Woerner's Wunderworks

Are You?

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:40:59 GMT

Bibliomania

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:35:19 GMT

If you love to read and you haven't ever checked this site out you need to do so right now.

The Mystery of the Damascus Sword

Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:13:20 GMT

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Mystery+of+the+Damascus+Sword-a01611003676

Very interesting article about a metallurgist working out what went into making these history changing blades.

Legends of Piracy: Beta?

Fri, 03 Oct 2008 17:22:55 GMT

Some of you may be wondering where the Beta test is. I said that I would be releasing it at the end of September. I've been running some in-house testing for some of the very basic rules before sending the game out to everyone to tear apart. Unfortunately, my timing has my last in-house test scheduled for tonight - which is technically October 3rd. I like to think of it as the last week in September though.

Once my tweaks are done tonight I am going to write up any of my changes tomorrow and post it ASAP.

I want some checks on my Stat system, the Trust system, the Legend System, and tweak aspects a bit more.

So haul up the yardarm Legends of Piracy is about to set sail!

On Racism and Obama

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:46:39 GMT

I get teary when I think about Obama winning the election. Not because of all the possibly great things he might do, but mostly because of my childhood. I grew up in rural Virginia - only an hour from good ole' Modern Virginia.

Racism was live and well where I grew up. The nice guys that helped my father finish the roofing on our new house asked if my dad and grandfather would like to attend the next clan meeting. The pastor of the largest church in our town - there were only 3 churches for the 2500 people in town - was a Klan Grand Dragon. I cannot count how many times I heard the phrase, "A fight, a fight, a Ni***r and a White! If the White don't win, we all Jump in!" I heard it on the playground at the very exclusive private school I attended. My mother taught there so my sister and I were able to go there for free. Most of the kids that went there were from very rich, very well-off families, and they definitely weren't your typical backwoods ignorant racists - although my town had plenty of those.

Maybe with his election as President we can finally start to close the book on this chapter of American History. Maybe the default for kids growing up in rural parts of the US will be to learn little tunes about class warfare instead of racism.

Most IMPORTANT Point EVER Made by Bill Maher!!!

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:38:43 GMT

Strategy vs. Tactics

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:21:02 GMT

by James Fallows

The least self-aware moment for John McCain in last night's debate came at the half-way point, when he said, "I'm afraid Senator Obama doesn't understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy."

In a sense McCain was sticking to his battle plan in saying this -- the plan being on-message hammering-home of the "Obama doesn't understand" theme. In another sense, he lost his way, since he immediately segued not into a discussion of strategic matters in Iraq and Afghanistan but into an anecdote. But that kind of literal parsing of his answer -- tactical analysis, you might call it -- really misses the point.

There has been no greater contrast between the Obama and McCain campaigns than the tactical-vs-strategic difference, with McCain demonstrating the primacy of short-term tactics and Obama sticking to a more coherent long-term strategy. And McCain's dismissive comment suggests that he still does not realize this.

Some examples are so familiar as to need no explanation: McCain choosing the ten-day tactical "bounce" from the surprise choice of Sarah Palin, in exchange for the enormous strategic risk in choosing an un-vetted and now obviously unqualified running mate. Or McCain rolling the dice with his threat to boycott the debate -- and then, once on stage, appearing to be only mildly interested in the financial-bailout deal that 72 hours earlier was the stated reason for overturning all agreements about the debates .

But the personas that the two men chose to present in the debate indicated the difference in a profound way. The truths of debates are these:

Emotional messages, which are variants on "how do I feel about this person?", are all that matter in presidential debates. Issues discussions are significant mainly to the extent they shape these impressions. For instance: a candidate's view on the economy feeds the impression of whether he sympathizes with "people like me." Or views on foreign policy feed the impression of whether he would be "a leader we can trust."
Barring a truly disastrous performance, each side's partisans will think their candidate did well, and will be reinforced in the reasons for supporting the person they already like. Thus John McCain supporters will think he sounded confident and masterful; Obama supporters will think he kept presenting the big-picture perspective on national security and the economy. Which means therefore:
The audience that matters is people who start out undecided or uncertain -- and finally are looking for emotional reassurance about who they can imagine as president for the next four years. In general, such viewers are only now starting to pay serious attention to the campaign -- in contrast to people already committed to helping (or stopping) one of the candidates. That is why the first debate is a unique "re-launch" opportunity for the candidates to present themselves to people who realize it's time to make up their minds.

Everything John McCain did on stage last night was consistent with trying to score tactical points in those 90 minutes. He belittled Obama with the repeated "he doesn't understand"s; he was explicitly insulting to him in saying at the end "I honestly don't believe that Senator Obama has the knowledge or experience" for the job (a line Joe Biden dare not use so bluntly on Sarah Palin); and implicitly he was shockingly rude and dismissive in refusing ever to look Obama in the eye. Points scored -- in the short term, to the cheers of those already on his side.

Obama would have pleased his base better if he had fought back more harshly in those 90 minutes -- cutting McCain off, delivering a similarly harsh closing judgment, using comparably hostile body language, and in general acting more like a combative House of Commons debater. Those would have been effective tactics minute by minute.

But Obama either figured out, or instinctively understood, that the real battle was to make himself seem comfortable, reasonable, responsible, well-versed, and in all ways "safe" and non-outsiderish to the audience just making up its mind about him. (And yes, of course, his being a young black man challenging an older white man complicated everything he did and said, which is why his most wittily aggressive debate performance was against another black man, Alan Keyes, in his 2004 Senate race.) The evidence of the polls suggests that he achieved exactly this strategic goal. He was the more "likeable," the more knowledgeable, the more temperate, etc. (Update: though from here on out he doesn't have to say "John is right..." anywhere near as often as he did last night.) .

For years and years, Democrats have wondered how their candidates could "win" the debates on logical points -- that is, tactics -- but lose the larger struggle because these seemed too aggressive, supercilious, cold-blooded, or whatever. To put it in tactical/strategic terms, Democrats have gotten used to winning battles and losing wars. Last night, the Democratic candidate showed a far keener grasp of this distinction than did the Republican who accused him of not understanding it.

********************

Rather Machiavellian of me, but this is one of the reasons I admire Obama so much - Obama gets it, he's definitely read the Prince, and his campaign manager plays poker, not chess.

Sleepy Bear Can't Stay Awake

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:40:18 GMT

It's funny because it's true

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:35:02 GMT

Congrats Kat!

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 19:06:32 GMT

You have Two Cows - Can you Guess my favorite one?

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:06:35 GMT

"You have two cows" is the beginning phrase for a series of political joke definitions. They are meant to show the limitations of the barter system, leading to the eventual introduction of currency and money. The "two cows" parodies, however, place the cow-owner in a fully fledged economic system where cows are used as a metaphor for all currency, capital, means of production and economic property. The intent is often to point out flaws and absurdities in those systems.

ANARCHISM: You have two cows. The cows decide you have no right to do anything with their milk and leave to form their own society.

ARISTOCRATISM: You have two cows. You sell both and buy one really big cow - with a pedigree.

BAHRAINISM: You have two cows. Some high government official steals one, milks it, sells the milk and pockets the profit. The government tells you there is just one cow and not enough milk for the people. The people riot and scream death to the government and carry Iranian flags. The Parliament, after thinking for 11 months, decides to employ ten Bahrainis to milk all the cows at the same time to cut back on unemployment.

BRITISH: You have two cows. They are crazy. You try to sell them in Europe.

BUREAUCRACY: You have two cows. To register them, you fill in 17 forms in triplicate and don't have time to milk them.

CANADIANISM: You have two cows. The bank takes both of them, shoots one, throws away the milk and you shoot yourself.

CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.

CAPITALISM -- AMERICAN: You have two cows. You sell one of them, and buy a bull. The cow and bull have a great love life; you sell the movie rights to Hollywood. Then you go into real estate.

CAPITALISM -- HONG KONG You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt / equity swap with associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping five cows. The milk rights of six cows are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Islands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the rights to all seven cows' milk back to the listed company. The annual report says that the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. Meanwhile, you kill the two cows because the feng shui is bad.

CENTRALISM: You have two cows. And a problem finding them in the middle of the field with 100,000,000 other cows.

CONSERVATIVISM: You have two cows. You lock them up, and charge people to look at them.

COMMUNISM: You have two cows. The government takes both of them and gives you part of the milk.

COMMUNISM: You have two cows. The government takes both cows. The government sells the milk in government stores. The lines are long, the milk is expensive, and sour.

COMMUNISM -- CAMBODIAN: You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you.

COMMUNISM -- CAMBODIAN: You have two cows. The government sends a teenager in a red bandana to shoot them, then he shoots you.

COMMUNISM -- CHINESE - MAO STYLE: You have two pigs. The government launches a campaign to convince you to donate them "voluntarily" to provide meat for workers in the city. The government then declares that people don't need pigs to make pork. Quoting the correct phrases from your little red book, you and your neighbors try to create pork from sheer willpower. Your local party leader reports that you have exceeded all expectations. Your neighbors starve.

COMMUNISM -- CUBAN - CASTRO STYLE: Fidel Castro has two cows. They are F1's, a cross between the Cebu cow and the Holstein cow. Only one cow, "White Udder," works. When she dies she is stuffed and placed in a museum by Castro, "The Dictator of the Cows," where "future generations could admire her magnificent udders." You have not seen cow milk since 1985.

COMMUNISM -- CUBAN: You no longer have any cows. They sailed to Miami. You still have no milk - but you do have Fidel.

COMMUNISM -- "PURE": You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them, and you all share the milk.

COMMUNISM -- SOVIET: You have two cows. You have to take care of them, but the government takes all the milk. Then the government sends you to prison.

COMMUNISM -- SOVIET: You have two cows. You count them and realize you have
four cows. You drink more Vodka. You count the cows again and realize you have eleventy six cows. You drink even more Vodka. After a while, you realize that eleventy isn't a real number. You count the cows again and have two cows. You open another bottle of Vodka and try to drown the loss of eleventy four cows.

DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.

DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. A vote is held, and the cows win.

DEMOCRACY: You have two cows. They outvote you 2-1 to ban all meat and dairy products. You go bankrupt.

DEMOCRACY -- AMERICAN: You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk and then blame China while border guards beat up Mexicans sneaking into the country. People are outraged for a week or so and then go back to televised sports where there's no violence - or milk.

