By Randall Rasmussen

The U.S. Senate will take up the financial bailout bill Wednesday in the hopes that its passage will convince enough House members who balked Monday to change their votes.

Senate leaders are writing the new financial rescue legislation the way they write ordinary legislation they want to pass – they’re adding goodies to buy off wavering votes.

In this case, the Alternative Minimum Tax legislation is the incentive.

When the House passed the AMT, they wanted it paid for but since the bailout bill is unfunded to the tune of $700 billion, Senate leaders figure, what’s another $100 billion or so. Attaching the AMT to the bailout will allow congressmen to justify a vote for the $700 billion lender rescue plan by telling constituents: Look, I’ve cut your taxes!

The reason the House rejected the bailout earlier this week was because it’s unpopular with the voters and members who were worried about re-election didn’t want to sacrifice their careers to make House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Bush look good.

That’s why Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D., voted no. South Dakotans were giving her an earful.

President Bush’s approval numbers are in the tank and Congress’ approval rating is even lower. They are living up to their rock-bottom approval numbers this week.

I think the bill has a good chance of passing Wednesday in the Senate only because two-thirds of senators are not up for re-election this year.

Watch Sen. Tim Johnson’s vote. How he votes and how he spins it will be interesting.

Bipartisan support? You bet! The migratory Frankenfeld campaign sign found itself in the hands of Harry S. Truman Monday morning in downtown Rapid City.

By Kevin Woster

As Harry Truman might have said: The sign stops here.

At least for now.

But the “Draft Don” movement will not be stopped, as the people of Mount Blogmore spread out across the mountains and plains of western South Dakota to preach the gospel of Frankenfeld.

The sign goes with them, taking the Frankendream to those in need of inspiration, those who crave the calling of a higher purpose in politics.

Watch for it, and believe.

By Kevin Woster

When Sen. John McCain looks back on the 2008 campaign, he’ll likely see his selection of Gov. Sarah Palin as the high-water mark, and the subsequent crisis of faith in the financial world the low.

McCain grabbed the political spotlight and the campaign momentum with the Palin pick. But the surge was shortlived, and soon overpowered by the worse possible issue for McCain: a crisis of faith, stocks and liquidity in the nation’s financial world.

Timing and luck are as important as abilities in most political campaigns. And for McCain, the financial crisis was about as bad as it gets for timing and luck.

It tossed the McCain campaign ship into the stormy, unpredictable, dangerous waters of what is perhaps his weakest issue, and gave Sen. Barack Obama a chance to regroup his suddenly stumbling campaign effort and retake the lead in the polls.

McCain was smart, if somewhat desperate, in suspending his campaign and returning to Washington to join congressional colleagues in working on the financial bailout plan. It was his only move, really. But even that got lost in the morass of politics and financial realities in Congress.

And the debate? He needed much more than Obama to win that one to restore his stalled - as opposed to suspended - campaign. Even a draw wasn’t enough.

McCain’s in trouble right now - in need of some bold, presidential-looking move, or international event, to accentuate his leadership strengths and experience, which certainly are not found in the economy or economic acumen.

Meanwhile, Obama has managed to appear calm, appropriately cautious and pragmatic throughout the last week. Inexperienced as he may be, he looked more presidential.

That’s a look he likes, and hopes to keep.

Meanwhile, McCain is trying to find that look again.

By Randall Rasmussen

Congress and the White House agreed to a financial rescue plan Sunday. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said not to call it a “bailout” but a “buy-in.”

I’d rather not buy-in.

The name of the new program – and this is just priceless – is Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP.

Now, what is that one does with a tarp? That’s right, you cover something up. You can’t make this stuff up.

The bill, which was three pages long on Thursday when Democrats were saying an agreement was reached, is now 110 pages.

Read it for yourself, if you’re masochistic enough, here:

Of course, the banking industry is going to love this bill. They get rid of bad or shaky loans and get a fresh infusion of capital — up to $700 billion — thanks to Joe Taxpayer, Joe Taxpayer’s sons and daughters and grandsons and granddaughters, and so on. We’re just one big, happy family now, up to our eyeballs in debt.

