September 26, 2008

9/26: High Drama

Liberal bloggers blame John McCain and the House GOPers for causing last night's bailout talks to break down, and they're urging Dem lawmakers to walk away from the negotiations. They're accusing McCain of engaging in political gamesmanship and they're declaring that if a financial crisis happens, it will be on McCain's shoulders, since he failed to bring House GOPers on board. Conservative bloggers are defending McCain by arguing that House GOPers never supported the legislation and that Dems are free to pass it without them.

That said, most lefty and righty bloggers agree that the bailout bill is flawed. You know it's a strange political environment when Michelle Malkin and Markos Moulitsas are both denouncing the same piece of legislation.

Meanwhile, liberal bloggers are buzzing about Sarah Palin's shaky interview with CBS' Katie Couric -- particularly her jumbled answers concerning Russia and the bailout. Lefty bloggers are describing Palin's performance as "mesmerizingly horrendous" and "incoherent" and they're arguing that McCain's running mate has become "a national joke". Unsurprisingly, conservative bloggers have been mostly silent about the interview.

$700 BILLION BAILOUT: No Deal? Blame McCain!

Liberal bloggers blame McCain and the House GOPers for causing the bailout talks to break down, and they're urging Dem lawmakers to walk away from negotiations:

• TalkLeft's Big Tent Democrat: "John McCain and the Republicans blew up this deal to further McCain's own political ambition. Country first my ass."
• Balloon Juice's John Cole: "If this is not a big enough crisis that McCain and the GOP can play games with it, it is not a crisis at all. Walk away, Democrats."
• Oliver Willis: "Everything points to the fact that drama queen McCain decided that working to scuttle the deal with his Republican allies is what's needed to use our economy as a flimsy backdrop to McCain's personal ambition. It's the ultimate demonstration of Ego First."
• Firedoglake's Scarecrow: "Okay, John McCain. You own this mess. You went to Washington to get a solution that didn't require your help, after telling the nation repeatedly that this was the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression and that we had to solve it to save the economy. If the crisis worsens in the next few days -- as in major banks failing -- and you don't get your crazies in line, you've just seized ownership of a possible financial meltdown."
• Mother Jones's Kevin Drum: "Well, it appears that John McCain has succeeded in his plan to torpedo the bailout negotiations for a while so that he can swoop in and pretend to be their savior tomorrow. [...] There really seems to be no end to McCain's preening self-regard and stunt-of-the-week campaigning strategy these days, nor any end to his lack of regard for caring about what's actually best for the country. If this stuff were a game with no real-world consequences, I'd admire his gamesmanship. Since it's not, I'm just disgusted."
• Obsidian Wings' hilzoy: "David Kurtz notes that McCain had spoken to the House Republicans before they staged their revolt, and that a number of them reported that he seemed sympathetic to their ideas. McCain's campaign, however, issued a statement saying that he 'did not attack any proposal, or endorse any plan.' That's what I call real leadership: parachute in after other people have been in complicated negotiations for days, trailing the entire national press corps behind you, on the grounds that you are urgently needed, in person -- and then undermine the deal behind the scenes without being willing to publicly take any position at all."
• Sadly, No!'s Brad: "It's time for the Democrats to call the GOP's bluff. They have to hammer the SOBs and tell them that they had a deal all set before John McCain and his big fucking ego decided to ride in on his white horse and fuck everything up. They cannot allow themselves to be used as pawns to get John McCain elected. Democrats, give them the finger and walk away until they meet your demands. And then go on television every day and loudly blame for the coming stock market crash. Crush them and don't stop crushing them until you've won."

$700 BILLION BAILOUT II: It's Not McCain's Fault!

Conservative bloggers are defending McCain against the Dems' charge that he contributed to the breakdown of the bailout talks:

• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "The House Republicans were never on board. And you don't actually need their votes to pass this bill; the holdup is that the House Democrats are terrified of having sole responsibility for the bill. What changed between yesterday afternoon and evening is that the Democrats position changed from 'we're comfortable passing the bill without many House GOP votes' to 'we're NOT comfortable passing the bill without many House GOP votes.' How is that John McCain's fault again?"
• Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "Democrats are claiming that McCain has done more harm than good in the legislative debate. Although this is always a possibility with McCain (and, indeed, just about anyone who is willing to lead), the Democrats' case is absurd. Their argument is that Congress was on the verge of a deal until McCain entered the picture and caused Republican House members to block it. The problems with this script are several. First, there is no evidence that House Republicans were ever on board with any deal. Second, the support of House Republicans is not needed to pass bailout legislation. The Democrats control the House. [...] If the deal made sense, House Dems wouldn't believe they need 'cover' from House Republicans."
• NRO's Jonah Goldberg: "I honestly believe that the determinative factor in McCain's decision to suspend his campaign and go to Washington was that he thought it was the right thing to do (in other words, politics was part of it, but he wouldn't have done it if he didn't feel it was his duty). Whether his move helps the situation or hurts it is hard to figure out now and may only be knowable in hindsight (and perhaps not even then). But politicization is a two way street. If the Democrats' reaction to McCain's intervention is to care more about denying him a victory than to get the deal done, they're just as guilty of 'politicizing' this mess."

$700 BILLION BAILOUT III: Just Say No, Dems

Most liberal bloggers remain strongly opposed to the bailout legislation, which they consider both politically foolish and wrong on the merits. They're urging lawmakers to wait until after the elections to pass major legislation addressing the financial situation:

• Firedoglake's Ian Welsh: "At this point I can't see how we get a good deal when the entire Congressional leadership, and the president plus both presidential candidates are onside for a bad bill (just, as it happens, different bad bills.) [...] Efforts should continue to make sure that backbenchers in both the House and Senate continue to refuse to sign off on this mess. No good bill is going to come out of this Congress with the help of this administration. Kill the bill, give [Treasury Sec. Henry] Paulson a hundred billion or so on strict strings just so that he and [Fed. Chair Ben] Bernanke can't blame Congress for the continued economic and financial deterioration which will occur no matter what is done, and go on holiday. January 20th a new Congress can start over with a new President and try and do it right."
• dday: "This is impossible to do in the current environment, and it always was, given that we're 40 days out from an election, and nothing more should be done than a temporary bridge loan to get us to Inauguration Day. The people can decide on the best practice after that."
• Open Left's Chris Bowers: "Stop the deal. We don't need an immediate decision -- the only reason Congress wants to wrap this up quickly is so they can go campaign. Fine -- they should stop the dealmaking, go and campaign on what they believe should be done, and then let us decide. We don't need bi-partisanship 40 days before an election. Give us a choice, and let us decide."
• Arianna Huffington: "I've said it before, and I'll say it again: bipartisanship in service of bad legislation is not a good thing. And, make no mistake, this bailout bill -- at least if the details that are trickling out are accurate -- is going to be very bad legislation indeed. And by that I mean very bad for the American people, whose interests are by no means identical to Wall Street's. If Barack Obama goes along with it in the name of post-partisan comity, he's making a big mistake."
• Open Left's Matt Stoller: "If I had to guess, a $700 billion is going to hurt Obama more than McCain. [...] Obama is giving up good turf here, where he can ask for everything from the right, and if they don't give it to him, appeal to the voters at the ballot box. But that's not what he's doing, he's giving away his political leverage. [...] The best case scenario is that things return to normal temporarily with no improvements in the housing situation, and normal is a bad place to be for Obama because normal returns the campaign to celebrity ads, race-baiting, and foreign policy turf where his campaign doesn't like to play (he can win there but he hasn't won there to date). And if they cut this deal, and the markets keep sliding and financial instability returns, then it'll be proof that neither McCain nor Obama, who are both calling for bipartisan unity around give-aways to the people who got us into this mess, can govern. And let's not even discuss the situation where McCain votes no on a trillion dollar bailout to Wall Street, and the Democrats and Obama vote yes."

Daily Kos' Moulitsas remains skeptical about the necessity of this legislation: "There has been zero effort to educate the American people about why the situation is so urgent. There have been a lot of proclamations that the situation is urgent, but still no explanation. I asked both [Sen. Maj. Leader Harry] Reid's office and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi's office about releasing Paulson's presentation to the leadership to the American people, so we can all see what supposedly has them all so spooked that we have to mortgage the next several generations of Americans. Reid's office was non-committal (i.e. 'I hear you', but no movement toward full transparency), and Pelosi's office blew me off. Maybe [Rep. Barney] Frank or [Sen. Chris] Dodd can clue us in? I mean, we know they think it's the end of the fucking world, but this isn't Iraq, there's no pretensions of 'secret intelligence' and 'protecting sources' to hide behind. If they want the peoples' representatives to sign off, then don't treat us like damn toddlers too delicate to see the facts. Because from where I'm sitting, it looks just like the Iraq War bullshit, and we all know how those dire 'facts' ended up turning out. Either offer full transparency, or stop whining about people skeptical about this solution to the crisis."

