McCain and Obama are even according to the Star Tribune.

 

 

Forget about what most of the polls are saying. Take a look at the map at www.fivethirtyeight.com. Ohio is turning McCain's way and Colorado is basically neutral at this point. If those two states go with McCain and everything else stays the same, McCain takes the election 274-264.

After Colorado goes McCain's way look for Minnesota to be next. The question: as it becomes apparent that Obama is not going to walk away with the election, do the Clinton's get more aggressive?

How permanent timeless? If Barack Obama is any measure, then it's about two weeks. Within the past six months Obama has given two speeches which uncritical sycophants have termed timeless. Where one person sees the Gettysburg Address, another may see a second-rate high school graduation speech.

Except the platitudes one would expect in the latter case have a fairly good chance of standing the test of time, while something uttered by his Oneness is likely to be violently contradicted before he can throw a close relative or friend under a bus.

Speaking of Reverend Wright (or Obama's grandmother-take your pick), it's been noted by many that Obama's grand defense of the man ("I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community") was separated by the denunciation ("What became clear to me was that he was presenting a world view that contradicts what I am and what I stand for.") by less than six weeks.

What has been less noted was just how quickly Obama's lofty "citizen of the world" nonsense he sputtered in Germany has fallen to earth. His naive messianic belief that all the competing interests of the earth will simply unify behind him as he utters bromide after bromide fell apart in Georgia last week.

No, the world is not united. It is defined by competing interests. Some policies are more enlightened that others in that they not only benefit one's side (yes, there are sides), but the other side as well. Free trade is one such policy. It can benefit two countries even if one of the countries is better at producing everything better than the other. But free trade requires a leap of faith. This is just the sort of thing you'd think a citizen of the world would encourage. Of course, Obama's against it, which says a lot.

On a more serious note (and given the implications of global economic growth, it's hard to get more serious), last week saw the invasion of the sovereign nation of Georgia, and an ally of the United States, by the Soviet Union, I mean Russia. A citizen of the world can't take sides in such a matter, unable to favor one set of brother and sisters over another.

From a certain perspective that's an admirable point-of-view. Unfortunately, it's not the point-of-view a President of the United States can take. When John F Kennedy spoke of his solidarity with the people of Berlin, no one took it to mean he was as German as he was American. And certainly, no one took it to mean he was seeking common ground with the Soviets or the East Germans.

Yet, when Obama declares himself a citizen of the world, one can't help but think he believes that because he can see all sides he thinks he will find common ground with America's enemies. Sooner or later reality will intrude upon such an individual. For the good of the country, it's important such an individual is not in charge.

It looks like an even bet to me as to which state flips red next, Colorado or Ohio, but I'm betting on Colorado. Hillary for Obama's VP? I don't see it as Obama would have to be desperate to go with her, owing to the way in which she ran her campaign. Recent revelelations will do nothing to make her an easier choice, but some are now saying Kerry. I don't see that either, but I think that would be a big net plus for the GOP, as Kerry would do nothing to bring swing voters over to Obama's side.