Incumbent Democratic Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin might have more than Chris Lien to worry about, judging from the sudden appearance of a born-again political sign outside her Rapid City office.

By Kevin Woster

Eighteen years after the inexplicable denial of his rightful place in Congress, the dream lives on for Don Frankenfeld.

And for those who believe in The Frankendream.

With an 18-year-old sign and a irrepressible spirit of renewal, we here on Mount Blogmore have begun a movement that is catching fire far beyond the mountain.

Don Frankenfeld is our man, forever - for any office, any time, any district, any state - truly a candidate for all seasons, for all reasons.

The signs are everywhere, including out front of U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin’s Rapid City field office.

Actually, it’s only one sign. But it gets around.

Who knows where it will turn up next? Or which incumbent might be made to feel uncomfortable in the workplace?

Meanwhile, you can feel the groundswell, among people who believe that the past is never forgotten, and really isn’t even the past.

Huh?

Whatever that meant, we urge you to believe, to dream The Frankendream.

Because the work begins anew.

The hope rises again.

The sign will never die.

Presidential debate moderator Jim Lehrer of PBS poses a question to Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. left, and Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during the presidential debate Friday at the University of Mississippi in Oxford, Miss. (AP photo)

By Randall Rasmussen

So, who won?

I have to say that I think Barack Obama won on points. No knockout, no knockdown, but he had John McCain on his heels the whole night.

Obama can demagogue with the best of them, and his partisan sniping was relentless.

Meanwhile, McCain’s counterpunches of praise for bipartisanship and both parties working together aren’t going to win a debate let alone an election. Perhaps he should put on boxing gloves instead of using feather pillows.

Score this one for Obama. One more like this, and he could finish designing his presidential seal and ordering furniture for the Oval Office.

The three District 32 Senate candidates get equal time in the front-yard flower bed.

By Kevin Woster

I’m now fully engaged in the District 32 Senate race.

In terms of political yard signs, that is.

They’re a fine-looking trio, don’t you think?

Now, the question is: Who’s going to win?

By Randall Rasmussen

To hear President Bush explain the financial mess facing the country, we’re looking at economic ruin. “Our entire economy is in danger,” he said.

He urged nothing less than immediate action by Congress to solve the problem. He invited Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama and leaders in Congress to the White House Thursday to settle on a course of action.

It’s like we’re in a game of economic Texas Hold’em and Bush says we need to go all in.

I’m not convinced that having the foxes devise a plan to make the henhouse safer is the best strategy. But we don’t seem to have much choice.

Here is the text of President Bush’s address to the nation Wednesday night:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/09/24/speech-text-bush-addresses-the-nation-on-bailout/

Earlier, McCain and Obama spoke on the financial crisis. Here are their statements:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/its_time_to_come_together_to_s.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/obamas_statement_on_eco.html

BY Kevin Woster

Good government or good politics, which is John McCain playing in temporarily suspending his campaign, asking for a delay in the first presidential debate and returning to Washington, D.C., to work with President Bush and Congress on a solution to the financial crisis.

I’d say both. It’s clearly about politics, and McCain’s need to strengthen his standing as a leader and reverse his slow slide in the polls. But it also seems to make sense to set the campaign aside for a week and come up with a plan that works.

Working together, I’d think Obama and McCain could help a lot in that - and show voters that there’s something more important than their own campaigns.

I’ve been watching CNN - which I think is generally the most fair and balanced source (sorry FOX) of national news, and I’ve been surprised at the lopsided reviews of McCain’s move. Neal Boortz beat him up for it. Jack Cafferty beat him up for it, and took advantage of the occasion to slap him around for denying reporters access to Sarah Palin.

The group of reporters all seemed to like Barack Obama’s position - that the debate and campaigns should go on - and seem to consider McCain’s move pure politics and campaign desperation. CNN had to go to Sen. Lindsey Graham, finally, to find someone with a positive word to say about McCain’s announcement.

I’m sure they’ll balance things out as the coverage continues. But for now, a viewer of CNN would get a pretty clear impression that McCain is all about politics and campaign desperation and Obama is all about fixing problems and not playing politics with a crucial issue.

