would McCain even try to stop this.... since he is so beholden to his party now?
You get 3 guesses. First 2 don't count.
A Last Push To Deregulate
White House to Ease Many Rules
By R Smith Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, October 31, 2008; Page A01
The Whitehouse is working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before pres bush leaves office in January.
The new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo. Some would ease or lift constraints on private industry, including power plants, mines and farms.
Those and other regulations would help clear obstacles to some commercial ocean-fishing activities, ease controls on emissions of pollutants that contribute to global warming, relax drinking-water standards and lift a key restriction on mountaintop coal mining.
Once such rules take effect, they typically can be undone only through a laborious new regulatory proceeding, including lengthy periods of public comment, drafting and mandated reanalysis.
"They want these rules to continue to have an impact long after they leave office," said Matthew Madia, a regulatory expert at OMB Watch, a nonprofit group critical of what it calls the Bush administration's penchant for deregulating in areas where industry wants more freedom. He called the coming deluge "a last-minute assault on the public . . . happening on multiple fronts."
White House spokesman Tony Fratto said: "This administration has taken extraordinary measures to avoid rushing regulations at the end of the term. And yes, we'd prefer our regulations stand for a very long time -- they're well reasoned and are being considered with the best interests of the nation in mind."
As many as 90 new regulations are in the works, and at least nine of them are considered "economically significant" because they impose costs or promote societal benefits that exceed $100 million annually. They include new rules governing employees who take family- and medical-related leaves, new standards for preventing or containing oil spills, and a simplified process for settling real estate transactions.
While it remains unclear how much the administration will be able to accomplish in the coming weeks, the last-minute rush appears to involve fewer regulations than Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton approved at the end of his tenure.
In some cases, Bush's regulations reflect new interpretations of language in federal laws. In other cases, such as several new counterterrorism initiatives, they reflect new executive branch decisions in areas where Congress -- now out of session and focused on the elections -- left the president considerable discretion.
The burst of activity has made this a busy period for lobbyists who fear that industry views will hold less sway after the elections. The doors at the New Executive Office Building have been whirling with corporate officials and advisers pleading for relief or, in many cases, for hastened decision making.
According to the Office of Management and Budgets regulatory calendar, the commercial scallop-fishing industry came in two weeks ago to urge that proposed catch limits be eased, nearly bumping into National Mining Association officials making the case for easing rules meant to keep coal slurry waste out of Appalachian streams. A few days earlier, lawyers for kidney dialysis and biotechnology companies registered their complaints at the OMB about new Medicare reimbursement rules. Lobbyists for customs brokers complained about proposed counterterrorism rules that require the advance reporting of shipping data.
Bush's aides are acutely aware of the political risks of completing their regulatory work too late. On the afternoon of Bush's inauguration, Jan. 20, 2001, his chief of staff issued a government-wide memo that blocked the completion or implementation of regulations drafted in the waning days of the Clinton administration that had not yet taken legal effect.
"Through the end of the Clinton administration, we were working like crazy to get as many regulations out as possible," said Donald R. Arbuckle, who retired in 2006 after 25 years as an OMB official. "Then on Sunday, the day after the inauguration, OMB Director Mitch Daniels called me in and said, 'Let's pull back as many of these as we can.' "
Clinton's appointees wound up paying a heavy price for procrastination. Bush's team was able to withdraw 254 regulations that covered such matters as drug and airline safety, immigration and indoor air pollutants. After further review, many of the proposals were modified to reflect Republican policy ideals or scrapped altogether.
Seeking to avoid falling victim to such partisan tactics, White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten, in May imposed a Nov. 1 government-wide deadline to finish major new regulations, "except in extraordinary circumstances."
That gives officials just a few more weeks to meet an effective Nov. 20 deadline for the publication of economically significant rules, which take legal effect only after a 60-day congressional comment period. Less important rules take effect after a 30-day period, creating a second deadline of Dec. 20.
OMB spokeswoman Jane Lee said that Bolten's memo was meant to emphasize the importance of "due diligence" in ensuring that late-term regulations are sound. "We will continue to embrace the thorough and high standards of the regulatory review process," she said.
