avery.

This past spring, Adam Avery, the owner of the brewery, returned from a road trip with the idea of creating a politically themed beer.

Overall, the reaction to the “Ale to the Chief” has been positive, the Brewery said.

“We’ve only had one person call up and complain to say ‘leave politics out of beer,’” Throll said. “We had to tell them that beer has been a part of politics a long time, that’s just the way it is. We weren’t setting out to offend anybody, but of course that’s going to happen.”

“It was not necessarily pro any of the candidates but pro change,” said Throll

Avery’s brewmasters have another batch of “Ale to the Chief” underway for Inauguration Day.

In the Midwest, the St. Louis Brewery Inc., producer of the microbrew Schlafly, is selling posters and T-shirts with altered versions of their labels featuring the candidate’s images.

“I changed our Hefeweisen to  ‘Hefe-Biden,’ our Oktoberfest became ‘Baracktoberfest,’ and our actual flagship pale ale became ‘Palin Ale,’” explained Troika Brodsky. graphic designer for Schlafly Beer.

Two days before the Vice Presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Brodsky learned that a church group would be screening the debate at Schlafly’s downtown brewery and restaurant.  To celebrate the debate, Brodsky made four custom tap handles and posters featuring altered ‘political versions’ of the brewery’s labels.

Although the other candidates’ names were easy to juxtapose with the labels, Brodsky said creating one for McCain was difficult. He settled on ‘McCain’s Maverick’ American Pale Ale.

“Its basically just parody,” he said. “They were a big hit, actually.”

Even though the church group holding the screening was “more conservative-leaning,” Brodsky said, “Still, the Baracktoberfest and the Hefe-Biden taps sold far more.”

Schlafly is now selling a limited number of Baracktoberfest and Palin Ale T-shirts on its website.

Beyond the tension and mudslinging of the election, it’s all in good fun, he said.

“The point of this is that everyone’s really exited about the election around here. We want to encourage that energy, encourage people to vote,” said Brodsky.

The supposed skinheads planned on orchestrating a national killing spree beginning at a chiefly African-American school in Tennessee, the ATF reports.  The men wished to end the spree by assassinating Obama in a drive-by shooting while wearing tuxedos and top hats.

Jim Cavanaugh, an ATF special agent in Nashville, said the men didn’t think they’d be able to carry out the assassination successfully.  “They didn’t believe they would be able to do it, but that they would get killed trying…they seemed determined to do it. Even if they were just to try it, it would be a trail of tears around the South.”

“The defendants stated that they would be willing to die during this attempt,” the ATF document states.

The two men told ATF authorities they planned on shooting and killing 88 African-Americans and decapitating another 14; the numbers 88 and 14 are symbolic in white supremacist society.

The number 14 symbolizes the white supremacist slogan written by neo-Nazi David Lane, and the number 88 symbolizes both the eighth letter in the alphabet (“HH” for Heil Hitler) and an 88-word statement from Hitler’s Mein Kampf; the inspiration for Lane’s modern slogan.

Daniel Cowart, 20, and Paul Schlesselman, 18, are currently being held without bond on charges of possessing an unregistered firearm, conspiring to steal firearms and threatening the life of a presidential candidate, according to the ATF document.

A sawed-off shotgun, a rifle and three pistols were confiscated from the men.  Authorities believe the men were planning to break into a local gun shop to pilfer additional firearms.

According to the ATF news release “Cowart allegedly traveled from Tennessee to Arkansas to pick up Schlesselman in order to carry out their plan.”  The two neo-Nazis attempted to rob a house but aborted their mission upon seeing a dog and two cars parked outside.

The men then purchased a bulk of nylon rope and two ski masks with the intention to commit robberies that would have ultimately funded their state-to-state murder campaign, the ATF document states.

The Secret Service became involved with the investigation when it was clear the killing spree involved an attack against Obama.

A spokeswoman traveling with Obama had no immediate comment regarding the incident, the Boston Globe reports.

This is the second assassination scare involving Obama.  During the Democratic National Convention in August, three men were suspected to have come to Denver to assassinate the presidential candidate.  Two of the three were believed to have had ties to white supremacy organizations.

The ATF says the plot also involved shooting or decapitating 102 other black people in Tennessee, in a planned killing spress.

Stick with http://blastmagazine.com/news as the story unfolds!

What’s even worse is Palin’s attempt to pander to the local teams. Here are here word-for-word comments on the Rays and Red Sox. She said the SAME EXACT THING to Phillies fans. At least Obama didn’t repeat himself verbatim. Notice in this clip that she checks her notes before telling Rays fans about how they “know how to turn an underdog into a victor.” She is so stupid.

