I have been thinking about what McCain could do to change the game going into the last debate. I think he needs to do two things. I think he needs to try and get people to look past Obama's flowery rhetoric. Secondly, he needs to define the issues of the debate. He can no longer afford to let the moderators, who are in the tank for Obama, control the message. I think the best way to do it is attack both areas with a bold opening statement.

Below is what I would say Wednesday night in my opening remarks if I were McCain.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to thank you for tuning in for tonight's debate between myself and Sen Obama. Tonight you are in for a treat. Sen Obama is one of the greatest political orators ever to run for president. The way he strings words together can at times be magical. I have a favor to ask those of you watching tonight. I want you to look past his pretty words and examine the details of what he proposes. I want you to look past the soaring prose and look at his actions.

He is going to tell you that he will cut taxes on 95% of the people. This is not true. Even the Wall Street Journal calls it an illusion. In reality, Obama and his Democratic allies in Congress are going to raise taxes on everyone. They want to raise the capital gains tax. They want to raise the death tax. They want to raise the taxes on business. If you want to see how Obama will govern, look at the record of Democratic leadership in congress. Why? Because Obama has voted with them 98% of the time.

He is going to tell you that everyone will get health care. That isn't possible unless you socialize the world's greatest health care system. A step that will bring one of our greatest institutions to its knees. Just look back 16 years ago, when Democrats controlled the White House and the Congress. They tried socializing health care then. Obama and his Democratic allies in the Congress will try to do it again.

He is going to tell you that he wants abortions to be rare, but he voted in Illinois to support infanticide. He is going to tell you he believes in your Second Amendment rights, but he voted in Illinois to have those rights taken away. He will tell you he will bring reform to Washington, but when he had the chance to reform the corrupt politics of Chicago, he was no where to be found.

He is going to paint a picture of doom of our economy. That our best days are behind us. And he will tell you how only he can fix it with new government programs. I can tell you from personal experience that the Democrats in congress will be chomping at the bit for the opportunity. But it is government programs like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and ACORN that have caused our current economic crisis. More government programs will only prolong our economic downturn. Not usher in a new era of prosperity.

My opponent will use flowery words to try to persuade you that the Democrats will make your life better. I again ask you to look past the pleasing talk of my opponent and study his actions and who he has teamed with in the U.S. Senate. It is a record of abject liberalism. A record that suggests a course that would take us from prosperity to economic ruin. From a shining city on top of the hill to just another city.

I can not match my oponent's exquisite rhetoric. I can not offer such rhetorical skills. But what I can offer is the power of my actions. I have a record of standing up against new taxes. I have a record for finding free market solutions to help people obtain affordable health care. I have a record of standing up for life. I have a record of standing up for the second amendment. I have a record of reform. I have a record of crossing the isle to work with others. I have a record for standing up for free and open markets. I have a record of doing what is hard and not politically expedient. I have a record of working for this country. So we can continue be the greatest country in the world.

So as you watch tonight please look past the words and look at the deeds. For it is in our deeds where you will see the meaningful differences between us.

I think such an attack would be brilliant for two reasons. First it sets the bar high for Obama's rhetoric. It will negate his only true skill. The ability to say nothing using pretty words. Plus it will put people on their guard for such empty rhetoric.

Secondly, it moves the debate to issues where McCain is stronger. Such an opening statement highlights the fact that he is the only candidate with a record and introduces topics that are good for him but have been ignored by the media. McCain can frame on what ground the debate will be held from the beginning.

Lastly, such a bold attack could easily ruffle Obama's feathers. He has shown before to have a thin skin. Such an attack at the beginning could unbalance him and cause him to make some game changing gaffes. What do you think?

The national media is having a field day. Why? Because Democratic state senator and staunch Barack Obama supporter Hollis French has delivered on his October surprise. Now we are treated to the following misleading headlines.

Panel: Palin abused power in trooper case

But when you look at the details of the Branchflower report you get the following.

Finding Number One

For the reasons explained in section IV of this report, I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) provides

The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

Finding Number Two

I find that, although Walt Monegan's refusal to fire Trooper Michael Wooten was not the sole reason he was fired by Governor Sarah Palin, it was likely a contributing factor to his termination as Commissioner of Public Safety. In spite of that, Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

Now, anyone who can read will see that these two statements are completely incongruent. How can the firing be "proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire" and still be illegal?