As the deadlines near, the administration has begun to issue regulations of great interest to industry, including, in recent days, a rule that allows natural gas pipelines to operate at higher pressures and new Homeland Security rules that shift passenger security screening responsibilities from airlines to the federal government. The OMB also approved a new limit on airborne emissions of lead this month, acting under a court-imposed deadline.
Many of the rules that could be issued over the next few weeks would ease environmental regulations, according to sources familiar with administration deliberations.
A rule put forward by the National Marine Fisheries Service and now under final review by the OMB would lift a requirement that environmental impact statements be prepared for certain fisheries-management decisions and would give review authority to regional councils dominated by commercial and recreational fishing interests.
An Alaska commercial fishing source, granted anonymity so he could speak candidly about private conversations, said that senior administration officials promised to "get the rule done by the end of this month" and that the outcome would be a big improvement.
Lee Crockett of the Pew Charitable Trusts' Environment Group said the administration has received 194,000 public comments on the rule and protests from 80 members of Congress as well as 160 conservation groups. "This thing is fatally flawed" as well as "wildly unpopular," Crockett said.
Two other rules nearing completion would ease limits on pollution from power plants, a major energy industry goal for the past eight years that is strenuously opposed by Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups.
One rule, being pursued over some opposition within the Environmental Protection Agency, would allow current emissions at a power plant to match the highest levels produced by that plant, overturning a rule that more strictly limits such emission increases. According to the EPA's estimate, it would allow millions of tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually, worsening global warming.
A related regulation would ease limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants near national parks.
A third rule would allow increased emissions from oil refineries, chemical factories and other industrial plants with complex manufacturing operations.
These rules "will force Americans to choke on dirtier air for years to come, unless Congress or the new administration reverses these eleventh-hour abuses," said lawyer John Walke of the Natural Resources Defense Council.
But Scott H. Segal, a Washington lawyer and chief spokesman for the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council, said that "bringing common sense to the Clean Air Act is the best way to enhance energy efficiency and pollution control." He said he is optimistic that the new rule will help keep citizens' lawsuits from obstructing new technologies.
Jonathan Shradar, an EPA spokesman, said that he could not discuss specifics but added that "we strive to protect human health and the environment." Any rule the agency completes, he said, "is more stringent than the previous one."
NOT in MY back yard!
this could be the 'killer Ad that could put Obama over the top for certain sure.
Just like the one the Republicans used during the last week of 2004, the wolves prowling in the dark and in and out of the trees and brush and circling ever closer to your home, inferring terrorists are lusking and it takes a Republican and GW Bush to save you from them.
Our Ad could be pictures showing a nuclear facility and John McCain in an audio clip stating out loud and in front of everybody, as he did so today in Miami at his wednesday October 29th rally, that he will do the following:
*John McCain Will Put His Administration On Track To Construct 45 New Nuclear Power Plants By 2030 With The Ultimate Goal Of Eventually Constructing 100 New Plants. Nuclear power is a proven, zero-emission source of energy, and it is time we recommit to advancing our use of nuclear power. Currently, nuclear power produces 20% of our power, but the U.S. has not started construction on a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years. China, India and Russia have goals of building a combined total of over 100 new plants and we should be able to do the same. It is also critical that the U.S. be able to build the components for these plants and reactors within our country so that we are not dependent on foreign suppliers with long wait times to move forward with our nuclear plans.
*Excerpt from John McCain's web site on Energy Policies.
*John McCain Will Put His Administration On Track To Construct 45 New Nuclear Power Plants By 2030 With The Ultimate Goal Of Eventually Constructing 100 New Plants. Nuclear power is a proven, zero-emission source of energy, and it is time we recommit to advancing our use of nuclear power. Currently, nuclear power produces 20% of our power, but the U.S. has not started construction on a new nuclear power plant in over 30 years. China, India and Russia have goals of building a combined total of over 100 new plants and we should be able to do the same. It is also critical that the U.S. be able to build the components for these plants and reactors within our country so that we are not dependent on foreign suppliers with long wait times to move forward with our nuclear plans. * excerpt from McCain's web site about his energy policies.
=============================
The reason we have not built nuclear power plants in 30 years is.... the last time somebody brought it up 30 years ago, everybody in America cried "Not In MY Backyard!"
ditto here. I don't want to have 45 nuclear power plants across the country with the possibility of a Chernoble or in each area of America.
