A Neighborly Horror Story

Since today does happen to be Halloween, and our entire staff hails from Nebraska originally, we thought it fitting to tell a Nebraska-based scary story today.

Sadly, this story isn't a fictional tale. Don Walton of the Lincoln Journal Star, along with Robynn Tysver and Matthew Hansen of the Omaha World-Herald relayed the details of what we're calling 'The Green-Eyed Next-Door Nebraska Neighbor's Tale' - also known as the Deb Fischer land grab - earlier this month.

In short, Fischer and her husband owned a parcel of land in the Northwestern part of Nebraska - Cherry County, to be specific - for many years, right next door to a perfect piece of property they coveted. The target of the Fischers' greed, their neighbors the Kime family, repeatedly refused to sell their land. The Kimes were more than generous though, allowing Fischer's cattle to graze on Kime's land for free, for many years.

After multiple unsuccessful tries at buying the Kime's land, the Fischers attempted to sue the Kimes out of their land. That was 17 years and $40,000 ago - the price the Kime family had to squeeze out to pay legal fees in order to keep the land they already owned.

This is no simple land dispute, as Ms. Fischer and her political campaign keep insisting. This is a good-old fashioned rich man's - or in this case, rich woman's - land grab. It's also an ugly display of Ms. Fischer's true character.

Our staff has family and political ties that go back in Western Nebraska over a hundred years. Our webmaster's great-grandfather was hung and killed in Cherry County over a century ago for speaking out about politics − so Ms. Fischer's land-grab tale isn't the only political horror story we have deep personal knowledge of from that area of the country.

What happened to the Kime family is a scary story of a different kind, though.

Les and Betty Kime did also end their days hung up - by legal strings. After their deaths, the Kime's children wanted to sell their land - including the parcel that the Fischers had unsuccessfully sued for - to a partnership of the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission and the Snake Falls Sportsmen's Club.

The legal hanging of the Kime family happened when Deb Fischer effectively blocked the gift purchase from the Kime family to all Nebraskans. Fischer was the leading state senator who closed the noose around a bill in Nebraska's legislature that would cut off the fiscal life for half of all Nebraska Game and Parks funding if the Kime deal went through.

Now that Deb Fischer is running for U.S. Senate, her campaign seems desperate to loosen the noose she'd draped around her own neck over the last two decades, including how it appears Ms. Fischer may have used her meager power in the state legislature to feed her own greed and petty vengeance against her neighbors.

This story hasn't ended yet - and it still could have a more favorable ending than most western tales of its ilk.

We only hope you remember the albatross that's hanging around Ms Fischer's own neck as you head to the polls next week.

After all, if Ms. Fischer wrung the financial lifeblood out of  her own next-door neighbors in her greedy quest for the land she coveted, imagine what she might do if given more power?

Putting Your Foot In It

Make no mistake, we're well aware of the massive damage and the mess that the now-downgraded superstorm Sandy continues to cause throughout the Northeast. The U.S. Federal government in Washington, DC is officially closed for a second day, as is the New York Stock Exchange. More than 12,000 flights have been cancelled, and mass transit in the region is currently nonexistent. A levee broke in New Jersey, where hundreds of people are now being evacuated. In many inland areas of the Northeast, it's also snowing wet, heavy, tree-breaking, powerline-snapping snow. More than seven milion Americans are without power, and property damage from wind, water, snow - and fire - continues to rise.

For those Americans trapped by Sandy who still have power, many have taken to turning their televisions off anyway, thanks to the still ongoing onslaught of political ads. So many of the ads are blatantly filled with lies, that it could make the calmest person want to put their fists or feet through their television screen.

Of course, that's not the fault of the television screen. It's the fault of candidates and campaigns who - metaphorically speaking - keep "putting their foot in it," as the Romney campaign has with their offensively mendacious and campaign-closing Chrysler ad.

In case you've forgotten, it was Mitt Romney who insisted that the Federal government should have "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" four years ago. As we noted here a week ago, what Romney wanted back then was for private banks to bail out GM and Chrysler - something that no bank was willing or able to do.

Thanks to President Obama stepping in, lending both GM and Chrysler the money they needed, and forcing both companies through major restructuring and bankruptcy, both automakers are now fiscally stable and successful. In fact, Chrysler reported third-quarter profits on Monday that were 80% better than at the same time last year. Fiat -Chrysler's current parent company - has been so successful that it recently announced that they were looking to expand their business and build a new factory in China to serve the growing Chinese demand for new vehicles.

Chrysler's current executives were so offended at Romney's whopper of a commercial, they publicly called out Romney's fabrication on their official company blog, as we also noted last week.

These facts are as clear as the picture on a new top-of-the-line high-definition flat screen TV - and they don't match up at all with the claims made by the Romney campaign. The Romney ad cherry picks the facts, and twists reality so bad, the Obama campaign's reply ad finally comes out and calls Romney's obfuscation and falsehood what it is: a lie.

While we've been calling Romney's baloney what it is - lies - for some time, it's rare to see one Presidential campaign use that word to describe what the other is doing. Campaigns will use virtually every adjective in the book but the word "lie".

Eventually though, when a person or a political campaign has been spouting bull pucky and untruths so provably, blatantly, and directly false as Mitt Romney and his campaign have - especially with this campaign-closing ad - even the no-drama campaign of President Obama reaches the limit of politeness.

We're glad the Obama campaign called Romney's lie about Chrysler what it is, instead of putting their foot through the nearest TV set. Frankly, we think the Obama campaign should have put their boots into the backside of the Romney campaign a long time ago.

We Are What We're Fed

The next few days could be a bit dicey, especially for our staff and friends in the Northeastern part of the United States. The worst of Hurricane Sandy will likely be hitting today from Virginia to New York, and even up to Boston - and it doesn't look like just the usual media overreaction when a storm affects that region.

Public and mass transportation has been shut down in DC, Philly, New Jersey, and even New York City. Boston will likely follow later today. Huge areas have been evacuated due to concerns about coastal flooding. Thousands of flights have been cancelled too. Even the 2012 Election - just eight days away - is being affected, with political activity in the area directly in the path of storm pretty much shut down for several days.

Our entire staff, having grown up and lived in Nebraska for many years, knows that the key to dealing with bad weather and disasters is to prepare as best you can, get somewhere safe and stay there, and then deal with the aftermath calmly, quickly, and together with your neighbors. In other words, separate out the news and legitimate information, and ignore the garbage you're being fed about this storm by the hyped-up media. Yes, it's an incredibly bad storm - but it's not the end of the world.