It’s not that simple, of course. Obama’s balking at a return to Washington is as political as McCain’s announcement to return. There’s plenty on the line for both of them as they shadow box. And neither makes a move without considering the political fallout or gains.

And maybe Obama wins on this, as early CNN coverage suggests. But I guess I can’t see how a presidential candidate loses by leaving the campaign trail and going back to D.C., and working to fix the problem.

Can somebody educate me?

By Kevin Woster

So, how’d that financial stimulus package work out for us, anyway?

Remember the $170 billion plan, the one cooked up by President Bush earlier this year and embraced by Congress to charge up the economy? Remember when we thought $170 billion was a lot to spend on a plan? Well, that was pre-$700 billion bailout plan.

John reminded me of the plan - the stimulus, not the bailout - in a thread below. How soon we forget. The idea was to spend our way back to financial health.

That philosophy has never worked in my own money management. But they’re the experts, right? Uh, not so much, I guess.

But I did my part, and part of Mary’s part, too. We got $1,200, and with that completely undeserved and mostly unneeded government check, I bought a new fly rod, reel and line for a total of almost $800. Mary didn’t spend the rest of her half, apparently because she wasn’t feeling as patriotic as her husband.

I felt goofy buying the fishing gear with the rebate or stimulus check or whatever you want to call it. It seemed like a waste of money. I mean, Mary and I make teacher-level salaries, but we didn’t need the dough. In fact, both of us would have felt a lot better sending a $1,200 check TO the treasury, if our president and Congress had come up with a plan to help pay for the war and knock down the deficit.

You know, silly stuff like that.

I would have felt really good about that. Call me goofy. Call me socialist. Call me another member of the secular-humanist, left-wing-liberal, drive-by media, but I actually agree with Joe Biden on paying taxes: I think it’s an act of patriotism.

Of course, a $2,400 swing in our family financial fortunes might have meant putting off the new fishing gear until next year. I could have lived with that.

I’ve got another rod. A couple of them, in fact.

But I’ve only got one country.

By Randall Rasmussen

Before passage of the proposed $700 billion bailout plan, Congress has to find someone to blame. It’s never their fault.

Read for yourself what’s being said. You decide.

Sen. Tim Johnson spoke Tuesday at the Senate Banking Committee hearing on the bailout proposal. The senator says that the Bush administration “stifled regulation and oversight at every turn.” You can read it here:

http://johnson.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=303389&

In response to the credit crisis and charges by Democrats that the Bush administration was hostile to regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the White House issued a release detailing its efforts to rein in the GSEs and how President Bush had asked for reform 17 times this year alone. Congress ignored him. The press release is here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/09/20080919-15.html

The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed today that assigns blame for the financial meltdown to Congress and Fannie Mae: “Blame Fannie Mae and Congress for the credit mess.” Read it here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212948811465427.html

Here’s another editorial from Investor’s Business Daily, a highly recommended source for conservative opinion:

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307062470860000

By Kevin Woster

Car loans and credit-card debt?

Seriously?

So, the $700 billion bailout of the stumbling,bumbling mortgage industry will do more than buy up badly conceived home and business loans? It could get into equally stupid smaller purchases as well?

Somebody racks up $10,000 in credit-card charges and the federal government pays for it? Somebody buys a new Tundra they can’t afford and we let them off the hook?

Huh?

Sure, sure, I’m certain that some of the credit-card debt is for uncovered medical expenses and daily living costs, for struggling families that lost an income or twoor had someone get seriously ill and needed the plastic to get by. Or somebody else buys a second-hand van on credit so they can get the kids to school and the adults to work.

That’s one thing. There ought to be some grace in those situations.

But how much of the private debt we’re talking about paying with public money was just stupid purchases and the willingness to indulge in selfish wants masquerading as needs?

That’s now a taxpayer responsibility, too?

Former state Sen. Stan Adelstein, a past honoree, former U.S. Sen. Tom Daschle, a 2008 inductee, and current FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, Stan’s son, give it up for the Mount Blogmore photographer following the South Dakota Hall of Fame noon luncheon Saturday in Aberdeen.

