Saying the “nation needs Romney,” The Boston Herald endorsed former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney for the Republican presidential nomination today.

“There is only one candidate in the Republican field with the integrity, the experience, the organizational strength and the intelligence to beat Barack Obama and that man is Mitt Romney,” the paper wrote in an editorial. “But perhaps more to the point, there is only one candidate who can put this nation back on the path to fiscal sanity and restore it to its central role on the world stage. That candidate is Mitt Romney.”

The news comes as Romney has begun to emerge as the frontrunner for the nomination in a recent Boston Globe poll.

“I don’t think the answer to our economic woes is to raise taxes,” he told Herald editors and reporters at a recent meeting. “People are already paying half of their income in taxes [to every level of government].

“Government is simply taking too large a slice out of our economy,” he added.

He’s out.

With poll numbers dropping like a stone and no new money coming in, Herman Cain has suspended his bid for the Republican presidential nomination.

Staffers had speculated that he would drop out today, but no official word had come until now. The announcement came in Atlanta, at the opening of Cain’s new headquarters, which was supposed to be a joyous occasion for the one-time GOP frontrunner.

On Friday, Cain returned home to suburban Atlanta and met face-to-face with his wife, Gloria for the first time since 46-year-old Ginger White came forward to say she had a 13-year extramarital affair with Cain.

Barney Frank, one of the first openly-gay politicians and one of Massachusetts’ most well-known politicians, announced he would not seek re-election.

Frank, who has usually coasted to re-election, has come under fire as chair of the House Banking Committee given the current state of the economy.

Massachusetts Republicans were quick to comment on his decision not to run again:

“It is clear that Congressman Frank was not looking forward to another hard fought campaign after losing his gerrymandered district and spending nearly every penny he had in 2010,” said Massachusetts Republican Party Executive Director Nate Little in a statement. “Republicans were already gearing up for a strong race and Frank’s sudden retirement injects added optimism and excitement into the election.”

Frank has been in office since 1981.

With the 2012 election season approaching fast and the majority of election news covering the GOP hopefuls, a major blow was struck to Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann’s nomination hopes as her entire New Hampshire staff resigned today.

According to the Global Post, the five-person team, including right wing radio personality Jeff Chidester who had called himself a “longtime friend” of Bachmann, all resigned at once in protest of the lack of attention New Hampshire was receiving from the campaign.

While there has been no official statement made by the team, it has been reported that Southern New Hampshire field director Caroline Gilger will be joining Texas Governor Rick Perry’s effort.

With the New Hampshire primary election poised to happen on January 24, this is the most recent hit to Bachmann’s bid for the nomination, which began strong with the winning of the Iowa Straw poll in August, but has dwindled down to a fourth place standing ever since.

David Axelrod, a senior adviser to President Barack Obama said Sunday that the Republicans seeking the presidential nomination don’t understand the reasons behind the “Occupy” protests that haves sprung up around the country, including Boston.

Axelrod told ABC’s “This Week” that people “want a financial system that works on the level. They want to get a fair shake.”

The remarks came the day after dozens of protesters from Occupy Wall Street were arrested in Times Square in a violent clash with police.

Meanwhile, the Occupy Boston protest has continued to grow after two weeks, and a similar movement has begun in Providence.

Axelrod said that American’s aren’t “impressed” by GOP presidential candidates saying they want to “roll back Wall St. reform.”

He also slammed frontrunner Mitt Romney for changing positions on issues throughout his political career.

“I think there’s this question about what his core principles are,” Axelrod said, citing changes in Romney’s positions from earlier in his political career when he was running for U.S. Senate and Massachusetts governor. “Then he was a pro choice, pro gay rights, pro environmental candidate for office. Then he decided to run for president. Did a 180 on all of that.

“So time and time and time again he shifts – and you get the feeling that there is no principle too large for him to throw over in pursuit of political office.”

Axelrod has specifically targeted Romney recently.

“If I were Governor Romney I’d be worried about all these changes in position and what kind of message that sends to voters,” Axelrod told “This Week” anchor Christiane Amanpour.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee raised $100,000 to support Elizabeth Warren’s bid for congress, to give Republican Senator Scott Brown a run for his money.

PCCC is a liberal grass-roots group who got more that 53,000 people to join its online project to draft Warren, who has not yet made an official announcement that she will run for office.