We've been talking a lot this year about what we, as consumers, take in. Our recent discussion of the changes by the USDA to our nation's school lunch programs made it clear our schools have been feeding our kids garbage, at the direction of America's parents - or maybe because of a lack of direction from those parents. Without the proper type, variety and portions of food, too many of America's kids have gotten fat and lazy. That's been the fault of every American - including you.

Now, thanks to the new USDA regulations, childhood obesity may be decreasing - though some kids may still think they're starving.

Our American media landscape has actually become much the same as our school lunch program, a failing that's incredibly obvious during storms like Hurricane Sandy. While "digital journalism" jobs continue to increase in number, what most stories bury near the bottom is that overall media jobs continue to shrink. Executive salaries in corporate media groups have remained high and stockholders have been catered to like spoiled children, just as Murrow warned over fifty years ago. In the meantime, the people who actually do the real work - reporters, air talent, photographers, graphic artists, engineers and more - have been cut, trimmed down, and gutted past the point of sanity.

Multiple national radio companies are - right now - looking at repeating what they did in 2011, eliminating even more personnel, dumping more real estate, and trying to operate the local radio stations they own completely via remote control, with syndicated programming and computers. Some local tv broadcasters already do this. Major newspapers in major cities - like New Orleans and Seattle - aren't any better. Many have shifted to less-than-daily status, or gone online completely over the last few years, in order to meet corporate profit targets. That kind of limping media infrastructure simply can't handle the responsibilities these organizations have to American society when a massive storm or some other major disaster hits - like the low-level tsunami that affected Alaska and Hawaii over the weekend. If you missed hearing about the tsunami, that only further proves our point.

For over thirty years now, Americans have been fed the ideas that greed is good and that corporations - including media entities - should be able to do whatever is in their fiscal best interest, often whether those things are legal or not.

If Hurricane Sandy makes anything clear, it should be that those ideas are no more healthy for America than the all-you-can-eat nacho bars that - until recently - existed in many schools across the U.S.

It's time we followed the example of the schools, with regards to our media. We can't simply accept the journalistic equivalent of junk food news, no matter how much complaining media stockholders do. The airwaves belong to the people, as does freedom of the press. If worldwide media corporations don't wish to follow those rules, they can always go overseas - or they can expect more battles from worker's unions, and more unions in the media in general. In America, we need to re-legislate our media to fulfill their responsibilities to local communities, to staff their outlets to be the right size, and to deliver quality products that fill the needs of Americans, come rain or shine.

Friday Funday: Keeping Your Head On Straight

If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs…
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it... 
-Rudyard Kipling

Around this time of year, our staff often ends up discussing Halloween costumes, especially those we wore as children. From what we've experienced in different workplaces, it's likely that your group of friends does the same thing.

None of our staff members have ever really tried to make a super scary costume. When real life gives us stories like the NYPD cop who tried to kidnap, cook, and eat women, there's not a whole lot of point in trying to compete with that kind of fear factor.

We do know a few people who this year might be putting together at least two costumes because they can't decide which one to go with. Good or bad, these people also vote - and right now, most of them are running around like their heads have been cut off.

Frankly, we're stunned how anyone could truly be undecided at this point. We, and most other well-seasoned, well-educated, and well-informed political observers agree that the contrast between candidates and parties is pretty severe, all the way to most local races. If you've got an issue that's important to you, you've probably already made your decision.

Some folks seem to just want to be standing with whichever "side" is going to "win", so they claim they're undecided - and then stare deeply at the polls.

As we warned a few weeks ago, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a discussion about the polls these days. Two weeks ago, they claimed the race was over for President Obama. Ten days before that the same people said the race was over for Romney.

The truth is, if you're undecided, there's no point in being schizophrenic about the polls - something we also warned you about earlier this month. There's also no point in listening to all the spin from political talking heads.

No big name endorsement like former Secretary of State Colin Powell will make that much difference to you. Major newspaper endorsements like the Washington Post's likely won't sway you either.

So this weekend, turn off the TV during political ads. The radio too. Read the newspaper - but skip the ads. Those friends you have that send you political chain e-mails, or post political stuff on your Facebook wall? Tune 'em out, hide them, dump their messages in your junk mail folder.

For all the cartooning and discussion we do here at the Daily Felltoon that centers around politics, the ultimate decision comes down to what really matters most to you. And that isn't something you're going to find in a poll, a study, a chain e-mail, or a 30-second TV ad.

If you're truly undecided, and you really want help deciding this weekend, push all that "political stuff" away from you for 48 hours - and spend that time doing what means the most to you, with the people you care about the most.

Then, on Monday, keep your weekend in mind, and your head about you - and go vote.

Good luck - and have a great weekend.

Fat Chance

Whether it's the non-scandal that is the Libyan consulate story, the ugly scandal that's the misogynistic Richard Mourdock story, or the potentially very real scandal of Mitt Romney committing perjury at an ethical level just one step above 'Code Blue (Dress)', the fact is, we're sick of all the petty bickering, fighting, and scandal - real or imagined - from the campaigns this year. Don't even get us started on the toupee dragging a man underneath it scandal that is Donald Trump.

During the last two weeks of what may be the most brutal election in history, what we'd really love to see and hear is for Americans to be talking about the real core issues of government we need to discuss, while other Americans listened, understood, then vigorously debated those issues in a civil manner.

Fat chance that would happen in most of America today. In fact, there are very few topics where Americans seem to be able to find common ground today - except maybe the public school lunch table.

From those deep blue-state "liberals" in California, to the deep red-state "conservatives" in Texas, and everywhere else in the nation, American school kids and the adults that interact with them have begun to notice a significant change in what's getting dished up in the school cafeteria.

The USDA - the Ag Department, for those of us from the Midwest - recently revised the guidelines used for the school lunch program for the first time since the Clinton administration. Some changes had been suggested as far back as 2004, but enforcement was effectively left up to schools, who effectively ignored the Bush-era standards.

So when the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 of was passed, and signed into law by President Obama, there were both literal and proverbial carrots in the new regulations, as well as "sticks" in terms of enforcement.