This could be Obama's'killer ad over the weekend... remember the wolves at the door for scaring Americans about terrorist lurking Ad that got the republicans back in office in 2004?
and it's too late for John McCain to stop our Ad, he's already said it forcefully today, wednesday 29th, in his Miami rally in front of God and everybody. Including Charlie Crist.
Republicans need to rethink their campaign tactics and think seriously about what the party will be remembered as and what Americans will come away with after the 2008 presidential election.
By all indications, most Americans who are not in the maniacal right-fringe, like Sean Hannity of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and followers, are going to come away with a very bad taste in their mouth, regarding the 'Grand Old Party'.
Todd Palin or 'First Dude', admits or even brags he is an advisor to his wife, Sarah Palin. If Sarah Palin is elected as VP, what effect will Todd Palin have in the whitehouse?
google AIP sarah and todd palin; or follow link below:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20081013/cm_huffpost/133966
as Menachem Rosensaft writes;
We are entitled to know what that role is likely to be. Is Todd Palin going to call government officials from the White House to lobby for or against political allies or enemies? Is he going to summon cabinet members into the Vice President's office to try to get a relative hired or fired? That is, after all, his track record.
Todd Palin also appears to have lobbied Alaska state legislators on issues other than his former brother in law's continued employment. When Republican State Representative Jay Ramras, the chairman of the Alaska House Judiciary Committee, saw the Todd Palin outside the legislative chamber one day last year, "My colleagues told me he was lobbying for the governor's position on oil taxes." This made Ramras uncomfortable. "I think that when the spouse of an elected governor steps away from safe issues that are nonpartisan in nature," he said, "that it is bad for the legislative and executive branches, and Todd Palin would not be an exception to that."
Equally important, if Todd Palin is going to be one of the Vice President's most senior advisors, if not the most senior, he should be made available to the media to answer questions about his political views. The little we know about him is disconcerting.
For seven years, from 1995 until 2002, he was a member of the controversial extreme right-wing Alaska Independence Party. This is a party whose principal goal is a statewide vote on whether Alaska should secede from the United States, and whose founder's nuggets of wisdom, featured prominently on the AIP's website, include "I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions," and "The problem with you John Birchers is that you are too damn liberal!"
What, if anything, did Todd Palin do as a member of the AIP? Did he actively support Alaskan independence, and if so, by what means? The Alaska Independence Party is affiliated with other extremist right wing political groups around the United States, including the Constitution Party (formerly the U.S. Taxpayers' Party) which wants to "restore our government to its Constitutional limits and our law to its Biblical foundations." Does he see himself as "an Alaskan, not an American"? What does he think about American institutions such as, say, the Supreme Court and Congress? Does he, like AIP founder Joe Vogler, consider the John Birch Society to be "too damn liberal"? Earlier this year, AIP Vice Chairman Dexter Carter urged party members to "infiltrate" the two major parties. Come again? Is that why Todd Palin is now a registered Republican?
We know that Sarah Palin has been "palling around" with Todd. We don't know with whom Todd Palin has been, or for that matter may still be, "palling around."
At the very least, both John McCain and Sarah Palin should tell us whether they approve of Todd Palin's past membership in the AIP and whether, if elected, they will allow him to use the apparent authority of the White House to promote a personal agenda.Menachem Rosensaft is a lawyer in New York City.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html
The article in the link is from Great Britain. Get it? I just found out that some of our most ardent supporters have not heard about the True John McCain. When they asked why is it that no one in the media has brought it up. I said, because as always, you don't talk (bad or negative) about a war hero or a veteran. Politically correct, don't you know. Tell everyone, anyway!