Let's assume for a moment that both of these findings are true. For the second finding to be true, she had legitimate reason for the firing. For the first finding to be true she had illegitimate reasons in addition to the legitimate reasons for the firing. Unless she came out and said that she fired him for personal reasons, then the author of the report is doing some serious mind reading.

At the end of the day, Gov Palin had legitimate reasons to fire Wooten and this report backs up those reasons. Any other conclusion is nothing less than pure speculation. Unfortunately, the media is in the tank for the Democrats and they have a chance to cut the knees out of a future star of the Republican party. Therefore this story will get tons of play over the next few days. What a joke.

Why all the doom and gloom today about the markets? It is a perfect opportunity to buy!

But I guess that doesn't fit into the template of a "bad economy" helps Obama that the media is using. So I guess we are going to get and endless supply of more doom and gloom stories in the hopes of scaring people into voting for Obama.

Reading all of this crap is so depressing and of course complete hogwash. We heard the same things after 9/11. But two years later the stock market was setting new records. We are going through a NATURAL cycle in the economy. It is no big deal. Hold onto your investments and in the next 5 years they will be back to where they were before if not higher. In fact some time in the next 5 years I expect the stock market to be setting new highs.

There has never been any 20 year period, including the great depression, where the stock market hasn't gone up 8-10%. Guess what. It will continue to do so into the future as long as we don't screw up the markets with more Government oversight and more Government regulation. Government intrusion is the only dangerous action we can take that will slow down the market's return.

The reality of the situation is that we will bounce back from this down turn like we always do. So laugh at all the doom and gloomers and have confidence that we will set new records in the stock market some time in the next 5 years. And if you have any extra money, now would be a good time to buy stocks.

I have to give the Democrats credit. They are bodacious. They are hoping that if they repeat a lie often enough then everyone will believe it. What is the lie? That de-regulation caused the crisis in the economy.

Yarmuth!'s campaign is using it.

"The people of Louisville understand that the economy is on the brink of a meltdown because of years of deregulation, corporate greed and the lack of oversight," he said.

Lusnford is using it.

Instead, in the TV ad Lunsford claims McConnell, the Senate minority leader, supported deregulation of the banking industry, which he says led to the meltdown in the mortgage banking industry. He avoids the issue of the Washington-crafted remedy.

Obama used it in the debate.

And I believe this is a final verdict on the failed economic policies of the last eight years, strongly promoted by President Bush and supported by Senator McCain, that essentially said that we should strip away regulations, consumer protections, let the market run wild, and prosperity would rain down on all of us.

The problem with this line of reasoning is it doesn't have any foundation in reality. I want someone to point me to the deregulation that caused this crisis. I want someone to point me to the regulation which was removed that caused this crisis. You can't. Why? Because it isn't what caused the crisis.

What caused this crisis was the lending practices encouraged by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They bought up these loans to make their books look good. They encouraged sub-prime mortgages so the poor could get into homes. These were agencies, created by Democrats, promoted by Democrats, and protected by Democrats. It didn't matter to Democrats that the poor people were buying homes they couldn't afford. It was for the good of society.

It was these organizations that pushed all of these toxic mortgages and allowed them to be bundled into MBSs that were traded on Wall Street. It was these poisonous loans that created the housing bubble. It was these bad loans that created the mess we are currently enjoying. Republicans for years have been trying to reign in these practices, but the Democrats have fought it tooth and nail. The Democrats know it and yet they are trying rewrite history.

Unfortunately, it has been left to McCain to carry the truth. So far he has been reluctant to clash with Obama on this issue. In fact he has talked extensively about the greed of Wall Street. This is ridiculous. He must attack the root and not pander as a populist. He needs to tell the truth everywhere he goes and he must do it in a forceful manner. He must confront Obama with it. Hell Obama received a ton of money from these corrupt housing organizations.

If he doesn't, he will allow the Democrats to create the perception that it was deregulation that caused this crisis. And in politics perception is reality. This crisis's roots lie within liberal Democratic policy. We need to call them on this so they don't get away with pinning it on Republicans and a failure of free markets. Markets work. It was the government intrusion into these markets that has caused the failure. It caused our stock markets to lose half of their value. Not some mythical deregulation.

