An interesting dialogue I was privileged to be privy to, between Cogit and Raymurgy, edited a bit to preserve the "flow":

This is the political blurb that started it, edited and composed by the patriarch of all Wrymouth, whom we shall call "The Codger":

Something to think About – info copped from the internet – (of course, but not entirely)  - but here is reality – at least this can make it a bit more real in these “America is upside-down” times.

• You couldn't get a job at McDonalds and become district manager after 143 days of experience.                  
  
• You couldn't become chief of surgery after 143 days of experience of being a sur geon.
  
• You couldn't manage a Pro Football team with just 143 days of hanging around the NFL. And on and on and on. Fill in your own blank.
• Certainly you couldn't join the military and become a colonel after 143 days of experience – Hell! You couldn’t make Corporal!....and he wants to command the whole kitten-kabuttle. How about the Captain on your next flight – you ok with 143 days experience? I’ll go so far as to say you can’t even become a nightly news anchor with only 143 days of experience as a reporter. (Although that could be the exception.)
  

•  BUT....   From the time Berry became a U. S. Senator, to the time he announced his “exploratory committee”, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate – the number of “working” days the Senate was actually in session. Somehow, after only143 working days (remember, that’s less than 5 months), he believes he’s ready to be Commander In Chief and leader of the Free World ..... 143 days…….Hard to believe that ANY sector of the American public is okay with that….but there you have it.   I know I wouldn't have accepted this premise in my own line of work when I was fighting for promotions - yet, for the job of President of the United States of America?..... 143 days is ok? Come on folks, we’re not voting for the next American Idol or “You got talent” show here.  Out of 300 million people these are the final two?....sigh…

Round One come courtesy Cogito's reply:

I’ll take the smartest guys in the room, thank you.

I’ll take the guys who can think on their feet and do not have to be hidden from the press. Guys who are not afraid to take questions from the people they want to govern. Guys who know that foreign policy is more than being able to see Russia from the kitchen window. Guys that know that responsibly regulated capitalism is superior to profits-I-win, losses-you-lose deregulated free for alls.

Guys who understand that if the government can help people afford to go to a doctor’s office, they may not have to bill taxpayers for the MUCH more expensive ER visit later, and cause 8-hour waits for people with real emergencies.

I’ve had it with the ‘who do you want to have a beer with’ simpletons. The country literally cannot afford another four years of the same.

Round Two, some weeks later, comes from Raymurgy:

I’ll take the smartest guys in the room, thank you.

I know you don't think Obama is smarter just because he has paper from Harvard. You've had eight years of paper from Yale, and you show no respect for that, so now is not the time to begin. Regardless, they have about the same intelligence, else none of them could rise to their positions.

I’ll take the guys who can think on their feet and do not have to be hidden from the press.

Sounds like McCain. When's the last time Barry said something with out stammering worse than your little brother off the cuff? I believe the quote was "Can't I just eat my waffle?" When's the last time McCain ducked hostile "press" with appearances on the View and any number of Sunday morning press shows in his tenure as Senator. Still waiting for Obama to accept appearances on hostile or imagined hostile shows or networks with regularity. I'm glad he impressed O'Reilly. BTW, did O'Reilly treat him with the abject disrespect of Whoopie and friends? The answer is "no."

Guys who are not afraid to take questions from the people they want to govern.

Yes, I do believe the quote is "Can't I just eat my waffle?"

In addition, seen what happened to Joe the Plumber? I don't care if Karl Rove himself asked the question of Obama, or if Joe himself is due a $1,000 tax break. Neither matter. It was Barry's unscripted, off-the-cuff, stammering assurance that if we "spread the wealth" then the "guys behind you" can succeed as well response that cost him in the polls.

And now some people, probably the Republicans (because they are the only negative group) are trying to ruin Joe: professionally, socially and politically. Some people angered McCain and challenged him face to face at HIS OWN RALLY, and he shouted them down and put them in their place. But no one stepped in to ruin their lives for embarrassing McCain and costing him points in the race.

Guys who know that foreign policy is more than being able to see Russia from the kitchen window.

John McCain is ignorant of foreign policy and its complexities. Right. ... are you really worried that McCain doesn't know foreign policy? Really?

Guys that know that responsibly regulated capitalism is superior to profits-I-win, losses-you-lose deregulated free for alls.

Seen the 2003 letter signed by 20 senators? You're shilling for McCain when you say this.

As far as responsibly regulated capitalism goes... how's that southern district of Chicago doing after the responsibly regulated capital injection of so many years ago?