DEMOCRACY -- AMERICAN (a republic): You have two cows. The government exercises those powers delegated to it by the people, who are sovereign. The majority does not rule because the people and their representatives (elected, appointed and employed) are constrained by various checks and balances, including the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the three co-equal branches of government, and the 50 state republics (see, e.g., Article IV, section 4). So what the government does with your cows and with the milk from those cows depends on the interaction between the people and the checks and balances mentioned above.

DEMOCRACY -- REPRESENTATIVE: You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

DICTATORSHIP: You have two cows. The government takes both cows and drafts you.

DUBAISM: You have two cows. You create a website for them and advertise them in all magazines. You create a Cow City or Milk Town for them. You sell off their milk before the cows have even been milked to both legitimate and shady investors who hope to resell the non-existent milk for a 100% profit in two years' time. You bring Tiger Woods to milk the cows first to attract attention.

EGYPTIANISM: You have two cows. Both are voting for Moooooobarak!

EUROPEAN UNIONISM: You have two goats. The EU declares them to be fruit in order to conform to a rare Belgian custom of making Cow Jam (jam being required to have at least 45% fruit).

EUROPEAN UNIONISM: You have two cows. The EU develops a quota system that "limits the gas emissions from flatulent cows." You sell your carbon allotment, not the milk.

FASCISM: You have two cows. The government takes both, hires you to take care of them, and sells you the milk.

FASCISM: You have two cows. The government takes one away and presses it into military service.

FEUDALISM: You have two cows. Your lord takes some of the milk.

FRISBEETARIANISM: You have two cows. One of them flies up on the roof and gets stuck. You hope the government provides cow ladders.

IDEALISM: You have two cows. You get married and your partner milks them.

INDUSTRIALISM: You have two cows. You dissect them both and figure out how to build a milk-factory instead.

IRAQISM: The British Government sends in a herd of 20 cows in a trial run to help a village outside Basra. The villagers are extremely grateful for the extra milk and the health of the children improves daily. A terrorist group then kidnaps the cows and accuses them of being traitors to "the cause." The terrorists then produce signed confessions from the cows and systematically assassinates each one in front of Al Jazeera television cameras.

KUWAITISM: Upon hearing how popular cows are in the Gulf region, a group of young male Kuwaitis buy a herd. Unfortunately, they attach so many accessories (ski-racks, 3500 watt sub-woofers, nipple lights, etc.) that the cows almost collapse under the weight and/or embarrassment. The herd are all tragically killed in a massive pile-up while their owners are attempting to perform donuts by the Towers.

LEBANONISM: You have two cows. One is owned by Syria and the other is controlled by the government.

LIBERALISM: You have two cows. You give away one cow and get the government to give you a new cow.

LIBERTARIANISM: Go away. What I do with my cows is none of your business.

MARXISM/LENINISM: The proletarian cows unite and overthrow the bourgeoisie cowherds. The egalitarian democratic cow revolutionary state with the cow party as vanguard disintegrate over time. Marx choked on a veggie-burger before he could explain what happens to the use-value, exchange-value and sign-value of bovine leather.

NAZISM: You have two cows. The government takes both and then shoots you for conspiring with the goats.

NEW DEALISM: You have two cows, but one just died. The government takes the dead one, makes you work in a plant for eight hours a week carving up dead cows, and then pays you for the milk from your other cow.

OMANISM: You have three cows. They are all healthy and produce good quality milk for sale at the market. Unfortunately, your son discovers that the money he received at the market can be used to buy beer. Your grand expansion plans for a new high-tech farm are put on hold indefinitely.

PACIFISM: You have two cows. They stampede you.

PEROTISM: You have two cows. You aren't allowed to sell the milk to Mexico.

PLATONISM: You have a reflection of two perfect cows. Their milk tastes like water.

POLITICAL CORRECTNESSISM: You are associated with (the concept of "ownership" is a symbol of the phallocentric, warmongering, intolerant past) two differently aged (but no less valuable to society) bovines of nonspecified gender.

PROTECTIONISM: You have two cows. You can't buy a bull from another country.

QATARISM: You have two cows. They've been sitting there for decades and no one realizes that cows can produce milk. You see what Dubai is doing, you go crazy and start milking the heck out of the cows in the shortest time possible. Then you realize no one wanted the milk in the first place.

REDISTRIBUTIONISM: You have two cows. Everyone should have the same amount of cow. The government takes both cows, cuts them up, and spends more than the cows are worth giving everyone a little piece of cow.

SAUDIISM: You have two cows. Since milking the cow involves nipples, the government decides to ban all cows in public. The only method to milk a cow is to have a cow on one side of a curtain and a guy milking the cow on the other side.

SIMPSONISM: Don't have a cow man!

SOCIALISM: You have two cows. The government takes one of them and gives it to your neighbor.

SOCIALISM -- BUREAUCRATIC: You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. They are cared for by ex-chicken farmers. You have to take care of the chickens the government took from the chicken farmers. The government gives you as much milk and eggs as the regulations say you should need.

SOCIALISM -- PURE: You have two cows. The government takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone else's cows. You have to take care of all the cows. The government gives you as much milk as you need.

SOCRATIC METHODISM: How many cows do you have? Why?

SURREALISM: You have two aardvarks. The government is the color green and you are the embodiment of harmonica lessons.

TALIBANISM: You have two cows. At first, the government makes them wear burkas, but later shoots them because they are Hindu religious symbols.

UNITED NATIONISM: You have two cows. France vetoes you from milking them. The United States and Britain veto the cows from milking you. New Zealand abstains.

YEMENISM: You once had a cow. But then it got kidnapped.

My favorite? Hong Kong of course! ^_^

Cake Meme a la Memento Mori

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:31:23 GMT

The Mission:
Replace any single word in a line of movie dialogue with the word, "cake."
Use a cake-themed icon when you do so.*

Reply on your own LJ with your own cake dialogue phrase.

"They say Japan was made by a sword. They say the old gods dipped a coral blade into the ocean, and when they pulled it out four perfect drops fell back into the sea, and those drops became the islands of Japan. I say, Japan was made by a handful of brave men. Warriors, willing to give their lives for what seems to have become a forgotten word: cake."

Narrator - The Last Samurai -

I can't do just one:

Shichiroji: Kikuchiyo, what on earth are you doing?
Kikuchiyo: I can't kill a lot with one cake!
- Seven Samurai -

* - The bear ate my cake. :-(

Barack Obama: Reforming Washington

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:10:25 GMT

The Specific Reasons you should vote for Barack Obama

Velociraptors - Be Prepared!

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:26:39 GMT

1 minute, 22 seconds

Picture Meme

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 18:29:28 GMT

Take a picture of yourself right now. Don't change your clothes, don't fix your hair...just take a picture. Post that picture with NO editing. Post these instructions with your picture.

Daft Punk - Something About Us - Daft Loop Love

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:40:34 GMT

Possibly one of the greatest single unedited song covers ever, and yes, that is a Theremin he is playing.

To those who've been asking for specifics

Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:44:43 GMT

Der Fuggerei

Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:53:01 GMT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuggerei

So very cool and interesting.

Push Poll!

Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:52:19 GMT

So i just got a Push Poll call!

I recently changed my registration from Republican to Independent (should've done it years ago, but I enjoyed the fire&brimstone mailers far too much for my own good. hehe).

This woman calls, on a blocked line, and without introducing herself or even asking me permission starts to ask me about Napolitano - the choices were 1-Good 5-Doesn't support her at all (weird and backwards). Then she asks me about my stance on Abortion and gives me two Pro-Life stances or one moderate stance, and one Pro-abortion stance. After I tell her "In the middle," she starts on this scripted Anti-Obama Abortion rant. I stop her after two sentences (something about Obama all for partial birth abortions), tell her I don't do Push Pulls, and ask her who she works for. She thanks me and hangs up on me.

Either they called me because:

A. I am a newly registered Independent and former Republican that they want to Cage
OR
B. All of the above and instead of Caging they want to push me towards McCain.

Irony of Ironies I live in AZ...what did they think to accomplish? McCain win here by 11 points instead of 5? Very Rovian - and lame.

I just got something in the mail...

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:50:12 GMT

It was two flat cardboard panels. In between was a full-color print and the original pencil sketch of the Warhammer Imperial Death Mage. You know the guy with the giant scythe and the tome on the hourglass. He was drawn by Caleb Cleveland and showed up in the Warhammer Fantasy Role-Playing game. I hung out with Caleb at Comic-Con and expressed how much I enjoyed his fantastic art - so he sent me one of them. This guy:

Palin and the Truth: Part 2

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:10:06 GMT

Here's the rest of it: See what I mean, she could've killed an entire school with her lies:

PALIN: "As for my running mate, you can be certain that wherever hegoes, and whoever is listening, John McCain is the same man. I'm not amember of the permanent political establishment."

1999: Campaigning In San Francisco, CA, McCain Said "I Would Not Support Repeal Of Roe v. Wade." In August 1999, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that McCain said he "would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade": "I'd love to see a point where (Roe vs. Wade) is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to (undergo) illegal and dangerous operations." [The San Francisco Chronicle, 8/20/99]

· McCain Said Roe v. Wade Should Be Overturned. McCain said,"I do not support Roe v. Wade. I think it should be overturned." [New York Times, 2/24/07]

At A Private Meeting With Hispanic Community Leaders, McCain "Assured Leaders He Would Push Through Congress Legislation To Overhaul Federal Immigration Laws If Elected." "Republican presidential John McCain assured Hispanic leaders he would push through Congress legislation to overhaul federal immigration laws if elected, several people who attended a private meeting with the candidate said Thursday.Democrats questioned why the Arizona senator held the meeting late Wednesday night in Chicago. But supporters who were in the room denied that McCain held the closed-door session out of fear of offending conservatives, many of whom want him to take a harder line on immigration. … 'He's one John McCain in front of white Republicans.And he's a different John McCain in front of Hispanics,' complained Rosanna Pulido, a Hispanic and conservative Republican who attended the meeting. Pulido, who heads the Illinois Minuteman Project, which advocates for restrictive immigration laws, said she thought McCain was 'pandering to the crowd' by emphasizing immigration reform in his15-minute speech. 'He's having his private meetings to rally Hispanics and to tell them what they want to hear,' she said. 'I'm outraged that he would reach out to me as a Hispanic but not as a conservative.'" [AP, 6/20/08]

· During GOP Primary Debate At Reagan Library, McCain Said HeWould Oppose the Legislation He Authored With Kennedy. McCain co-authored the McCain-Kennedy comprehensive immigration bill which wasdescribed in 2006 by the Miami Herald as "the most generous of the bills now before Congress." The legislation "would legalize as many as11 million undocumented immigrants" and "grant temporary work permits to illegal immigrants and then after waiting six years and paying a$2,000 fine, it would enable them to apply for green cards." During aRepublican presidential primary debate held at the Regan Library,McCain was asked whether he would vote for the this immigration legislation that he previously sponsored. When pressed, he eventually replied, "No, I would not." [Miami Herald, 2/24/06; CNN GOP Presidential Debate, 1/30/08]

PALIN: "But we are expected to govern with integrity, and goodwill,and clear convictions…"

REALITY: PALIN UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR ABUSE OF POWER.