By Kevin Woster

Once again, the South Dakota Hall of Fame failed to include me in its annual list of new inductees.

Tom Daschle made it. So did Sue Brown, Gordon Hanson, Evelyn Leite and Dr. James Martin, and eight or nine more.

These people have a list of accomplishments that could choke a newshound. That fine. Super. Good for them.

But once again this year - as I look at the empty place on my wall where a hall-of-fame medallion and plaque might hang - I must ask:

Is there no place for the mediocre? Are not the underachievers of South Dakota worth recognition? Why do those with talent, skill, intelligence, a relentless work ethic and selfless community involvement get all the attention, while those of us who set more modest goals in life and still fail to reach them get consistently overlooked?

Will my only role in these important events be as court jester at the annual noon luncheon? And will the fact that my sister, the smarty pants retired professor, has now joined me and my brothers at the event set an intellectual bar too high to clear?

These are questions for the ages - including the age of 57, which I’ll be reaching come Nov. 3.

And if my math and understanding of the calendar are correct (remember, I’m a middle-school dropout), I’ll still be 57 next September. That seems like a great age to be inducted to the South Dakota Hall of Fame.

By then, perhaps the judges will have come to appreciate the value of below average.

Aberdeen Mayor Mike Levsen, whose son, Russ, is a staffer for Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, offers a welcome to South Dakota Hall of Fame attendees at the mayor’s luncheon Saturday. For reasons that remain unclear, or at least unacceptable to some, Levsen said Mary Alice Haug outperformed her brothers, Jim Woster and Kevin Woster, at the luncheon (Terry was at the Chamberlain powwow). Actually, Levsen did offer one reason that was fairly clear, if still unacceptable to some: “Of course she was better. She was prepared.” Mary Alice’s brothers thought that seemed harsh, if accurate.

In this Oct. 15, 1992, file photo, President Bush, left, talks with independent candidate Ross Perot as Democratic candidate Bill Clinton stands aside at the end of their second presidential debate in Richmond, Va. (AP Photo)

By Randall Rasmussen

Friday is the first presidential debate at the University of Mississippi in Oxford, Miss. Jim Lehrer of PBS’ “The News Hour” will be the moderator. Debate questions are to cover foreign policy.

I think John McCain has an advantage over Barack Obama going in, but that simply means that Obama could come out on top by looking like he knows what he’s talking about.

Of course, avoiding placing one’s foot in one’s mouth is a key for both candidates.

Here are my favorite debate moments:

In 1976, President Gerald Ford’s insisted that “there is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe.” The moderator offered Ford a chance to recover, but Ford stuck to his guns.

In 1984, President Ronald Reagan, who was 73 at the time, delivered this snappy comeback during his second debate with Walter Mondale: “I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponent’s youth and inexperience.”

In 1988, Republican vice presidential nominee Dan Quayle foolishly tried to compare himself with John F. Kennedy by saying he had served in Congress just as many years as Kennedy. His Democratic opponent, Lloyd Bentsen, cut him down to size: “Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”

In 2000, Democrat Al Gore’s heavy sighs while listening to George W. Bush’s answers were picked up by the microphone. During the town hall debate, Gore snuck up behind Bush and looked ridiculous when Bush turned and said, “Hello,” then ignored him.

What are your favorite debate moments?

Curses, signed again. The campaign sign issue intensified for our confused political reporter Friday evening, as he returned home to find a newsman’s no-no - a political yard sign - jammed in the flower bed near the new white coneflower plantings. It could be a sign of worse to come.

By Kevin Woster

Stan, Elli, seriously, I didn’t have anything to do with it.

I know, it looks bad for me to have a “Re-elect Katus” sign in my front yard. But I didn’t do it. And I can’t really do much about it - unless I want to move.

See, my neighbor, Rod, torments me every campaign season by planting signs in my front yard, for all the passing world to see. I rush out and put them back in his yard. He sneaks over and plants them back in mine.

Back in the 2006 primary, it got so bad I had to hide Rod’s Adelstein sign in my garage (Stay out of the garage, Rod!). I might have to resort to that again this year with the Katus sign.