Watching the debate last night was painful. It was painful to listen to empty suite Obama push socialism while McCain pushed his talking points. I think McCain did OK, but he had a couple of chances to bury Obama and really shine and he missed them.

Let's look at each of these questions.

Brokaw: Sen. Obama, time for a discussion. I'm going to begin with you. Are you saying to Mr. Clark (ph) and to the other members of the American television audience that the American economy is going to get much worse before it gets better and they ought to be prepared for that?

Obama: No, I am confident about the American economy. But we are going to have to have some leadership from Washington that not only sets out much better regulations for the financial system.....

Elendil: I am glad to see that Obama agrees with me that the fundamentals of our economy are strong. What we do not need is more regulation. What we need is to get government out of the people's way. We have the most productive and inventive workers in the world. If we just get out of their way we can rebound quickly. Sure we might have a short time downturn in the economy, but that is the natural fluctuation of the market. Rather than interfere and distort the markets, we need to get out of the way so the correction takes place and we can come roaring back. If we stay out of the way, it will come back sooner rather than later.

Question 2: How can we trust either of you with our money when both parties got -- got us into this global economic crisis?

Elendil: The bottom line is you can't trust us with your money. It is the interferences of Washington that have caused our problems. It was liberal policies that believed everyone should own a home that created the sub-prime mortgages and pushed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to create a market for bad loans. If government hadn't gotten involved in the housing industry we would not have created the bubble whose burst has driven our current problems. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. What we need to do is get the money and power out of Washington and back into the hands of the people. My administration will work from day one to lessen the influence of Washington in our economy.

Question 3: Since World War II, we have never been asked to sacrifice anything to help our country, except the blood of our heroic men and women. As president, what sacrifices -- sacrifices will you ask every American to make to help restore the American dream and to get out of the economic morass that we're now in?

Elendil: We don't need to ask the people to sacrifice anything. They sacrifice enough. Anyone who looks at their paycheck stub can see their sacrifice. What we need to do is ask Government to sacrifice. It is time we ask Government what it can't live without. We need to call on Government to do with less. My administration will work relentlessly to make sure that government deals with less and gets out of the way. We have the best workers in the world. All we have to do is unleash their potentials from the shackles of government and we will turn this economy around.

Missed Rebuttal:

Obama: So let's be clear about my tax plan and Sen. McCain's, because we're not going to be able to deal with entitlements unless we understand the revenues coming in. I want to provide a tax cut for 95 percent of Americans, 95 percent.

If you make less than a quarter of a million dollars a year, you will not see a single dime of your taxes go up. If you make $200,000 a year or less, your taxes will go down.

Elendil: If Obama's tax plan is put in place you might get a tax cut, but you will also lose your job. His plan to tax companies and the rich will suck capital from the market place and cause companies to lay off employees. That is simple economic fact that my opponent fails to understand. And we will all have to pay a steep price for his ignorance.

Question 3: Sen. McCain, I want to know, we saw that Congress moved pretty fast in the face of an economic crisis. I want to know what you would do within the first two years to make sure that Congress moves fast as far as environmental issues, like climate change and green jobs?

Elendil: I want to state up front that I believe that man made global warming is a myth. Their is no evidence that human activities has caused the latest warming cycle. With that said, no one wants to destroy our environment. We need to work to lower pollution and find renewable sources of energy. I will work to make sure that we continue to be the most environmentally friendly country in the world. What I don't want to do is make rash mistakes that will damage our economy based on environmental extremists claiming that the sky is falling. I think we can work to improve the environment without asking Americans to sacrifice in the name of Chicken Little.

The first step is to develop nuclear power. We need to create more permits and keep environmentalists from filing lawsuits to hamper development. Nuclear power is clean and can provide us with our growing need for electricity. We just have to make it easier to do.

It will provide us with the time we need to develop alternative energies. I am not going to gamble the future of the economy on the hope that we can create energy sources in 10 years. I want to make strides to do what we know we can do now, and give alternative energies a chance to prove themselves in the marketplace.

Question 4: Should we fund a Manhattan-like project that develops a nuclear bomb to deal with global energy and alternative energy or should we fund 100,000 garages across America, the kind of industry and innovation that developed Silicon Valley?

Question 5: Quick discussion. Is health care in America a privilege, a right, or a responsibility?