$75,000 of the raised money will go directly to Warren’s campaign, while the remainder will pay for online ads in Massachusetts.

The Harvard Law professor will decide after Labor Day whether or not she will try to win back the late Senator Edward Kennedy’s seat for Democrats.

Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann visited New Hampshire and clutched a teabag during a speech in Nashua, but at an earlier speech in Manchester, she Republican confused one of the basic facts of the Revolutionary War.

“What I love about New Hampshire and what we have in common is our extreme love for liberty,” the potential presidential candidate said. “You’re the state where the shot was heard around the world in Lexington and Concord. And you put a marker in the ground and paid with the blood of your ancestors the very first price that had to be paid to make this the most magnificent nation that has ever arisen in the annals of man in 5,000 years of recorded history.”

Of course, the opening battles of the Revolution were actually fought in Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts.

The gaffe is likely to go down as one of the larger blunders of the upcoming 2012 presidential primary season.

The remark also illustrates a lack of basic knowledge of New England geography and of grade school-level American history — the same history that her Tea Party backers drew from in forming the movement.

The story was first reported by RealClearPolitics.

A recent study by California-based media research company Experian Simmons seems to prove what many already believe: Democrats and Republicans have different tastes. Their research reveals that Republicans are more likely to be enthusiastic about shows with big ratings while Democrats seem to gravitate towards shows that are less popular but more critically acclaimed.

“The big shows with mass appeal tend to have above-average scores from Democrats and Republicans but with higher concentrations of Republicans,” according to Experian Simmons senior marketing manager John Fetto, “Looking at the Democrats side, I don’t mean to make light of it, but they seem to like shows about damaged people. Those are the kind of shows Republicans just stay away from.”

The degree to which Republicans gravitate to more popular shows is striking: nine out of ten top shows on the Neilson list appear on the Republican list as well. None appear in the Democrats’ top 10. Democrats tend to adore “Mad Men” while “American Chopper” and “Pawn Stars” are more popular with Republicans.

While at first glance it might seem that there’s a “high brow versus low brow” conflict at the heart of these differences, the reality is more complicated. Republicans favor reality shows based around competition but certain particularly unabashedly trashy reality shows — “Jersey Shore,” “Kourtney & Khloe” — are more favored by Republicans. Animated comedies such as “Family Guy” score higher with Democrats, as do most shows on the CW.

Democrats also tend to love NBC’s Thursday night comedy block. “30 Rock”, “Community”, and “Parks and Recreation” appear in the Democrats’ top 15. Republicans tend to rate those shows lowly while, maybe surprisingly, giving “The Office” even slightly higher marks than their Democrat counterparts.

“Modern Family,” a show featuring a gay couple with adopted kids, seems like an unlikely choice for the Republicans’ number three spot, yet there it is. This and similar details of the study make it difficult to wax analytical about how viewing habits relate the supposed “culture war” between the Left and the Right in the United States. But for anyone hoping for less partisanship in American politics anytime soon, the bad news seems more concrete: Glenn Beck’s show tops the Republican list while Keith Olbermann’s program is tops with Democrats.

Here are each group’s favorites:

As released by Charlie Baker’s campaign:

My fellow Republicans…My name is Charlie Baker, and I’m running to serve YOU as the next Governor of the great state of Massachusetts!

Thank you and God Bless the great state of Massachusetts!

Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jennifer Nassour released the following statement this morning regarding the upcoming Tea Party rally on Boston Common:

“We welcome the Tea Party movement to Boston and it’s always exciting to witness democracy in action. Just like the American colonists in 1773 who protested against burdensome taxes, the Tea Party movement is a motivated group of voters who are disappointed with the party in power. Like Republicans, they’re tired of the way business is done — both on Beacon Hill and Capitol Hill. Our Republican candidates support controlling taxes and spending, and on the major fiscal issues that the Tea Party supports, they are going to find the most alignment with the GOP. It’s time to unite on the issues we can all agree upon and get Republican candidates elected in November 2010.”

Health care reform supporters gather in Phoenix./Courtesy of ellene000 on Flickr

If you followed the non-stop health care coverage leading up to last night’s vote, you may be surprised to learn that Obama isn’t sitting atop the White House with a sniper rifle picking off old people one by one.