September 13, 2008 Op-Ed ColumnistShe’s Not Ready By BOB HERBERThttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/13/opini ... rbert.htmlWhile watching the Sarah Palin interview with Charlie Gibson Thursday night, and the coverage of the Palin phenomenon in general, I’ve gotten the scary feeling, for the first time in my life, that dimwittedness is not just on the march in the U.S., but that it might actually prevail.How is it that this woman could have been selected to be the vice presidential candidate on a major party ticket? How is it that so much of the mainstream media has dropped all pretense of seriousness to hop aboard the bandwagon and go along for the giddy ride? For those who haven’t noticed, we’re electing a president and vice president, not selecting a winner on "American Idol."===============================================================
Reply from: Fly on The Wall Alright, Mr. Herbert, I am going to tell you how we now have Sarah Palin on the national ticket for John McCain's vice presidential running mate. It came about because........ John McCain threw a hissy-fit. Seeing the Democrat Barack Obama's nomination party in Denver, McCain couldn't stand it a second longer, and knew he could never compete with his rival on a man to man, one on one, toe to toe basis and screamed; "bring me a woman!" (must have startled some aides for a nano second or two.) "get me a woman on this ticket now!" Because he knew he couldn't compete otherwise. He has to win to show Cindy, his rich millionairess heiress, that he still has the old fire in the furnace or the ...uh.. the hanging apparatus, and all.And when they look blankly at McCain, he screams; "and make sure she is young, has kids, babies, whatever, and has something to do with .... with.... get me a woman!"
Thursday, in the hours leading to the debate, CNN talking head talked to a friend and advisor of Palin's and the woman (didn't get her name...) told CNN that Palin knew the answers to Couric, during any of the CBS interviews but was in the mode of thinking forward as "she learned to do back when she, herself was a journalist-reporter. Like, you have to think ahead of how the Q&A could be used or distorted .. and so Palin did not give answer to the question -- but she knew it. Sarah always does know what the answer is to the subject, she just is careful..."
Rope-A-Dope. Get it? The Repgulicans have used that trick successfully over the last 8 years, thinks to Rove, especially. Make the candidate appear dumb or --(or, something...) -- and get people roped in to see the debate and then ....
Only problem is, Americans are waking up to this ploy. Americans are not quite as stupid as the Repuglicans want us to be.
Today, Wednesday, Oct. 1, 2008, I am watching Barack Obama give a wonderful speech in LaCrosse, Wisconsin, and the phone rings and the caller ID reads that it is The Republicans. Just from curiosity, I push the on button and say hello. The young woman on the other end says "Hi, I wonder if you'd like to help with a survey..."
"I am voting for Obama." I replied strongly. "Oh, well. try to have a nice day..." she said and hung up.
ha ha :-))
July 19, 2008 politics and economy.
On Thursday, I hear that our government is planning to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and IndyMac and now, on Friday, I hear Wachovia Bank mentioned. The figure to bail them out was $300 billion. Dollars. Are you getting that?On Bill Moyer's Journal, PBS, tonight, I learn that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not federal owned institutions, are run by private investors, and foreign investors are able to come in and take advantage of the U.S. crisis. After we ... I mean, our "government" spends $300 billion of our tax dollars to make these gigantic lending institutions flush again, that is. With OUR tax dollars. And with no demands upon the institutions to behave better or to change habits or to stop engaging in un-ethical practices.This week, the JOURNAL presented two different perspectives on our troubled economy. The first came from frustrated citizens of Cleveland grappling with their community’s extraordinarily high rates of foreclosure. Cleveland, Ohio's Cuyahoga County treasurer Jim Rokakis said: back in the old days when there was no sheriff in town people robbed the banks.
"Back in the old days when there was no sheriff in town, people would rob the banks. Well, here we are in the modern day era, and there’s no sheriff in town. The banks were robbing the people... I learned a hard lesson: I learned that the Fed really is there to protect banks, and not to protect the consumers."
these days the banks are robbing the people. ie; when retirees on fixed incomes wanted to re-mortgage their house for repairs for a new roof or plumbing or so on, they got the sub-prime and bad loans instead of the fixed rate loans of the old days.
William Greider, corrrespondent and author, writes for The Nation. says:
some comments to Bill Moyer's Journal Blog:
I think some of the saddest effects of recent economic problems are not monetary. The human cost is rising as well. Stress, anger, and fatigue are running high. People I talk with down here in Orlando are just exhausted.
As one friend put it, “I have to know everything about everything before I do anything now mostly because if I don’t, they rip me off. I have to know how my car’s cooling system works so I won’t get screwed for an $800 fan switch installation when the problem is most likely a $90 thermostat. I have to be part lawyer, doctor, computer tech, financially analyst. I can’t rely on what anyone actually says anymore.”