The list of changes required by the USDA is long - and many kids aren't very happy with them. More fruits and vegetables. Smaller, more age-appropriate serving sizes of protein. And ketchup is no longer considered a vegetable.

The results, however, for states and school boards that had already started down similar pathways are already lifting weight off the shoulders of both students and adults alike. In cities and states that began tackling the issue shortly before the new standards took effect, childhood obesity rates appear to be holding steady, or even declining, after thirty years of increases.

The proverbial carrots we mentioned were even doled out in our hometown of Lincoln, Nebraska this year when seven schools there reached "gold status" in the Healthier Schools Challenge - which earned each school's nutrition program $1500.

We know - this battle to keep kids healthy isn't over by a long shot. Keeping schools, kids, and parents on the right path will be like getting children to eat their lima beans - literally.

In the end though, we think America as a nation, and our American kids individually, will thank us all for helping them to eat healthier, so they can live better and longer - even if they're not exactly happy about it now.

This fight against childhood obesity is one fight where hopefully all Americans can be on the same side.

Heading To The Exits

For all the jabs being poked at the final presidential debate on Monday night, nearly a fifth of the nation watched the show, and as we recapped in Tuesday's edition, Mr. Romney didn't exactly come off as presidential.

In fact, Romney came off as all wet - both literally and on foreign policy - during the debate. It was almost as though he was already mentally, stepping out the exit door. In the words of political pundits who really wish they were sports broadcasters, Romney was playing prevent defense Monday night.

Of course, as anyone who understands the prevent defense knows, the momentum really needs to be swinging in your team's favor for the prevent defense to work. After Mitt's performance on Monday night, there's no way the momentum is shifting in his favor - even if the corporate media execs are desperate to make it seem like it is.

The truth is, this election will likely be won by the most trustworthy individual - and that certainly isn't Mitt Romney.

In one of the key moments of the debate Monday night, Romney pulled out a fabrication he's used throughout his campaign. He insisted that what happened in Detroit, when the government bailed out General Motors and Chrysler, was actually a managed bankruptcy. As both Sam Stein and Jonathan Cohn point out, what the Government did to rescue GM and MOPAR was not a managed bankruptcy, in the way that Romney quite clearly outlined in his infamous "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" editorial.

What Mitt wanted, during late 2008 and early 2009, was for private banks to loan GM and Chrysler the money they would need to go into bankruptcy, while the government stepped in to guarantee the loans didn't go bad. In fact, Romney was clearly against the government directly lending to the auto companies. Yet, in late 2008 and early 2009 banks were barely lending to each other, let alone anyone else - and they certainly wouldn't have loaned to the car companies.

We know this, in part, because the man who handled the rescue of the auto companies, Steven Rattner, has publicly said he asked ALL the big banks - and not a single one would have helped save the auto industry.

It's this cluelessness about something so key to the presidency - understanding macroeconomics - along with the arrogance to ignore any information Romney disagrees with, that was really on display during Monday night's debate.

Romney showed this same failure of leadership when he used the 'apology tour' claim (which has long since been thoroughly debunked), when he displayed his refusal to explain how his military proposals would be paid for, and over the last week as his surogates have pushed the lie that Romney has momentum.

The truth is reflected in the data - and the numbers simply don't say that Mr Romney's campaign has the lead in momentum. If either major campaign does, after Monday's debate, it's the Obama campaign.

In short, Mitt Romney's prevent strategy has no basis on which to stand - especially when there are still thirteen days left to go.

Obama Wins The Debate - And Mitt Romney Agrees.

To say that watching last night's foreign policy debate was painful would be a bit like saying an ax to the head will give a person a minor headache. Of course, as a variant on the old axiom goes, 'When you're a fool with an ax, everything looks like a tree.'

From the beginning, the President was poised, assertive, and focused - and he hit Romney hard. Mr. Romney was visibly nervous all night long. It was as though he had an ax to grind with the President, but was simply too afraid to swing it. Inevitably, Romney's policy positions were much like they have been his entire campaign - scattered all over the place, not really landing any serious blows at all.

At the first question from moderator Bob Schieffer, Romney began churning out word-salad responses that sounded confused and yet somehow also pre-rehearsed. In contrast, President Obama spontaneously brought clear details to the first question on Libya and his foreign policy. Obama ticked off a list of foreign policy accomplishments, including the end of the war in Afghanistan, the killing of Bin Laden, and the decimation of Al Qaeda's leadership. Obama then shifted to the attack in Libya, and reminded people that Americans helped topple the brutal regime of Muammar Gaddafi just a year ago.

Romney responded to President Obama's Gaddafi answer with a comment about how he too would "go after the bad guys," sounding strangely like George W. Bush. Again, though, Romney didn't give any real details. Sadly for Romney fans, this was the pattern for the whole debate.

At each question, President Obama would give details, some of them highly specific. Romney would often agree with President Obama, but not give details about what he would do differently. When Romney wasn't delivering word salad, or agreeing with the President, he would dance around the current question, like a verbal version of the 'Time Warp': Just a jump to the left, then a step to the right...

Our 'Time Warp' reference seems oddly fitting, since President Obama also nailed Mr. Romney on the core problem with the Republican nominee's policies - a combination of 1980s foreign policy, with 1950s social policies, and 1920s economic policies.

President Obama also made it clear that Romney is stuck in a time warp on military budgeting. When pinned down by Bob Schieffer on the fact that the math on Romney's military budget simply doesn't add up, Romney kept repeating the idea that the U.S. Navy is the smallest since 1917. Obama replied to Romney's military mendacity, "You mention the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916." "

"Well governor," said Obama, "we also have fewer horses and bayonets… It's not a game of battleship where we're counting ships, it's 'What are our capabilities?'"

That key goal, of keeping focused on the priorities of Americans, was also key to Obama's success in the debate, as the Washington Post's Greg Sargent noted. Obama linked his broader foreign policy argument to his main message - that our government needs to once again invest in America, and in the American middle class. At every turn, from trade with China and offshoring of jobs, to the winding down of the American war machine and how that money can be put back into education, infrastructure, and paying down the debt, President Obama did something many pundits didn't think he could do: Make foreign policy relevant to Americans again.

One member of our staff summed up what Romney likely thought but didn't say in one simple line: "I agree with most of the stuff you're doing, President Obama - but I still think you suck."