“Sen. Barack Obama surrounds himself with a number of individuals and advisors who are hostile to Israel and American Jews,” the coalition said in a statement. “They include Zbigniew Brzezinski, General Tony McPeak and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. All are known for their anti-Israel views.”

Jeremiah Wright’s name gets mentioned again and again in this election.

They also say Obama voted against legislation to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization and ”his willingness to meet with Iranian President Ahmadinejad without any preconditions,” echoing a popular John McCain sentiment.

NEW YORK — Results from the Dow Jones Insight-2008 Presidential Election Media Pulse show that Sarah Palin continues to hold the lead in overall media coverage of the four nominees for president and vice president — clearly giving a boost to Republican running mate John McCain, whose recent coverage has matched or exceeded that of rival Barack Obama after trailing the Democratic candidate for most of the year.

While Palin had virtually zero coverage in the days prior to her August 29th unveiling as the Republican vice presidential nominee, in the period from August 30 through September 13 her coverage surpassed that of presidential nominee Obama, and left vice presidential rival Joe Biden far behind, according to analysis of mainstream and social media sources tracked by Dow Jones Insight.

When considering coverage of the two presidential candidates only, McCain had 179,004 total mentions in all tracked media sources during the same time period, or a 55 percent share, to Obama’s 148,000 mentions, or 45 percent share. McCain also led in terms of headline mentions in the mainstream press, with 21,995 mentions, or 54 percent, to Obama’s 18,769, or 46 percent, while in social media sources (blogs and boards) Obama had 33,120 headline mentions to McCain’s 32,900, for a 50-50 split.

Palin May Have Stolen the Show in Minnesota, but Obama Still Pulled in Higher Convention Coverage

The timing of the Palin announcement could be viewed as a clear effort to steal Obama’s thunder, but it couldn’t quite offset his coverage during the Democratic convention itself. While the spotlight has shifted toward the Republicans over the past few weeks, when comparing mainstream and social media coverage of both candidates around the time of their respective conventions, Obama still came out ahead.

Dow Jones Insight tracked coverage of the candidates on the four scheduled days of each convention, plus the preview day before and the wrap-up day afterward — or August 24-29 for the Democrats and August 31-September 5 for the Republicans — and found that the Democratic convention time period saw 91,395 total mentions of both candidates, 14% more coverage than the 80,250 total mentions in the days surrounding the Republican convention. Since the Republican convention was shortened by a day due to Hurricane Gustav, the higher overall total for the Democratic convention is understandable. However when comparing each candidate’s percentage of total mentions, Obama had a more dominant share of the conversation during his convention than McCain had during his.

• Obama had 54,624 mentions, or a 60 percent share, during the Democratic convention time period tracked, compared to McCain’s 36,771 mentions, or 40 percent, in the same timeframe.
• In the days tracked surrounding the Republican convention, McCain received 45,448 mentions, for a 57 percent share, compared to Obama’s 34,802 mentions, or 43 percent
• When combining mentions from both time periods, Obama received 52 percent of the total to McCain’s 48 percent

If Money Talks, Which Candidate Speaks Loudest?

With Barack Obama’s announcement this week that he had raised a record $66 million in August and lined up more than 500,000 first-time donors, he is by far the leader in donations from the public, and also leads the way in terms of media coverage on the topic. According to analysis of mainstream and social media sources tracked by Dow Jones Insight, there were 1,740 mentions of Obama’s name in close proximity to fundraising-related terms in the previous seven days, or 36 percent of the total 4,826 fundraising mentions of the four candidates over that period. His running mate, Joe Biden, who has not played a very public fundraising role, netted just 279 mentions, or 6 percent.

While Obama declined to take public funds to finance his campaign, McCain, who has accepted public financing and is therefore limited in how much he can raise and how he can spend it, is expected to spend far less time drumming up donations. In the previous week McCain drew 1,665 mentions in reference to fundraising, or 35 percent of all fundraising mentions of the four candidates. Meanwhile, Palin received 1,142 mentions on the issue, or 24 percent, as she took on a major fundraising role for the McCain campaign.