When you slander the immature and unsophisticated investors of today, they were fed by "Greed is Good." from Hollywood (Stone and Dougas incidentally) and the tech orgasms / day trading of the 90s. Perhaps the greatest mistake of the first 6 of the last 8 years was keeping Clinton's appointments in the FED? Those policies led to the next paper tiger on Wall Street.... but still no recession. Curious.

(BTW - We've heard about recession for the last two years - when two people started running for President. Some have even cheered one on, some in very important positions have even predicted knowingly (hoping for a self-fulfilling prophecy? not possible, because all evil, self-serving people work for Bush and the republicans - no one in the press or any Democrat in power would do such a thing). In the summer, absent of a real recession and in the face of >3% growth in July, we get the phrase "feels like a recession" and "oughta be a recession" Now, after the stock market bubble burst while the dollar strengthened internationally - they want to just go ahead and redefine "recession.")

Guys who understand that if the government can help people afford to go to a doctor’s office, they may not have to bill taxpayers for the MUCH more expensive ER visit later, and cause 8-hour waits for people with real emergencies.

Both McCain and Obama are addressing this in different ways. Since this will be a roll-out and any plan will have missteps and hiccups (cf: Hawaii), in theory you may like Obama's plan better, but in practice will you be unable to live with McCain's at all?

You [are apparently so blinded] that you don't see a difference between McCain and the rest of his party. You now despise Lieberman: a man deserving of your vote eight years ago.

Don't vote against a party. ... Vote *for* someone or not at all. You will feel better if you look into Obama and apply your analytical expertise to him. How will he do sitting across the table from Putin? Will there be nukes in Venezuela in record time? After all, it was none other than Kennedy himself admitted that his meeting with Kruschev led directly to the Berlin Wall and missles in Cuba because Nikita saw weakness and inexperience.

Don't dismiss reports critical of Obama out of hand. They usually carry references. Easily checked. You might be surprised at the level of fidelity to the incidents these characterizations pose. Be critical of Obama and the Democratic party. It's allowed.

The country literally cannot afford another four years of the same.

Hyperbole aside, if you are completely dissatisfied with the last eight years, well, then it's a good thing Bush isn't running. He's out.

So you're free to consider McCain. You really are.

Round 3? Cogito ripostes... and I am having to edit far less than I thought I would when I started:

I know you don't think Obama is smarter just because he has paper from Harvard. You've had eight years of paper from Yale, and you show no respect for that, so now is not the time to begin.  Regardless, they have about the same intelligence, else none of them could rise to their positions.

No, I think Obama is smarter because he went to Harvard on scholarship, was elected President of the Harvard Law Review, has demonstrated a strategic and tactical mastery during a two year campaign, is confident enough to seek out dissenting opinions, demonstrates a depth of knowledge of complex subjects, and, most importantly, selected as his running mate a man who complements his areas of expertise, and who is recognized by everyone ... as one of the pre-eminent experts on foreign affairs today.

Incidentally, and I’ve made no bones about it, Biden was MY first pick during the primary season, followed by Dodd, Edwards (yeesh), Obama, Clinton and Kucinich (whose unlikely selection would have had me voting Republican without a doubt). It is this combination I was referring to in the plural as ‘the smartest guys in the room’.

Any of my references to ‘guys’ in the plural means the ticket, and McCain/Palin would be the corollary, not McCain by himself. And Palin is where McCain lost me for good.

When's the last time McCain ducked hostile "press" with appearances on the View and any number of Sunday morning press shows in his tenure as Senator.  Still waiting for Obama to accept appearances on hostile or imagined hostile shows or networks with regularity.  I'm glad he impressed O'Reilly.  BTW, did O'Reilly treat him with the abject disrespect of Whoopie and friends? The answer is "no."  

And what of the eminently qualified Governor Palin? She STILL has not appeared on Sunday morning, nor has she given a full-on press conference. Her performance in her debate with Biden was, objectively, an embarrassment. If you read the transcript of her remarks as if they were responses to a middle-school civics exam, I’d challenge anyone to give them more than a ‘D’.

Like Bush before her, she is pretty much limited to friendly, pre-screened crowds and pre-recorded one-on-one interviews. Not the courage and self-confidence I want in my President.

... As a notably inarticulate left-handed goofball whose mouth often says things that appall my brain, I bestow zero importance on the verbal gaffe, from either side. This goes back to poor Gerald Ford, who in his third debate with Carter allowed that the people of Poland would not consider themselves under Soviet domination. This was seen by many as a chilling display of international ignorance, I saw it as a clumsy and inarticulate attempt at acknowledging the indomitable spirit of the Polish people.

Presidential campaigns are exhausting, interminable exercises that feature constant scrutiny and instant reactions to any mistakes, actual or perceived. The amazing this to me is that there are so FEW gaffes and blunders by the participants. I for one could never survive such an ordeal without looking like the stupidest person ever.