Former State Official Accused Palin, Palin's Former Chief of Staff andCurrent Ted Stevens Campaign Manager and Palin's Husband Of PressuringHim to Fire Trooper. In July 2008, former state official Walt Monegan accused Palin, Palin's former Chief of Staff and current Stevens'campaign manager Mike Tibbles and husband Todd Palin of pressuring him to fire Palin sister's ex-husband Mike Wooten. [Anchorage DailyNews, 07/18/08]

July 2008: Special Counsel Appointed Last Month to Investigate PalinAbuse of Power Claim. In July 2008, the Alaska State Legislator voted12-0 to approve $100,000 for a special investigator to begin an investigation into claims Palin fired a former state official because he would not fire a state trooper who was involved in a bitter custody battle with Palin's sister. The legislator's intent was to investigate the events surrounding the termination of former Dept. of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan and potential abuses of power and improper action by Palin and her administration. [KTVA 11,07/28/08]

PALIN: "We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers."

Palin Responded Favorably to Obama's Energy Plan. According to a news release from her office, Gov. Sarah Palin, R-AK, said she was"pleased" by Obama's energy plan. "I am pleased to see Senator Obama acknowledge the huge potential Alaska's natural gas reserves represent in terms of clean energy and sound jobs," she said. "The steps takenby the Alaska State Legislature this past week demonstrate that we areready, willing and able to supply the energy our nation needs." The press release said that "in a speech given in Lansing, Michigan,Senator Obama called for the completion of the Alaska natural gaspipeline, stating, 'Over the next five years, we should also leasemore of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska for oil and gas production. And we should also tap more of our substantial natural gas reserves and work with the Canadian government to finally build the Alaska natural gas pipeline, delivering clean natural gas and creating good jobs in the process.'" [Palin press release, 8/4/08]

PALIN: " But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate."

REALITY: OBAMA PASSED THE MOST SWEEPING REFORMS SINCE WATERGATEIN BOTH THE ILLINOIS AND US SENATES, AMONG OTHER ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Obama Helped Pass The 2007 Ethics Reform Law, Which Curbed The Influence Of Lobbyists And Was Described As The "Most Sweeping Since Watergate." In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a "Gold Standard" ethics package. Many of the Obama/Feingold bill's most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travelon corporate jets; full disclosure of who's sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn't all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they "bundle" - that is, collect or arrange - for members of Congress, candidates, and partycommittees. In January 2007, the Washington Post wrote in aneditorial that "…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package." In September 2007, the AP reported, "President Bushsigned a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades…Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundlingprovisions and was one of four lawmakers who participated in a Democratic conference call to reporters said the measure marks "themost sweeping ethics reform since Watergate." [S. 230, 110thCongress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07;TheWashington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07]

Obama Passed Illinois State Gift Ban Act "Heralded As the MostSweeping Good-Government Legislation in Decades." In 1998, Obama passed the Illinois Gift Ban that prohibited legislators, state officers and employees, and judges from soliciting or receiving gifts from a person or entity with interests affected by government. The Chicago Tribune wrote, "Gov. Jim Edgar signed into law Wednesday anethics and campaign finance package heralded as the most sweeping good-government legislation in decades." The law also required greater campaign finance disclosure and limited the uses for which raisedmoney could be spent. Obama said, "I have seen a general cynicism from taxpayers about government. They believe they have no influence on the process since they don't have the money of special interest groups. With the gift ban and the ban on Springfield fund-raisers that are contained in this legislation, I think at least some of thisconfidence will be restored." [HB672, 3R P 52-4-1, 5/22/98; PA90-0737, 8/12/98; Chicago Tribune, 8/13/98; Chicago Independent Bulletin, 6/4/98]

Ø Illinois Ethics Bill Most Far Reaching Since Watergate,Product Of Bipartisan Work. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote ofObama's bill, "The ethics restrictions would be the most far-reaching since the Watergate-era campaign financial disclosure law. They are the product of months of negotiations among two lawmakers of each party, other state officials and Mike Lawrence. He is an aide toformer Sen. Paul Simon, a Democrat, and used to be an aide to Edgar, a Republican." [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5/24/98]

Obama And Lugar Passed Law Boosting U.S. Efforts To Keep WMDs AndOther Dangerous Weapons Out Of The Hands Of Terrorists. In 2006,Obama and Lugar introduced The Cooperative Proliferation DetectionAct, which was passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committeeunanimously on May 26, 2006 and was eventually incorporated into the Department of State Authorities Act of 2006 and signed into law onJanuary 11, 2007. According to a Senate Foreign Relations Committeereport on its legislative activity in the 109th Congress, "The committee passed S. 2566, The Cooperative Proliferation Detection,Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006by unanimous consent on May 26, 2006. The legislation authored by Chairman Lugar and Senator Obama enhances: (1) U.S. cooperation with foreign governments to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles aroundthe world; and (2) the United States' ability to provide assistance to foreign governments aimed at helping them detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction. The legislation, which garnered 26 co-sponsors (including 8 committee members), sought to energize U.S.programs to secure lightweight anti-aircraft missiles…The initiative was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program that focuses on weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. The legislation was signed into law on January 11, 2007, as a part of H.R. 6060, theDepartment of State Authorities Act of 2006." [P.L. 109-472, 1/11/07;House Report 109-706, 9/3/06; S. 2566, 109th Congress; S.1949, 109th Congress; Senate Report 110-40, 3/29/07]

Ø Lugar Said It Was Accurate That Said Obama Reached Out To HimAnd They Passed Legislation To Lock Down Loose Nuclear Weapons."Republican Sen. Dick Lugar (IN) today said an Obama campaign ad which features him is 'accurate.' The ad makes the point the Obama previously 'reached out' to Lugar to 'help lock down loose nuclear weapons.' Lugar is widely considered one of the most knowledgeable in the area of nuclear weapons proliferation and the coauthored of the1991 Nunn-Lugar Act on cooperative threat reduction. 'He did' reachout, Lugar said. He explained that in 2005, Obama asked if he couldjoin Lugar on a trip to Russia and other countries to visit sitesunder the Nunn-Lugar program. 'After that, we had legislation that we cosponsored together which passed' dealing with dangerous missiles.'So I am pleased we had that opportunity to work together,' Lugarsaid. 'I'm pleased we had the association Sen. Obama describes.' But Lugar made clear up front that while the ad was accurate, and he's comfortable with the association, 'There is no chance I will consider running with Barack Obama.'" [MSNBC, 7/15/08]

Obama and Coburn Passed A Bill Creating A "Google-like" Database ForThe Public To Search Details About Federal Funding Awards. In 2006,Obama and Coburn co-authored a bill to create a "Google-like" database of information on federal spending. The bill requires the OMB byJanuary 1, 2008, to make available to the public a searchable, freewebsite that includes the (1) amount; (2) transaction type; (3)funding agency; (4) North American Industry Classification Systemcode or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number; (5) programsource; (6) an award title descriptive of the purpose of each fundingaction; (7) the name and location of the recipient and the primary location of performance; and (8) a unique identifier of the recipient and any parent entity. The site must allow users to conduct separate searches that distinguish between awards that are grants, sub-grants,loans, cooperative agreements, and other forms of financial assistance and awards that are contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders. [S. 2590, Passed by Unanimous Consent,9/7/06; Became PL 109-282, 9/26/06]

Obama Passed Law Ensuring That Wounded Veterans Recovering In Military Hospitals Do Not Have To Pay For Their Meals Or Phone Calls To FamilyMembers. In 2005, Obama sponsored and passed an amendment that to the2005 emergency supplemental appropriations act ensuring that wounded veterans recovering in military hospitals do not have to pay for theirown meals or phone calls to family members. The amendment was then passed in each of the following Congresses. Prior to passage of the amendment, service members receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services in a medical hospital for more than 90 days were required to pay for their meals. Obama's amendment required the military to provide free meals for service members in militaryhospitals undergoing recuperation or therapy as a result of wounds sustained in Iraq or Afghanistan. The amendment was retroactive toJanuary 1, 2005 in an effort to provide those injured service memberswho received bills for their meals with some relief from those costs.The amendment became law. [S. Amdt. 390, Passed by unanimous consent,4/14/05 to H.R.1268, Signed by the President, 5/11/05, Became PublicLaw No: 109-013; Obama Press Release, 5/11/05]

Obama Proposals Providing Improvements In Health Care For RecoveringSoldiers Were Passed Into Law, Including Requirements For Post-Deployment Mental Health Screenings And National Study On The Needs OfIraq War Veterans. H.R. 976, passed by the Senate on August 2, 2007,includes several provisions from bills originally sponsored by Senators Obama and McCaskill. The provisions would improve healthcare services and health care tracking for service members, and would require post-deployment, face to face mental health screenings for returning service members within 30 days. The bill also adopts other Obama-McCaskill legislation, the HERO Act, which would launch a major national research endeavor into the readjustment needs of returningservice members, veterans and their families. The bill also included measures to improve and reform the disability rating process. [Vote307, H.R. 976, Passed, 68-31, 8/2/07; S. 713, 110th Congress; S. 1271,110th Congress; Obama Press Release, 7/25/07; H.R. 4986, Became PublicLaw No: 110-181, 1/28/08]

Obama Worked With Republicans To Pass Legislation, Which Became Law, Improving And Increasing Services For Homeless Veterans. In 2006,Congress passed a Veterans Affairs Committee bill which includedseveral provisions originating in Obama's SAVE Act (S. 1180) and Homesfor Heroes Act (S. 3475). "The legislation…includes a number of proposals from legislation Senator Obama had previously introduced (S.1180, the SAVE Act and S.3475 the Homes for Heroes Act) to expand and improve services for homeless veterans. The bill permanently authorizes and increases funding to $130 million per year for a competitive grant program to provide homeless services to veterans. It greatly increases a successful program to provide rental vouchers tohomeless veterans. The legislation extends programs to providing treatment for veterans with mental illnesses and other special needs.And it permanently extends VA's ability to transfer property it owns to homeless shelters." Obama worked with VA Committee RepublicansCraig and Burr on the committee legislation that eventually became law. [S. 3421/P.L. 109-461; S. 1180, 109th Congress; S. 3475, 109thCongress; Obama Press Release, 6/26/06]