The citizen debate was passionate, at times ugly. Racial epithets and spit were hurled at black congressmen. Barney Frank, the openly gay representative from Massachusetts, was called a "faggot". I’ll leave it up to you to guess which side was responsible for this.

President Obama, a man who campiagned on the promise of uniting the country, ripped it apart in the most unlikely of ways. He created a divide by demanding more Americans be given access to health care. He’s been attacked by every side, by countless Americans and government officials, for his policy and, in some cases, his race. You have to wonder how much of the hate is directed toward the bill, and how much of it is an explosion of pent up anger from those who still can’t beleive that a young, African American with little political experience defeated a decorated war veteran from Arizona in 2008.

Anyway, back to the bill. Ezra Klein, a blogger for the Washington Post, defined the arguments against the bill quite well yesterday on Twitter: ezraklein The GOP’s argument on the bill is 1) it’s socialism and 2) it cuts Medicare too much? So, too socialist and not socialist enough?

Too true. You know how you separate the historically educated from the historically ignorant? Those who call Obama a socialist, or who beleive the U.S. is inching toward socialism, are the latter. For example, Glen Enloe, from the Kansas City Star, who says "change is just another a code word for socialism". You sir, are historically ignorant. Or maybe these people, Enloe included, aren’t historically ignorant. Maybe they know history. Maybe they’ve studied history and know what socialism is and what socialist leaders really act like. But that means they’re inciting fear and hate for the purpose of political gain. You tell me which is worse.

I’ve strayed again. Apologies. Back to the bill. Of course it isn’t perfect. It’s the first major reform in almost a century. Obviously, not everyone can be pleased. Obama’s last minute deal with Bart Stupak guaranteed the bill would pass, and that deal, which ensured no federal money would go toward abortions, angered the National Organization for Women (NOW). They say Obama’s decision to issue the Executive Order shows his commitment to health care is "shaky at best". Obviously, that isn’t true, he’s put his presidency on the line to ensure more Americans have access to health care.

NOW is angry because they didn’t get what they wanted. I never thought the abortion clause would go through unnoticed or unchallenged, or, in fact, that it would go through at all. It’s just not a conversation the country is willing to have right now, and in the midst of sweeping health care reform, to get caught up on one issue, however important, is not in the best interest of the country. Obama recognized that, that’s why he took it out. But we all know where the president stands on abortion, so I really, really doubt he’ll toss it aside for too long.

Like I said before, the health care bill is not perfect. It can’t be. It never will be. But no matter who you are, or what side you’re on, you cannot possibly think the health care system in the United States is the “best in the world.” The World Health Organization ranks it at 37, just behind Slovenia. Infant mortality is higher than the European Union, largely because of lack of access to health care caused by racial and ethnic disparity, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Life expectancy in the U.S. is last among the G7 and 38th in the world, behind Cuba. In a country obsessed with being first, that’s not good enough.

This is not the “best health care system in the world.” It wasn’t before the bill, and it won’t be after the bill. But making great physicians available to a larger percentage of the population is a mark of an improving health care system. That’s what the U.S. needs to focus on right now. It’s people.

A billboard just outside Wyoming, Minn. has sparked a national conversation regarding our current president’s relative effectiveness as compared to former President George W. Bush.

The billboard shows a picture of a smiling President Bush with the words “Miss Me Yet?” printed beside the photo. The billboard’s creators want to stay anonymous, though an employee from Schubert & Hoey Outdoor Advertising says the creators are a ” group of small businessmen and individuals who just felt like Washington was against them,” the Christian Science Monitor reports.

The billboard has drawn strong opinions from both the right and the left. It comes at a time when Republicans and Democrats are pulling further away from each other on key issues like health care, and as Obama’s approval rating drops to record lows.

What do you think? Do you miss him yet?

Do you?

Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jennifer Nassour released the following statement regarding Senator-elect Scott Brown’s victory this evening:

“Tonight’s historic, come-from-behind victory by Senator-elect Brown will serve as a blueprint for our Republican candidates running in Massachusetts in 2010 and beyond. His relentless focus on fiscal responsibility, lower taxes and a promise to serve as an independent voice for Bay Staters resonated with not only Republicans, but also independents and Democrats who are tired of politics as usual and one-party rule. It is my sincere hope that Senator-elect Brown will be seated immediately so that he can roll up his sleeves for Massachusetts, and work toward continuing Senator Kennedy’s legendary constituent services.”

