We’ve agreed to something with Iraq

Unfortunately, our own BushCo government won’t tell us WHAT changes it has accepted in its status of forces agreement with Iraq.

It WILL tell us, though, that it’s through negotiating changes on the SOFA:

A US official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said “there may be requests for clarifications (from the Iraqis) but as far as we're concerned that process of negotiating has come to an end.”

Don’t worry, though; Arab-language Asharq Al-Awsat fills in what BushCo won’t tell us.

Among other things, BushCo reportedly dropped a clause authorizing Washington and Baghdad to seek an extension for retaining troops in the cities beyond 2009 and in the country beyond 2011.

There's more: "We’ve agreed to something with Iraq" >>

"I WAS THERE"

Even through all the hours of volunteering, miles of travel, days of anticipation; I could never have imagined a feeling like this. A feeling that cannot be described…a historic feeling.

Through voter registration drives, phone banks shifts, campaign rallies and debate watching parties. I could never have imagined that I would be a part of something my kids could be so proud of me for.

As the day approached, a sense of numbness came over me as I continued to do my small part to be a part of history. A numbness that removed any feeling of counting pre-hatched eggs of historic proportions. Even as momentum grew, I did not let my efforts become complacent.

I think of the sacrifices and hours I gave then sit in awe as I realize they don’t even compare to what he gave for this…historic opportunity.

Everyone dreams of that story they can tell their kids, their grandkids and great-grandkids. The story that always can be summed up with these words…

I WAS THERE.

I was there in Springfield he first asked the nation to say, “Yes We can!”

I was there in the room of dozens calling voters in other states to tell them about this great man.

I was there when I had to say good-bye to Trinity and Daddy J.

I was there in Denver when he accepted the nomination, united a party and ignited a nation.

I was there among the hundreds who registered last minute voters in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio.

I was there when people opened their homes to watch the debates with strangers held by the common belief that CHANGE and HOPE are possible.

I was there when a young boy asked “VOTE FOR MY BETTER TOMORROW”

I was there when hundreds of thousands voted early in record numbers.

I was there when we called on millions of young voters to take back their country and show this country that our generation is not lost.

I was there in Indiana and Ohio when we believed that we could turn RED into BLUE.

I was there when 250,000 waited outside of Grant Park, the site of race riots just 40 years ago, in hopes of being there when history was made.

I was there when each electoral vote was awarded…

16

Then 70

Then 130

Then 197

Then 207

Then 273

And finally 292

I was there when we danced in Grant Park when he won.

I was there when strangers hugged each other and cried in each other’s arms, overcome by the emotion of the moment.

I was there when many called their loved ones to share the news.

I was there as they sold T-shirts, buttons, towels so we’d never forget this night.

I was there when Oprah and Jesse cried.

I was there when 250,000+ screamed “Yes We Can” as he walked on stage.

I was there.

Never in my life…even during the campaign did I expect to feel such a joy that could be compared to the births of my children. Yet there I was…calling my little girls in tears to let them know that I loved them and to remind them that this night proves that anything can happen and importantly to look to this day if they ever doubt what they are capable of.

I was there when millions celebrated in the streets all of the country as if they celebrated a new year when in fact they were celebrating a new day, a new country and a new belief in to what is possible.

I was there the next morning as everyone scrambled to newsstands to pick up their piece of history.

I was there as to witness homeless men and women smile from ear to ear to spend their only dimes and nickels on anything with his face on it.

I was there.

I was there.

I was there and nothing can compare to that. No one can take that from me.

Yet life goes on…as will I. Back to my life before “I was there”; before history was made as a nation said “Yes we can”.

So as my hair turns grey and my children grow, I now have my old man story that I will tell over and over. I have my story that will define my generation. A story I hope will inspire all and motivate others. A story that will be read by those that weren’t there so that they may create their own “I was there” moment.