So many folks are scrambling and scrambling and scrambling. One lady said she spends an hour in the grocery store just reading labels and ingredients. An elderly neighbor says she spent 2 hours on the internet researching roof shingles for a repair job. Another neighbor is pouring through credit card receipts and statements from 8 months ago to prove to a company that a purchase was made and the item still under warrantee. Another, after hours of research, is fighting with a doctor about why her daughter is prescribed one drug that directly counteracts the effects of another prescribed drug.And this stress is turning to anger…people are outright meaner and ruder to each other. I saw security people called to a cashier line when a dispute arose over who was there first. It’s a tinder box of reactivity. No one lets anyone finish a sentence. Doors aren’t held anymore. Few people say “please” or “thank you.” Few even say “good-bye” on the telephone anymore.
Comedienne/CBS Commentator Nancy Giles said it best a couple of years ago. She said it came to her when she was pumping her own gasoline one day. “You know, I’m doing a lot more jobs now. Why isn’t there a line on my IRS tax return for ‘wages earned but unpaid?’”
Posted by: songweasel | July 19, 2008 12:17 AM
I'm somewhat amazed (but not surprised) that the same people who, when times are good, talk about the self-correcting nature of the free market (which I believe, but only if everyone is honest and agree to play by the rules), are the first ones to ask for a bailout when things go bad.
Let the banks fail, and I'll bet the next time a sub-prime packaged security is offered there won't be many takers.
Posted by: Eric | July 19, 2008 12:17 AM
I’ve been a fan of Greider for a long time. This was my first opportunity to hear him in person. As when I read his articles, my response is that what he says makes sense. It is too bad that no one (in power, as in Congress) is listening.
The most important point he made is that the private corporations get bailed-out but not bought-out. Why don’t the people of the US own Continental Illinois Bank, all the savings and loans, Chrysler, and Bear Stearns? We paid for them. The only way to stop the exploitation of “too big to fail” is for failed industries to be nationalized.
Posted by: January | July 19, 2008 12:16 AM
Regulators knew this meltdown was going to occur for almost ten years now. It was blatant, obvious, and they did nothing to stop it.
Ten years ago Japan had their meltdown, and it almost took down all of Asia. The experts watched and learned, then turned around to use what they learned to strip the middle class here in America of its assets.
Ten years ago Japan had a major meltdown, recession, and ultimately deflation. The value of homes, everything, had to drop to realistic levels.
Everything that happened to them is happening to us. If you want to understand how bad things are going to get, study what happened to Japan.
After all, that's exactly how the criminals that are stealing your money, destroying your bank, learned how to do it.
Posted by: allyn | July 19, 2008 12:14 AM
What scares me: Greider's prediction -- and my belief -- that Americans have darker days ahead as this ripple of credit woes cripple the US. Greider's fears appear valid about private equity funds buying into US financial institutes.
I hope this is a nightmare...and that I wake to an American Dream.
If Fanny and Freddie are bailed out, more US Treasuries will be sold, possibly doubling the national debt. Thus, ever greater US debt held by China and oil rich countries. What happens when foreign creditors own a controlling majority of US Treasury debt? What if instead of US private equity funds, it's foreign investment funds that purchase American banks and Wall Street? After all, the combined market value of the US financial market is beginning to look like a bargain.
And there's no rush. As the US implodes, foreign investors can chose at what deflated price they claim the complete package: the US government and Wall Street.
read more if you don't get it yet.... http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2008/07/facing_economic_troubles.html
This thing of McCain's to cancel debate to "save" the economy, is of course another repug trick.
Thank God, our fellow Americans are seeing things truly, and will vote for Obama, no matter the tricks the repugs play around us.
see my website on how Punch and Judy celebrate repuglicans now. http://www.pajamaparty2008.com/
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
can somebody tell me about this url? When I was thinking I was on our site, I had noticed the pages were slower and most of all, the login page and fields seemed off somehow. Then the browser IE7 sends up a phishing alarm and said I should check the web site and I did and it said it was an imposter. I tried backtracking and think this is the one. Gee, I hate this if we have been hacked and phished and used by the repugs!