In short, Obama had the details, knew the facts, and quite obviously had a mastery of foreign policy. He knew the power of diplomacy, and the influence our American foreign policy has on our domestic priorities - and the polls agree that Obama crushed Romney.

Romney appeared weak, vacillating, anxious, unclear, and quite obviously unprepared. In short, Romney was simply out of his league, a fool with an ax to grind - but no ability to do so.

The Big Squeeze

You've likely noticed that you can't open a newspaper or your mailbox, or turn on a TV, radio, or computer without being flooded by political ads lately.

Even though ads aren't likely to change anyone's mind at this point, that isn't going to stop either side from dumping millions more into political advertising over the next two weeks. If you're tired of the monster of campaign advertisements choking all of us, let us remind you of something we've said for several years now.

The single biggest problem in our political system is money, in large part thanks to the Supreme Court, Citizens United, and the ideas that money is speech and corporations are - legally - people. No matter who wins, we need to make sure that after this election, we all focus on getting the money out of elections. As it is, advertising isn't the only place money is being unethically spent in this election.

The Romney family also has been putting their money into the voting machine company that will count the votes in Ohio - and that's a HUGE problem. Multiple investors and top level executives at Hart Intercivic have deep ties to the Romney family, including Mr. Romney's own son Tagg - the hothead who claimed he wanted to take a swing at the President (which is technically a Federal crime).

If you're wondering why we're not as focused on the substance of tonight's debate - foreign policy - the answer should be fairly obvious. When it comes to the facts of foreign policy, President Barack Obama and his administration have been amazingly successful during his first term.

The news that leaked out Saturday - that the U.S. and Iran may be on the verge of nuclear talks - was retracted publicly on Sunday. Because of the sources and writers associated with the news of this situation, we have no doubt that even if public talks are being denied, private talks are now likely ongoing. The steep sanctions President Obama has inflicted on Iran are driving its government closer to a diplomatic solution every day.

As far as Libya goes, as more details emerge, it appears the information given to Obama's State Department (including Susan Rice) that pointed to local non-al Qaeda militias being responsible was far more correct than the al Qaeda scare story that the right-wing has been pushing.

This is what actual diplomacy looks like under President Obama - and it's exactly the opposite of Mitt Romney's foreign policy.

Seventeen of twenty-four of Mitt Romney's foreign policy advisors are Bush era neocons, led by the same people who got us into the war in Iraq, including Dan Senor. Last week, Senor - one of the top members of a group called "The Foreign Policy Initiative" - even advocated the United States get involved with 'boots on the ground' in the civil war in Syria.

There is a serious reason why Mitt Romney remains vague about his foreign policy, and why - among all those ads swamping you right now - you will not see a single one that even comes close to describing Mitt Romney's foreign policy approach.

That's because Mitt Romney's foreign policy is the same as George W. Bush's & Dick Cheney's. Choosing Romney as our next leader very likely means Americans will keep sending our young men and women to die, for the indefinite future, into any country that doesn't bow to the bullying and cowboy diplomacy of a Mitt Romney administration.

President Obama, on the other hand got us out of war in Iraq, is pushing to get us out of Afghanistan, and - in case you forgot - President Obama is directly responsible for the death of Osama Bin Laden.

Keep these details in mind when you watch the debate tonight - which will thankfully be ad-free.

Friday Funday: Cleaning Up, Counting Down

As we're sure you're aware, the election is two weeks from next Tuesday, and the final presidential debate is next Monday.

While we're not exactly planning on resting and relaxing all weekend, we are hoping to catch up on some reading and catch some time with the family, outdoors - preferably in less windy conditions. We hope to catch a few games on TV too - along with all the hypocritical, lie-filled political ads.

In general, though, right now seems like the calm before the media storm, with no real single story dominating the media. So we're doing a little autumn clean-up today, trying to tackle a few mostly unrelated items that you may want to know about heading into the weekend.

For those of you still screaming at us about polling, the great Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight.com has a serious and unquestionable breakdown of why the current Gallup Daily Tracking poll isn't something you should be putting too much stock in. The other six daily tracking polls have now swung back towards the President, as we thought they would. All six say roughly the same thing: that President Obama has a slight lead, overall. The positive trend for Mr. Obama from Tuesday's big debate win is only now really being picked up by the polls, though, so most polling experts - including Nate - seem to think Obama will be doing a bit better again before the weekend is over.

Speaking of politics, if you haven't gotten involved, now is definitely the time. Today - October 19th - is the LAST day to register to vote this year in Nebraska. Registration deadlines are still open in many states, so check websites like GottaRegister.com to see if you still can register, and if you haven't done so yet, make that a priority this weekend too.

Something else we hope that you'll make a priority is fighting cancer. October is National Breast Cancer Awareness month, and we think this weekend is as good a time as any to get out, and get involved in that battle. There are big events scheduled this weekend around the nation, including near our offices in Washington, DC, Nebraska, and South Florida. Cancer sucks. That's something we can all agree on, regardless of our political affiliation.

No matter what you're doing this weekend, whether it's recovering from travel, cleaning up leaves, or just watching the game on TV, we hope that you get some rest. You can guarantee our staff will be getting in as much sleep as we can.

The last two weeks of Election 2012 begin next week - and we have a feeling there won't be very much time for resting again till after the election.

The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly

While some members of our staff are still laughing at some of the crazy online things poking fun at Mitt Romney's disastrous showing at the second Presidential debate ("binders full of women"? Who says that kind of thing?), the fact is, there are far more important things going on today even more likely to put a smile on your face.

Of course, if you're a Republican or if you subsist on a steady diet of Fox News and right-wing talk radio, the facts we're about to share with you might truly stun you. We know this because some of us do have conservative friends - friends who were actually quite surprised when we showed them the facts behind how positive the U.S. economy has become, especially lately.

Sometimes we find ourselves looking at our right-wing friends as though they've suddenly sprouted two extra heads, as though these people we've known and loved have become infected with some kind of twisted virus that numbs them to facts and reality. Down deep, we think that many of them are still the same people we've always known - which is why we keep trying to help them with facts.

For example, new housing starts surged last month to its fastest rate in more than four years, according to new data from the Commerce Department. By itself, that number might seem like an outlier, just a blip in the data.

However, these numbers on new homes don't exist in a vacuum.

The unemployment rate is at its lowest point since President Obama took over the disaster left to him by his predecessor. Consumer confidence is also at its highest point in five years. Retail sales are up, American industrial production numbers are up - even car sales are surging again.

