Yet somehow the idea of sharing wealth — the idea of the United States as a republic run by people instead of corporations — has become something borne of Marxism or socialism, two ideologies that have also been distorted in the last week as a downtrodden McCain campaign clings to fear as its only weapon.

In what has become an election in which economic woes have superseded “moral values,” tax cuts are of pre-eminent concern, regardless of their real impact and, even worse, in total disregard of the real fact that a president doesn’t have the authority to overhaul an entire tax plan anyway.

Still, while “socialism” is thrown around as a destructive European ideology that steals from the hands of the workers, the real irony is in its current reality: Economists note that the largest “spreading of the wealth,” the most socialist-like move of late, has come in the form of the Wall Street bailout. Darrell West, the director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution, recently told the International Herald Tribune, “The biggest socialist right now is George W. Bush.”

Yet, in playing volleyball with that word and failing to defend its ideal — that the distribution of wealth is for the good of everybody — progressive pundits make the concept of “spreading the wealth” a dirty deed instead of a requisite for a healthy nation, one that Adam Smith considered a founding principle of modern economies.

Today political analyst David Gergen criticized Democrats for allowing the McCain campaign to turn “wealth distribution” into something akin to armed robbery. He noted that progressive taxation was also hailed by Teddy Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan was responsible for creating the Earned Income Tax Credit. In other words, “spreading the wealth” was never as synonymous with government theft as it has been with the McCain camp. And, he adds, Democrats are at fault for letting the McCain campaign continue to run wild with a twisted and antiquated class-warfare concept that only stokes a growing divide.

For more on the wealth-distribution issue and its perversion by the McCain campaign, check out yesterday’s New Yorker article by Steve Coll and this recent article on the red-scare fear campaign from Washington Monthly.

The campaign of Democratic nominee Barack Obama quickly seized on the report and issued a statement lowering expectations for their candidate’s performance. The statement argued that “McCain’s debating skills are unparalleled,” and that “the expectations for him tonight are sky-high.”

More: Read the statement released by the Obama campaign

TO:      Interested Parties
FR:      The Obama Campaign
RE:      Home-field advantage: John McCain
DA:     September 26, 2008

Already declaring victory before the debate has even started, in ads running on the Wall Street Journal website, John McCain meets Barack Obama tonight to debate foreign policy – McCain’s professed area of expertise.

The centerpiece of John McCain’s campaign has been his more than a quarter century of experience in Washington learning about and debating foreign policy.   If he slips up, makes a mistake, or fails to deliver a game-changing performance, it will be a serious blow to his campaign.   Given his unsteady performance this week, he desperately needs to win this debate in a big way in order to change the topic and get back to his home turf.

For eight years, McCain has marched in lockstep with every single major Bush decision, while Barack Obama opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning and has called for a focus on Afghanistan and al Qaeda.  Americans want to know whether John McCain will stop spending $10 billion in Iraq while the Iraqi government sits on a $79surplus and our economy is in turmoil.  Will he continue a policy that has taken our eye off al Qaeda and Afghanistan, and let Iran make progress in building a nuclear weapon?  Will he continue the cowboy diplomacy and empty bluster that has shredded our alliances and set back our standing in the world?  The fact is, John McCain will continue more of these same failed foreign policies. Barack Obama will lead us in a new direction.

On the economy, McCain’s words and actions over the course of the past week have illuminated his lack of expertise.  He admitted he does not understand the economy — his erratic, out-of-touch behavior this week, his failure to do anything of substance to move the agreement forward on the bailout, and his commitment to continuing Bush economic policies, demonstrate it.  But there are some questions we might see answered tonight after McCain’s misadventure to Washington and the phony ’suspension’ of his campaign.  For example, will McCain finally say where he stands on the unworkable and counterproductive House Republican plan?  Will he be willing to buck his own party?

According to the pundits, McCain’s debating skills are unparalleled, as you can see below, and the expectations for him tonight are sky-high.