President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. Some are ecstatic, some are confused and some are overcome with anger.

I thought it was an odd decision. Definitely. Especially given the other nominees which include the Cluster Munition Coalition, a group that strives to clean up cluster bombs and decrease accidental civilian war deaths and Dr. Denis Mukwege, an inspired young Conoglese physician who opened a hospital to treat female victims of sexual abuse.

Inspiring, to say the least. Deserving candidates, no doubt.

And then there’s the victor, Barack Obama, a Harvard law school graduate, community organizer, civil rights lawyer, law professor, junior senator and president of the most “powerful” country in the world. A stunning resume, but where are the accomplishments? The peace work, the advocacy, the results?

That’s what so many are asking. What so many are wondering. And while I, a supporter of Obama, do not think he deserved the award based solely on his accomplishments to date, I do believe the award was given for a reason, and a just, sane reason at that.

Innovative decision to award Obama prize

Now hear me out. Obama won the prize not just for what he has achieved in less than 10 months (which is quite a bit if you look at it with an open mind) but for how he changed the game and reshaped the face of a nation so hated and demonized for so many years. For the potential of peace on a plethora of fronts.

Obama is in the process of sewing together the gaping wound that is America’s international reputation; not an easy feat. It’s something that no other modern Democratic or Republican candidate could do in two terms, let alone a quarter of one.

The fact that the Norway-based committee stressed it made the prize decision based on Obama’s efforts to date was a little strange. I don’t really believe that to be the case, nor does anyone else, even the hardest and strongest Obama supporters. Obama doesn’t believe it either, rightfully so.

Strengthening the international reputation of the most “powerful”nation in‚ the world contributes to peace in many ways. His efforts toward nuclear disarmament are commendable. His decision to end the missile-defense system in Poland led to strengthened ties with Russia, a nuclear powerhouse. His administration has striven for peace with India, another nuclear nation.

His efforts to strengthen relationships and mend ties between Americans and Muslims was politically risky, but so right and groundbreaking morally.

His confusion on Afghanistan is warranted, no one knows what the hell is needed there, and the answer given (“more troops”) isn’t a surprising one. But he’s taking his time and not rushing.

Some view him as the “do-nothing” president or the president of “inaction.” I view him thoughtful and rational, and I’d rather he take weeks to decide the fate of thousands of American soldiers than make a quick decision (like the last guy) and put so many soldiers in harm’s way just because of political pressure from both sides of the spectrum, without thinking it through and weighing the options. That’s called reasoning.

His no-nonsense discussions with Iran, without preconditions, a proposition he was so ridiculed for during his campaign, showed the world he is committed to nuclear disarmament and a more peaceful Mid-East.

His speech in Cairo, though predictable, reaffirmed that idea. His quoting the Qu’ran was a great way to connect with an overwhelmingly large global group so alienated by American ideological extremists.

We elected him for that reason. Because he’s intelligent, thoughtful, peaceful, multi-racial and ambitious. It’s been less than 10 months. How many ambitions are achieved in 10 months? None. But the path to realizing those ambitions has been laid.

Oz

Let me make it a bit clearer by using a crude but wonderfully applicable analogy.

Think of Obama as Dorothy and his path to peace as the yellow brick road. When Obama crash landed in the White House after a whirlwind electoral campaign, he was ambitious, excited and ready to overhaul the system. Soon he realized that that’s not possible, at least not as quick as he thought. There are hundreds, if not thousands of people to please and political and social hurdles to vault.

Just as the Afghanistan war became more brutal and a reassessing of the plan was needed (just as Dorothy tried to find out from the munchkins how she could get back to Kansas), Obama was given hope, something he’d given, in abundance, to millions around the world.

The Peace Prize committee are the munchkins, they are Glinda (the good witch). They gave Obama direction, thanked him for his bravery and pushed him, inspired him (as he inspired us) to continue his work. To keep on going. After all, he doesn’t want to be the guy who won the prize and did nothing to deserve it. And no, he’s not already that guy.

There will be obstacles (the wicked witch, the fake Wizard of Oz) however Obama/Dorothy prevail in the end, defeating the evils that stand in their ways. Yes you can think he was awarded prematurely, but only if you view the award as something given only for hard results. More results will come, the award is faith in that.

In fact, the award was given because he’s changed the world’s mood. He’s made global citizens happier and more tolerant in times of economic uncertainty, global racially charged fear, terrorism and war.