Stocks are finding new highs too.

What's more, the Federal budget deficit is shrinking, down over $200 billion from just last year, and down $311 billion from Obama's first year when  - and remember, he inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit the moment he became President.

In short, the economy is looking up, thanks in large part to the policies of the Obama Administration.

Could things still be better yet? Absolutely. Congress could come back, and handle the responsibilities they've been shirking for most of the last two years, since the Republicans took over the House. They could pass the Farm Bill, fix the tax cut for the middle class, ditch the tax cut for the rich - and even pass President Obama's jobs bill, which is still languishing in the House.

Economists across the political spectrum agree that Obama's jobs bill would reduce the unemployment rate another full point - just the kind of economic boost that could turn all of these other numbers into a strong, self-sustaining economic recovery.

Of course, if you're like our three-headed friends, the only economic news you've likely heard is how bad things still are, compared to where everyone wishes they were.

The facts don't lie though - and neither do we. The economy is getting better - and it's certainly better than it was four years ago at this time.

Maybe we should keep the guy responsible for this economic miracle in place, for just a bit longer. Say... four years or so...

Obama Won the Debate, Hands Down. So Did Crowley.

We try to always admit when we're wrong, and we have to admit we were definitely wrong in our doubts about Candy Crowley as the moderator of the second Presidential debate last night. Ms. Crowley did exactly what she said she would - she got involved and truly moderated a debate that became more of a real debate than we've ever seen in a Presidential context. Crowley was firm with both men, she rarely backed down, and she gave serious fact checks when needed.

As far as the two men at center of last night's events, the debate was never going to be anything more than a Rorschach inkblot for much of the country, who are already firmly and deeply decided on who they support and therefore were going to see in it whatever they already expected to see.

That said, it was the undecided voters that the two men were addressing - both the 80 undecided voters in the room, and the thousands of undecided voters across the country, upon whom this presidential race hinges. The immediate post-debate consensus seems to be that President Obama beat the tar out of Mr. Romney, and we heartily concur. To say that at times Romney looked shocked, almost punch drunk, wouldn't be going too far.

Mr. Romney interrupted and attempted to bully both President Obama and Ms. Crowley at nearly every turn, often in a rude, arrogant, and discernibly angry way. Romney's arrogance made it clear that he is not accustomed to everyone around him not deferring to him at all times, on his every idea - what a friend of our staff calls 'strong and wrong.'

That incredible level of arrogance could not have been featured any more starkly than when Mr. Romney got fact checked, in real time, during the discussion on the President's Rose Garden remarks the day after the attack in Libya.

Romney seemed to refuse to acknowledge that the President in fact did call the Libyan attack "an act of terror" even after the President corrected him. When Ms. Crowley stepped in and backed up the President with the quote from the Rose Garden, Romney was visibly stunned. And then continued his insistence that it was untrue.

The large number of topics covered in the debate was surprising, given the vigorous back and forth between the two candidates. From good-paying jobs and outsourcing, to energy and taxes, to trade issues and immigration, the debate was full of solid questions.

We were particularly impressed with how President Obama took a question from a young lady about workplace fairness for women, and after mentioning that the first bill he signed was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the President then turned to women's health - and specifically birth control - as a financial issue for American women. This is a fact that is too often overlooked by men making healthcare policy for women.

Overall, President Obama had more than just better energy and presentation this time. Obama also had punch after punch, fact checking Mr. Romney at nearly every turn. Obama had all the facts, and more details in one answer than Mr. Romney provided all night.  Mr. Obama was a "professor" once again, but the kind you become friends with and have beers with later in life - not the stodgy, aloof, uptight guy you and all your friends made fun of back in school. Obama made the facts reachable for most Americans - which means those facts are significantly more likely to stick in their heads for the next twenty days.

President Obama finished both the night and Mr. Romney with a remark that Romney invited comment on in his own closing answer, a comment about the 47%. Obama noted that Mr. Romney is a good man and loves his family - but that Mitt Romney has no idea of who the real people in America are, the people that Mitt was writing off with that 47% remark, behind closed doors, when Romney thought most Americans would never hear his words.

We still think Obama is 100% correct with his assessment, that Mitt Romney is out of touch with what most Americans struggle with daily - and this debate clearly showed Romney simply doesn't have the skills to be a leader for all Americans.

The post-debate polls said Obama won, and our assessment of both the facts and the style of the second presidnetial debate agrees with those polls.

President Obama won this debate soundly.

Prepping For The Spin

The second presidential debate at Hofstra University in Long Island, New York will officially begin tonight at 9PM Eastern/8PM Central Time - but we can tell you with certainty that the truly influential part of the debate has already begun.

Over the weekend, both campaigns already began hinting at what might be coming tonight. But the first camp to break the ethical boundary and begin outright spinning the media for their candidate was - to nobody's surprise - the Romney campaign. This time Team Romney is trying a new approach, in that they're turning their blame cannon on the media itself - by insisting that the media wants an Obama comeback.

The theory behind that claim is that it will place the blame completely on the media for any anti-Romney remarks that are made after the debate, while also lowering expectations for Mr. Romney's performance tonight.

Sadly, we're almost certain that, like stupid dogs that chase any ball thrown their way, much of the media will take Romney's bait and pull back on their criticism of him.

You can rest assured: we're nobody's lapdog, and we'll be tough on both candidates. If Obama lies as much as Romney does, we'll certainly call him on it. If either man attempts to do something out of character, we'll call him on that too.

The format for tonight is the town hall format, which our staff is frankly somewhat divided on.

The town hall format is a debate development that was first tried twenty years ago, and it has its pluses and minuses. On the positive side, the format often forces the candidates to think on their feet, pivot quickly, and showcase their charm - something every President has to do daily for four years. On the negative side, it's a form of leaving the incredibly difficult work of vetting candidates to complete amateurs, at a level where it should be done by the very best professionals available.

As with all town hall debates, the crowd will have been partially screened for political makeup, and even to some degree for the questions the attendees say they might ask. As long as the questioners aren't screened out too intensely, tonight may provide more fireworks than some in the media believe it will.

Remember: people are unpredictable, especially when they know cameras are rolling.

Tonight won't be easy for the moderator, CNN's Candy Crowley. To start with, Ms. Crowley is facing significant pressure from both the Romney and Obama campaigns to follow a "Memorandum Of Understanding" both campaigns signed prior to the debate in Denver, and which was leaked Monday by Time's Mark Halperin.