Higher Overall Coverage for McCain Translates to Ownership of Additional Issues

In the period August 15 – September 15, media coverage of the campaign issues being tracked by Dow Jones Insight surged again, with a trend in issues ownership toward McCain reflecting the overall increase in McCain- related coverage. McCain had the lead in 17 of the 25 issues being tracked, up from six in a previous analysis. Among the issues he led were the economy, taxes, terrorism, health care and abortion (each with a split of 54 percent for McCain to 46 percent for Obama), as well as energy (59 percent to 41 percent) and the environment (56 percent to 44 percent). Obama owned just five issues, down from seven in a previous analysis, including faith, race, Israel, gun control and NAFTA. Total issues- based coverage was up 22 percent during this period, reaching 1,137,582 mentions of all 25 issues compared with 934,408 from the previous analysis.

The Dow Jones Insight-2008 Presidential Election Media Pulse (http://dowjonesinsight.blogspot.com/) provides a high-level view of a competitive media landscape and demonstrates how candidates and issues are covered in the media and how that coverage changes over time. Dow Jones Insight combines proven research methodologies, trusted content and advanced text-mining and visualization tools to deliver strategic qualitative and quantitative media measurement metrics. Organizations use the analysis to nurture their reputation, demonstrate the effectiveness of their communications strategies and achieve business objectives. The platform processes nearly a million articles, Web pages, blogs and message board posts per day.

It’s unbelievable the effect this election is having on Americans and people around the world.  This video really embodies the spirit of this election, and the desperation Americans have for change.

The video features various artists, of both music and film, saying and singing, the poetry that is Barack Obama’s speech.

Obama is really inspiring generations of, not only young and old Americans, but global citizens of all ages.

Sarah Palin?  Apparently the most popular governor in the United States.  I guess we all missed that memo.

Palin is an ultra-conservative who is pro-life, pro-guns, pro-offshore drilling, against gay marriage and a staunch supporter of McCain’s stance on the war in Iraq.  She has been described, by republicans mind you, as a ‘gun-toting’ mother.

From 1996-2002, Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, a small town of under 7,000 residents. In 1984, she wore the crown of Miss Wasilla, and competed in the Miss Alaska competition, placing second.

She was elected Alaska’s 11th governor in 2006, defeating republican incumbent Frank Murkowski.

By choosing Palin as his running mate, McCain has effectively shattered the argument he so often uses to belittle his adversary, that Obama is too inexperienced to govern the country.

I know Palin is the VP choice and isn’t running for president, but when you are faced with the prospect of electing a 72 year-old man into office, the VP plays an important role.  It isn’t absurd for the public to be concerned about this, and the fact that McCain has had serious health problems in the past only heightens the public’s anxiety.  His recently released medical records show a pretty clean slate, but still concerns are concerns and the public is entitled to them, and will continue to have them for as long as he is in the running.

With Palin as the VP choice, if McCain is elected to office she will be next in line for the presidency.  If in, let’s say, two years McCain (if he is elected) is unable to continue his presidency, Palin will be sworn in as the President of the United States.

That’s something, even taking into regard her wonderful work uncovering corruption, managing the budget and improving energy and environment situations in Alaska, that will be a constant fear for all Americans since she, among many other things, has no foreign policy experience.

Clearly I disagree with Fox New’s Steve Doocy, who said Palin does have foreign poilcy experience because Alaska is next to Russia.

What Palin lacks in foreign policy experience, McCain claims he has.  What Obama lacks in foreign policy experience, Senator Joe Biden certainly has.

The fact remains, even though Obama is not a very experienced leader, his ideals, goals and ambition for his country are genuine.  With Biden by his side, experience is there.

People can argue that McCain has the experience Palin lacks, but it seems that McCain’s choice might do more harm than good.  She is a dark horse pick, she has uncovered corruption in her state and propelled Alaska to a better balanced budget.  But she lacks what Biden has, and it will be very interesting to see how she fairs in a debate against him.

She has been described as aggressive, and was known on her high-school basketball team as ‘Sarah Barracuda.’  But how far can aggressiveness get you in a debate against one of the most seasoned politicians in Washington?

McCain has come under much criticism for the pick, which many thought, and think, was made as to attract disenchanted Senator Hillary Clinton supporters.  That probably won’t work because of their different views on many important issues.

McCain obviously sees something in Palin the public currently doesn’t.  We’ll see how many republicans warm up to the selection in the coming weeks.

10:14 PM

The crowd of 80,000+ is chanting “Yes We Can!” Barack Obama officially accepts the party’s nomination for presidency.

10:15 PM

He thanks Hillary Clinton for her work on her campaign and his. He also thanks Bill Clinton for his wonderful endorsement speech last night, and Ted Kennedy for his resilience. Also, Joe Biden for his speech, and his work. He also thanks his wife, Michelle Obama, and his daughters.