Moulitsas also believes the bailout is bad politics: "The American people aren't happy with this bailout. Democrats are giving McCain a gift by allowing him to be seen as its slayer. Yet Democrats sit there thinking that lining up behind [George W.] Bush's proposal will somehow be a political plus. Yet every challenger across the nation, Democratic and Republican, is running against this thing to public cheers. The tone deafness on this is shocking."

$700 BILLION BAILOUT IV: Kill The Bailout!

Many conservative bloggers are also denouncing the bailout legislation:

• Malkin: "[I] just heard from several readers that Lindsay Grahamnesty [SC Sen. Lindsay Graham] told Fox that the Mother of All Bailouts includes a reported $100 million more in funding for the left-wing housing entitlement thugs and heavily tax-subsidized fraudsters at ACORN. [...] Told you not to trust Hank Paulson. And I repeat: Fiscal conservatives need to be looking out for us tonight as they try to ram this thing through with a plethora of goodies for liberal shakedown artists."
• NRO's Jack Fowler: "So a huge chunk of this proposed bailout is going to end up in the coffers of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now? [...] This bailout seems to be developing into a lefty Christmas tree, and that's just something conservatives will just have to swallow. Unless ACORN gets sprinkled with this pixie dust, unless John Sweeney and his hugely overpaid labor buddies get their wish list adopted, we are going to have a depression? Stop the world, I want to get off."
• Hot Air's Ed Morrissey: "I'd support a rational bailout package, but anything that funds the [Housing Trust Fund] needs to get stopped."
• Right Wing News' John Hawkins: "The reaction to the bailout deal remind[s] me of the very early stages of the immigration debacle, before people became completely infuriated -- except, this time the anger is on the Right AND the Left. Every single day since this lousy deal has been announced, the general reaction I've seen has gotten more negative, with more and more people speaking out against it. This bill is going to be absolute political poison by the time it's done and if you want to know why they're hurrying so fast to 'get something done,' I think it has as much to do with the fact that they realize that the political window is closing fast and they want to get it done before the public really figures out what's going on and gets very, very angry."
• AmSpec Blog's Quin Hillyer: "I predict that if this bailout plan passes as expected, the relief will only be temporary, and that a new crisis will emerge when even more capital flees the US markets because the dollar isn't strong enough to make the investments worthwhile. If John McCain had any sense, what he would do is endorse one of the conservative plans ([Rep. Thaddeus] McCotter, [Newt] Gingrich, [Rep. Jeb] Hensarling) and bend Paulson and company to HIS will. [...] This is not a good plan. It should not be adopted. And conservatives hungry for leadership from McCain will again be disappointed -- unless, in a surprise, he actually does do something dramatic to re-emphasize free-market principles."

$700 BILLION BAILOUT V: A Necessary Evil

Other conservative bloggers believe the bailout is necessary:

• Geraghty: "Over the past days, I've become a reluctant supporter, or at least acknowledging that what the Paulson plan aims to do has to be done. You can't say, 'this will take care of itself' or, 'let the markets work,' unless you're comfortable with the stock market really crashing (several thousand points), and continuing to decline for a long stretch, with serious repercussions for the entire economy. [...] I'm noticing that the members of Congress who are on committees that deal with financial issues are (generally) on board with the plan, and the opposition seems to be coming from rank-and-file members, who, it seems safe to say, have less familiarity of the details of how the markets work. There seems to be a sense among some folk that if they don't own stock themselves, a stock market crash wouldn't affect them. I can see a lot of reasons to not like this proposal. But I can see a lot more reasons why inaction is worse."
• Townhall's Carol Platt Liebau: "I admire the House Republicans' purity of purpose -- and like them, I wish that the crisis could could be solved through cutting taxes and deregulating that would attract a flood of private capital into the markets. The problem, however, is that the problem has become too big and needs to be solved fast. We're talking $700 billion that's needed [...] There's simply not enough private capital out there -- with people willing to sink it immediately -- to solve the problem. And make no mistake. If the markets crash and borrowers remain unable to access the credit markets because the markets lack liquidity, the problem will spread to every sector of the economy. Everyone will be hurt. Anyone who (like me) worries about the 'creeping socialism' that the Paulson plan may represent needs to remember the aftermath of the first Great Depression. That's when the modern administrative state and previously unheard-of powers for the federal government came into being. Does anyone think that if we encounter a second Great Depression -- especially coupled with an Obama presidency (how, exactly, does McCain make the case for himself this fall if his party scuttles the deal?) -- that we're not going to see even more socialism than the Paulson plan represents?"