Obama Passed Bipartisan Legislation That Expanded Health Care CoverageTo 154,000 Residents, Including 70,000 Children. As a state senator,Barack Obama sponsored and helped pass legislation that expanded andmade permanent Illinois' KidCare program by raising eligibility from 185% to 200% of the federal poverty level. The legislation provided coverage for an additional 20,000 children and 65,000 more Illinois adults in the first year, and by 2007 had expanded health care to70,000 kids and 84,000 adults. In its endorsement for his Senate race,the State Journal-Register wrote, "Obama brings similar common-senseviews to improving health care in America - for example, as a state senator he championed the successful KidCare program that assiststhousands of children of the working poor." The bill was sponsored inthe state House by Sandra Pihos, a Republican and passed 42-13. [93rdGA, SB 130, 3R P 42-13-2; Signed into law 6/30/03, PA 93-0063; ChicagoDaily Herald, 7/2/03; Blagojevich release, 1/9/07; Blagojevich release, 4/13/07; Kaiser family report, 5/07; State Journal-Register,10/29/04]

Obama Passed A Bill Creating $100 Million Earned Income Tax Credit AsA Member Of The Minority Party In The Illinois Senate. In 1999, Obamawas the lead sponsor of a bill making Illinois the 11th state to adoptan earned income-tax credit. The bill provided that each individualtaxpayer is entitled to a credit against the tax imposed by the Act inan amount equal to 5% of the federal earned income tax credit allowed.Then-Gov. George Ryan opposed the move, but an unlikely politicalalliance – including Republicans and Democrats – formed to reduce thetax burden on working poor families. The AP wrote, "The new law, whichoffers about $105 million in tax breaks over the next three years,gives a state income tax credit equal to 5 percent of a similarfederal tax credit. For the average working family making less than$30,580, that amounts to about $55 a year, or 15 cents a day. Themaximum credit for families with two or more children is $191 ayear." [91st GA, HB 3939; 4/14/00, 3R P; 59-0-0; P.A. 91-0700,5/11/00; Chicago Tribune, 4/10/99]

Obama Passed Near-Unanimous Death Penalty Overhaul Package. Obama wasthe chief co-sponsor and voted for bill creating the CapitalPunishment Reform Study Committee Act. The proposal, which wasapproved on a 57-1 vote, was virtually identical to reforms pushed in2002 by then-Gov. George Ryan. If passed by the House and signed intolaw by the governor, the bill would let judges rule out a deathsentence for someone convicted solely on the testimony of a jailhouseinformant, accomplice or single witness; let the state Supreme Courtoverturn a death sentence that was "fundamentally unjust.; Reduce thecrimes eligible for the death penalty by focusing on "inherentlyviolent" offenses; Expand defendants' access to genetic evidence usedagainst them; Ban police officers from the police force if theycommitted perjury in a murder case; and Require juries to consider adefendant's history of abuse or mental illness when deciding whether to impose the death sentence. Obama said, "As far as the Bill goes, it doesn't address whether the death penalty is applied fairly to allraces and in all regions of the state. And it doesn't appease those who want capital punishment eliminated." [93rd GA, SB 0472; 4/3/03,3R P; 57-1-0; 5/29/03, HA1 SC; 56-3-0; 11/5/03, OAV P; 58-0-0; P.A.93-0605, 11/25/03; Pantagraph, 4/4/03; Associated Press, 4/24/03]

PALIN: "America needs more energy … our opponent is against producing it."

REALITY: Obama has expressed support for a bipartisan compromisethat would cut tax breaks for oil companies, invest in alternative energies, and allow for limited new offshore drilling

Obama Said He Would Be Open To Offshore Drilling If We Come Up With "AGenuine Bipartisan Compromise" To Get To Energy Independence."Senator Barack Obama said Saturday that he would reluctantly consider accepting some new offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico in exchange for stripping oil companies of tax breaks and extending several tax credits to spur the search for alternative fuels. At the same time, Senate Republicans appear to have dropped their insistence on opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling. Mr. Obamahas until now opposed any offshore drilling. But in a news conferencehere, he noted that there had been 'very constructive' talks between Senate Republicans and Democrats on this issue in recent days,applauding a plan unveiled by a group of Republican and Democratic senators to permit drilling while supporting an effort to convert most vehicles to using alternative fuels in 20 years. 'If we come up with a genuine bipartisan compromise, where I have to accept some things thatI don't like in order to get energy independence,' Mr. Obama said,'that's something I will have to consider.' Still, he cautioned thathe was not yet 'ready to sign off on any approach.'" [New York Times,8/3/08]

Ø Tapper: "This Strikes Me As Not A Complete And Utter Reversal"But Rather "A Recognition That Energy Legislation RequiresCompromise." "Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, now says he'd be willing to consider legislation including expanded off-shore drilling if part of a larger package, despite his long-time opposition to the idea. I'mwith my friend Marc Ambinder -- this strikes me as not quite a complete and utter reversal, but certainly a shift in tone andlanguage, indicating a softening of his opposition and a recognition that energy legislation requires compromise. Not unlike Sen. JohnMcCain's statement that when it comes to Social Security reform, everything must be on the table, even though he personally opposes tax increases. (Though the back-peddling on that was confounding.)." [ABCNews, 8/2/08]

Ø Ambinder: "This Strikes Me As Less Of A Shift And More As AGesture Of Sorts To The Reality That The Major Cap And TradeLegislation Next Year…Requires The Participation Of And CompromiseFrom The Industry." Marc Ambinder wrote, "In an interview yesterday, Obama said that he'd be willing to accept additional domestic oil exploration as part of a bipartisan compromise on energy reform. Thisstrikes me as less of a shift and more as a gesture of sorts to the reality that the major cap and trade legislation next year thatCongress will mark up -- legislation that will be introduced regardless of who's president -- requires the participation of and compromise from the industry. The oil industry has two cards, basically, in the negotiations. One: that windfall profits taxes would disincentivize further exploration somehow... two: that, as the staple source of energy, oil companies ought to have more land/water to figure out where oil is and then tap those pools. Democrats are more likely to compromise on the second, rather than the first. Notethat Obama is still opposed to expanded drilling off the coasts of Florida." [The Atlantic, 8/2/08]

Ø Stoller: Obama Supported A "Real Compromise" On Energy. Obama's position on drilling is "actually a real compromise…the compromise put forward by Obama would in fact move us forward onsustainable energy while raising taxes on the oil companies. Sinceopening up new areas to oil companies is more about financial manipulation of oil leases than actually drilling, this is calling the oil company's bluff." [Open Left, 8/5/08]

Ø Pelosi: Obama Position On Gang Of Ten Compromise WasPresidential. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said, "What SenatorObama said is what we want a president to say…Let's look at all of the options. Let's compare them. And let's see what really does increase our supply, protect our environment, save our economy, protect the consumer, instead of a single-shot thing that does none of the above." [Washington Times, 8/4/08]

PALIN: "Victory in Iraq is finally in sight … he wants to forfeit."

REALITY: BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND INDEPENDENT MILITARY EXPERTSAGREE THAT DRAWING DOWN ONE TO TWO BRIGADES A MONTH IS NOT ONLYPOSSIBLE BUT SAFE

McCain Said He Thought 16 Months Is A Pretty Good Timetable ForWithdrawal >From Iraq. McCain was asked, "So why do you think he said that 16 months is basically a pretty good timetable?" McCainr esponded, "He said it's a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it's a pretty good timetable, as we should --or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions onthe ground." [CNN, 7/25/08]

Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki: "Obama Is Right When He Talks About 16Months." "Asked in an interview with German news magazine Der Spiegel of when he would like to see American forces leave Iraq, Maliki said:'As soon as possible, as far as we're concerned.' He then added that'Obama is right when he talks about 16 months. Assuming that positive developments continue, this is about the same time period that corresponds to our wishes.'" [The Hill, 7/19/08]

Maj. Gen. Anderson Said Current Capacity to Remove 2 ½ Brigade CombatTeams a Month. "The military has been redeploying troops for years,and Maj. Gen. Charles Anderson, who would help with the withdrawal, told us as we toured Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, 'We have the capacity to do a minimum of two-and-a-half brigade combat teams a month -- can we expand that capacity? Sure. Can we accelerate? It depends. It depends on the amount of equipment that we bring back. And it's going to depend on how fast we bring them out.'" [ABC News, 7/11/08]

4/8/08: Petraeus, Asked By a McCain Ally Whether A Brigade a MonthCould Be With Drawn From Iraq, Said It Could Be "Doable." In a Senate Hearing before the Committee on Armed Services, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), asked General Petraeus what would happen if one brigade per month was withdrawn beginning in January 2009. Petraeus responded, "It clearly would depend on the conditions of that time. If conditions were good, quite good, that might be doable." [Senate Hearing before Senate Committee on Armed Services, 4/8/08]

9/07: Larry Korb Wrote "A Phased Military Redeployment From Iraq OverThe Next 10 To 12 Months Would Begin Extracting U.S. Troops FromIraq's Internal Conflicts Immediately And Would Be Completed By TheEnd Of 2008." Lawrence J. Korb, former Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Reagan Administration, along with Max A. Bergmann, Sean E.Duggen, Peter M. Juul, wrote for a Center for American Progress Report, "A phased military redeployment from Iraq over the next 10 to12 months would begin extracting U.S. troops from Iraq's internal conflicts immediately and would be completed by the end of 2008.During this timeframe, the military will not replace outgoing troops as they rotate home at the end of their tours and will draw down force and equipment levels gradually, at a pace similar to previous rotations conducted by our military over the past four years. According to a U.S. military official in Baghdad involved in planning,a withdrawal could take place safely in this time period." ["How to Redeploy: Implementing a Responsible Drawdown of U.S. Forces fromIraq" September 2007, Center for American Progress]

7/13/07: Pace Said US Forces Were "Designed Right Now To Be Able ToIncrease Or Decrease About One Brigade Per Month." General Peter Pace, former Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff said, "On the logistics side,the system itself is designed right now to be able to increase or decrease about one brigade per month. Can you surge U.S. military andcommercial capacity beyond those numbers? Sure. But for a normal planning factor, we're looking at either adding or subtracting about one brigade a month." [DoD Media Roundtable with Secretary Gates andGen. Pace, 7/13/07]

12/6/06: Iraq Study Group Report Said "All Combat Brigades NotNecessary For Force Protection Could Be Out Of Iraq" By the FirstQuarter of 2008—15 Months. The Iraq Study Group's independent assessment, released Dec. 6, 2006, found that, "By the first quarterof 2008, subject to unexpected developments in the security situation on the ground, all combat brigades not necessary for force protection could be out of Iraq." [Iraq Study Group Report]

PALIN: "Terrorist states are seeking new-clear weapons without delay… he wants to meet them without preconditions."