And this is just for District 32. Wait until he gets fired up about the presidential campaign.

I’d like to guard the flower bed all day tomorrow, but I’ll be leaving early to drive to Aberdeen, where my big bro, Jim, and big sis, Mary Alice, and I will be emceeing the awards luncheon for the 2008 South Dakota Hall of Fame inductees. (I know, I know, you’d think the hall could do better. But we come cheap…like, for free, although we eat like hogs.)

Our main man Tom Daschle will be among the inductees, joining the hall this year. I’ll snap a picture to of the former Senate leader to bring back for the Mount.

Heavens knows what I’ll find in my flower bed.

By Kevin Woster

Barack Obama has had some days lately when he’s looked decidely unpresidential.

Welcome to that world, John McCain.

If Obama struggled to maintain his campaign stroke against the swell of McCain support caused by the Sarah Palin typhoon, McCain was treading water this week.

It’s the economy, senator, and the colossal collapse of financial institutions and related Wall Street woes couldn’t have come at a worse time for McCain. Talk about a momentum killer. He made it worse by stumbling in his speeches and seeming to shape shift in his statements on the economy and the banking-investment-insurance shakeouts.

Obama struggled initially to find a tactic in response, but eventually brought the hammer down by tying the troubles of today to the systems of the past, and McCain’s 26 years in the Senate.

It worked. He looked much stronger than he has lately, when McCain-Palin stole old Mo.

The economy and the news that Todd Palin is refusing to testify to a legislative committee in the so-called “trooper-gate” investigation back home - overblown, perhaps, but effective - made for a tough week in the McCain-Palin camp. Even the fawning pieces on Palin and her First Dude by FOX news - reminscent of some of the giddy, goofy coverage Obama received on other big stations early on in his primary against Clinton - did little to plug the leaks.

By the time next week rolls around, Obama should have reclaimed his lost standing in the polls. He better have. He can’t count on many weeks like this one.

Clutching a keepsake from poignant campaigns past, a confused political reporter hopes, as he has every second autumn for years, for a Frankenfeld comeback.

By Kevin Woster

Once again, I throw caution and the guise of objectivity to the autumn wind and endorse Don Frankenfeld in this year’s general election.

For what office? Who cares? He’s qualified for many in my book. That’s why I keep his yard sign from the good old days - back when he lost his 1990 U.S. House race against incumbent Tim Johnson - at my desk in the Journal newsroom.

It’s a reminder that in politics, even winners can be losers.

It’s still my favorite campaign sign (which I really do intend to return someday, really Don, I promise…), although it’s getting some competition from my new “Hamiel For House” sign. I picked up that little sweetheart during a quick stop in Mitchell a few days back.

I know, I know, it’s poor form for a political reporter to be showing off a campaign sign for an active candidate (Don is, well, yes, somewhat inactive). But we’re talking Noel Hamiel, a seasoned newsman of many years who was responsible in large part for the Mitchell Daily Republic’s evolution into a first-rate small daily paper. He’s out of the news game now, and trying to write a new story for himself in politics.

Oh, and did I mention that he lived just down the road from the Woster farm back in Lyman County? And that his dad, Don, and my dad and uncle Frank were practically inseparable?

Sure did. Sure were.

I can’t endorse Noel, of course. Wouldn’t think of it. And living in Rapid City, I couldn’t vote for him if I wanted to. And while Noel’s an old bud, I’ll leave it up to the voters of District 20 to decide whether he’s state House material. He and fellow Republican Rep. Lance Carson, an incumbent, and Democratic challengers Tony Sieler and David Mitchell are competing for the two district House seats.

I wish them all good luck.

But I gotta have the Hamiel sign.

It looks great up there next to Frankenfeld’s.

By Randall Rasmussen

According to an AP story in Wednesday’s Journal, Sen. Tim Johnson’s re-election campaign has booked more than $1.1 million in air time. Their strategy is to expose the average voter to 280 television ads before Election Day.

Oh, no! Where’s my remote control?

Meanwhile, his Republican challenger Joel Dykstra has aired his first campaign ad.