Ms. Crowley will also likely be judged against ABC's Martha Raddatz, who did an incredible job moderating during the Vice Presidential Debate. Like many at the top levels of the media, Ms. Crowley is competitive and Ms. Raddatz's performance last week set a phenomenally high bar. Hopefully, that competitive nature may spur Crowley to be truly tough on both candidates. Crowley has also stated publicly that she will get involved in this debate and likely ask follow-up questions - which we fervently hope she does, in spite of both campaign's efforts to silence her in the role of moderator.

As with previous debates, we'll have an analysis of the event in tomorrow's edition, along with the applicable fact checks.

Get your popcorn and drinks ready, folks - and know that we'll be watching with you tonight.
We have a feeling this will be the real 'Must See TV.'

Putting On Scary Airs

As the 2012 election season races towards its inevitable closure in 22 days, we're seeing a significant increase in the fear-mongering techniques of certain political hopefuls and their supporters.

We're not really surprised at this behavior. We could just chalk it up to the coming celebration of Halloween during an election year and ignore the fake fear - but that wouldn't be the best idea. In fact, looking at just who is trying to scare the American people by ramping up the fear factor tells us a lot more about the state of this year's political races than most of the polls.

In case you missed it heading into the weekend, some of America's corporate plutocrats appear to be awfully afraid of President Obama winning this fall, given that they've taken to throwing massive temper tantrums in the form of threatening their employees to vote for Mitt Romney - or else.

The CEO of Westgate Resorts, who built the largest house in America (90,000 square feet!) along with the CEO of Koch Industries (one of the largest backers of the Republican Party), both sent letters to their employees recently, effectively telling them to vote for Mitt Romney, or they could lose their jobs.

This voter intimidation technique is not only ethically reprehensible, but it may also violate Section 11.(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It's also horrible business, since both letters effectively broadcast to the competitors of Koch Industries and Westgate Resorts that neither company is doing very well - and imply that neither company will be doing well in the future unless they can get unethical and/or illegal favorable treatment from the government.

There's more fear being spread in the churches too.

In Burlington, Iowa, a pastor at City Church recently began preaching about the removal of Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins, and displaying brochures that specifically call for Wiggins' removal - both of which are a blatant violation of Federal law. He's not the only one violating the 501c(3) law that gives churches tax-exempt status. Nearly 1500 pastors, preachers, bishops, rabbis and imams deliberately broke the law earlier this month, specifically in order to bring politics into their religious places.

We don't have a problem with religious organizations expressing opinions about the issues of the day. But if a church, synagogue, or mosque wants to get into politics, then they need to follow "man's laws" as well as their God's laws. In other words, if they want to advocate for the election or defeat of specific candidates or ballot measures, then it's time to start rendering unto Caesar.

The media's been driving a larger than normal share of fear too, lately. Corporate media execs, desperate to keep high ratings and sales, will most assuredly be flogging their staff members to call every political race a desperate tie - especially after the next Presidential debate this Tuesday.

Even the Romney/Ryan campaign has been spreading fear, as they've continued to politicize the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans even after multiple sources at the State Department have confirmed what Vice President Biden said last week in his debate.

The unifying trait we've noticed from all this fear-mongering is that almost all of it has been coming from the political right in America. Meanwhile, on the political left, the early voting returns keep showing significantly higher voting rates among Democrats and left-leaning independents than it does Republicans.

As we said earlier, we're not surprised at all the fear-mongering this year. We're just bored with it.

You'd think they could at least get better costumes.

Biden Wins Debate, Hands Down.

On Fridays, we usually like to focus on something positive outside of politics - a school event, have a cookout, support a worthy cause like a friend with cancer, something like that. Today, we can enjoy ourselves and focus on politics too.

From the very beginning of last night's debate, it was clear that Vice President Biden wasn't going to put up with any of the "malarky" that characterized the performance of Ryan's running mate in the first debate.

It was also clear that moderator Martha Raddatz wasn't going to put up with malarky or a lack of specifics either. Raddatz had a fantastic night as a moderator. She was crisp, she managed time well, and, unlike the first debate moderator, Jim Lerher, Ms. Raddatz called out both candidates on specifics and facts.

Diving into the issue of the terrorist attack on Libya and the deaths of four Americans - an issue the Romney/Ryan campaign has recently been politicizing in a macabre way - Raddatz went after Biden on specifics right out of the gate.

Biden delivered strongly on Libya, as he did all night long, on every topic.

On the other side of the table, Paul Ryan's inexperience on foreign policy was exposed from the very beginning. Ryan stumbled on the Libya issue, delivering a proven lie. He was all over the place on Iran and Israel, making a mess of the Iranian sanctions issue - which is working - as well as Israel's support of the Obama Adminstration.

Biden responded with laughter - and the truth.

The debate moved to the economy and taxes - and Ryan simply had no facts or details.

Raddatz pushed very hard for specifics from Mr. Ryan - and Ryan evaded Raddatz's every question about specifics and gave her none. Ryan kept throwing out numbers - but couldn't actually explain the Romney/Ryan tax plan specifically, with legitimate math. Ryan also kept insisting he had six studies that backed him up - a claim which was already previously debunked. Ryan also kept saying he and the Republicans wanted to be bipartisan - but then he'd push ideas that Democrats would never vote for.

Vice President Biden just laughed at Ryan's ridiculousness - literally.

Biden knew all the facts on the economy, on the auto industry, and on the stimulus too. Biden even made the point that Ryan had requested stimulus money for his constituents - a fact that made Ryan visibly squirm.

When it came to healthcare, Ryan's lack of facts and details ran smack into the tough moderation of Raddatz, and the facts that Biden provided, as multiple fact checks proved.

On defense, Ryan didn't even know his own campaign's position on the defense budgets. Biden knew exactly what was going on with Afghanistan. The Vice President did not equivocate - and he made it clear: America is leaving Afghanistan no later than 2014. In a confusing turn, Ryan seemed to be both for extending the war indefinitely and for ending the war, saying the Romney/Ryan ticket agreed with the Obama/Biden timeline and transition - but then wanted the right to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely. As with everything else, Ryan simply didn't give any specifics.