Elendil: It is clearly a responsibility of Americans to insure themselves. My opponent will claim it is a right. Obviously he has never read the constitution. He seems to be more familiar with the writings of Karl Marx than our founding fathers. We have a right under the first amendment to free speech. We have a right under the second amendment to own fire arms. We have a right under the fifth amendment to a fair trial by our peers. We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We don't have is a right to health care.

It is the responsibility of every American to provide themselves and their family to provide health care. But government does have a role. It has the responsibility to make sure health care is not substandard. It has a responsibility to make sure health care companies live up to their responsibilities. Government has the responsibility to promote healthy living standards. Otherwise government should get out of the way and let free markets bring the cost of health care under control. For it is people making free choices about coverage and doctors that will cause the markets to optimize and reduce costs.

Question: Sen. Obama, let me ask you if -- let's see if we can establish tonight the Obama doctrine and the McCain doctrine for the use of United States combat forces in situations where there's a humanitarian crisis, but it does not affect our national security.

Take the Congo, where 4.5 million people have died since 1998, or take Rwanda in the earlier dreadful days, or Somalia.

What is the Obama doctrine for use of force that the United States would send when we don't have national security issues at stake?

Obama: Well, we may not always have national security issues at stake, but we have moral issues at stake.

If we could have intervened effectively in the Holocaust, who among us would say that we had a moral obligation not to go in?

If we could've stopped Rwanda, surely, if we had the ability, that would be something that we would have to strongly consider and act.

So when genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us.

And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, our national interests, in intervening where possible.

Elendil: I guess Sen Obama didn't believe that ethnic cleansing of the Kurds was taking place in Iraq. Or that suppression of the Shiites didn't occur under Sadam. According to what he just said about moral imperative, we should have gone into Iraq and liberated her suppressed people. At this point I am confused. We shouldn't have gone it to Iraq because AQ wasn't there which they clearly have been over the last few years and we should have let the Iraqi people suffer under a dictator. But it is OK to help suffering people in other parts of the world. I must say that at this point your foreign policy is as coherent as a bunch of monkey's typing on a typewriter.

The rest of McCain's answer on this question was pretty good. In fact, the rest of McCain's answers throughout the debate were really good. He had an opportunity to stick it to the left and Obama and he failed to do it. I just don't think it is within him to be as ruthless as his opponent. It's a shame. He could have really left Obama out to dry if he had.

Last week, I was surprised that Yarmuth! changed his mind on the bailout and voted for it the second time around. I thought at the time it was a major blunder and Northup should hammer him on his false populism. Ask and you shall receive. Today Northup sent out the following email.

In case you missed it, your representative, John Yarmuth, decided to give $700,000,000,000 ($2,300 for every man, woman and child) to Wall Street, and only four days after voting against the bill.

On Monday, John said he agreed with the Nobel Prize-winning economists who said the bailout was not the solution. Listen here.

What changed? The Senate added $150 billion in pork: lower taxes on wooden practice arrows and Puerto Rican rum, to name a few. Yarmuth thought the bailout needed to be even bigger!

Economists everywhere where advocating for solutions that would protect taxpayers, rather than just give their money away. I said last week that we should pursue these solutions, but Yarmuth never gave them a chance.

That is the fundamental difference between John and us. He believes that the government should tax more, spend more and give money away. We believe in the virtues of less government spending, lower taxes and accepting responsibility for failures.

As you head to the polls on Election Day, think about what you, your spouse and your kids could have spent your $2,300 on, and think about how much of it you will ever see again, now that it's in the hands of Wall Street fat cats.

I believe this is a brilliant line of attack. The first shot can be found in the following television advertisement.

From an election standpoint, Northup is driving a dagger into Yarmuth!. She gets to hit him on two areas. First he voted for a $700 billion "bailout" of Wall Street. It's hard to be a populist after giving so much money to Wall Street firms. That is a lot of money. The vote makes it difficult for him to claim he is looking out for the little man. Secondly, she gets to hit him on voting for the bailout after it was porked up with lots of government goodies. Yarmuth!'s vote makes him vulnerable to the label of tax and spend liberal.