I may not have been there when ROSA SAT

Or when MARTIN WALKED

But damn it…I was there when OBAMA RAN

And I pray that I am there when OUR CHILDREN FLY

THE SHAUN HAS SPOKEN

There's more: ""I WAS THERE"" >>

The Real 2008 Election Picture

From Mark Newman, Department of Physics and Center for the Study of Complex Systems, University of Michigan:

Election results by state

Most of us are, by now, familiar with the maps the TV channels and web sites use to show the results of the presidential election:




The states are colored red or blue to indicate whether a majority of their voters voted for the Republican candidate, John McCain, or the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama, respectively. Looking at this map it gives the impression that the Republicans won the election handily, since there is rather more red on the map than there is blue. In fact, however, the reverse is true – the Democrats won by a substantial margin. The explanation for this apparent paradox, as pointed out by many people, is that the map fails to take account of the population distribution. It fails to allow for the fact that the population of the red states is on average significantly lower than that of the blue ones. The blue may be small in area, but they represent a large number of voters, which is what matters in an election.

We can correct for this by making use of a cartogram, a map in which the sizes of states are rescaled according to their population. That is, states are drawn with size proportional not to their acreage but to the number of their inhabitants, states with more people appearing larger than states with fewer, regardless of their actual area on the ground. On such a map, for example, the state of Rhode Island, with its 1.1 million inhabitants, would appear about twice the size of Wyoming, which has half a million, even though Wyoming has 60 times the acreage of Rhode Island.

Here are the 2008 presidential election results on a population cartogram of this type:

Hat Tip To BentLiberal @ Docudharma

And on the flip: Palin's "real" America: From Larisa Alexandrovna at-Largely this morning...

Sarah Palin has told us over and over that she represents real Americans. So consider this very interesting analysis from New York Times, showing the areas of America that delivered more Republican votes than in 2004:

In comparison, look at the below map showing where there was an increase in Democratic voters:

Um, Sarah, looks like your real America is a tiny strip where mountain folk still dwell.

There's more: "The Real 2008 Election Picture" >>

Mr. President...

There's more: "Mr. President..." >>

DEMOCRATIC LANDSLIDE 11/4/8

.
VOX POPULI, VOX DEI TODAY

IT'S JUDGEMENT DAY, AND THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IS HEARD IN THE LAND



Record Nationwide Popular Turnout Buries Old Regime In The United States Of America

VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!
VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!
VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!
VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!
VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!VOTE!!!

VOTER INFO:

Election Guide 2008

Congressional Election Information

US Election Assistance Commission

Registering to Vote and Voting

Find your polling place

VOTER INFORMATION CENTER

Election Protection

Report Voting Problems

[Cross-posted at blog me no blogs.]
.
.

There's more: "DEMOCRATIC LANDSLIDE 11/4/8" >>

JOHN MCCAIN, ILLEGAL ALIEN? SARAH PALIN, SECESSIONIST? DISQUALIFIED!!!

.
MCCAIN WAS NOT BORN IN THIS COUNTRY; PALIN WANTS OUT

WHY WON'T MCSAME SHOW HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE? WHERE IS IT? IS IT ON PAPER, OR PAPYRUS?


YOUTUBE
"Cafferty File: McCain Not U.S. Citizen?"
CNN says McCain's eligibility is questionable.



YOUTUBE
"Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party. Palin addresses AIP convention"
Palin praises "inspiring work" by gun-toting right-wing nuts toward breaking up the United States.



NOT ELIGIBLE TO BE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF: McCain Could Be Disqualified If He Wins; Palin Might Then Bust Up The United States, Her Secret Agenda. Pelosi Is Next In Line...

Much has been made of the fact that Barack Hussein Obama's father was born in Kenya, and that his mother divorced the Dad and remarried a man in Indonesia, where Obama then went to live. But Barack was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, as his birth records show, and his mother was always a U.S. citizen.

John Sidney McCain III was born somewhere in Latin America, supposedly on a shadowy military facility in the jungles of Panama. Was it foreign soil? Are there any records? Who were his real mother and father? Is there any proof of his parentage? Or was his birth deliberately moved to Central America to conceal his true origins? Was his actual mother a Panamanian prostitute? Was his true father a Columbian gigolo? Does anyone really know? Who is John McCain?

He claims to be the same person who was arrested and imprisoned by the Vietnamese government for terror-bombing Vietnamese children. He says he was brainwashed by them, and forced to make propaganda for them. Did his programming include taking over the United States of America? To what end? Can he be trusted today? Has he ever been de-programmed? By whom? For what purpose? Is he a Manchurian Candidate, bent upon our destruction, possibly a communist, islamist or fascist dupe? How do we know?