That said, I’ve still yet to see Governor Palin say anything remotely substantive on any subject.

In addition, seen what happened to Joe the Plumber?  I don't care if Karl Rove himself asked the question of Obama, or if Joe himself is due a $1,000 tax break.  Neither matter.

It was Barry's unscripted, off-the-cuff, stammering assurance that if we "spread the wealth" then the "guys behind you" can succeed as well response that cost him in the polls.  And now some people, probably the Republicans (because they are the only negative group) are trying to ruin Joe:  professionally, socially and politically. 

It never matters when the GOP operative* misrepresents himself, does it?

Joe, whose name is Sam, the plumber, except he’s not licensed as a plumber, claims Obama’s tax plan would prevent him from buying a business, which he had no means of doing, and besides, that the incremental 3% on net earnings over $250,000 would somehow queer the deal is a stretch anyway.

It was an attempt at a ‘gotcha’ moment that only partially succeeded. And when a potentially-heart-rending-real-American-dream story is laid at the feet of the media, who is amped up to 11 anyway, can you really be surprised that the press would do a little digging?

And, you’re right, Obama’s answer was inartful (from my perspective) or a telling admission of truth (from his opponent’s perspective). You can only balance his one-time, three-word socialist manifesto against everything else in his economic plan and make your own reasoned judgment. I have.

[* I am only going to stick my nose in here, briefly, to note that I hope Cogit doesn't really think Wurzlebacher, or whats-his-name, is a gubmint GOP "operatchnik." I mean... sheesh. That sort of thinking means we can sic the politicos and press on ordinary citizens such as Joe and that poor crazed woman who carved a "B" on her cheek, and think they are only getting what they deserve. "Five Minutes' Hate" — that outghta teach 'em, eh? But don't let that keep you from digesting his more reasoned points, which are many.]

John McCain is ignorant of foreign policy and its complexities.  Right.  Rather than list any percieved shortfalls of Obama, are you really worried that McCain doesn't know foreign policy?  really?

I am not worried that McCain is ignorant of foreign policy.

I do wonder about his grasp of the complexities. He conflates the Sunni and Shia, he changed the time line of the surge vs the Anbar awakening. I’ll give him the Pakistani-Iraqi border mistake as a mere gaffe.**

[**Sorry; me again. Recall Cogit said he bestows "zero importance" on verbal gaffes, from either side.]

My real concern is that his running mate and selected successor (a position he had more than FOUR MONTHS to consider, vet and nominate) knows nothing of foreign policy, and thinks we’re stupid enough to accept her perky assurances that she does. And I’m worried about what this ill-conceived selection says about his ability to make decisions that REALLY put ‘Country First’.

Seen the 2003 letter signed by 20 senators?  You're shilling for McCain when you say this.   As far as responsibly regulated capitalism goes...  how's that southern district of Chicago doing after the responsibly regulated capital injection of so many years ago? 

When you slander the immature and unsophisticated investors of today, they were fed by "Greed is Good." from Hollywood (Stone and Dougas incidentally) and the tech orgasms / day trading of the 90s.    Perhaps the greatest mistake of the first 6 of the last 8 years was keeping Clinton 's appointments in the FED?   Those policies led to the next paper tiger on Wall Street....   but still no recession.  Curious. 

BTW - We've heard about recession for the last two years - when two people started running for President.  Some have even cheered one on, some in very important positions have even predicted knowingly (hoping for a self-fulfilling prophecy?  not possible, because all evil, self-serving people work for Bush and the republicans - no one in the press or any Democrat in power would do such a thing).  In the summer, absent of a real recession and in the face of >3% growth in July, we get the phrase "feels like a recession" and "oughta be a recession"  Now, after the stock market bubble burst while the dollar strengthened internationally - they want to just go ahead and redefine "recession."

Financial protections (some would say regulations) were put into place after the bank collapses of the Depression by the Roosevelt administration. These regulations were systematically dismantled starting with Reagan and into the Clinton administration under the GOP congress of 1994-2000. ...

Now, all kinds of incomprehensible instruments are in place that make no sense and provide no value to the market at all. They are gambling instruments, not financial instruments and they are completely unregulated. I look forward to reasonable regulation of the financial market, and (in my fantasy world) the complete elimination of every investment that does not contribute directly to the economy. This would include: hedge funds, derivatives, short selling, stock futures, anything that is nothing more than a bet.*

[* A point all reasonable people — meaning me and Cogit — totally agree upon. We both think ENRON was an example of perverted and evil avarice, NOT A GOOD BUSINESS MODEL. But too many in business and government, on all levels, took a look at ENRON — and disagreed with us. And the world is a poorer place for it.]

