This Sucks
Why isn't it making bigger news? (via Kos Diary)

Debra A. Reed voted with her boss on Wednesday at African-American Research Library and Cultural Center near Fort Lauderdale. Her vote went smoothly, but boss Gary Rudolf called her over to look at what was happening on his machine. He touched the screen for gubernatorial candidate Jim Davis, a Democrat, but the review screen repeatedly registered the Republican, Charlie Crist.

That's exactly the kind of problem that sends conspiracy theorists into high gear -- especially in South Florida, where a history of problems at the polls have made voters particularly skittish.

A poll worker then helped Rudolf, but it took three tries to get it right, Reed said.

"I'm shocked because I really want . . . to trust that the issues with irregularities with voting machines have been resolved," said Reed, a paralegal. "It worries me because the races are so close."

These voting machines are the worst. I hate our new touch-screens. Make sure you go through the "review" process before you submit your ballot.

Prediction
I'm not ready to make my final predictions yet for the midterm elections, but I can tell you what my crystal ball sees clearly: If Republicans somehow hold on to the House and only lose a seat or 2 in the Senate it won't be because of voting shenanigans. It will be because of this. Is that why Bush and Rove are so confident? Hopefully the American people won't fall for it.

Widespread Destruction and Chaos
Is this just playing the expectations game? Or does political analyst Stu Rothenberg really believe this? Raise the bar a little bit, why dontcha Stu.

With the national environment being as it is - and given the last round of redistricting, which limits possible Democratic gains - Republicans probably are at risk to lose as few as 45 seats and as many as 60 seats, based on historical results. Given how the national mood compares to previous wave years and to the GOP’s 15-seat House majority, Democratic gains almost certainly would fall to the upper end of that range.
...
Dangerously big waves can be very strong and very unpredictable. They can bring widespread destruction and chaos. Republicans now must hope that this year’s midterm wave isn’t as bad as national poll numbers suggest it could be, because those national numbers suggest a truly historic tidal wave.

The Dilbert Guy
Obviously - from the posts below about children and TV - we don't know diddly about how brains develop. So read this - we don't know much about how brains work at any age.

As regular readers of my blog know, I lost my voice about 18 months ago. Permanently. It’s something exotic called Spasmodic Dysphonia. Essentially a part of the brain that controls speech just shuts down in some people, usually after you strain your voice during a bout with allergies (in my case) or some other sort of normal laryngitis. It happens to people in my age bracket.

I asked my doctor – a specialist for this condition – how many people have ever gotten better. Answer: zero. While there’s no cure, painful Botox injections through the front of the neck and into the vocal cords can stop the spasms for a few months. That weakens the muscles that otherwise spasm, but your voice is breathy and weak.

The weirdest part of this phenomenon is that speech is processed in different parts of the brain depending on the context. So people with this problem can often sing but they can’t talk. In my case I could do my normal professional speaking to large crowds but I could barely whisper and grunt off stage. And most people with this condition report they have the most trouble talking on the telephone or when there is background noise. I can speak normally alone, but not around others. That makes it sound like a social anxiety problem, but it’s really just a different context, because I could easily sing to those same people.

Read the whole thing. It has a happy ending.

Confusing
I've heard this many times now. Is it true?

Some political scientists and strategists refer to it as the "15% lie" — when whites, bowing to societal pressure, tell pollsters they intend to vote for a black candidate but fail to do so in the voting booths.

I have a hard time understanding it if so. There are legitimate-sounding reasons to be against Ford if you're a conservative and even if the true reason is some latent racism you don't have to say why you're against him. Even if in the poll they ask you why, just spout one of the other bits of nonsense Corker is offering.

I have a hard time believing in, or understanding this phenomenon. I do think people change their minds at the last minute, refer back to traditional voting habits, or worse yet simply like to vote for the winner. To me, that's the biggest danger here: that Corker has momentum and may be seen as the inevitable winner. I have at least one friend who tells me she likes to vote for the winner - it just makes her feel better to be on the side of everybody else.

I know it's awful, but that at least makes some logical sense to me, moreso than the lie-as-some-bizarre-racist-ploy.