Townhall's Hugh Hewitt writes a "Memo To House Republicans": "No one likes the risks involved in Paulson 2.0 or the precedent of using so much public money to rescue reckless bankers, both private and semi-private. But there is a very good chance that (1) it will actually make money for the Treasury and (2) without it the financial crisis will spread and the small businesses of America and the people who own and staff them will be deeply injured. These businesses are the backbone of the economy, and they are in danger. This isn't just a bailout of Wall Street; it is a breakwall for Main Street. [...] Gather with John McCain this morning -- he is the leader of the party -- and invest him with the authority to conclude or walk from the deal. [...] You cannot stand by and watch people's business and savings hemorrhage and expect them to reward you for your purity of purpose and incompetence of execution."

NRO's Kathryn Jean Lopez disagrees with Hewitt: "Hugh Hewitt wants the House guys to chill out. They are doing their job -- trying to make the deal better. And I'll defend their right to do it. I don't want markets to collapse either. But if some noise can make for a better, more conservative plan in the end, I'm glad they're fighting."

Townhall's Matt Lewis also supports the efforts of House GOPers: "The belief among House Republicans is that a bad bill is worse than no bill -- a point I tend to agree with. [...] We may well need a bill to get us out of this situation, but a bad bill will set a dangerous precedent, as well as bring America even closer to socialism. Washington and New York elites got us into this mess, but conservative congressmen are elected to represent we the people. [...] House Republicans ought to insist on a clean bill which will solve the current crisis, without creating a new one. Democrats can pass this legislation without the support of conservative Republicans. After losing in 2006, we have finally gotten a group of up-and-coming conservative young turks elected to congress who are not tainted by from being in the majority during the Bush years. If this bad bill is to pass, let it happen without tainting conservative hands."

MCCAIN: His Campaign Sure Doesn't Look Like It's Suspended...

Liberal bloggers are pointing out that McCain hasn't suspended his campaign in any meaningful sense, since (a.) his TV ads continued to run all day Thursday, (b.) his surrogates continued to appear on TV and attack Obama, and (c.) his state campaign offices were still open and operating:

• TPM's Josh Marshall: "Let's see. In the interests of saving the country, John McCain has to cancel the debate. But he's got time to do prime time interviews on each of the three broadcast networks tonight."
• MyDD's Jonathan Singer: "Color me confused. John McCain is apparently so embroiled in negotiations that he can't participate in tomorrow night's debate, but he's not so busy that he can't appear on all three network news programs tonight?"
• Atrios: "Does this look like suspended to you?"
• AMERICAblog's John Aravosis: "Busted. McCain's campaign specifically said they'd stop appearances, rallies, and TV advertising. But they didn't. Liars."
• TPM's Greg Sargent: "McCain's suspension of his campaign apparently doesn't apply to his own advisers. Despite McCain's claim that he's put his campaign on hold, two of them directly attacked Barack Obama in political terms on television this morning."
• Daily Kos' SusanG: "Andrew Sullivan has reports from two different readers in two different media markets that McCain ads are up and running as relentlessly as ever. David Kurtz at Talking Points Memo reports on McCain surrogate Nancy Pfotenhauer appearing on Fox to attack Obama, and then scooting on over to the Washington Times for a friendly little chat about the campaign. Guess we'll be seeing McCain at the debates tomorrow since he's decided to keep his campaign going. Right?"
• The Huffington Post's Sam Stein: "The Huffington Post called up 15 McCain-Palin and McCain Victory Committee headquarters in various battleground states. Not one said that it was temporarily halting operations because of the supposed 'suspension' in the campaign. Several, in fact, enthusiastically declared the continuation of their work."

PALIN: I Can See Alaska From My House!

Liberal bloggers are criticizing Palin's answer to Couric's question about why she believes that AK's proximity to Russia "enhances [her] foreign policy credentials" (video here, transcript here):

COURIC: Have you ever been involved with any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?

PALIN: We have trade missions back and forth. We-- we do-- it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is-- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to-- to our state.