Until these questions are answered, McCain is or should be ineligible to serve as President of the United States. His unqualified lunatic choice for next-in-line for the Presidency, Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, currently under investigation in Alaska, is an advocate of secession from the Union, which is treasonous. If she attempts to take over the government, military and law enforcement officers would be duty-bound to arrest and imprison her. That would leave us without a President, until Nancy Pelosi, next in line as Speaker of the House of Representatives, could step in. If our enemies don't step in first.


[continued]
.



.

Would we rather have Nancy Pelosi appointed or Barack Obama elected as President? That is the real choice. America cannot stand any more chaos and uncertainty. To avoid all this, we have no choice but to elect the only competent loyal American born in this country that is still in the race and eligible to take the office of the Presidency, Barack Obama. Vote Country First, America! You don't want to live in Manchuria, do you?

(Where is Manchuria, anyway? Is that where Fu Manchu is from? Wicked kewl 'stash, bro! It might not be so bad after all, living the Manchu way! Do they have helmet laws? How much is gas there? Just askin'.)


LA PRENSA LATINA
"John McCain, the Republican Bet"
See, the Latino's know!

' Born in 1936, in a US base in the Panama Canal, another issue that went against him when he ran for the White House in 2000. According to the US Constitution, to run for the Presidency you have to be born in a state of the Union. '

IREPORT.COM
"McCain's citizenship called into question"
I thought Romney was a cholo, that vato!

' This issue has been raised before in the presidential campaigns of Barry Goldwater, born in Arizona territory not the United States, and George Romney, born in Mexico. But it was never resolved. In 1964, the Supreme Court seemed to say, without deciding, that "natural born" meant born inside the United States. In an opinion on an unrelated issue, the court observed, "The rights of citizenship of the native born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the 'natural born' citizen is eligible to be President." But that language is not legally binding, and the Supreme Court has never ruled on what "natural born" means. '

NY TIMES
"McCain’s Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out"
Musty? McCain is musty, all right!

' Mr. McCain’s likely nomination as the Republican candidate for president and the happenstance of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the nation’s highest office. Almost since those words were written in 1787 with scant explanation, their precise meaning has been the stuff of confusion, law school review articles, whisper campaigns and civics class debates over whether only those delivered on American soil can be truly natural born. To date, no American to take the presidential oath has had an official birthplace outside the 50 states. “There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent,” said Sarah H. Duggin, an associate professor of law at Catholic University who has studied the issue extensively. “It is not a slam-dunk situation.” Ms. Duggin and others who have explored the arcane subject in depth say legal argument and basic fairness may indeed be on the side of Mr. McCain, a longtime member of Congress from Arizona. But multiple experts and scholarly reviews say the issue has never been definitively resolved by either Congress or the Supreme Court. “They ought to have the same rights,” said Don Nickles, a former Republican senator from Oklahoma who in 2004 introduced legislation that would have established that children born abroad to American citizens could harbor presidential ambitions without a legal cloud over their hopes. “There is some ambiguity because there has never been a court case on what ‘natural-born citizen’ means.” The conflict that could conceivably ensnare Mr. McCain goes more to the interpretation of “natural born” when weighed against intent and decades of immigration law. Mr. McCain’s citizenship was established by statutes covering the offspring of Americans abroad and laws specific to the Canal Zone as Congress realized that Americans would be living and working in the area for extended periods. But whether he qualifies as natural-born has been a topic of Internet buzz for months, with some declaring him ineligible while others assert that he meets all the basic constitutional qualifications — a natural-born citizen at least 35 years of age with 14 years of residence. “I don’t think he has any problem whatsoever,” said Mr. Nickles, a McCain supporter. “But I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if somebody is going to try to make an issue out of it. If it goes to court, I think he will win.” '

ASSOCIATED CONTENT.COM
"Sarah Palin: Voted Most Likely to Secede"
Maybe it's because she can see Russia from her taxpayer-funded hot-tub.