Uninspired criticism

Today I came across an article on the British website timesonline.co.uk written by broadcaster/writer Minette Marrin. She claims, wrongly in my opinion, that Obama should never have accepted the peace prize. That he is undeserving, and she compares his victory to that of Henry Kissenger’s in 1973.

Ms. Marrin, that’s cold. It’s unfortunate that you can’t see past the present day.

Marrin ventures another guess as to why Obama accepted the prize, a very odd one. She ventures that the president accepted the prize just because two fellow Democrats, Al Gore and Jimmy Carter, also boast the prestigious medal in their respective trophy libraries.

As if the award were some piece of trivial memorabilia, some baseball card, that an 11-year-old pines for just because his best buddies have the same one. She then quotes an “American commentator” who said “it is like accepting an Oscar now for being likely to make an Oscar-winning movie next year.” A degradation of the award that is insulting to past winners and childish, to say the least.

Marrin goes on to ask “Can it be that Obama is already intoxicated with the exuberance of his own celebrity? For that is all he is so far “" a well-meaning super-celebrity.” Well-meaning? See the second section of this piece.

However there are many who wonder if Obama’s ego has been so inflated that he believes himself the savior of America and the world.

But to those of you who ask that, I ask why is he so “humbled” by the award? Why is it the man, the president, started off his acceptance and justification speech by talking about his two children? Yes, he has speech writers, but only he heard what his kids said that morning. And he remembered.

Yes Obama is a little egotistical, he is, after all, the president. But don’t forget, we gave him that ego (see: road to ’08 election).

Finally, for those who believe Obama didn’t deserve this prize, you hold a valid view. I too believe Dr. Mukwege or the Cluster Munition Coalition deserve an award of recognition for peace work.

My argument is that Obama’s victory isn’t unwarranted or undeserving. His accomplishments to date are impressive, his future is full of possibilities and the peace prize was awarded to him by a panel “instructed to encourage international co-operation, arms reduction and acts of engagement”‚ for his initiative and to ensure he keeps working towards his, and our, ultimate goal.

Peace.

Just as President Obama, during a speech about health care reform at a joint session of Congress Wednesday night, stated his new health care plan would not cover illegal immigrants, Joe Wilson did the unthinkable. “You lie!” he shouted at the President, anger spewing from his mouth and his gaze.

Honestly, it sounds fictional. It sounds like a bad political novel. Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina’s 2^nd district has managed to catapult himself into the international spotlight by, as VP Joe Biden put it so eloquently, “demeaning the institution.” And that he did.

It takes guts to call out the President, especially when you are watching him give a speech firsthand. But being courageous, at the wrong time, has its consequences. Loudmouth Joe was immediately booed by hundreds of Democrats. Republicans lambasted the 5^th term representative for being disrespectful and breaking Congress rules.

Wilson had to apologize immediately after, and though he didn’t get to say sorry face-to-face with the President, Obama accepted the apology. To me, these apologies mean little anyway. Anyone can say “sorry” after the fact, but it take someone of real integrity not to make the mistake in the first place. Or, in this case, someone with with half a brain.

Many of the more vocal republicans have been quite outspoken when it comes to the issue of the new health care plan giving benefits to illegal immigrants. Obama has said time and time again that it won’t, but, apparently for Loudmouth Joe and many others, that hasn’t been enough.

Sadly, because the health care document is more then 1,000 boring, boring pages, no one will ever read through it to find the truth. Or, we could just listen to the President.

Even if you choose not to, just don’t take a page out of Joe’s book. We don’t need another Joe in the spotlight. That plumber was enough.

Joe Wilson (R-SC) may have saved his political career by issuing a public apology for his outburst at President Obama last night, but I’m not holding my breath.

As a Republican working and living among the bluest of blues in Boston, I understand how frustrating it can be to listen to bleeding-heart liberals talk about their plans to save the world. But I also understand the importance of political give-and-take, and the first “give” has got to be respect. Publicly, in front of a joint session of Congress and a national television audience, calling anyone a liar, never mind the President of the United States, knocks Wilson, as well as the GOP as a whole, down a few notches in the give-and-take game.