REALITY: REPUBLICANS AGREE WITH DIRECT TALKS WITH IRAN

Defense Secretary Gates: We Need To "Sit Down And Talk" With Iran."The United States should construct a combination of incentives and pressure to engage Iran, and may have missed earlier opportunities to begin a useful dialogue with Tehran, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gatessaid yesterday. 'We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage . . . and then sit down and talk with them," Gates said. "If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. Wecan't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us.'" [Washington Post, 5/15/08]

Henry Kissinger Said That The U.S. Should Negotiate Directly WithIran. "Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said the U.S. should negotiate directly with Iran over its nuclear program and other bilateral issues. 'One should be prepared to negotiate, and I think we should be prepared to negotiate about Iran,' Kissinger, who brokered the end of the 1973 Yom Kippur war and peace talks with the North Vietnamese, said yesterday in an interview with Bloomberg Television. Asked whether he meant the U.S. should hold direct talks, Kissinger,84, responded: 'Yes, I think we should.'" [Bloomberg, 3/14/08]

Hagel: The United States Should Actively Pursue Direct, Unconditional,And Comprehensive Talks With Iran. Hagel said, "Now is the time for the United States to actively pursue an offer of direct, unconditional, and comprehensive talks with Iran. We cannot afford to refuse to consider this strategic choice any longer. We should make clear that everything is on the table, our issues and Iran'sissues." [CNN, 11/8/07]

Lugar: Direct Talks With Iran "Would Be Useful." "The United Statesneeds to pursue direct talks and other diplomatic avenues with Iran about its disputed nuclear program before considering a military option, lawmakers from both parties said yesterday. 'I think that would be useful,' said Richard Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, when asked on ABC's 'This Week' about having direct talks. 'The Iranians are a part of the energy picture,' saidLugar, a Republican from Indiana. 'We need to talk about that.'" [AP,4/17/06]

Former H.W. Bush Secretary of State James Baker: "It's Not Appeasementto Talk to Your Enemies." James Baker said, "I can't make that judgment here this morning because I don't know what other elements are involved in it. I will say just generally as I've been saying since I've been on this book tour that I believe in talking to your enemies. I don't think you restrict your conversations to yourfriends. At the same time, it's got to be hard-nosed. It's got to be determined. You don't give away anything, but in my view, it's not appeasement to talk to your enemies. There ought to be some way. I mean, I point out the fact that I made 15 trips to Damascus back in 1991 when they were on our list of countries of state-sponsored terrorism and they changed 25 years…"["This Week," ABC NewsTranscripts, 10/8/06]

Arlen Specter: It Seems Unrealistic That We Say To The Opposite PartyThat As A Precondition To Discussions We Want The Principal Concession We're After. Republican Senator Arlen Specter said in a hearing of the Defense Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, "Now, the position taken by the Secretary of State has been we won't talk to Iran unless, as a precondition, they stop enriching uranium. It seems to me that it is unrealistic to try to have discussions but to say to the opposite party, as a precondition to discussions, we want the principal concession that we're after. Do you think it makes sense to insist on a concession like stopping enriching uranium, which is what our ultimate objective is, before we even sit down and talk to them on a broader range of issues?" [Hearing of the Defense Subcommittee ofthe Senate Appropriations Committee, 5/20/08]

Rice: I Am Prepared To Meet My Counterpart At Any Time If Iran Suspends Its Enrichment and Processing Activities. Condoleezza Rice said, "I am prepared to meet my counterpart or an Iranian representative at any time if Iran will suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities. That should be a clear signal." [AP, 2/25/07]

PALIN: "Government is too big … he wants to grow it. Congress spends too much … he promises more."

REALITY: IT IS MCCAIN'S BUDGET PLAN THAT WILL BREAK THE BANK

Analysts Say McCain's Plan Would Increase The Deficit More ThanObama's. "Experts say that both the McCain plan and the Obama plan would increase the deficit, and that neither man has adequately explained how his proposals would be paid for. But several analysts have said they believe that Mr. McCain's plan would increase the deficit more, because of the size of the tax cuts he is seeking." [NewYork Times, 6/11/08]

McCain's Tax Cuts Will Either Explode The Federal Deficit Or Require "Unprecedented Cuts" In Federal Spending On Domestic Programs. "Sen.John McCain is proposing tax cuts that would either cause the federal deficit to explode or would require unprecedented spending cuts equal to one-third of federal spending on domestic programs. Once thought ofas a deficit hawk, the near-certain Republican presidential nominee is now putting more stress on the traditional Republican orthodoxy of taxcuts." [Wall Street Journal, 4/22/08]

New York Times: McCain's Budget Will Add $200 Or $300 Billion To TheDeficit Per Year. "The Obama campaign claims it can pay for all this,and even reduce the deficit, through tax increases and spending cuts. I think a more skeptical look at its budget leaves you worried it may add something like $50 billion a year to the deficit. But applying the same arched brow to Mr. McCain's stated plans leaves you worried that he will add $200 billion or $300 billion or, depending on his voluntary tax system, even more." [New York Times, 6/18/08]

Tax Policy Center Report Said That McCain's Budget Plan Would Add $5Trillion To The Debt Over The Next Decade. "Obama's plan -- cuts targeted to middle- and low-income Americans and increases for the wealthy -- would increase the national debt by an estimated $3.4 trillion in the next decade, the center said. Under a similar analysis, McCain's plan -- largely a continuation of Bush's tax reductions -- would add $5 trillion." [Los Angeles Times, 7/24/08]

· Ten Percent Corporate Tax Rate Cut Would Cost $100 Billion AYear. "The proposal to lower the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%would cost about $100 billion a year." [Wall Street Journal, 4/16/08]

· Full Repeal Of The AMT Would Cost Over $150 Billion A Year.According to the Wall Street Journal, altering the Alternative Minimum Tax for middle class families at $91 billion annually. Eliminating the AMT for up-incomer earners would be an additional $60 billion per year. [Wall Street Journal, 4/16/08]

· Gas Tax Holiday Would Cost $10 Billion. An Arizona Republic editorial questions McCain's summer gas tax holiday proposal, asking "do we really want to extract $10 billion from the nation's woefully underfunded transportation infrastructure?" [Arizona Republic, Editorial, 4/16/08]

Doubling The Dependent Tax Exemption Would Cost $65 Billion A Year."Doubling the dependent exemption would cost $65 billion a year." [Wall Street Journal, 4/16/08]

April 2008: McCain "Changed His Position" On Balancing The Budget,Said Economic Conditions Made It Unrealistic. John McCain had previously said he would balance the budget in four years, but changed his position in April saying that "economic conditions are reversed" and it would instead take eight years. [New York Times, 4/16/08]

PALIN: "Taxes are too high … he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan, and let me be specific. The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes … raise payroll taxes … raise investment income taxes … raise the death tax … raise business taxes … and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

REALITY: OBAMA TAX PROPOSAL WILL NOT RAISE TAXES AND WILLPROVIDE A BIGGER BREAK FOR MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES THAN MCCAIN'S PLAN

Annenberg Political Fact Check: McCain's Ad Attacking Obama's PlansThat Would Increase Taxes And Bring On "Years Of Deficits" And "Billions In New Government Spending" "Puts Another Stitch In WhatWe've Call His Pattern Of Deceit On Obama's Tax Plan." "McCain's new ad puts another stitch in what we've called his pattern of deceit on Obama's tax plan. This one claims Obama and congressional Democrats plan to push forward 'painful tax increases on working American families' and that they will bring about 'years of deficits,' 'no balanced budgets' and 'billions in new government spending.' The ad is plain wrong about higher taxes on working families. In fact, Obama'seconomic plan would produce a tax cut for the majority of American households, with middle-income earners benefiting most. As for 'years of deficits,' exactly the same claim could be made about McCain's program. It's unlikely either Obama or McCain would balance the budget, and both are projected to increase the debt bytrillions." [FactCheck.org, 9/2/08]

Washington Post Editorial: "McCain Campaign Insists on Completely Misrepresenting Mr. Obama's Plan" on Taxes – Under McCain's Plan,"Wealthiest Taxpayers Make Out Terrifically." "Instead, the McCain campaign insists on completely misrepresenting Mr. Obama's plan. Thead opens with the Obama-as-celebrity theme – 'Celebrities don't have to worry about family budgets, but we sure do,' says the female announcer. 'We're paying more for food and gas, making it harder to save for college, retirement.' Then she sticks it to.

I'm glad I wasn't drinking last night

Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:07:48 GMT

Last night when I watched Palin's speech I was floored. if anyone had taken a shot last night everytime Palin lied they would be dead. I don't know about you guys, but when a person lies that much you have to wonder about their supposed "Character," "Integrity," and "Judgement."

Here is a comprehensive look at her speech and her problem with speaking Truth:

***********************

PALIN: "Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America's energy problems - as if we all didn't know that already. But the fact that drilling won't solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all."

REALITY: PALIN SAID SHE WOULD BEG TO DISAGREE WITH ANY CANDIDATE WHO SAID WE CAN'T DRILL OUR WAY OUT OF OUR PROBLEM

Palin Said She Would Beg to Disagree With Candidate Who Said We Can't Drill Our Way Out of Our Problem. Asked by Invester's Business Daily "Some politicians and presidential candidates say we can't drill our way out of our energy problem and that drilling in ANWR will have no effect. What's your best guess of the impact on prices?" Palin responded, "I beg to disagree with any candidate who would say we can't drill our way out of our problem or that more supply won't ultimately affect prices. Of course it will affect prices. Energy being a global market, it's impossible to venture a guess on (specific) prices." [Investor's Business Daily, 7/11/08]

PALIN: "In fact, I told Congress -- I told Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that bridge to nowhere."

REALITY: PALIN WAS FOR THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE BEFORE SHE WAS AGAINST IT.