MCCAIN DEBATE PERFORMANCE

New York Times: A Review Of Debates Show That McCain Is Most Comfortable And Authentic When The Subject Is Foreign Policy. McCain “heads into the first debate on Friday with a track record as a scrappy combatant and the instincts of a fighter pilot, prepared to take out his opponent and willing to take risks to do so. … A review of several of Mr. McCain’s debates shows that he is most comfortable and authentic when the subject is foreign policy. And in a stroke of good fortune, foreign policy is the topic for Friday, the first of three 90-minute debates with Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee.” [New York Times, 9/23/08]

New York Times: McCain Is Likely To Steer The Conversation To His Captivity In Vietnam Which He Showcased Triumphantly Last October In The Debate In A Discourse About Hillary Clinton’s Earmark For The Woodstock Concert Museum Where He Mentioned That He “Was Tied Up At The Time” Of The Concert. “McCain is likely to steer the conversation, as he has in prior debates, to his captivity in Vietnam. It was the bedrock experience of his life and is the organizing principle of his political identity. … He showcased it most triumphantly last October in a debate in Orlando, Florida. The moderator noted that while McCain had strongly supported the troop surge in Iraq, Hillary Rodham Clinton, then seen as the likely Democratic nominee, wanted to pull the troops out. McCain was asked whether the surge was a winning issue for Republicans in 2008. With a quick nod to the troops, McCain, characteristically, hijacked the question and skipped to pork-barrel spending, his favorite mode of attack. ‘In case you missed it, a few days ago, Senator Clinton tried to spend $1 million on the Woodstock Concert Museum,’ McCain said slyly. ‘Now, my friends, I wasn’t there,’ he continued, letting it sink in why he had missed that festival in 1969. ‘I’m sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event,’ he deadpanned, pausing again to stoke the culture wars. ‘I was tied up at the time.’ The audience roared with approval and rose to its feet for an extended ovation.” [International Herald Tribune, 9/23/08]

Nate Silver: The Foreign Policy Debate Plays To McCain’s Strengths. “There is little doubt that a discussion on foreign policy is playing to McCain’s strengths. Even when Obama may be winning a foreign policy argument on points, it probably benefits McCain for foreign policy to be the subject of discussion, period, as it brings his experience, war heroism and purported readiness to the fore.” [TNR, 9/23/08]

Emory University Assistant Professor of Political Science Andra Gillespie: McCain “Enters The Debate As The Substantive Favorite.” Gillespie: “Because John McCain holds the issue advantage on national security, he enters the debate as the substantive favorite.” [Andra Gillespie, Atlanta Journal Constitution, 9/21/08]

Vanderbilt University Professor John Geer: McCain Has An Edge In The Foreign Policy Debate. Geer: “McCain has an edge in this debate, since the topic is foreign policy. Obama needs to show his own understanding of the international affairs.” [John Geer, Atlanta Journal Constitution, 9/21/08]

Georgia State University Professor Mary Stuckey: Foreign Policy Would Seem To Favor McCain Rather Than Obama. Stuckey: “Foreign policy would seem to favor McCain rather than Obama, and I would expect McCain to rely heavily on his personal experience and biography as evidence of his foreign policy expertise.” [Mary Stuckey, Atlanta Journal Constitution, 9/21/08]

Heilemann: The Debate On Foreign Policy Is “A Lucky Break For McCain” And A “Chance To Move The Debate To Ground That Favors Him.” “But the story line of the campaign is about to pivot to foreign policy and national security. Why? Because those are the topics on the agenda at the first Obama-McCain debate this coming Friday at Ole Miss. A lucky break for McCain, I hear you saying, a chance to move the debate to ground that favors him. And you may be right.” [John Heilemann, New York Magazine, 9/21/08]

OBAMA DEBATE PERFORMANCE

DEBATES ARE NOT A GOOD FORMAT FOR OBAMA

New York Times: Obama’s Debating Skills Are “Uneven” As He Has “A Tendency To Overintellectualize And To Lecture” And “Frequently Rises Above The Mire Of Political Combat When The Battle Calls For Engagement.”  “Senator Barack Obama has shown himself at times to be a great orator. His debating skills, however, have been uneven. Some of his chief strengths — his facility with words, his wry detachment, his reasoning skills, his youthful cool — have not always served him well and may pose significant vulnerabilities in the series of presidential debates that begins Friday, according to political analysts and a review of his earlier debate performances. Mr. Obama has a tendency to overintellectualize and to lecture, befitting his training as a lawyer and law professor. He exudes disdain for the quips and sound bites that some deride as trivializing political debates but that have become a central part of scoring them. He tends to the earnest and humorless when audiences seem to crave passion and personality. He frequently rises above the mire of political combat when the battle calls for engagement.” [New York Times, 9/23/08]

AP: Obama Comes Across As “Lifeless, Aloof, And Windy” During Debates. “For a man known as a powerful speaker, Obama has rarely wowed people in political debates. He can come across as lifeless, aloof and windy.” [AP, 9/20/08]
Fallows: Obama Never Managed To “Receive Big Acclaim After A Debate.”  “While Hillary Clinton time and again beat expectations, Obama never managed to put her away or receive big acclaim after a debate.” [The Atlantic, September 2008]

John King Said Democrats Worry That Obama Is To Professorial Or Too Subdued In Debate Settings.  John King said on CNN, “While Obama excels at the big event, some democrats worry he’s too professorial or too subdued in debate- style settings like last weekend’s faith forum.” [CNN, 8/22/08]

Lawyers and law firms make up Obama’s main source for bundlers. His number one bundling buddy is Goldman Sachs, while executives at Lehman Bros and Credit Suisse also have handed over bundles to his campaign.