• Moulitsas: "Ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch. You have to watch her. It's mesmerizingly horrendous. Watch how she says 'as Putin rears his head'."
• Cole: "This isn't even funny anymore. I am now feeling bad for this moron, she is in so completely over her head. This is like one of those awkward moments in school when a student is giving a presentation they are completely unprepared for, and the teacher knows it, the student knows it, and everyone watching knows it, yet you sit there and go through the charade. [...] Heartbeat away. Jeebus."
• Ezra Klein: "Has there ever been a national politician this incoherent? And how has the McCain campaign organization not helped her memorize a better answer to the Russia question?"
• Sargent: "Anyone know what this means? Again, that's not snark. Never mind the image of Putin rearing his head as he floats into Alaskan airspace. Is she saying that American spies who keep an eye on Russia take off from Alaska? And what does that have to do with being Governor of the state? What is the woman talking about?"
• The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "Usually, candidates for national office get better as time goes on. Palin is clearly getting worse. I mean, really, think about Palin's argument here. She has foreign policy experience because [Putin] flies over Alaskan air space. Seriously, that's what Palin told a national television audience. [...] I'm afraid Sarah Palin is not only embarrassing herself, she's quickly become a national joke."
• Aravosis: "[This is a] horrific, horrific, horrific excerpt of Palin explaining why living close to Russia and Canada makes her a foreign policy expert. She comes across as a blithering idiot. At some point, Republicans have to ask themselves why they're willing to risk our national security, should McCain die in office, on someone who is quite clearly not ready to lead our nation in a time of crisis."
• Daily Kos' DemFromCT: "Oy. Watching this interview, I'm thinking McCain accidentally picked Mary Richards from the old Mary Tyler Moore Show to run for VP. If only all we needed was 'perky'..."
• Think Progress' Matthew Yglesias: "It's very hard to say what this is supposed to mean. When I flew from Moscow to New York, my flight path didn't take me anywhere near Alaska. Indeed, Moscow is closer to New York than it is to Anchorage. And yet nobody would say that [NY Gov.] David Patterson has extensive foreign policy experience thanks to his proximity to Russia. I think Palin may have gotten a briefing that told her that Alaska is in the flight-path for some Russian nuclear missiles that go over the arctic en route to destinations in the United States. That, I believe, is true though it's certainly not what she said. It's possible that all this cramming is causing Palin to become less coherent -- instead of just parrying questions she knows she doesn't have good answers to, she's trying to remember canned lines but it's too much all at once to actually get right."
• BooMan: "I know Alaskans speak English, but I have to ask you Alaskans, 'Does Sarah Palin make sense to you?', because down here in the lower 48 it seems like she is speaking a foreign language."
• Atrios: "The horror continues."

PALIN II: Okay, This Isn't Even Funny Anymore

Liberal bloggers are also criticizing Palin's jumbled answer to Couric's question about the bailout:

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries? Allow them to spend more, and put more money into the economy, instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: ...Ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it's got to be about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and getting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade -- we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the trade sector today. We've got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation.

• Moulitsas: "I just want to make sure you guys understood this answer properly about the $700 billion bailout: Reducing taxes has to be accompanied by tax reductions. Got it? Good. Carry on."
• Salon's Glenn Greenwald: "[This is] more than just being inarticulate. It's exhibiting a complete inability to formulate a coherent thought about core issues."
• TalkLeft's Jeralyn Merritt: "Unbelievable that Gov. Sarah Palin could be Vice-President of the United States. She's practically sub-verbal and she makes no sense."
• Drum: "Look, this is just getting scary. I don't care how partisan you are, you can't watch this clip from Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric without wondering if she's completely cracked under the pressure of running for vice president. The question is a simple softball about the bailout -- something she's had weeks to bone up on -- but her answer is incoherent. Not just the usual platitudes politicians offer when they don't feel like answering a tough query, but completely incoherent. Hell, it's barely even in English. I don't even feel right making snarky jokes about this stuff anymore. This campaign has gone seriously off the rails. I've never seen anything like it."
• Benen: "If you watch the clip, you might notice that Palin was intermittently referring to notes. In other words, this is the kind of response she offers on a question about the Wall Street bailout with help."
• Brad: "WHAT THE HOLY HELL IS SHE EVEN TALKING ABOUT??!?!!!?!!? OK, people, I am scared to death. If any Canadian friends will take me in, I will be your official houseboy: I'll clean up, take out the trash, wash dishes, cook meals, walk your pets, ANYTHING. Just GET ME OUTTA THIS MADHOUSE!!!!"
• Daily Kos' BarbinMD: "Now we know why the McCain campaign is hiding Palin."
• Klein: "Try to parse [her answer]. The bailout helps health reformers by bankrupting the government? We need to accompany our tax reductions with reduced taxes, and pair that with tax relief for Americans? How does the bailout connect to trade, or to job growth? And even the syntax is falling apart: She corrects 'help' to 'helping,' but 'helping' doesn't make sense in that paragraph. These aren't lies she's telling. It's not misdirection, or deception. It's just nonsense."
• TAPPED's Sam Boyd: "It's hard for me to believe that McCain couldn't have made a better pick than Palin after watching this projectile nonsense. [...LA Gov.] Bobby Jindal might not have generated quite as big an initial bump as Palin, for example, but he certainly would have generated public interest and pleased the base just as much as Palin -- plus he's capable of speaking in complete sentences."