' But one item in her resume seems to be unknown by the majority of Americans, since it has gone virtually unreported by most of the mainstream media. This is the fact that Sarah Palin would actually like for the state of Alaska to secede from the United States and become its own sovereign nation. Palin's husband Todd was, for a number of years, a card carrying member of the Alaskan Independence Party (the AIP), whose avowed goal is getting a vote for secession on the ballot in Alaska, and passed as quickly a possible. Sarah Palin herself can be seen in a DVD she sent to the AIP's convention, welcoming them and effusively praising their efforts to dismember the United States. '

TALKING POINTS MEMO.COM
"We're Outta Here"
By golly, they're traitors!

' Todd Palin, husband of Sarah, was a member of the secessionist Alaska Independence Party from 1995 through 2002. That's the information we just got from the Alaska Division of elections. Probably not coincidentally, 2002 was the first time Sarah Palin ran for statewide office in Alaska. '

SALON
"Meet Sarah Palin's radical right-wing pals"
"Welcome to the White House, boys! When would you like to pull the U.S. military out of Alaska? Would noon today be OK? Kool-aid, anyone?"

' Though Chryson belongs to a fringe political party, one that advocates the secession of Alaska from the Union, and that organizes with other like-minded secessionist movements from Canada to the Deep South, he is not without peculiar influence in state politics, especially the rise of Sarah Palin. An obscure figure outside of Alaska, Chryson has been a political fixture in the hometown of the Republican vice-presidential nominee for over a decade. During the 1990s, when Chryson directed the AIP, he and another radical right-winger, Steve Stoll, played a quiet but pivotal role in electing Palin as mayor of Wasilla and shaping her political agenda afterward. Both Stoll and Chryson not only contributed to Palin's campaign financially, they played major behind-the-scenes roles in the Palin camp before, during and after her victory. Palin backed Chryson as he successfully advanced a host of anti-tax, pro-gun initiatives, including one that altered the state Constitution's language to better facilitate the formation of anti-government militias. She joined in their vendetta against several local officials they disliked, and listened to their advice about hiring. She attempted to name Stoll, a John Birch Society activist known in the Mat-Su Valley as "Black Helicopter Steve," to an empty Wasilla City Council seat. "Every time I showed up her door was open," said Chryson. "And that policy continued when she became governor." '

[Cross-posted on blog me no blogs.].
.

There's more: "JOHN MCCAIN, ILLEGAL ALIEN? SARAH PALIN, SECESSIONIST? DISQUALIFIED!!!" >>

Does KBR Make Money Off Dead Soldiers?

An Associated Press article came out this morning and I guess it makes an appropriately disgusting Halloween post.

KBR 3Q profit rose 35 pct as revenue climbs
Associated Press 10.31.08

KBR, which provides engineering services to the energy sector and the government, said Friday its third-quarter profit rose 35 percent as a newly-acquired business and work on Gulf of Mexico vessels drove sharp revenue increases.

Net income rose to $85 million, or 51 cents per share, in the three months ended Sept. 30 from $63 million, or 37 cents, a year ago. Income from continuing operations totaled 44 cents per share, including Hurricane Ike-related costs of 4 to 5 cents a share. (click HERE to read the rest of the article)

First, let me clarify, I think it’s great when companies make money. Especially in this day and age. BUT…I don’t feel the “end justfies the means”! With that said, I have a few questions for KBR, the DoD, Senator Dorgan Chairman of the Senate Democratic Policy Committee and Congressman Waxman, Chairman of The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

#1 Under the current LOGCAP III contract, does KBR invoice the DoD for attorney fees incurred while defending themselves in suits filed by former employees and families of dead soldiers and so on?

#2 Under the current LOGCAP III contract, if KBR loses a suit and a settlement is awarded, can KBR invoice the DoD for that settlement?

#3 Under the current LOGCAP III contract, if KBR is allowed to do #1 & #2 above, are they allowed to add their 1% (ie cost plus 1%)?

#4 Under the current LOGCAP III contract, if KBR is allowed to do #1, #2 & #3 above, does the DoD add these invoices in when figuring KBR’s Award Fee amount?

I guess my main question is:

Is KBR Making Money Off Dead Soldiers and Injured and Killed U.S. Citizens?

I was wrong…I have another question. Are my tax dollars paying for KBR’s attorney’s? OMG!! Say it isn’t so!