We won’t get a debate; we’ll get dueling TV ads instead.

Johnson reported in July that he had $5.1 million on hand to defend his seat, while Dykstra had raised $380,000.

At least they waited until mid-September before launching their media campaigns. This is the part of election campaigns I dislike the most: TV ads with a carefully crafted message containing an unknown amount of truthiness.

Given the fund-raising disparity between the candidates, voters may come to look forward to Dykstra’s ads out of welcome relief that it’s not another Johnson sales pitch.

By Kevin Woster

As a farm kid with a well-earned GED who ran from economics classes at SDSU like they were swarms of culex tarsalis mosquitoes, I tend also to avoid detailed discussions about the failures of the housing-credit industry and its impacts on the economy.

I know, I know, a lack of knowledge never stops me from commenting on politics…

But I was interested by comments on the troubled banking-investment-housing business this morning by Democratic U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington, who said on C-SPAN that much of the problem came from the deregulation of the financial industry. That lack of government control allowed for more risky loan procedures and more profitable years initially that eventually went south to the detriment of borrowers, lendings and the entire economy, she said.

Make sense? I don’t know enough about it to say. But certainly there’s some truth there.

I heard the other side of the argument from Rush Limbaugh yesterday, as he ranted about the failures of liberal Democratic policies that made homes available to people who couldn’t afford them and shouldn’t have ever qualified for loans in the first place. Some people just aren’t meant to be homeowners, Limbaugh said.

Make sense? Not sure about that, either. But there seems to be some truth in that, too.

I do know this: Every time I was in the market for a house, my real-estate agents tried to convince me that I could afford a more expensive house than I thought I could afford, or was comfortable buying. Bankers were ready to loan me money for those uncomfortable-feeling houses, too, since I qualified for the loan amount.

I thought they were nuts, and bought much less house than I was capable of financially, by their estimates. In my previous life in Sioux Falls, I bought a modest, $50,000 home with a location, location, location that my daughter half-joking called “on the edge of the ghetto.”

Yet, I was happy there. And so were my kids. I liked my neighbors, many of whom exhibited eccentricities that rivaled my own. And my mortgage payments were affordable, even when other expenses - broken washers, emergency-room visits, sick hunting dogs and ailing SUVs - surprised me and my bank account. In the end, after 10 years in the house, I made all the payments easily, added additional funds to the principle from time to time and even made a little money on the sale.

All the while, I looked at some of the homes other people were buying - here and in other states - and wondered how in the world they could afford them.

Turns out in many cases, they couldn’t.

Whose fault was that, anyway?

In this photo provided by NBC, actress Tina Fey, left, plays Gov. Sarah Palin, and actress Amy Poehler plays Sen. Hillary Clinton on “Saturday Night Live” Saturday in New York. (AP photo)

By Randall Rasmussen

“Saturday Night Live” began a new season Saturday. It has never been as good as the ‘70s-era shows, but its political satire is still as sharp as ever.

From Chevy Chase’s slips and falls as President Gerald Ford to Will Ferrel’s George W. Bush malaprops, every president, vice president and presidential candidate has been mercilessly skewered by the writers and staff on SNL.

On Saturday, former SNL star and writer Tina Fey returned to do a spot-on parody of Gov. Sarah Palin, while Amy Poehler did her hilarious Hillary Clinton imitation.

Some of the dialogue from the opening skit:
Fey as Palin: “And I can see Russia from my house!”
Poehler: “I believe global warming is caused by man.”
Fey: “And I believe it’s just God huggin’ us closer.”

Poehler ended the sketch: “In conclusion, I invite the media to grow a pair. And if you can’t, I will lend you mine.”

Wickedly funny.

Last year, SNL parodied the media’s fawning over Barack Obama, which seemed to coincide with a reversal of Clinton’s campaign and she began to win many state primaries at the end.

SNL will have 10 more shows before Election Day, including seven prime-time specials, no doubt timed to provide satirical commentary on the presidential race.

I look forward to their broadcasts. The only question I have, is Joe Biden funny? Obama, McCain and Palin are target-rich environments, as they say, for satirists. But is Biden funny?