Who says Washington–and and lack of transparency–can’t be bought?

Obama has already expressed support for the Great Lakes Compacts and a separate $26 billion Great Lakes restoration plan that has been stalled in Congress for the past three years. His campaign stressed that this proposal is in no way a replacement for that legislation.

“We need to recognize this as a great national treasure that needs to be protected,” said Heather Zichal, energy and environment policy director for the Obama campaign. ”It’s the largest freshwater system on the planet, and therefore we need to put the power of the federal government behind restoration.”

In a conference call with reporters, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar claimed that Obama has been a consistent advocate for the Great Lakes.

“As a state senator, he was a leader in helping to clean Lake Michigan and, in the Senate, he has been a key leader in the Great Lakes compact,” she said.

Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow cited yearly cuts to Great Lakes programs under the Bush administration and hit a familiar theme by connecting them to Republican nominee Sen. John McCain. McCain has pledged to support Great Lakes restoration but has yet to commit to funding levels for any legislation.

“It’s very reassuring to us in Michigan to have a Great Lakes senator running for president of the United States,” said Stabenow.

That in turn must be reassuring to Obama who would like very much to win Michigan’s 17 electoral votes. The candidate can only hope the same holds true in the other Great Lakes states: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Nearly 600 medical doctors have signed a statement calling for Republican presidential nominee John McCain to issue a full and public disclosure of all of his medical records. McCain is a 72-year-old four-time cancer survivor who has lived most of his life with physical disabilities as a result of torture endured as a prisoner of war.

In May the McCain campaign made more than 1,000 pages of medical records from the last eight years available only to select journalists for a three-hour period under a stringent set of rules. The statement argues that such a disclosure is insufficient and call McCain’s health “an issue of profound importance.”

If elected, the Republican nominee would become the oldest person ever inaugurated as president of the United States, a fact that is often mentioned in the context of his relatively inexperienced running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

McCain, who has been declared cancer-free and in good cardiovascular condition by his physicians, would be 76 years old at the end of his first term in office, if elected.

Palin shows solidarity with the residents of Gravina Island.

Over 37 million people saw Sarah Palin declare in her acceptance speech that she told Congress, “thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere.” That statement is demonstrably false, but the campaign of Sen. John McCain continues to tout Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s opposition to the so-called “Bridge to Nowhere” despite once linking it to the collapse of the 35W bridge.

During the 2006 gubernatorial campaign, Palin was a strong proponent of the project, which aimed to connect the town of Ketchikan, Alaska, to a nearby airport on Gravina Island.

“I support these infrastructure projects,” Palin said during a gubernatorial debate. “It will build Alaska, and it’s cheaper to do it today than it is tomorrow.”

Once governor, Palin killed the effort only after it became apparent that the federal government wasn’t going to put any more money into the bloated project beyond the $233 million in earmarks that Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, had already secured. Under pressure to cut wasteful spending, Congress then stripped the stipulation that the money be spent on a bridge but allowed the state of Alaska to keep the $233 million for other transportation projects. Palin then directed her transportation commissioner, Leo von Scheben, to review transportation projects statewide to prepare a list of possible uses for the funds.

Days after the 35W bridge collapse John McCain connected that $233 million with the tragedy that claimed 13 lives in Minneapolis.

“Maybe if we had done it right, maybe some of that money would have gone to inspect those bridges and other bridges around the country,” McCain said at a campaign stop in Ankeny, Iowa on Aug. 4, 2007. “Maybe the 200,000 people who cross that bridge every day would have been safer than spending $233 million of your tax dollars on a bridge in Alaska to an island with 50 people on it.”

One month after McCain’s critical comments Palin changed her position on the bridge, citing the project’s high cost to Alaskans, while continuing to defend the project.

“Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island,” Palin stated in a released statement dated Sept. 21, 2007. “Much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened.”

Obama previously held a 10-point lead. The poll surveyed 742 registered voters in Minnesota and has a 3.5 percent margin of error.