Ryan also seemed to be on both sides of the question on Syria, seemingly dinging the UN for moving too slow, while saying the Obama/Biden administration should have used the UN more - or implying the U.S. should have taken action on its own. Not surprisingly, when Biden pressed Ryan to outright say he would have taken the U.S. to war in Syria, Ryan evaded the question.

Thankfully, Raddatz made sure both men addressed social policy, specifically through their shared Catholic faith. Biden made it clear that he sided with the social justice wing of the Church, as we said he would. Biden also made it clear that he has no interest in forcing other Americans to abide by the tenants of his faith.

Ryan attempted to weasel out of siding with the positions of the culture warrior side of the Church - and ended up dropping a bombshell. In a brief but telling section of the debate, Ryan all but said a Romney/Ryan adminstration wouldn't use legislation to outlaw abortion, but clearly implyed they would do everything they could to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

In the end, the Vice President had the facts, he had the details, he had the energy - and most of the snap polls we saw coming down after the debates agreed Biden was the overwhelming winner.

The polls say Biden won. The facts say Biden won.

Vice President Biden obviously won this debate. Congressman Ryan lost. Badly.

What a way to start the weekend.

Debate Night, Round 2

Debate season 2012 is still rolling on, and the deeper we get into the season, the less fun Republican candidates seem to be having.

In congressional debates in Illinois and Massachusetts this week, Democratic candidates Tammy Duckworth and Elizabeth Warren put their Republican opponents up against the ropes.

The Vice Presidential debate is also happening tonight, and frankly, we hope current Vice President Joe Biden cleans Rep. Paul Ryan's clueless clock - a result that would surprise few people on the left or the right.

Biden is well known to enjoy the back-and-forth of a good debate and, while he hasn't been involved in a formal debate since he handily bested Sarah Palin four years ago, there have been reports that Biden's debate prep has been going exceedingly well.

Contrast that with the pre-debate actions of the man conservatives like to think of as their intellectual policy wonk, Paul Ryan. Earlier this week, when a local Michigan television reporter attempted to get some simple details from Paul Ryan on his positions on guns and taxes, Ryan abruptly ended the interview, and attempted to damage the reporter's credibility.

Then yesterday, as Ryan arrived at a campaign photo-op in Florida, he chided reporters for giving him softball questions. The reporters then asked him a hard question - the difference between his position and Mitt Romney's on abortion. Ryan appeared struck dumb for a moment, then evaded the question, telling reporters they would find out his position later, in the debates.

That kind of evasion will likely be the basis for Ryan's approach on foreign policy, with which he has almost no experience. Biden, on the other hand, is a long-time, seasoned foreign policy advisor, including many years on the Foreign Relations Committee during his time in the Senate.

While both Biden and Ryan are Catholics, they appeal to two entirely different parts of the church. Biden, a devoted Catholic, sides with the old-school, social-justice wing of the church, while Ryan - also a serious Catholic - sides with the socially conservative, culture-warrior wing of the church. The divide between the two men with regard to social issues will almost certainly feature prominently in tonight's debate.

The two men will also likely tussle about the $716 billion removed from Medicare subsidies to private companies. Biden supports Obamacare, which puts that money back into the health care system. Ryan, on the other hand, doesn't seem to be able to explain exactly what he and Mr. Romney would do with that money.

The biggest battle will likely be fought over the Ryan Budget, the core of the Romney/Ryan fiscal plan. As advisors and policy wonks from all political backgrounds seem to agree, the "math" behind Ryan's budget, which he recently told Fox's Chris Wallace was too complicated to explain, simply doesn't add up.

We're fairly certain Vice President Biden will land more than one solid punch on Ryan on many of these issues. The hardest choice for Biden will likely be which one will be the knockout punch.

A Friendly Media Suggestion

While you may not have noticed it, most of the American political media on both the political left and the political right have had similar problems for most of a week. On the left, the handwringing has been about the polls and the first Presidential debate. On the right, the pearl-clutching has been about the very positive jobs numbers that came out last Friday.

We're hoping that after we dress down our colleagues today, they'll pull their heads out of their backsides, maybe even by this afternoon. Hopefully, our industry can then get back to the business of reporting real political news stories, on topics like mendacious politicians, movement on tax policies and the Federal budget, the upcoming Vice Presidential debate and more.

We realize part of the problem is one we touched on yesterday, the whorish corporate media culture in America. Talking about tax policies, budget priorities, and policy implementation is often not as sexy as political media wonks think it is. Ratings, clicks and readership levels all reflect the fact that plain facts and plain talk often don't interest as many people as souped-up stories about "the fiscal cliff" or "taxmageddon."

Still, we have our standards, and ethically, we can't just blow out substantive content for the cheap, sell-out, get-ratings-at-all-costs approach our colleagues in the pure entertainment field have. That method is one that far too many of the politicians we cover also use regularly.

For our friends in the left-leaning media, our commentary today is a message to you, much like the one Preisdent Obam got last week. It's time to put on your big-boy and big-girl pants, shut the hell up, and get back to work. While the polls are still all over the place, and our friends in the polling divisions are having their own issues, the facts are clear.

President Obama didn't have the kind of debate performance we expected or that he expected. No, he didn't lose. In an ethical society, you still can't lose a debate to someone that lied the way Mr. Romney did. But Obama also didn't win. More importantly, most in the left-leaning media got played by the hyper-rapid response by the GOP after the debate, just as multiple media watchers said we would.

As Kevin Drum noted again twice this week, part of the reason the left-leaning media can be "played" like that is the gap between the number of right-wing media hacks and their media outlets, and the number of media outlets on the left. Contrary to the cries of unfair criticism from those like Joan Walsh, it's clear that those who are trusted in the left-leaning media do have more power to affect outside events - like the post-debate spin - then their counterparts on the right.

We certainly aren't calling for more hacks on the left to match the number of ethically challenged media folks on the right. That said, there's a smaller pool on the left. When too many are encouraged to make a splash, it's not at all hard to start a tidal wave.

As for those we know in the right-leaning media, you also need to put on your collective big-kid pants and quit denying reality. No one 'cooked the books' on the September jobs numbers released last Friday. When the unemployment numbers made the President look bad, you were more than happy to believe the BLS. The jobs numbers were good in September not because someone cooked the books, but because the economy is, in fact, recovering. As some professional economists have been saying for some time now, the economic trend lines have predicted that the U.S. would finally recover from the Bush Recession at some point this year. That our current recovery is coming at a time that's incredibly inconvenient for your side politically shouldn't drive you to the insanity of denying reality.