It is not like Wilson does not have enough outlets to voice his disagreement with the president’s health care plan “" his Congressional website, Fox News, Facebook, a Twitter account he last updated on Labor Day, with no mention of the President’s health care plan. I support public disagreement with the President in the appropriate forums, but as a conservative (and also a political science major with a keen interest in the American Presidency), I believe the Presidential office should be sacred “" a symbol of America, like the flag. If you disagree with a national policy, you would not turn your flag upside down. Likewise, I don’t believe you should mock the president. Belittling him belittles everything we stand for as Americans, as he was freely elected by our fellow citizens.

Wilson’s childish outburst also undermined his party’s cause. The media is not asking Republican politicians what they think of the President’s health care plan; they are asking what they thought of Representative Wilson’s outburst. Was it justified? The potential for a deep and insightful national conversation about healthcare has been lost to some political name-calling. Media outlets like CNN are also noting the number of conservatives who are defending Wilson on Twitter. Health care was not the number one trending Twitter topic last night, Joe Wilson was.

Wilson’s public disagreement may be protected by the First Amendment, but is a diluted representation of the kind of disagreement that should be protected. Wilson should back up his position that he made so public with an intelligent op-ed in a major newspaper, citing reasons for his outburst. Maybe then he can protect the GOP from being mislabeled as a party of immature extremism, but rather as one of true ideas that are simply different from those being place on the table by the President.

So it’s not exactly who we expected.

Canton selectman Bob Burr, 43, is the first Republican to stand up and say he's running for Senate.

The day after former Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey decided not to run for the US Senate seat vacated with death of Ted Kennedy, we thought State Senator Scott Brown (R-Wrentham) might announce his candidacy, but it was an obscure town selectman who became the first Republican to officially announce he is running for Senate.

Bob Burr, a three-term selectman from Canton, a town 20 minutes south of Boston, announced his candidacy Monday.

Burr, 43, gets press coverage for being first. He makes up in balls what he lacks in statewide or national experience.

“This election represents a great opportunity for the people of Massachusetts to shape the future for a stronger America,” Burr said in a statement. “By electing a Republican to the United States Senate, the people of Massachusetts can ensure that there will be debate on the issues affecting healthcare, taxes, and deficit spending. If the Senate were to remain at a 60 member, filibuster proof, Democratic majority, I fear that opportunity will be lost in the coming months. And that loss could put America on a trajectory that is not necessarily in concert with desires of the American people.”

Burr is a 1989 graduate of Boston College with a degree in business.

The Republican Jewish Coalition lashed out against Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Monday, saying his policies and advisors posed threats to Israel and American Jews.

“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.

McCain and Obama went head-to-head tonight. Here’s what I thought.

Having the first 30-minutes devoted to the economy was a great idea. The candidates got a chance to stretch their economic muscles at a time of heavy uncertainty.

McCain said he would back a spending freeze on everything except defense. That’s more of a small scale solution. Obama said he wants to fund in need programs at home, while cutting funding for the programs that aren’t working.

Obama refused to take a stance on the bailout since the final details are still unknown.

The next 60 were about foreign policy as planned. If you watched it on CNN, you saw the ticker line fluctuate a few times, but mostly stay around the center. After the debate, some people were asked whether they were satisfied with the night’s discussion, most said no.

That’s because while foreign policy is immensely important, people wanted that 30-minute economy debate to turn into a 90-minute national affairs debate. If only that was possible.

McCain accused Obama of being ignorant in his handling of the Georgia crisis earlier this year. Obama had called for both sides to exercise restraint, while McCain said he’d support both Georgia and Ukraine’s inclusion in NATO.

McCain also talked about nuclear weapons in Iran, saying that if Iran acquired them, more mid-east countries would try to do the same, presenting a huge threat to much of the world.

Obama blasted McCain for being wrong about the war from the get-go, after McCain accused Obama of not acknowledging that they are now “winning” that war.

Obama said that wasn’t true.‚  He then exemplified the need for more troops to move to Afghanistan where real help is needed.

Even though McCain is more experienced when it comes to foreign policy, he couldn’t put Obama away. That’s a loss I think.

Obama has been accused of being inexperienced and inept when it comes to foreign policy, (he probably did get some pre-debate advice from Biden) but that didn’t show tonight.

He came out swinging on every topic. McCain did well, but the topic was a strength for McCain, he should have won and he didn’t.