Somebody set me straight!

Ms Sparky

There's more: "Does KBR Make Money Off Dead Soldiers?" >>

The war won't end on Tuesday

From our friends at the Iraq Moratorium:

Yes, we know there's an election in four days, and a lot of folks are preoccupied. By all means, cast a ballot. But don't stop there.

No matter who wins or loses on Tuesday, the war in Iraq won't be over. It will drag on. More blood will be shed.

We want the war, the occupation, and the bloodshed to end as quickly as possible.

That's why in three weeks, on Nov. 21, we will observe the Iraq Moratorium once again. We hope you will again be part of it, as people all across the country interrupt business as usual and take action to call for an end to the war.

If we're going to end this war, it is essential that we keep the pressure on the people who are elected on Tuesday. We learned after the 2006 elections that change does not come quickly, easily, or automatically.

Please plan to join thousands of others who will take some action, big or small, on Nov. 21 to mark the Moratorium. You'll find lots of ideas on the website, IraqMoratorium.com.

And please take a minute to list the activity you're planning, so others can learn about it and participate, or take heart and inspiration from what you do. Use this easy form to share your plans.

And if you can spare a dime, buddy, we sure could use it, now that the campaigns are winding down. We've operated for more than a year on almost no money or paid staff. But even a shoestring operation needs to buy a shoestring now and then. We'd be most grateful for any help you can offer. Go here to donate.

There's more: "The war won't end on Tuesday" >>

MILITARY SEXUAL TRAUMA

WHAT'S MILITARY ABOUT IT? SOUNDS GODD*MNED UNMILITARY TO ME

IS THE DOD INSTITUTIONALIZING RAPE, MOLESTATION, AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT AS "COLLATERAL DAMAGE"?


Conduct Un-Becoming Is Becoming A Pretty Big Statistic

Over 15% of all women serving in the US armed forces in the Middle East have been subject to military sexual trauma, which, in English, means sex-crimes perpetrated by fellow servicemen and/ or women. More than one seventh, or a company out of every battalion, have been victimized because of their gender.

[continued]
.

.

THIS SUCKS!!! THIS IS UNAC-F*CKING-CEPTABLE PEOPLE!!! YOU'D BETTER JUST STAND THE F*CK BY!!!

Sorry, troopers & marines, that's my impression of a righteous, righteously pissed-off Gunny/ Master Sergeant/ or CO or XO, reaming out the formation. If there is any so righteous. There had f*cking well better be. Because our goddam sisters in arms are our g*ddam BROTHERS-IN-ARMS YOU F*CKING ASSHOLES!!!


NEWSWISE
"Substantial Proportion of Female Veterans Report Military Sexual Trauma; Military Sexual Trauma Is Associated with Higher Rates of Mental Health Problems"

' According to preliminary research results from the Department of Veterans Affairs, approximately 15 percent of recently returned female veterans utilizing the VA health care system report experiencing sexual trauma during military service. The cross-sectional study, presented at the American Public Health Association’s 136th Annual Meeting & Exposition in San Diego, examined health care screening data of over 100,000 veterans of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) who utilized medical care at any Veterans Health Administration facility during a six-year period. Along with the more than one in seven women, 0.7 percent of males also reported having experienced military sexual trauma (MST). Both males and females reporting MST were more likely to be diagnosed with a mental health condition than patients who did not report MST. '

USA TODAY
"15% of female veterans tell of sexual trauma"

' "There is concern about the number of sexual assaults, and we're working very hard to prevent them," says Kaye Whitley, who heads an office created by the Pentagon in 2005 to prevent and respond to the incidents. All service branches are expanding their prevention programs, and her office will launch a prevention effort next year focused on educating 18- to 24-year-old men, she says. A General Accounting Office report in July said training to prevent military sexual assaults isn't consistently effective, some commanders don't support the programs and more than half of victims don't report the incidents. Many women are afraid to report the assaults, says Anita Sanchez of the Miles Foundation, a non-profit that provides services to victims of military-related trauma. Fewer than a third of women who come to Miles for help after sexual assaults say they've told the military, she says. "A typical scenario is it's either a supervisor or someone at her level, in the same military unit. If you come forward, you're tattle-telling on a comrade. Women have told me about the sneers, the sarcastic comments. They can find themselves ostracized," says Sanchez, and when other women see this, the lesson isn't lost on them. '