Gay Marriage
I have to admit I kind of hope this good news doesn't get much press until Nov. 8, but the NJ high court just announced its decision that denying same-sex couples all of the civil rights and privileges afforded marriage is unconstitutional. They don't care whether the committed same-sex couples are called "married" or not, so long as there is a mechanism that will guarantee their rights.

Yet More Senate Polls
From the LATimes/Bloomberg. The bad news is it seems to confirm that Ford's small lead has disappeared. Corker is up 49-44. And McCaskill is down in Missouri - that's one we really need.

The good news is this confirms a Dem lead in NJ and is the first poll I remember that actually shows Jim Webb *ahead* of George Allen in VA, 47-44.

If these results hold up, Dems will win OH, PA, MT, RI, VA and be tied 50-50 with Republicans, assuming Lieberman doesn't bail on Nov. 8. That will leave the GOP in charge, with Cheney breaking the tie. Winning MO or TN would put Dems over the top.

Incidentally
The post below regarding the effect of TV on children under the age of 3, and its increase of the risk of autism, generated a good bit of discussion for this blog. You may be interested to know that Stevie T--our resident expert on all things childhood development-related--has commented again, answering some of your questions. Some of us won't like it (just leave the tv off until the kid goes to bed). Use this post to continue that discussion, if you'd like. I know I'm interested by the topic, even if I can't make heads or tails of the report he links. They might as well just have one page with 2 words: "TV Bad."

Here's one thing I do know. The argument I've heard some make--not here but elsewhere--something like: "that can't really be true. If it were, my kids would be all screwed up"--is a logical fallacy of the highest order. The research shows that the risk of developing autism and ADHD is *increased.* Like smoking increases the risk of developing lung cancer. Some people smoke their entire lives and never get cancer. That doesn't mean the cause and effect is disproven. The risks are increased - but not to 100%. There are probably many risk factors here - most of which we likely don't even know about.

Here's one reason this seems so important to me. Suppose it's true that the huge increase in autism and ADHD over the last 20 years can be completely attributable to TV exposure under the age of 3. With some education (and discipline), these are conditions we can practically eradicate, right? And in our lifetimes. How often does a big problem suddenly seem solvable? If we can just do that, and solve that pesky global warming problem...that wouldn't be a bad generational contribution to society.

Feeling optimistic today.

New Senate Polls and a Question
By Mason-Dixon. If they hold up, they show Dems gaining 5 seats, just 1 shy of what we need to take control. Ford (down 45-43) and Webb (down 47-43) are close in TN and VA. I still think Ford has the better chance - he's running a much stronger campaign than Webb. I am hoping the ground game in Memphis still has some teeth to it.

Here's my question - does your state have early voting? And if so, have you already voted? One of my recent Ford emails encourages early voting for this reason: the campaign can retrieve the list of folks that have voted early, and won't waste time calling or visiting you in the get-out-the-vote efforts leading up to the big day. I have always liked voting *on election day* but this sounds like a reasonable, helpful request. So I'm doing it. Who's with me?

MEDIA MONDAY
What have you been watching, listening to, reading?

The Prestige
I don't have time to get my thoughts down here, but I loved The Prestige. Go see it!

Jittery
Just between you and me, I'm suddenly much less confident about the Harold Ford Senate chances in TN. The "best campaign of the cycle" seems to have made several bizarre missteps lately. First, why would you do this?

Democratic Senate nominee Harold Ford Jr. interrupted his opponent's news conference Friday, confronting Republican Bob Corker in a Memphis airport parking lot and scolding him for criticizing Ford's family.

Corker was talking to reporters about lobbying reform and ethics.
Ford spotted Corker in the parking lot and began walking toward him, saying, "It's good to see you. I'd love to debate you on this Iraq thing."

Ford continued talking about his plan to partition Iraq into three regions as the candidates shook hands. But then Corker stopped him:

"I came to talk about ethics, and I have a press conference," Corker said in TV footage captured by WREG in Memphis. "I think it's a true sign of desperation that you would pull your bus up when I'm having a press conference."

And then why would you actively bash the liberal Democratic candidate for your old seat and actively antagonize liberal voters, who were already holding their noses to vote for you? These both seem like rash decisions, especially the first one. Could it be that his internal polls show him slipping?

Which part of this story makes sense?
None of it. Obviously the judge is being a little weird (even if, personally I don't mind this law being applied only to men) But let's start with this: in general, is disrobing in front of a 14-year-old boy any real strategy for a female neighbor who's trying to get the boy to stop coming out to the back yard to play basketball?