More than 30 registered voters, (democrats, republicans and independents) were polled after the debate ended. More than 60% said they’d vote Obama come Nov. 4. It’s a small sample of course, but even CNN flash polls marked Obama as the clear victor, even when it came to McCain territory, Iraq war.

I do agree.‚  It wasn’t so clear cut but this one leans Obama’s way.‚  He wasn’t nervous, he showed sound judgement and quick response.‚  McCain was a little jumpy at times, and Obama kept his cool.‚  McCain should’ve put Obama away in a foreign policy debate and he didn’t.‚  McCain comes out the less appealing candidate.

PS.‚  McCain didn’t wear an American flag pin on his lapel.‚  Oh no!

Make sure to follow along tonight as I live blog the highly anticipated speech of GOP VP candidate Gov. Sarah Palin.‚  She has garnered a lot of negative media attention since her inclusion in the campaign, so it will be interesting to see how she validates herself as the VP candidate.

Last night, Sen. John McCain was endorsed by Sen. Joe Lieberman, President George Bush and Former Sen. Fred Thompson.‚  All named McCain as the right choice for office and tried to assure republicans and Americans that he is ready to lead.

Tonight, Palin will try to establish her place on the ticket.‚  She will try to reassure everyone that McCain’s choice was a wise one, and she may address some negative comments that have been made about her, her abilities, her past and her family.‚  The latter may not happen though, she may steer clear of that.

She will definitely talk about how she’s shaken up Alaskan politics, uncovering corruption and putting “country first,” or in her case, state first.

Make sure you join me tonight.‚  Palin is scheduled to hit the podium around 10:30 PM.

10:30 PM

Palin hits the stage.

10:32 PM

Palin accepts nomination for GOP VP.

10:34 PM

Palin launches into a speech about McCain, praising him, his resolve and his “sheer guts.”

10:36 PM

She mentions his service, and his approval and support of the troops in Iraq.‚  She supports his position because her son is in the military, about to go to Iraq.‚  Her nephew is serving in the Persian Gulf.

10:38 PM

Well, I guess she does want to talk about her family.‚  I think it’s wise that she’s decided to do that.‚  She’s connecting with middle-class America, saying that her family goes through the same hardships as every other American family, so she knows what it’s like to deal with them.‚  She addresses families with children with special needs, saying that if they elect her, they have a personal representative in high government.

10:40 PM

She introduces her husband, who stands to introduce himself.‚  He receives a standing ovation…..

10:42 PM

She references her Alaskan citizens, saying they are some of the hardest working Americans in the country, of course, talking about herself as well.‚  “The difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull—lipstick.”‚  Funny.‚  Also shows she is savvy and gritty.‚  Look for more grittiness throughout the speech.

10:44 PM

References Obama’s old comment about how small town folk cling to guns and religion.‚  Says he talks one way to people’s faces, and another behind their backs.‚  Says John McCain will never do that.‚  He is the “same” man.‚  Funny, democrats say he’s the “same” man too…

10:46 PM

She references the media’s speculation that she is unqualified because she has no real Washington experience.‚  She says, “I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion, I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this great country.”‚  Basically, says she doesn’t need experience in Washington because she is going to change it.‚  Don’t you need to know something about what you plan to change?

10:48 PM

Palin is repeating a lot of the things she said when she was first introduced.‚  She talks about how she and the citizens of Alaska reformed the government and put it “back on the side of the people.”‚  She talks about her economy reform in Alaska, and how McCain says he will use vetoes as president if necessary.‚  She tells the audience that she has vetoed nearly half a billion in unnecessary spending in Alaska.

10:52 PM

She talks about the $40 billion pipeline that is being constructed, that will “lead America one step further away” from oil dependence on foreign nations.‚  She says that the U.S. should not draw from their strategic oil reserves, Obama wants to do that.‚  Some people int he crowd caught that reference.‚  She does not want the country to be at the “mercy of foreign suppliers.”

10:54 PM

She’s now referencing the oil situations in different countries, basically showing the audience she does know a little about foreign policy and what’s going on in the rest of the world, and that she isn’t just a sheltered Alaskan governor.

10:56 PM

Talks about keeping jobs in America.‚  She says that Obama has authored two books, but no reform.‚  References his celebrity status again.‚  That’s really not working anymore.‚  Basically says he thinks he has a God-like status, “turning back the waters and healing the planet.”