10:18 PM

He talks about the American dream. He says all that is wrong with America, in regards to the economy and other major problems are a direct result of the Bush Administration.

10:20 PM

“Enough! This moment, this election is our chance to keep, in the 21st century, the American promise alive.” He references the Republican convention next week, and says we are here because we love this country too much to let the next four years look like the last eight. “Eight is enough!”

10:23 PM

“Senator McCain likes to talk about his judgment, but what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right 90% of the time?” He talks about what McCain has said about the economy and the American people, “a nation of whiners” when it comes to their complains about the economy’s downfall. He is getting in touch with middle-class America. He’s showing there is no disconnect, like McCain tries to make it seem, and like many are afraid of. Obama himself, rose from nothing to everything, he is the epitome of a lower-middle class man, he chose social service over a high-paying post in a law firm.

10:26 PM

He talks about the difference between each party’s view on progress. “We measure progress in the 23 million new jobs that were created when Bill Clinton was president.” Many economical issues that effect middle-class families today, that didn’t effect them when the last democrat was president. Issues that effect them now under George Bush, who all democrats liken to John McCain.

10:29 PM

Reminds the public about his civil service in Chicago 20 years ago. Talks about all his grandmother has done for him, the sacrifices she made for him to have a better life. He puts down the comparison to celebrity that McCain has tried to enforce upon him, saying his life has not been that of a celebrity, but of a hard-working American.

10:31 PM

A government should do “that which we cannot do.” “Our government should help us, not hurt us, it should ensure opportunity…for every American who’s willing to work.” “We rise or fall as one nation”

10:32 PM

His Change: A tax cut for companies that create jobs in America, not ship them overseas. Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses and start-ups. Cut taxes for 95% of all working families. “In 10 years we will finally end our dependence on oil from the middle-east.” “We will do this.”

10:34 PM

Off-shore drilling is a short term measure not a long-term solution. “Not even close.” He says he will tap our natural gas reserves and fund clean coal companies. He wants fuel-efficient cars to be built in America. $150 billion over the next 10 years in renewable energy, creating five million new jobs that can’t be outsourced.

10:36 PM

World-class education for children, so all children have the chances he has had. Higher salaries for teachers. Affordable college educations for social servants or those in the military. Affordable, encompassing health-care for all Americans. References his sick grandmother, who had cancer, arguing with health insurance companies.

10:38 PM

Equal pay for equal work. “We cannot meet 21st century challenges with a 20th century bureaucracy.” He says he’s ready to lead, and is ready to debate McCain, who says Obama isn’t experience enough to be Commander-in-chief.

10:42 PM

References all that is wrong with McCain’s view on the war, and all that he, Obama, has stood up for. He is showing everyone that he knows a lot about foreign policy, and with Biden by his side, no one need worry. “We are the party of Roosevelt, we are the party of Kennedy, so don’t tell me this party won’t keep us safe.” “We are here to restore that legacy.”

10:45 PM

Obama says he will end the war responsibly. He, eloquently, tells everyone he will once again make America a symbol of hope and prosperity.

10:47 PM

“I’ve got news for you John McCain. We all put our country first.”

10:48 PM

Acknowledges the differences of opinions between republicans and democrats, on gun control, same-sex marriage and abortion. Highlights what everyone can agree on, keeping AK-47’s out of the hands of criminals, keeping gays and lesbians free of discrimination and reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies.

10:50 PM

“This election has never been about me, it’s about you” Acknowledges that he isn’t the typical presidential candidate, but he has a dream to help the people of this country. He’s a new player, with new ideas and a new brand of politics. He will bring change “to Washington.” Because, he says, change doesn’t come “from Washington.”

10:53 PM

Talks about where he’s seen change around the country, and how he will make life easier in America. He talks about the promise that defines America. He talks about Dr. Martin Luther King’s speech 45 years ago, a speech that started a revolution that has allowed him to be where he is now.

10:56 PM

He ends with a God Bless the United States of America.

This has been a wonderful speech. He’s saying everything that needs to be said, he is putting McCain’s accusations to rest and being as eloquent as ever. He gave every American, I think, proof that his inexperience isn’t a bad thing. He used his inexperience as a tool, saying that “change doesn’t come from Washington, it comes to Washington.” What I really liked was the organization of the speech, how he started off addressing the middle-class, the one’s the republicans have said he is disconnected from, and really hit home with them. He addressed all the issues that concern each and every one of them, and probably surprised a few viewers. Eloquence and clarity is something that you can always expect from Obama, but tonight’s speech was especially well-delivered, it had a different feel, an urgent feel, and was impeccable.