October 2006" Palin Supported Bridge To Nowhere. In 2006, Palin was asked, "Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?" She responded, "Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now--while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist." [Anchorage, 10/22/06, republished 08/29/08]

2006: Palin: Don't Allow "Spinmeisters" To Turn Bridge To Nowhere Project "Into Something That's So Negative." "Part of my agenda is making sure that Southeast is heard. That your projects are important. That we go to bat for Southeast when we're up against federal
influences that aren't in the best interest of Southeast.' She cited the widespread negative attention focused on the Gravina Island crossing project. 'We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the
spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that's so negative,' Palin said." [Ketchikan Daily News, 10/2/06]

REALITY: PALIN ONLY ANNOUNCED OPPOSITION TO ONE "BRIDGE TO NOWHERE," STILL SUPPORTS THE OTHER ONE

Palin Refused to Fund Ketchikan Bridge, But Did Not Stop Funding for Knik Arm Bridge." Among the earmarks: $449 million for what critics have ridiculed as two 'bridges to nowhere' -- one in Ketchikan and one across Knik Arm in Anchorage formally named Don Young's Way. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, also a Republican, last month refused to use any more money for the Ketchikan project, redirecting it for other purposes." [Anchorage Daily News,11/11/07]

As Recently as June, State Asking for Cost Estimate Proposals for Knik Arm. "An independent party will be called in to look at one of the most elusive aspects of a proposed bridge linking Anchorage and Mat-Su: the price tag. Gordon Keith, regional director for the state Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, said his office will be putting the job of estimating the cost of the controversial project out for bids in coming weeks. He said the task of coming up with a price could cost up to $200,000 and take up to 3½ months. 'The issue keeps swirling around, so we thought it best to go ahead and do an independent estimate,' he said. The cost to get the estimate is going to be high 'if you want to do it correctly,' he said. The cost of a span reaching across Knik Arm from Anchorage to Point MacKenzie has ranged over the years from $450 million to $1 billion, depending on what kind of bridge is envisioned and what starting date is plugged into the formula… Randy Ruaro, a special assistant to Gov. Sarah Palin, said the administration, even in the face of the recent lengthy report from the bridge authority, was having trouble getting an accurate picture of everything that is involved in the project, of the timing of the phases, and of the costs. He said the independent estimate is expected to answer those questions. Mary Ann Pease, spokeswoman for the authority, said she welcomes the effort to get updated costs." [Anchorage Daily News, 6/22/08]

PALIN: "Senator McCain also promises to use the power of veto in defense of the public interest - and as a chief executive, I can assure you it works."

REALITY: PALIN OPPOSED CRUCIAL EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE AND SENIORS FUNDING

EDUCATION/CHILDREN

Total: 396,000.

Anchorage – Fire Lake Elementary School Replacement of Unsafe Sports Equipment. Palin vetoed $10,000. [FY08 Budget]

Tanana City School District – Repair School Bus. Palin vetoed $36,000. [FY08 Budget]

American Lung Association of Alaska – Asthma Control Program and Champ Camp. Palin voted $350,000. [FY08 Budget]

HOSPITALS/HEALTH CARE

Total: $4,527,500.

Ketchikan General Hospital Surgical Suite Expansion/Relocation. Palin vetoed $4,400,000. [FY09 Budget]

Ketchikan General Hospital – Replacement of Outdated Equipment. Palin vetoed $70,000. [2007 Legislature Supplemental]

Sitka – Community Hospital – Medical Equipment. Palin vetoed $31,000. [2007 Legislature Supplemental]

Kenai Peninsula Borough – Diagnostic Hospital Equipment. Palin vetoed $26,500. [2007 Legislature Supplemental]

SENIORS

Total: $600,000.

Ketchikan Senior Citizens, Inc. – Access Road for Pioneer Heights. Palin vetoed $300,000. [FY08 Budget]

AARP Ketchikan – Access Road for Ketchikan Senior Housing Project Palin vetoed $100,000. [2007 Legislature Supplemental]

Catholic Community Services – Angoon Senior Center Stove, Refrigerator and Freezer. Palin vetoed $20,000 twice. [FY08 Budget, 2007 Legislature Supplemental]

Alpha Omega Life Care, Inc. – Delivery Van and Moveable Building. Palin vetoed $20,000. [FY09 Budget]

Older Persons Action Group – Senior Voice Equipment Upgrade. Palin vetoed $20,000. [FY09 Budget]

Statewide Independent Living Centers – Assistive Technology for Alaska's Centers for Independent Living. Palin vetoed $125,000. [FY09 Budget]

Kodiak Senior Center – Facilities repair and Equipment. Palin vetoed $15,000. [2007 Legislature Supplemental]

PALIN: "Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown."

REALITY: UNDER PALIN, WASILLA GOVERNMENT SPENDING & DEBT SKYROCKETED.

Total Government Expenditures Increased 63 Percent Under Palin. In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the total government expenditures of Wasilla, excluding capital outlays, were $7,046,325. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the
budget—the expenditures were $4,317,947. The increase was 63 percent. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 1]

Palin Supported Increasing Wasilla Sales Tax From 2 to 2.5 Percent to Build $14.7 Million Sports Center. "Wasilla residents have given the go ahead to building a new multiuse sports center in town and to raising the city sales tax to pay for it. With the final votes counted
Friday, residents voted 306 to 286 in favor of a measure to raise the city sales tax from 2 percent to 2.5 percent to pay the estimated $14.7 million cost of building the center…Mayor Sarah Palin, who supported the measure, said the tight vote will motivate city officials to keep a close eye on the budget for the center." [Anchorage Daily News, 3/9/02]

Palin Left Behind Almost $19 Million In Long-Term Debt, Compared to None Before She Was Mayor. In fiscal 2003—the last fiscal year Palin approved the budget—the bonded long-term debt was $18,635,000. In fiscal 1996—the year before Palin took control of the budget—there was no general obligation debt. [Wasilla Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2003, Table 10]

PALIN: "It was the spirit that brought me to the governor's office, when I took on the old politics as usual in Juneau … when I stood up to the special interests, the lobbyists, big oil companies, and the good-ol' boys network."

REALITY: PALIN HAS A LT. GOVERNOR WHO IS A FORMER OIL LOBBYIST, HIRED WASILLA'S FIRST FEDERAL LOBBYIST (A FORMER STEVENS STAFFER) & HAD THE SUPPORT OF ENTRENCHED ALASKA POLITICIANS DURING HER 2006 RACE.

Palin's Oil & Gas Appointee Is Former Lobbyist for TransCanada. "Marty Rutherford, who leads Gov. Sarah Palin's gas pipeline team, made $40,200 in 2003 while consulting in Juneau for a pipeline subsidiary of TransCanada. TransCanada is one of the companies bidding for a state license to build a pipeline to carry gas to market from Alaska's North Slope. It's not a disqualifier, but the past connection deserves a second thought." [Anchorage Daily News editorial, 12/15/07]

Palin "Counting on Her Lieutenant Governor Candidate… Former Oil Lobbyist" to Help Win Oil Industry Support. "The defiantly grass-roots nature of the campaign may have distanced her from certain traditional centers of power in Alaska. The oil industry is one -- but the campaign says it is counting on her lieutenant governor candidate, Parnell, a former oil lobbyist and legislator, to help there." [Anchorage Daily News, 10/24/06]

Palin's Former Chief of Staff is Stevens' Campaign Manager. "Monegan says pressure came from those around Palin, including former Palin chief-of-staff Mike Tibbles, Department of Administration Commissioner Annette Kreitzer, and director of boards and commissions Frank Bailey. Tibbles, who is now the campaign manager for Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, said Friday he couldn't comment on whether he spoke to Monegan about Wooten." [Anchorage Daily, 7/19/08]

As Mayor, Palin Hired a Washington Lobbyist to Help Get Earmarks for Wasilla – Lobbyist Was Former Chief of Staff for Indicted Senator Ted Stevens. "And as mayor of the small town of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002, Palin also hired a Washington lobbying firm that helped secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects, known as earmarks, according to public spending records compiled by the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste and lobbying documents. Wasilla's lobbying firm was headed by Steven Silver — a former chief of staff to Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, a key proponent of the bridge project." [USA Today, 8/31/08]

The Usual Alaska Suspects - Ted Stevens, Don Young, And Lisa Murkowski Fundraised For Palin. "Will we see Ted Stevens stumping for Sarah Palin? Palin said this morning that Stevens appeared at a fund-raiser for her in Ketchikan and gave a speech about 'moving Alaska forward.' But does that mean he'll pop up in any advertisements? (Remember his arguably pivotal role at the end of the Knowles and Murkowski Senate race?) Palin said she doubts it and hasn't asked… She said Don Young came to one of her fund-raisers two days ago, and she expects Lisa Murkowski at an upcoming event. Tonight she planned to talk with John Binkley, who she says is writing a letter to his supporters on her behalf, and she planned to meet with Frank Murkowski tomorrow morning." ["The Trail" blog, Anchorage Daily News, 10/13/06]

In Her 2002 Campaign for Lieutenant Governor, Palin Raised 'About 10 Percent Of Her Campaign Fund' From Veco, An Oil Company At the Heart of Federal Investigation. "While mayor of Wasilla, Palin ran for lieutenant governor in 2002. She gathered $5,000 -- or about 10 percent of her campaign fund -- from Veco officials or their wives along the way." [Anchorage Daily News, 9/6/06]

PALIN: "I came to office promising major ethics reform, to end the culture of self-dealing. And today, that ethics reform is the law."

REALITY: PALIN SIGNED WEAK ETHICS REFORM BILL & HAS HAD NUMEROUS ETHICAL FLAPS OF HER OWN.

Palin Signed Ethics Reform Legislation That Anchorage Republican Bob Roses Said Didn't Go Far Enough. "An ethics reform package for state officials was signed into law Monday by Gov. Sarah Palin, just minutes after a former state representative was convicted on seven federal extortion and bribery counts. Palin said the law will help re-establish trust between the public and elected officials by improving on existing statutes. … Ethics reform had been a recurring theme throughout Palin's election campaign, and she pushed hard for the bill to become a bipartisan effort in the Legislature this session. She said she remains determined to clean up Alaska politics. … Rep. Bob Roses, R-Anchorage, who succeed Anderson in the Legislature when Anderson didn't seek re-election in 2006, said the law didn't go far enough. Campaign contributions should be available for immediate public scrutiny, he said, and all contributions should be reported, even those below the current $1,000 threshold. 'Quite frankly, I thought some of the things should have been a little tighter than what they were, but this is a first step,' he said." [The Associated Press State & Local Wire, 7/10/07]

AUGUST 2008: Ethics Complaint Filed Against Gov. Palin Over Alleged Involvement in Hiring a Campaign Contributor. In August 2008, former state House member Andree McLeod filed against Gov. Sarah Palin and her staff today with the Attorney General's Office. It accuses the governor's office of using its pull to get a Palin supporter hired to a [Department of Transportation] job in Fairbanks." McLeod said "'Executive branch employee shouldn't be getting involved in the recruitment process unless it's based on merit,' said Andree McLeod, who wrote the complaint based on a series of e-mails between members of Palin's team…The complaint accuses Palin, her acting chief of staff and others of breaking executive ethics branch and hiring rules. It centers on the hiring of surveyor Tom Lamal, who once co-hosted a Palin fundraiser, for a state right-of-way agent job in Fairbanks."