... If you think back to those heady days of July, you’ll recall that gasoline was topping $4 a gallon, the dollar was at its weakest, and food and energy prices were astronomical. And, apparently, the >3% growth was a complete hallucination.

Coincidentally (or not) media ownership protections (some would say regulations), also put into place by the Roosevelt administration, were likewise systematically dismantled starting with Reagan and continuing to this day. This is a prime reason why political discourse is so polarized, ill-informed and vitriolic in this country today. It has served us VERY poorly. The broadcast spectrum belongs to everyone. Why can’t my half of the time be devoted to politics I want to hear?* Is an informed electorate REALLY a market question? I hope not –we’ve seen where that’s gotten us.

[* Me again: because the politics you want to hear, every bit as vitriolic and ill-informed, are also a commercial sink-hole to boot. But this is why the Federal Government subsidizes "public" radio heavily, to keep it from foundering on it's own foolhardiness. Where are the liberal (progressive, what-have-you) entertainers who can put together a product that is riveting and profitable without government interference? What is the Universal Constant that allows only conservative (small-government) entertainers to pull this off? 'Tis — a puzzlement, no?]

The thing to ask about government regulations is: why were they put into effect in the first place? Government regulations are not created for no reason, there is almost always a causal event or condition that results in regulation.**

[** Indeed. I explain to my math students that mathematicians are people, and don't invent mathematical models for no reason. Since they are people, the formulas must have a reason. We may consider government regulations in the same way]

Do they sometimes over-reach? It’s the government, so “yes”. Are they one of the few recourses an average citizen has to ensure he or she will not be swindled, injured or killed by the private sector? Yes.

If the underlying reasons for the regulations have not changed, then one should be VERY cautious about messing with them, and especially lifting them entirely. As for the old bromide that the market is ‘self-correcting’, that may be, but only with the agility of an aircraft carrier,*** only after thousands if not millions are adversely affected. Once in place, government regulations are preventative, not reactive.

[*** but — BUT — I ponder, and quail: if private enterprise has the agility of an aircraft carrier, what is the agility of the federal government? Dealing with customer service at Best Buy is aggravating, but they can't hold a candle to the IRS in my book.]

Personally, I don't want to have a beer with simpletons. 

Neither do I, but the GOP seems to think we do.

[* may I just add? "BUR-R-RNNN!!"]

One thing I do agree on is that the dogmatic left is no more tolerant of dissent than the dogmatic right.

Number two: I was a fan of John McCain well into Bush’s second term, and admired very much the fact that there was legislation named ‘McCain-Fiengold’ and ‘McCain-Kennedy’. I particularly remember his principled (and mavericky) position against the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 with great fondness. I find his personal story inspiring. I was one of the few that thought that a Kerry-McCain ticket in 2004 was a great idea. But that guy has changed.

How will he do sitting across the table from Putin?  Will there be nukes in Venezuela in record time?  After all, it was none other than Kennedy himself admitted that his meeting with Kruschev led directly to the Berlin Wall and missles in Cuba because Nikita saw weakness and inexperience.

Obama will do fine across from Putin. ... I’d ask the same thing about McCain, who has already demonstrated a dangerous capriciousness and a lot of the same uncritical certainty that got 5,000 American soldiers killed and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted.

Don't dismiss reports critical of Obama out of hand.  They usually carry references.  Easily checked.  You might be surprised at the level of fidelity to the incidents these characterizations pose. Be critical of Obama and the Democratic party.  It's allowed.  And it will allow you to feel better about not being in control of national politics.

I might say the same thing to you re: McCain, Palin and the GOP. And, as I mentioned before, Obama was my fourth choice in the primaries – there are several areas where he and I don’t agree, particularly in the breadth and scope of some social programs. But on balance, more agreement than disagreement.

So you're free to consider McCain.  You really are. 

I have considered McCain – and found him wanting, for all the reasons above, but primarily for Palin. That is the first Presidential decision a nominee makes, he was the presumptive nominee since February, and apparently he gave it all the thought that he’d would give to what kind of donut he’d get at Krispy Kreme. He failed that test in my book, and nothing he has done since has made me change my mind.

There you have it.

I am not surprised at how prominently Governor Palin figures in these discussions — McCain's choice was a bona-fide "high-risk, high-reward" gamble. What fascinates me is how strongly she resonates with some people I know and respect, and how — anathema, I suppose — she is to others I know and respect. Some see her as a veritable representative, others as an insult of the crassest variety. Very few (me?) somewhere down in the middle.

End, Part 1