That’s it from me and the DNC.

During the roll call, where state delegations announce their votes, New Mexico yielded their time to the Illinois delegation. After announcing themselves as the home of the “next President of the United States of America,” Mayor Daley of Chicago, yielded to the state of New York – home of Senator Hillary Clinton. In a showing of unity, Senator Hillary Clinton, after the state announced themselves, motioned to suspend the rules, count all delegate votes, and nominate Senator Barack Obama by acclamation.

With a loud cheer from the floor and no opposition, Barack Obama was nominated the Democratic Candidate for President. The Democrats, despite the bitter ending of their primaries, have a story book ending with a unified nomination on the Convention Floor. The party has been reunited for the common goal of winning the White House in November, despite the battles over the past few months.

Senator Obama will give his acceptance speech tomorrow evening at Invesco Field.

Two rifles, a high-powered scope and a score of methamphetamine were all found in Gartrell’s rented car.

The traffic stop ignited a chain of arrests–two more men and one woman — all believed to be planning an attempt on Obama’s life during his acceptance speech this Thursday night. One of the men — not Gartrell — is said to be a white supremacist.

Inside Gartrell’s car, officers, in addition to the weapons, scope and methamphetamine, found a bulletproof vest, camouflage clothing, walkie-talkies and several licenses with different names on each.

The series of arrests took place about 11 miles from the Pepsi Center, the site of the Democratic National Convention.

According to the Denver TV station CBS4, when one of the suspects was asked whether he had come to Denver to assassinate the presidential candidate, “he responded in the affirmative.”

CBS4 also reported that one of the suspects told authorities he planned to, “shoot Obama from a high vantage point using a … rifle sighted at 750 yards.”

Some police sources are saying the case concerns drugs more than a possible plot against Obama’s life, which does contradict what media reports the suspects told authorities. Regardless, the FBI is currently investigating the event.

Colorado U.S. Attorney Troy Eid told media he is “confident” there is no threat to Obama’s safety during the convention.

The ailing senator has endorsed Obama for many months, before he won the democratic nomination. He campaigned with Obama for a while before suffering a seizure that led to the discovery of his brain cancer.

Kennedy’s promise is a bold one, but the optimism is no doubt necessary for all democrats; the road to the White House will now be even harder for Obama, but it is certainly doable.

As for his promise to return to the Senate, those on all parts of the political spectrum will surely support him in both his political and personal recovery.

UPDATE-LIVE:

Michelle Obama gives insight on her own life, speaking of the trials and tribulations of growing up and honoring the triumphs and sacrifices of her parents, ones made to help put her and her brother through college. She connects that with Mr. Obama’s upbringing, citing both of their beliefs in honesty and hard work.

She quotes something Mr. Obama said to her earlier on, of the difference between “the world as it is, and the world as it should be.” He said, “all too often we accept the difference between the two and we accept the world as it is…we have an obligation to fight for the world as it should be.”

Mrs. Obama talks about servicemen and women, and cites Senator Hillary Clinton as putting “those 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling” to help young female–and male–Americans succeed. She cites Senator Joe Biden as someone who never stops fighting for those who need help. Joe Biden rises in standing ovation for a comment about Mr. Obama.

Mrs. Obama highlights Mr. Obama’s beliefs, in ending the war in Iraq, on health care and the economy. She tells of how much he cares about the middle-class, seemingly trying to reinforce what their camp has been trying to tell the public, that he is not out of touch with mainstream America.

“The Barack Obama of today is the same man I fell in love with years ago.” She adds a story of how Mr. Obama brought her and their child, Malia, home from the hospital 10 years prior. Mrs. Obama is doing a wonderful job of infusing emotion and personal family affairs with politics, showing that their family is like any other. They are an ordinary American family with strong family values and great dreams for the country they love. No disconnect from middle-class America here.

Biden’s smiling. Great job by Mrs. Obama.

The Obama children make an appearance on stage with their mother, waving along toward the audience.

Mr. Obama appears on screen, his daughter, Sasha, yells out, “Hi daddy!” several times.

Mr. Obama has never looked more like a president than he does right now. I don’t know why, but it’s true. He’s connecting with his daughters on a personal level on international television.

Mr. Obama tells the audience he’s in St.Louis, his daughter, Sasha, then screams out, “Where are you daddy?” He corrects himself and says Kansas City. His daughters both scream, “I love you daddy!” as he leaves. What a lovable family.

That’s it from the Obama’s for tonight.