10:59 PM

She says Obama wants to raise taxes.‚  Not really, only for the highest 5% of the population.‚  He actually wants to lower them for 95% of the population.

11:00 PM

Says McCain uses his career to “promote change.”‚  She’s saying, basically, that Obama is all-talk, he’s just an orator and has no substance.‚  She says McCain has actually accomplished things.

11:03 PM

She says the “American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery.”‚  The U.S., she says, does not just need an organizer.‚  Says there is only one man in this election that “has ever really fought for you.”‚  “That man is John McCain.”

11:05 PM

She references his past as P.O.W.‚  A journey from Hanoi to the White House.‚  References John McCain’s optimism during his torture, how he smiled while walking back after the treatments.

11:08 PM

She ends by saying that if it’s change you want, join us.

11:11 PM

McCain joins Palin’s family on stage. Asks the audience if they think he made a good choice.‚  He’s already making me sleepy.

That’s it from the RNC.

Her speech was good, she took countless shots at Obama, part of what people wanted to hear.‚  She talked about herself a little, but all she said, we’ve heard before.‚  It leaves people thinking that, what we’ve heard that she’s done, is all she’s really done, that’s all her experience, and that will be a problem for many non-hardcore republicans.

She talked about, for the majority of the speech, John McCain’s goals, ambitions, and what he will accomplish as president.‚  She took more shots at Obama than many of the other speakers combined.‚  She is gritty, republicans will love her after this speech.

Not much talk about the economy or jobs in America.‚  A little, but not a lot.

I usually keep this stuff in the OTR blog, but considering the heightened political climate, and the fact that Sarah Palin has made big news over the weekend, I’m going to put it in the main magazine.

Deadspin got a hold of an old sports news video with Sarah Heath (as she was known then) doing the sports highlights for a local news station in Alaska. Despite her wonderful hair, she isn’t very good at this job and the transition to politics seems to have been a good idea.

Decide for yourself:

The Massachusetts Republican Party released this statement seconds after Governor Deval Patrick walked off the podium at the Democratic National Convention.

Boston, MA – The Massachusetts Republican Party issued the following statement today in response to Governor Patrick’s speech to the Democrat National Convention

MassGOP Chairman Peter Torkildsen said, “Tonight, Deval Patrick spoke in Denver, but he might have well as spoken in Hollywood, because what he talked about had no basis in reality and no relation to his own dismal record of broken promises. Having an eloquent, but extremely inexperienced Governor is bad enough: an eloquent, but extremely inexperienced President would be much worse. The bottom line is this, Barack Obama is not ready to lead and not ready to govern.”

The Federal Emergency Management Agency and the United States Secret Service responded quickly Saturday morning to an Associated Press report that stated terrorists might clone police and emergecy vehicles to conduct attacks against the Republican Convention in St. Paul, Minn., and the Democratic Convention in Denver.

“Unfortunately the article suggests a connection to the Democratic and Republican National Conventions that does not exist,” the government said in a statement. “These bulletins are periodic refresher notices designed to inform and educate emergency responders about potential threats and emergency management issues. Similar advisories were issued prior to the 2004 political conventions.”

“To be clear, there is no evidence at any level of the federal government that this type of activity is a current and viable threat to either convention.”

The government agencies went on to encourage organizers to be dilligent as always with a major national-level evnet to “maintain a heightened awareness for any contingency.”

“But again, there is no current credible threat from cloned or fake emergency vehicles,” they said.

“The Secret Service and all other federal agencies remain hyper-vigilant and focused on all credible threats,” they said. This was a quick, pointed response to a story that quickly spread across the national newswire and airwaves.

The news story came across the Associated Press newswire this morning, stating “a Federal Emergency Management Agency memo says terrorists could use such ‘cloned’ emergency or commercial vehicles to conduct surveillance or carry out an attack. The National Insurance Crime Bureau says faking such vehicles can be cheap and easy.”

The report cited examples of cloned trucks including a fake Wal-Mart truck that was busted carrying a ton and a half of marijuana and 450 pounds of cocaine.

Mitt Romney has won the Michigan Republican Primary.

Stick with our Politics With a Touch of Class blog for details!

From our Washington reporter:

Rumors have it that if Romney doesn’t do well tonight, this could make or break his campaign – the man has millions so I don’t understand but coming out of Iowa and NH with a couple second place wins and a "gold medal" from Wyoming, his support seems to be waning [...]