Facts are stubborn things, as Ronald Reagan once said, and as Ezra Klein noted recently, the jobs report is about the economy, not the election.

It's time we all get back to work, people, on all sides of the media. Politicians are still selling themselves to the lowest common denominator, and voting day is less than four weeks away.

Swingin' A Dead Cat

If you like to do a bit of traveling, as our staff does, you tend to notice that most places around the world have their own quirky habits and sayings that make them unique. One of the more bizarre but catchy regional phrases we've picked up over the years is supposed to be used for those times when you're telling someone you feel like a certain object or experience seems to be everywhere you turn: That you "can't swing a dead cat without hitting (the subject in question)."

For example, "Mr. Romney delivered a foreign policy speech on Monday in which you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a lie."

As multiple journalists reported Monday, including our friend and colleague Rick Ungar, Mr. Romney's foreign policy speech on Monday was yet another vague stack of lies and reversals of his previous policy claims. It's true that some portions of Romney's speech tried to make his approach seem different than President Obama's; however, if you believed what Mitt was saying on Monday, you'd also have to believe that what he's said multiple times in the past about foreign policy was a lie.

For example, Mr. Romney insisted he'd increase the size of the U.S. Navy - except he has no idea of what kind of ships the Navy needs, or how he'd be able to pay for them. The best guess by expert military journalist Spencer Ackerman is that Romney's naval wish list would add $30-40 billion to a federal budget that Romney also promises to somehow cut.

That says nothing of Romney's trade claim that President Obama hasn't signed any trade agreements - well, other than the three President Obama signed last October with South Korea, Panama, and Columbia. Or Romney's claim to support a two-state solution between Palestinians and Israelis - a solution he derided in that infamous 47% video this summer, when he thought his words were being spoken in private.

As we said earlier, you couldn't swing a dead cat through Mitt Romney's foreign policy speech without hitting a lie.

There was one other topic you also couldn't swing the cat around without hitting on Monday - self-proclaimed polling experts determining that the race is now over for President Obama.

It's a day like Monday when we loathe the corporate media culture that's turned many of the folks we once trusted into self-aggrandizing ratings whores. Many of those who cherry picked the polls on Monday, are the same hacks who helped enable the jobs report conspiracy theory last Friday. Frankly, some in the mainstream media seem willing to set themselves on fire if it would get them the attention and ratings they crave. Cherry-picking poll results to get a rise out of the audience is child's play, compared to wearing fire or swinging a dead cat.

Here's the truth: Single polls do not matter, except the one on election day. Accurate polling looks at trends, as we've told you many times over the years. It's one of the reasons we put such faith in Nate Silver and his team at FiveThirtyEight.com. They get the final numbers right because they get the aggregated polling trends correct, over time.

So what was Nate's take on Monday's polls? Other than the Pew poll - which may indeed be an outlier - Nate pointedly noted Mr. Romney's polling on Monday was weak. In aggregate, Mitt would have made no real gains at all without that odd Pew poll. In fact, by Monday evening, tracking polls already showed a shift back towards Obama. Yet how many of those same ratings whores will be excitedly selling today's polling trend back towards Obama with the same vigor they tried to sell those horserace polls on Monday?

We bet by the end of today, you'll be able to swing around as many dead cats as you want, and not hit a single member of the mainstream media who apologizes for their poll hysteria yesterday.

Firsts

Although today may seem like just another Monday for you and most other Americans, today is Columbus Day. It's still an official U.S. Federal holiday, even though the age-old idea that Columbus actually discovered America has long-since been thoroughly disproven.

The fact is, Columbus was an ambitious man who made the mistake of thinking he'd landed in India when he landed in the Americas. That fact, however, was one Columbus was never willing to accept - maybe because he wasn't starting from the same place in his thought processes, a concept known as 'first principles.'

One of our staff members has been doing a good bit of thinking about first principles lately, in light of two news stories: the pile of lies that Mitt Romney told at the first presidential debate that many in the media continue to mull over, and a new contraception study released over the weekend.

The debate over the debate is the story we're fairly sure you saw over the weekend, if you took in any serious media. As more and more journalists look back over the facts of the debate, many of our colleagues seem to be coming around to the position we originally took last Thursday - that no one who lied as much as Mitt Romney did could have possibly won the debate. Even former GOP rival Newt Gingrich admitted Romney wasn't honest during last week's debate.

As the contraception study and the story of Chris Columbus remind us however, many of us in the media may not be starting from the same first principles as Team Romney, or the extremists on the right.

The two-year contraception study released over the weekend basically gave women any kind of birth control they wanted for two of years at no cost. The study found that no matter what the women's background, education, religion, or economic level, abortions were reduced by 75%. The study comes just as millions of women will begin to get access to contraception without insurance co-pays, thanks to a part of Obamacare that we discussed in detail earlier this year.

In short, the study proves that all those on the extreme right who have been fighting for years against low or no-cost contraception, or for abstinence-only education, have in fact been responsible for INCREASING the rate of abortions, not protecting the sanctity of human life, which is their stated goal.

That's now a scientific fact that's not up for debate, unlike many of Mitt Romney's statements at last week's debate, which distorted and obfuscated undebatable facts.

That's where first principles come in.

Most educated people now think that Columbus was educated, but pridefully stupid - too proud to admit his factual error about landing in the Americas. In a similar manner, many people who see this contraception study may think the extreme conservative anti-abortion rights crowd will now see the error of their ways, and change their tactics.

Both groups are wrong, just as many of us in the media who have factually proven Mitt Romney didn't win last week's debate are also wrong.

If you're starting from the premise that debates should be about facts, you're not starting from the same premise as Team Romney. They wanted to win the battle against the first draft of history, which deals almost exclusively in appearance, not fact. As far as they're concerned, facts weren't important - only appearance.

Likewise, the extreme anti-abortion groups don't really care about preventing abortions, especially using methods like those outlined in the new contraception study. Sexuality, to them, is something to be feared, and the reproductive system is something to be controlled. That's their first principle.

As for Christopher Columbus? His first principle was to become wealthy, not to discover the route to India and East Asia. His principle, like the others, worked for a while, at first. But the Spanish crown eventually took his title, holdings and money.

In the end, facts matter. But often, not at first.