Time’s Mark Halperin provides more data from the poll:

Total: Obama 53, McCain 41

Total with all candidates: Obama 51, McCain 37, Nader 4, Barr 2, McKinney 1

Among men: Obama 51, McCain 44

Among women: Obama 55, McCain 37

Among whites: Obama 49, McCain 44

In 65+ age group: Obama 55, McCain 40

Under 50 age group: Obama 55, McCain 39

Making under $50,000/year: Obama 60, McCain 34

Making more than $50,000/year: Obama 52, McCain 43

But wait. There’s more. The McCane comes with its own instruction card and McCain cartoon, where he’s rocking the big stick like Clinton rocked the sax. After all, nothing says “new” and “innovative” like a good ol’ walking staff bedazzled in red, white and blue ribbon streamers.

It’s hard to make out the instructions, so we inquired with the creator who said the cane’s special uses are as follows: As a political crutch to support a healthy conservative posture; as a means to fend off those stubborn donkeys and clear a path to a brighter America; and as a lightening rod to ignite Republican fervor and to blaze a trail to the White House. Canes: Blazin’ trails since 1763.

If Republican candidates haven’t learned their lesson yet, artists don’t like when you steal their material and manipulate it to make it your own: Bruce Springsteen demanded Reagan quit using “Born in the U.S.A.” in 1984. George W. Bush got into his own trouble in 2000: Tom Petty forced George W. to quit playing “I Won’t Back Down”; then Sting forced him to stop playing “Brand New Day.” The group Orleans made him quit using their song “Still the One” in 2004. And don’t forget the “Dole Man,” who caught heat for using Sam and Dave’s “Soul Man” tune…the list goes on and on.

So what does a song say about a candidate? We look at the best and worst campaign songs over the last few elections and declare a winner and loser.

Continued: Click “Read more

1992: Al Gore for VP
Song: “You Can Call me Al,” by Paul Simon
Sample lyrics: “A man walks down the street, he says why am I soft in the middle now? Why am I soft in the middle? The rest of my life is so hard. I need a photo-opportunity. I want a shot at redemption.”
What it says about the candidate: “Al’s my name; don’t wear it out. Also, I got a big mid-section.”
Verdict: A prescient and unfortunate tune, no? Call me “bored.” Inspiration factor: 0.

2000: George W. Bush for President
Song: “I Won’t Back Down,” by Tom Petty
Sample lyrics: “Well, I won’t back down, no I won’t back down. You can stand me up at the gates of hell, but I won’t back down.”
What it says about the candidate: “I’m a real stubborn muttonhead.”
Verdict: Wow, this guy’s just like Mussolini! Fear factor: 10.

2004: John Kerry for President
Song: “Fortunate Son,” by John Fogerty
Sample lyrics: “It ain’t me, it ain’t me. I ain’t no millionaire’s son. It ain’t me, it ain’t me. I ain’t no fortunate one.”
What it says about the candidate: “I was born into the Forbes family. I summered in France. I went to Yale. I married into the Heinz fortune. I windsurf. Millionaires: They’re just like you!”
Verdict: Dude’s way too defensive. Denial factor: 10.

2008: Barack Obama for President
Song:“The Rising,” by Bruce Springsteen
Sample lyrics: “Come on up for the rising. Come on up, lay your hands in mine. Come on up for the rising. Come on up for the rising tonight.”
What it says about the candidate: “I tread lightly. I’m all about you and giving you the power to rise up with me.”
Verdict: I admit that every time I hear this song Steve Miller Band’s awful “Jet Airliner” chorus gets stuck in my head. That said, it’s a great tune. Empowerment factor: 10.

2008: John McCain for President
Song: “Take a Chance on Me,” by ABBA
Sample lyrics: “Take a chance on me. Come on, give me a break will you? Take a chance on me.”
What it says about the candidate: “I’m not so sure about myself either. But they’ve been grooming me for years for this and I’ve had it up the here with all if it, and come on, can’t you just cut me some slack? Really. Why can’t you please just this once…”
Verdict: Seriously? That’s all you got? A milquetoast Swedish disco band begging for a chance? Desperation factor: 10

Winner: Springsteen’s “Rising.” It’s working-class without being Ford tough. It’s inspirational without being “Happy Days are Here Again.” And it’s Bruce.

Loser: Abba’s “Take a Chance on Me.” No one likes it when you beg for it. Especially via Europop.

Americans love a good dance, whether it’s babies, hamsters, or presidential candidates getting their lip-biting groove on. And just as the candidates’ handwriting speaks volumes about who they are, dance moves scream tomes. So what do these dancing videos say? For starters, Clinton and Obama are dad-in-white-knee-socks embarrassing. John McCain does the dance of the dead. And presidential candidates ain’t got no soul.