I thought Yarmuth! had the edge in this election with Obama at the top of the ticket. I think that edge has been wiped out by his vote on the bailout. I think Northup has a real opportunity to do well in the south end of Jefferson County. If she can make significant inroads with the working families there, then she can and will win this race. I will be interested to see new polls on this race in a couple of weeks.

Sad news this morning.

State Rep. Larry Belcher, a Shepherdsville Democrat, was killed in a traffic accident Monday night.

The crash occurred a little after 6 p.m. CDT on Interstate 65 half a mile north of mile marker 43 in Edmonson County, a Kentucky State Police Trooper Todd Holder said.

My prayers go out to the Belcher family.

When college kids vote in mock elections you generally see a tidal wave of support for the Democratic candidates. I believe the reason for the mass Democratic support is simple. First and foremost they don't care about politics. A fact which is backed up by abysmally low voter turnout numbers. Since they don't care they are more easily swayed by the liberalism which inundates today's campuses. Add on top of that the fact that many don't have any real responsibilities. The don't have kids. They don't pay bills. They don't see the effect on taxes on their primary source of earning. It is amazing how much living in the real world will change a person's outlook on politics.

Therefore it isn't surprising that the latest "mock election" consisting of 12 Kentucky campuses show Obama with an 11 point win over McCain. And this is a state that McCain will win by 15 to 20 points. One would think that Lunsford would trounce McConnell in the same election. Apparently not. McConnell won 50 to 49. That is not a good sign for Lunsford as he attempts to upset McConnell in a few weeks.

I have said for some time that the internals of the polling data points to a McConnell victory. Lunsford's approval ratings are abysmal. It is nearly impossible to beat another candidate with lower approval ratings. I think this "mock election" is just another data point to back up my beliefs. If Lunsford can't win the young idealistic vote, he isn't going to win the election.

Friday was a horrifying day if you are a believer in free markets and capitalism. Congress passed a bill and Bush signed a bill that effectively socializes the mortgage industry. A move that wasn't even needed. Did we not learn anything from Japan's attempt to socialize their mortgage industry? It took them 10 years to recover. Hopefully it won't take as long for us, but I am a bit dismayed. I wonder what other "bailouts" are going to be necessary moving forward.

It was embarrassing watching our delegation to Washington split 4-4. They should have vote 8-0 against. Oh well, nothing we can do about it now. All we can do is look at potential political fallout from the votes.

Personally, I think this is a perfect opportunity for Northup to take Yarmuth! to task and shove all of his populistic crap back down his throat. Not only did Yarmuth! turn his back on his "principles", but he did it on the "hardest" vote he ever cast.

On top of his hypocrisy, he doesn't even understand the root cause of the problem.

While the bill may avert immediate catastrophe, we still have a lot of work to do. I pledge to continue to put the working people of Louisville first, and to put an end to the deregulation that got us to this point of national emergency.

He is either lying or is too ignorant to understand basic economics.

This problem was not a failure of deregulation. It was a failure of LIBERAL POLICY. It was the stupid policy of liberals seeking to put people in homes they could not afford. This attempt to interfere with the market artificially inflated housing prices leading to the housing bubble. And when the "good intentions" failed and the bubble popped, it brought the credit industry to its knees. What we don't need is more regulation and government interference in the markets. All they do is distort the market and create more unintended consequences.

If I were Northup's team, I would hammer Yarmuth! all day long for his hypocrisy and failure to grasp these simple economic concepts.

I thought Biden probably came off well with the public in the debated based upon his forceful performance. I also thought that most people couldn't tell he was making stuff up left and right. Investor's Daily takes Biden to task for his untruths.

In "The Prince of Darkness," his memoir of 50 years as a reporter in Washington, Robert Novak points out that while Jimmy Carter successfully ran for president by acting as "the anti-Washington, anti-government, anti-lawyer candidate telling audiences, 'I'll never lie to you' and setting post-Watergate standards of honesty," behind the smile Carter was actually "a habitual liar who modified the truth to suit his purposes."

But neither Carter nor Bill Clinton, whose twists and turns before a grand jury led to his impeachment, ever stared into the camera and spouted such a string of outright fabrications as if they were gospel truths the way Barack Obama's running mate did last week.

Ouch, that's going to leave a mark. The article goes on to catalog many of Biden's whoppers. I wonder if the main stream media is going to call Biden to task for his untruths? I am not going to hold my breath.