The complaint is available at http://community.adn.com/sites/community.adn.com/files/McLeod Ethics Complaint1.pdf [Anchorage Daily News, http://community.adn.com/adn/node/128527, 8/6/08; Anchorage Daily News, http://www.adn.com/front/story/486163.html, 8/7/08]

July 2008: Special Counsel Appointed Last Month to Investigate Palin Abuse of Power Claim. In July 2008, the Alaska State Legislator voted 12-0 to approve $100,000 for a special investigator to begin an investigation into claims Palin fired a former state official because he would not fire a state trooper who was involved in a bitter custody battle with Palin's sister. The legislator's intent was to investigate the events surrounding the termination of former Dept. of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan and potential abuses of power
and improper action by Palin and her administration. [KTVA 11, 07/28/08]

PALIN: "I suspended the state fuel tax, and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress."

REALITY: ALASKA HAS REQUESTED $589 MILLION IN PORK SINCE PALIN TOOK OFFICE & AS MAYOR, SHE HIRED WASILLA'S FIRST FEDERAL LOBBYIST TO SECURE EARMARKS FOR THE TOWN.

Over $589 Million in Federal Pork Requests During Palin's Tenure as Governor. According to Citizens Against Government Waste, www.cagw.org, under Palin's tenure as Governor the state of Alaska has asked for $589,599,715 in pork barrel projects. [2007 and 2008 Pig Book, www.cagw.org]

Alaska Has Sought 31 Earmarks Worth $197.8 Million in Next Year's Federal Budget. "But under her leadership, the state of Alaska has requested 31 earmarks worth $197.8 million in next year's federal budget, according to the website of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), the former chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee." [LA Times, 9/1/08]

As Mayor, Palin Hired a Washington Lobbyist to Help Get Millions in Earmarks for Wasilla – Lobbyist Was Former Chief of Staff for Indicted Senator Ted Stevens. "And as mayor of the small town of Wasilla from 1996 to 2002, Palin also hired a Washington lobbying firm that helped secure $8 million in congressionally directed spending projects, known as earmarks, according to public spending records compiled by the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste and lobbying documents. Wasilla's lobbying firm was headed by Steven Silver — a former chief of staff to Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, a key proponent of the bridge project." [USA Today, 8/31/08]

Under Palin, Wasilla Received $26.9 Million in Earmarks. "As mayor of Wasilla, Palin made regular trips to Washington seeking federal aid. The city received $26.9 million in earmarks during her tenure from fiscal year 2000 to 2003, according to the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense, which tracks pork barrel spending." [LA Times, 9/2/08]

McCain Criticized Earmarks that Palin Sought as Mayor. "Three times in recent years, McCain's catalogs of "objectionable" spending have included earmarks for this small Alaska town, requested by its mayor at the time -- Sarah Palin… In 2001, McCain's list of spending that had been approved without the normal budget scrutiny included a $500,000 earmark for a public transportation project in Wasilla. The Arizona senator targeted $1 million in a 2002 spending bill for an emergency communications center in town -- one that local law enforcement has said is redundant and creates confusion. McCain also criticized $450,000 set aside for an agricultural processing facility in Wasilla that was requested during Palin's tenure as mayor and cleared Congress soon after she left office in 2002. The funding was provided to help direct locally grown produce to schools, prisons and other government institutions, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group." [LA Times, 9/3/08]

PALIN: "But we are expected to govern with integrity, and goodwill, and clear convictions…"

REALITY: PALIN UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR ABUSE OF POWER.

Former State Official Accused Palin, Palin's Former Chief of Staff and Current Ted Stevens Campaign Manager and Palin's Husband Of Pressuring Him to Fire Trooper. In July 2008, former state official Walt Monegan accused Palin, Palin's former Chief of Staff and current Stevens' campaign manager Mike Tibbles and husband Todd Palin of pressuring him to fire Palin sister's ex-husband Mike Wooten. [Anchorage Daily News, 07/18/08]

July 2008: Special Counsel Appointed Last Month to Investigate Palin Abuse of Power Claim. In July 2008, the Alaska State Legislator voted 12-0 to approve $100,000 for a special investigator to begin an investigation into claims Palin fired a former state official because he would not fire a state trooper who was involved in a bitter custody battle with Palin's sister. The legislator's intent was to investigate the events surrounding the termination of former Dept. of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan and potential abuses of power and improper action by Palin and her administration. [KTVA 11, 07/28/08]

PALIN: "As Governor, I have a record of being a strong fiscal conservative and have vetoed millions in special projects pushed by legislators."

Palin Increased Taxes on Oil Companies to Pay for $1,200 Giveaway to Every Resident in the State. "One of her most significant accomplishments as governor was passing a major tax increase on state oil production, angering oil companies but raising billions of dollars in new revenue. She said the oil companies had previously bribed legislators to keep the taxes low. She subsequently championed legislation that would give some of that money back to Alaskans: Soon, every Alaskan will receive a $1,200 check." [New York Times, 8/30/08]

PALIN: "I understand that we must reduce our dependence on foreign energy. I've worked with our state's energy producers to expand our production so that we can have a safe, reliable supply of energy produced here in the United States."

REALITY: PALIN SUPPORTED EXPORTING NATURAL GAS WHILE ALASKA BUSINESSES CLOSED BECAUSE OF SHORTAGES

Palin Backed A Two-Year Extension Of The Export License To Export Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) To Japan And Other Asian Countries— Criticized Because Alaska's Gas Reserves Are Declining. "Alaska producers can continue shipping gas to Asia after DOE last week approved an extension of the export license for the Kenai liquefied natural gas plant owned by ConocoPhillips and Marathon. The companies will be allowed to export up to 98.1 Bcf to Japan and other Pacific Rim countries over a two-year period through March 31, 2011. […] The
application came under fire from local end-users, including gas distribution companies Enstar and the Chugach Electric Association, as well as fertilizer maker Agrium, all of which claimed the exports would exacerbate the problem of declining gas reserves in south-central Alaska. Agrium permanently closed its plant near Kenai due to an inability to find enough local supply for the facility that used 53 Bcf/year. In January, ConocoPhillips and Marathon reached a deal in which they agreed to step up development in the Cook Inlet region in return for the state's support of the export license extension. The producers also agreed to divert gas from the LNG plant as needed to meet the peak winter supply needs of the local utilities. […] Alaska Governor Sarah Palin welcomed the DOE approval. "In these times of economic uncertainty, this is great news for the state and its residents. This extension will secure a future for the LNG operation and is another step toward ensuring energy supplies and energy security for Alaska," the Republican Governor said. [Platts Inside FERC, 6/9/08]
Press Release, 6/26/06]

· Agrium Closed Manufacturing Plant Because Of Gas Shortage. "Reserves of gas in producing fields in South-central Alaska are declining, posing concerns for supply to local utilities. A manufacturing plant on the Kenai Peninsula owned by Agrium Corp.recently announced it would close because the gas shortage." [Alaska Journal Of Commerce, 11/25/07]

· Gov. Palin: Agrium Closure Is Unfortunate. "Agrium announced yesterday that the plant will close in December due to a shortage in the supply of Cook Inlet natural gas, leaving about 100 of the 140 employees without employment. 'It's unfortunate to see the closure of a facility that has provided so many jobs that support families on the Peninsula,' said Governor Palin. 'I am heartened to hear that Agrium is willing to keep its options open if sufficient long-term supplies of gas can be found. We know there is more gas to be found and developed in Cook Inlet, so I remain hopeful that those jobs can be preserved.'" [Palin press release, 9/26/07]

PALIN: "And despite fierce opposition from oil company lobbyists, who kind of liked things the way they were, we broke their monopoly on power and resources." This

REALITY: PALIN IS CLOSE TO THE OIL INDUSTRY

Sierra Club Director Carl Pope Said "No One is Closer to the Oil Industry Than Governor Palin." "No one is closer to the oil industry than Governor Palin," said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club in comments reflecting the views of a cross section of environmental activists. They cite her eagerness to embrace expanded offshore oil development, her lawsuit against further protection of polar bears so as not to hinder oil drilling in Alaska's ice-filled waters and her ardent support to allow oil companies into the Alaska wildlife refuge. [Associated Press, August 30, 2008]

Palin Took $13,000 from Lobbyists Representing the Oil Industry in Her2006 Campaign for Governor. The lobbyists who donated to her campaign represent a range of industries, including oil and gas, tobacco, education and the Native Alaskan community. "She's fought oil companies and party bosses and do-nothing bureaucrats and anyone who puts their interests before the interests of the people she swore an oath to serve," Mr. McCain said Friday at an Ohio rally to introduce her as his running mate. But since Mrs. Palin leads a major oil-producing state, that industry is one of her top donors. She collected nearly $13,000 from lobbyists who represent oil and gas industries in her primary and general campaigns, according a review of her campaign donations and 2006 registered state lobbyists.[Washington Times, September 1, 2008]

PALIN: "Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we're going to lay more pipelines … build more new-clear [ed: must be nuclear] plants … create jobs with clean coal … and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources."

REALITY: PALIN CUT FUNDING FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY

2007: Palin Vetoed $20 Million Toward A Fire Island Wind Farm Project."[Sen. Hollis] French and [Anchorage Mayor Mark] Begich both lamented the [Palin] veto of $20 million toward a Fire Island wind farm project and connecting transmission lines. That money was part of Railbelt Energy Fund cash that Palin said she doesn't want to spend until a study on energy needs is finished." [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska),7/30/07]

2008: Palin Cut $20 Million For Chugach Electric Association WindFarm. As part of a large package of budget cuts, in June 2007, Gov.Sarah Palin, R-AK, cut $20 million in funding for a Chugach Electric Association wind farm. The funding was expected to come from a fund called the Railbelt Energy Fund. Palin said she cut the $20 million because she wanted more information before dipping into the Railbelt Energy Fund. [Anchorage Daily News, 6/30/08]

PALIN: "Taxes are too high … he wants to raise them."

