Obama and the McCain smear touchstones

I'm watching the presidential debate. I'm not going to do a point by point analysis of this thing, but I'm observing McCain doing a much better job. He's speaking in a more level tone with a softer tenor to his voice. I think he did a good job of making Obama miss the mark on some of his GOP talking point associations, particularly ACORN.

Obama took time to address a question about Ayers and then about ACORN stating he sat on an education board 10 years ago with Ayers, and served as a lawyer for ACORN in a 1995 suit against the State of Illinois.

Obama probably is keeping it brief in regards to "his association with Ayers" because I would imagine, in his estimation, speaking more and more about the topic, even in an effort to set the record straight, would lend more credence to the McCain campaign's claims than perhaps they deserve.

Obama didn't mention the extent of the other associations, however innocuous, the two share -- my understanding from reading Chicago newspaper articles is the two were notable Chicago liberals. I have also read Obama reviewed one of Ayers' books in the Tribune, but I haven't been able to substantiate this with a primary source.

Regardless, his whole thing smacks of a smear campaign with racist subtext and is such a non-issue it's almost absurd. McCain's comment that "he doesn't care about some washed-up terrorist" clashes right against Palin's rhetoric of "pallin' around with terrorist." Big surprise.

More importantly, he did not mention that his campaign gave ACORN $800,000 and then amended an FEC report to reflect why they did it. I don't know enough about ACORN at this point to know if the alleged voter fraud is endemic, but by not disclosing this obviously relevant piece of information, it erodes his credibility.

As an Obama supporter and an Ohio voter, I'm frustrated at his lack of response to the ACORN issue. My assumption is the politically expedient decision is for him to sweep it under the rug and hope swing voters don't notice.

One thing is for sure, Ohio voters are going to be hearing quite a bit about voter fraud.

Cordray says contribution, contract not related

Look, Ohio Treasurer Richard Cordray is really smart. Really smart.

So smart, in fact, that I bet he would realize that when a maximum $10,000 contribution shows up from an twentysomething individual donor whose stepdad happens to be Wachovia bonds salesman, maybe he should question it.

The Dayton Daily News really nailed this one -- in the article, Daily News reporter Laura A. Bischoff observes Wachovia gained about 37 percent of the state's investment portfolio's total bonds after Cordray took office.

I think a "common sense" test would shoot some holes in Cordray's claim that the money was unrelated to the assignment of increased contracts with Wachovia -- at the very least, the appearance of impropriety is pretty obvious here. This sounds like a dirty trick for it to be leaked to the media -- likely how the Daily News ended up with it -- so late in the election season.

Wonder what this will do for Michael Crites' campaign. Cordray has said he returned the contribution, although, as Crites pointed out, after he was caught "red-handed."

Cordray sends out more press releases than every other Ohio office combined (a slight, but not complete exageration), and while I don't know him, this would lead me to believe he's media-savvy. It's no secret that state-level Democrats' credibility has already taken a beating in many Ohioans' eyes. If I were him, I would be worried about how this will play.

If this takes hold, it could means curtains for Corday. (ooh! alliteration!)