"When I'm president, there will be a whole lot more like this, not only here in the Gulf, but also off of our east and west coasts," McCain said in brief remarks to the press. "We need to drill offshore. We need to do it now. If I were president, I would call the members [of congress] back into session and tell them get back to work."
He added, "Senator Obama opposes new drilling. He has said it will not 'solve our problem' and that 'it's not real.' He's wrong, and the American people know it. I hope he'll seize the opportunity to come out and pay a visit like this one and I think it would probably change his mind." Obama, along with many experts in the field, has argued oil drilling won't reduce gas prices in the short term, although McCain's opponent has said he could support drilling as part of a compromise to pass broader energy legislation. But McCain touts his support of offshore drilling everywhere, and his visit here was the most striking declaration of that position. The tour was very brief, as officials here spent about a half-hour explaining to him how oil and natural gas are extracted and produced at the rig.
McCain spent more time traveling to the rig than he did on the platform, where he read remarks an aide had prepared for what was essentially a photo-op at sea.
===============================================================
McCain's visit came a day ahead of the Minerals Management Service's lease sale in New Orleans to auction off 18 million acres of the western Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling. The tracts could potentially yield as much as 400 million barrels of oil, but that amount would only meet the nation's oil needs for about 19 days, and it would be at least seven to 10 years until oil started flowing.
Reading this article, we can conclude that Palin is ready for Washington, DC, on day 1.
The New York Times
WASILLA, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin lives by the maxim that all politics is local, not to mention personal.
So when there was a vacancy at the state Agriculture Department, she appointed a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister, to the $95,000-a-year directorship. A former real estate agent, Ms. Havemeister cited her childhood love of cows as a qualification for running the roughly $2 million agency.
Ms. Havemeister was one of at least five high school classmates Ms. Palin hired, often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages.
Ms. Palin walks the national stage as a small-town foe of "good old boys" politics and a champion for ethics reform. And as the Republican vice presidential nominee, she points to her management experience while mocking her Democratic rivals, Sens. Barack Obama and Joe Biden, as speechmakers who never have run anything.
An examination of her swift rise and record as mayor of Wasilla and then governor finds that her visceral style and penchant for attacking critics – she sometimes calls local opponents "haters" – often contrasts with her public image.
Throughout her career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials.
Interviews show that Ms. Palin runs an administration that puts a premium on loyalty and secrecy. The governor and her top officials sometimes use personal e-mail accounts for state business; dozens of e-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that her staff members studied whether that could allow them to circumvent subpoenas seeking public records.
Of course, Barack cannot reveal his plans to go forward on the economy crisis. If he did....and whatever Barack Obama says... then hardly one hour later, John MCain will have co-opted Obama's message,
Any idea or words from our guy, Obama, is immediately taken up and grabbed (stolen) by McCain.
And, Obama is aware of this. Today on the campaign trail in Florida, Obama said "everybody knows that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." speaking of his foe, McCain.
But, in this case, Obama cannot afford McCain's form of imitation which in reality is plain old thievery.
tell everybody when they want to make excuses not to vote for Obama, such as but, he's a muslim...tell them No. That the Democrat Party wants to win too badly, and, that the Democrat Party would not run a muslim for a candidate for president, not in these troubling times. Argue the case that Obama has to be christian, in order to run for president.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/19/AR2008091903589.html
and help Joe Biden as much as you can; as he suggests in the excerpt below;
excerpt from wapol; At the end of a two-day bus trip through Ohio this week, Biden acknowledged in an interview that he and others still have more work to do in selling Obama to those voters before Election Day. He said a lack of familiarity with Obama and false rumors about him were still hampering the Democratic ticket, particularly the untrue e-mail chains suggesting that Obama is a Muslim. The Democratic presidential nominee is a Christian. Everybody likes him, they get out there and they look and they go, 'I like him a lot, but is this guy a Muslim? Does he go to a madrassa?' Biden said. People like him, but they want to be reassured [that] some of the malarkey, the negative stuff they hear about him, is just not true. But, he added, we're still winning, we're still doing well. Biden said what he described as Karl Rove tactics by Republicans have hurt Obama. I think some of the stuff they're trying to say is less racial. What they're trying to say is, this guy is exotic, this guy isn't like you, like the whole thing that he is a celebrity, he is a rock star, he said.