North Korean Leader: "My Bad"
Link

Kim told Chinese State Councilor Tang Jiaxuan that "we have no plans for additional nuclear tests," Yonhap news agency reported, citing an unnamed diplomatic source in Beijing.

Kim also told the Chinese that "he is sorry about the nuclear test," the mass-circulation Chosun Ilbo daily reported, citing a diplomatic source in China. The North Korean leader also raised the possibility the country would return to arms talks.

Oops. Sorry about that nuclear test. Even if that's not what he said, I like that it's what they decided to say he said.

Unstoppable Force meets Immovable Object
Sooo funny. NJ media try to get Republican Senate hopeful Tom Kean to answer a simple question. Who gets more points for stubbornness, the media or the candidate?

A Fighting Keyboardist Abandons His Post
Shorter Jonah Goldberg: I was wrong about the Iraq War, but I was right to be wrong (and you were wrong to be right). Quickly becoming the most unreadable columnist around, Jonah finally flips on the war in his LATimes piece today.

I must confess that one of the things that made me reluctant to conclude that the Iraq war was a mistake was my general distaste for the shabbiness of the arguments on the antiwar side.

But that's no excuse. Truth is truth. And the Iraq war was a mistake by the most obvious criteria: If we had known then what we know now, we would never have gone to war with Iraq in 2003.

But just think, now when Jonah gets asked why he's not volunteering for the war, he can finally be honest: that he just doesn't believe in it. If he truly thought a war was necessary to preserve our national well-being, he would have joined, right? Now we know that his "reluctance" to be honest with himself about that had more to do with his dislike for the "arguments" (which is to say, the arguers) on the other side. We could be right as rain but because we're Democrats and liberals he feels compelled to argue vociferously on the other side, no matter the cost.

Thanks, Jonah. A real stand-up guy.

16
is a pretty high number in dog years. and 16 wins would give you an undefeated regular season in pro football. But as an approval rating (out of 100) 16 is pretty darned low, even for Congress.

The question is, will all of this disenchatment lead to more voting? Or less? It sure seems like this time, if we can get folks to the polls, they won't be voting for Republicans.

2 1/2 weeks to go.

Looking for Some Good News About Iraq?
Good Luck. I wonder if Cheney smokes his crack or snorts it?

They Don't Know Who They're Fighting
Because depression really should be shared among friends. Read this. Then go ahead and pick up the closest sharp pencil and stab yourself in the heart. Put yourself out of misery. No, wait! First, read the post below, which really is important. Then, turn off the TV. Then stab yourself. I'll be slumped lifeless in the corner.

This Looks Important
I don't have any kids under the age of 3, but I do have a niece under the age of 3. And this frightens me.

Today, Cornell University researchers are reporting what appears to be a statistically significant relationship between autism rates and television watching by children under the age of 3. The researchers studied autism incidence in California, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington state. They found that as cable television became common in California and Pennsylvania beginning around 1980, childhood autism rose more in the counties that had cable than in the counties that did not. They further found that in all the Western states, the more time toddlers spent in front of the television, the more likely they were to exhibit symptoms of autism disorders.

Information about autism is everywhere these days, and like with the increase in children's need for medication for attention deficit and everything else, it would be easy to grouse that "we didn't have these problems back in my day. Kids just need to suck it up." But the fact is that there are some very real things that are different today in terms of visual and aural stimulation. If we can buy into the idea that black, white and red toys help infants' brains develop, it makes sense to think twice about what the flashing spectrum of images a TV offers might be doing to them.

I have to admit this is something I never thought about before right now, so I'm probably behind most of you. I know about the effect of TV watching on eyesight development, and on vocabulary--even psychology once the content of programming starts to make the slightest sense. But I never have thought of the effect of the sheer visual stimulation.

If you're the parent of one under 3 (yes you!) you should read the whole thing.

It's like 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife - not.
In the never-ending quest to define irony, not just here at A19 but on all the internets, I hope this proposed requirement of congresspersons/FBI investigatees to use the word "ironic" more appropriately can be broadened to include other words, such as "literally" . . . or "responsibility." (Posted on DC Universe, found via Wonkette.)