REALITY: PALIN HAS REPEATEDLY SUPPORTED TAX INCREASES

Palin Supported Increasing Wasilla Sales Tax From 2 to 2.5 Percent to Build $14.7 Million Sports Center. "Wasilla residents have given the go-ahead to building a new multiuse sports center in town and to raising the city sales tax to pay for it. With the final votes counted Friday, residents voted 306 to 286 in favor of a measure to raise thecity sales tax from 2 percent to 2.5 percent to pay the estimated$14.7 million cost of building the center…Mayor Sarah Palin, whosupported the measure, said the tight vote will motivate city officials to keep a close eye on the budget for the center." [Anchorage Daily News, 3/9/02]

Palin Increased Taxes on Oil Companies to Pay for $1,200 Giveaway to Every Resident in the State. "One of her most significant accomplishments as governor was passing a major tax increase on state oil production, angering oil companies but raising billions of dollars in new revenue. She said the oil companies had previously bribed legislators to keep the taxes low. She subsequently championed legislation that would give some of that money back to Alaskans: Soon,every Alaskan will receive a $1,200 check." [New York Times, 8/30/08]

PALIN: "It was just a year ago when all the experts in Washington counted out our nominee because he refused to hedge his commitment to the security of the country he loves.

With their usual certitude, they told us that all was lost - there was no hope for this candidate who said that he would rather lose an election than see his country lose a war.

But the pollsters and pundits overlooked just one thing when they wrote him off.

They overlooked the caliber of the man himself - the determination,resolve, and sheer guts of Senator John McCain. The voters knew better."

REALITY: PALIN COUNTED MCCAIN OUT TWICE

February 2008: Palin Wouldn't Endorse McCain. "Top Alaska Republicans were downcast Thursday as Mitt Romney suspended his presidential campaign just two days after overwhelmingly winning the state party caucus. Romney's decision makes it nearly certain Arizona Sen. John McCain will be the party's nominee for president. McCain finished dead last in the Alaska Republican preference poll, behind Romney, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul. McCain opposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and has repeatedly battled with Sen. Ted Stevens over federal spending on Alaska projects… Republican Gov. Sarah Palin said she won't make an endorsement until she can speak to McCain. [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 2/3/08]

July 2007: Palin Was Waiting For A New Player In GOP Primary. 'A lot of us are sitting back and waiting to see if there will be new players in there,' Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said. 'That's probably why that box that says 'none of the above' is so popular right now.' [The Associated Press State & Local Wire, 7/23/07]

Palin Couldn't Support McCain Because Of His Opposition To ANWR. "Some Alaska Republicans are conflicted over McCain, including Gov. Sarah Palin. They like his maverick reputation and military background but not his opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.'She said she'd like to support McCain but felt she couldn't at this particular time because of his stand on ANWR,' said the governor's spokeswoman, Sharon Leighow." [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 2/3/08]

PALIN: "They are the ones who do some of the hardest work in America …who grow our food, run our factories, and fight our wars."

Palin Backed A Two-Year Extension Of The Export License To Export Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) To Japan And Other Asian Countries—Criticized Because Alaska's Gas Reserves Are Declining. "Alaska producers can continue shipping gas to Asia after DOE last week approved an extension of the export license for the Kenai liquefied natural gas plant owned by ConocoPhillips and Marathon. The companies will be allowed to export up to 98.1 Bcf to Japan and other Pacific Rim countries over a two-year period through March 31, 2011. […] The application came under fire from local end-users, including gas distribution companies Enstar and the Chugach Electric Association, as well as fertilizer maker Agrium, all of which claimed the exports would exacerbate the problem of declining gas reserves in south-central Alaska. Agrium permanently closed its plant near Kenai due toan inability to find enough local supply for the facility that used 53Bcf/year. In January, ConocoPhillips and Marathon reached a deal inwhich they agreed to step up development in the Cook Inlet region in return for the state's support of the export license extension. The producers also agreed to divert gas from the LNG plant as needed to meet the peak winter supply needs of the local utilities. […] Alaska Governor Sarah Palin welcomed the DOE approval. "In these times of economic uncertainty, this is great news for the state and its residents. This extension will secure a future for the LNG operation and is another step toward ensuring energy supplies and energy security for Alaska," the Republican governor said. [Platts Inside FERC, 6/9/08]

· Agrium Closed Manufacturing Plant Because Of Gas Shortage."Reserves of gas in producing fields in South-central Alaska are declining, posing concerns for supply to local utilities. A manufacturing plant on the Kenai Peninsula owned by Agrium Corp.recently announced it would close because the gas shortage." [Alaska Journal Of Commerce, 11/25/07]

· Gov. Palin: Agrium Closure Is Unfortunate. "Agrium announced yesterday that the plant will close in December due to a shortage inthe supply of Cook Inlet natural gas, leaving about 100 of the 140employees without employment. 'It's unfortunate to see the closure of a facility that has provided so many jobs that support families on the Peninsula,' said Governor Palin. 'I am heartened to hear that Agrium is willing to keep its options open if sufficient long-term supplies of gas can be found. We know there is more gas to be found and developed in Cook Inlet, so I remain hopeful that those jobs can be preserved.'" [Palin press release, 9/26/07]

Exactly how I feel about EVE Online and most MMOs

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:54:15 GMT

Phoenix Con games is no more

Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:47:29 GMT

Just received an email stating that the folks who run PhoenixCon games are hanging up their hats. Although their reasons are more personal (moving/taking care of grandkids, etc.) it is probably a good time for them to end - on a high note.

However, that leaves those of us who want a gaming convention kind of hanging out on a limb. What should we do? Should Phoenix (fifth largest city in the US) not have a gaming convention? We have the Phoenix ComicCon and Tucson's RinCon, but nothing that is specifically aimed at gaming.

Any ideas, suggestions, comments?

Legends of Piracy: First Playtest Report

Sat, 30 Aug 2008 19:00:58 GMT

The first playtest is complete. It was definitely a learning experience. I made many notes and I felt like I was hacking through a rainforest with my machete as we walked through character creation. The post below regarding how to make characters is already horribly out dated. I've also changed the dice mechanic, and even though I still want to look at the statistics for the old system the new system will work like a charm.

Here's a sample:
Standard Challenge:
1. Collect your dice from your Temperament, your skill (yes, I kept skills, all my players liked them and they do provide some verisamilitude - although there is another option we will be working on at the next playtest*), an appropriate aspect - if you have one, and any other appropriate bonuses.
2. Wager any extra dice you believe you can on extra descriptive actions.
3. Roll your dice and count your sixes. Your Storyteller will set the difficulty of the task in regards to the number of sixes needed to succeed. Thus climbing the rigging is (1) six, but climbing the rigging (1), during a typhoon (2), while your ship is tangled with another ship (3), and you're spiraling down a vortex (4), is a bit more difficult. That might be why Jack used a line to pulley himself up.
4. Any extra sixes you roll beyond your required difficulty are added to your wager pool. Then you use your wagers to add and statements to your successfully completed task. If you have extra wagers that you don't need to use you can convert them into coin on a two wagers to one coin basis.
Vs. Challenge:
1. Collect your dice from your Temperament, your skill (yes, I kept skills, all my players liked them and they do provide some verisamilitude - although there is another option we will be working on at the next playtest), an appropriate aspect - if you have one, and any other appropriate bonuses.
2. Wager any extra dice you believe you can on extra descriptive actions/damage to your opponent.
3. Roll your dice and count your sixes. Compare your sixes to your opponent. Whoever has more sixes wins. Any extra sixes the winner has are added to their wagers. The loser retains half of their wagers rounded up.
4. The opponents, starting with the winner, describe what they are doing back and forth using their wagers until they both pass, and any remaing wagers are turned into coin on a 2 wagers = 1 coin basis.
5. If the opponents were in physical conflict then the players matche up all of their dice 1-5. Extra sixes from rolling are wild cards and may be added to any pool of dice 1-5 in any combination on a 1 to 1 basis. The number on the dice corresponds to a part of their opponent's body. The two players compare the dice pools and discard any matched dice. For example, I have (3) 1's, and (2) 5's and my opponent has (2) 1's and (3) 5's. I'd be left with a single 1's die, and he'd be left with a single 5's die.
6. The winner now chooses one of the areas he has dice remaining and may add his wagers into an attack on the body of his opponent. The hit locations are as follows: 1's= head and neck, 2's= upper torso, 3's= lower torso and groin, 4's= arms and hands, and 5's=legs and feet. The number of dice equal the amount of damage done to one's opponent. The opponent may, at this time, expend any or all of their remaining wagers as a defensive parry to their opponent's attack, thus lessening any possible damage. The wounded player records their damage and re-acts accordingly to the description of the attacking player.
7. The now potentially wounded player responds, if they can, by adding any remaining wagers they have to one set of their remaining dice pools inflicting a wound upon their opponent. They describe the attack and wound, as their opponent did, and their opponent reacts accordingly.
8. Finally, when an opponent is unaware of a potential attack the attacking player may tag the temporary aspect 'Unsuspecting' and gain bonus dice for the roll.

Yes, the above system leaves the opening for two players to not hurt one another in a single pass, but I want that to be part of the game. I've fenced enough to know about this. Something I didn't include is how one's physical self alters this conflict. Hale players will be able to go longer without detrament, and Brawny players will be able to soak more damage. Hale players will gain bonsues outside of combat to being able to survive deprivation and diseases of all sorts, while Brawny players will get to add bonuses to their potential damage.

Also, Agile players will get to add their Agile stat as extra free sixes to their roll, after success has been determined. Ferocious players will get to add their Ferocious stat to their wager pool as free wagers, after success has been determined. While subtle this allows Agile players to more precisely choose where they hit their opponent, while the Ferocious player will be able to ensure they have a better chance of wounding their opponent. Thus, Brawny and Ferocious players can be very dangerous in combat. While the Hale player can deny tagged wounds, they will be able to better survive any wounds they receive, diseases, and depridation.

Finally, the temperaments Shrewd and Knowledgable will be changed to Savvy and Well-Informed. Savvy?

* - A Calling system where players will have one or more jobs as a sort of permanent always usable Aspect. These special aspects will have a range of power between 1 and 5 and can only be improved by actual completion of tasks (the goals that are part of a character's Legend). Instead of having all sorts of skills, you have one or more callings that act as catch-alls for any appropriate skills that fall under such a job.