PALIN III: Everyone Knows I'm In Over My Head...Over My Head...

Liberal bloggers are growing increasingly skeptical about Palin's readiness to become VP:

• Greenwald: "Sarah Palin's performance in the tiny vignettes of unscripted dialogue in which we've been allowed to see her has been nothing short of frightening -- really, as I said, pity-inducing. And I say that as someone who has thought from the start that the criticisms of her abilities -- as opposed to her ideology -- were much too extreme. One of two things is absolutely clear at this point: she is either (a) completely ignorant about the most basic political issues -- a vacant, ill-informed, incurious know-nothing, or (b) aggressively concealing her actual beliefs about these matters because she's petrified of deviating from the simple-minded campaign talking points she's been fed and/or because her actual beliefs are so politically unpalatable, even when taking into account the right-wing extremism that is permitted, even rewarded, in our mainstream. I'm not really sure which is worse, but it doesn't really matter, because with 40 days left before the election, both options are heinous."
• dday: "I think John McCain suspended his campaign (sort of) to deflect attention away from the jaw-gaping performance by his running mate with Katie Couric. We already know that he ran in for a damage control interview with Couric last night in the middle of [David] Letterman. That was the right move. I mean this is stunning. [...] I'm with Greenwald, she's either deeply ignorant and incurious or she's so buttoned up by the McCain campaign that she can only speak gibberish."
• Klein: "What's happened to Sarah Palin? The fact that Palin's responses to questions are becoming increasingly incoherent rather than rapidly more polished is interesting. Rote memorization should have all but eliminated the overlay of nonsense in her answers by now."

Most conservative bloggers haven't mentioned about Palin's interview with Couric, but there are a few exceptions:

• The Atlantic's Ross Douthat: "And now, an excerpt from my inner monologue, as transcribed while watching various clips from Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric (I can't link to them; they're too painful): And that, Douthat, is why nobody's ever going to hire you to help pick their running mate. But hey, maybe it's all just effing brilliant rope-a-dope for the [Joe] Biden debate...."
• AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein: "This doesn't change my earlier assessment that, in my view, Palin is not ready to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. What I am saying is that Palin is in a situation in which she has to field questions on a lot of subjects that she doesn't know a lot about. Rather than try to spit out rehearsed lines over and over again, she would be better off, as much as possible, to speak in her own words, rooted in her own values, and sense of right and wrong."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Are We Overemphasizing Stock Market Performance?

Yglesias:

"People are generally happier when the stock market goes up than when the stock market goes down. But given that large numbers of people own no stock, and most people own only a very small amount of stock, it makes no sense to make stock market performance the main goal of economic policy. Most people's year-to-year financial situation is more influenced by the state of the health care system than by the state of the stock market. Most people's retirement security is more influenced by whether or not large cuts are made in promised Social Security benefits than by the state of the stock market. But the interests of the relatively small minority of people whose financial situation is dominated by the state of the stock market have disproportionate influence over the media and the political system."

LEST WE FORGET: Mmmm...Krispy Kremes

From Overheard in the Office:

Female employee: You've never had Krispy Kreme donuts?
Male employee: Nope.
Female employee: Ohh. They are so good!
Male employee: Really?
Female employee: Yeah, they're better than sex!
Male employee: Hmm. You must be doing it wrong.

Posted by Ian Faerstein at September 26, 2008 12:50 PM