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS
"Evans Releases Military Sexual Trauma Report Suppressed by Administration "

' Rep. Lane Evans (D-IL), the Ranking Democratic Member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, today decried the Bush Administration for attempting to hide a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) study and report on military sexual trauma among National Guard and Reserve forces. Despite the Bush Administration’s refusal to release it, Evans obtained the long overdue report that was originally due by March 2001. Evans has repeatedly requested the report and had been told it is under review at the Office of Management and Budget. The VA report indicates that across National Guard and Reserve components the estimated prevalence of any military sexual trauma (MST) among females is 60% and among males is 27%. MST includes sexual harassment, sexual assault and rape. The report also states the estimated prevalence for rape among females is 11% and among males is 1.2%. '

PBS: "NOW"
"Military Sexual Trauma"

' Roughly one in seven of America's active duty military soldiers is a woman, but a NOW investigation found that sexual assault and rape is widespread. One study of National Guard and Reserve forces found that almost one in four women had been assaulted or raped. Last year alone, almost 3,000 soldiers reported sexual assault and rape by other soldiers. In one of the only national television broadcasts of the issue, NOW features women who speak out for the first time about what happened. One woman recounts her ordeal of rape by her superior officer. Many more don't report the incidents for fear of how it will affect their careers. The shocking phenomenon has a label: military sexual trauma, or MST. NOW meets women courageously battling to overcome their MST, bringing light to an issue that's putting the Army in shame. '

(Cross-posted on blog me no blogs.)

There's more: "MILITARY SEXUAL TRAUMA" >>

BUSH BOMBS SYRIA: MCCAIN 'GUARANTEES' ELECTION VICTORY

.
"OCTOBER SURPRISE"? OR JUST MORE MURDEROUS BUSHCO BUNGLING?

MCCAIN JUST HAPPENS TO "PRE-ANNOUNCE" HIS OTHERWISE UNLIKELY VICTORY ON THE DAY OF THE ATTACK ON SYRIA

YOUTUBE: MSNBC
"US attacks Syria"

YOUTUBE: NBC
"John McCain on Meet The Press"

Coincidence? Or Fair Warning Of Another Stolen Election: You Be The Judge, Jury And Guard At Gitmo

Bush raided Syria. Is this what McSame had in mind when he made this "prediction"? Or do the 'Pukes have something worse in store for America?

"McCain guarantees victory"

How can he "guarantee" victory, being so far behind? Exactly what does he base that "guarantee on? Why do these idiot corporate media lapdog reporters never ask the OBVIOUS questions in response to sh*t like this??? Oh, right, they wanna hang on to their cushy part-time jobs and their seven-figure salaries. I get it. "Country Last," eh boys?

[continued]
.


.

' “I guarantee you that two weeks from now, you will see this has been a very close race, and I believe that I'm going to win it,” McCain told interim "Meet" moderator Tom Brokaw. “We're going to do well in this campaign, my friend. We're going to win it, and it's going to be tight, and we're going to be up late.” '

He's being rather cocky & quite specific, like he knows something we don't know, in advance, something he couldn't know unless the fix was already in. Did he spill the beans today, or are we being prepped for another 2000/ 2004 election result?

The pollsters are suddenly providing back-story in advance, too:

' Reuters reported that Obama's lead has dropped over the last three days after hitting a high of 12 points on Thursday. Pollster John Zogby said: "Things are trending back for McCain. His numbers are rising and Obama's are dropping on a daily basis. There seems to be a direct correlation between this and McCain talking about the economy." '

McBush was talking about the economy? When was that? Was that the day the markets dropped record points? It's not exactly his strong suit. And who was listening? "Likely voters"? Like, straight white Christian evangelical Republican conservative retired miltary males over eighty with really bad hemorrhoids?

Better get ready for another October Surprise, or major election-theft, backed up by the Supremes. Time to start organizing a general strike?

[Crossposted at blog me no blogs.]
.
.

There's more: "BUSH BOMBS SYRIA: MCCAIN 'GUARANTEES' ELECTION VICTORY" >>