Governor Sarah Palin launched a harsh, frontal attack against Barack Obama on Saturday for the Senator's position on abortion rights.

Appearing in Pennsylvania, the Alaska Republican claimed that Obama had "unconditional support for unlimited abortion," was "vague and evasive on the subject," and held extreme views when it came to life. On several occasions, she took past Obama statements and positions greatly out of context.

Speaking before a generally rowdy Saturday morning crowd, Palin eagerly resurfaced one of the Democratic nominee's most memorable rhetorical flubs from this campaign, only to twist his intent and language.

"[Obama] said that a women shouldn't be quote, punished with a baby," declared Palin.

In actuality, Obama said that he did not want his nine and six year old daughters to be "punished with a baby" should they make a mistake. "I don't want them punished with an STD at the age of 16," he added. "You know, so it doesn't make sense to not give them information."

Later in her campaign rally, Palin accused Obama of supporting partial birth abortion.

"Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan said partial birth abortion was too close to infanticide," she said. "Sen Obama thinks it is a constitutional right, but he is wrong."

Truth be told, Obama has argued on the campaign trail that, "the state can properly restrict late-term abortions," as long as there are provisions "to protect the health of the mother." In the Illinois State Senate Obama voted against a bill that would criminalize the practice of doctors performing partial birth abortions.

In the days after Tuesday's presidential debate there was some complaining among conservatives that so little of the campaign dialogue had focused on social issues. Palin's appearance on Saturday suggests that - in addition to reprising Obama's association with Bill Ayers - the McCain ticket will be renewing the cultural wars through focus on issues like abortion. For its part the crowd in Johnston, Pennsylvania, responded to the red meat the Alaska Governor provided them.

John McCain sought to walk back some of the hostility that he and his crowds have projected towards Barack Obama in recent days, saying he wanted to run a respectful campaign and urging his supporters to think of Obama as a decent person.

After an attendee at his town hall said he was concerned about bringing up a child under a president who "cohorts with domestic terrorists such as [Bill] Ayers," McCain didn't take the bait. Rather, he sought to calm the questioner's obviously emotional tone.

"[Senator Obama] is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared about as President of the United States," he said, before adding: "If I didn't think I would be one heck of a better president I wouldn't be running."

McCain was subsequently booed.

Later in the townhall McCain was pressed again about Obama's "other-ness" and again he refused to take the bait.

"He is a decent family man and citizen that I just have disagreements with on fundamental issues," he said.

Earlier in the campaign stop in Lakeville, Minnesota, he told the crowd that while he was "going to take the gloves off" when it came to bringing up Obama's voting record and past associations, the campaign would remain "respectful."

There are two possible interpretations to the somewhat conciliatory tone. McCain could be sensing a political backlash to the vitriol of his crowds, which have labeled Obama a terrorist and traitor, accused him of treason, and called for his death. Certainly, polling suggests raising the Ayers issue has done relatively little to advance McCain's electoral cause. Or he could be playing a classic political game, in which he leaves the mudslinging to his campaign and vice president while he himself stays clean and above the fray.

After all, just hours before McCain spoke, his aide Brian Rogers sent a statement to reporters defending the McCain-Palin audiences as everyday Americans.

John McCain was booed by his own supporters during a rally on Friday after he described Barack Obama as a "decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States."

McCain was responding to a town hall attendee who claimed he was concerned about raising a child under a president who "cohorts with domestic terrorists such as [Bill] Ayers." Despite the fact that McCain and his campaign have repeatedly used Ayers to hammer Obama in recent days, the Arizona Senator tried to calm the man.

"[Senator Obama] is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared about as President of the United States," he said, before adding: "If I didn't think I would be one heck of a better president I wouldn't be running."

The crowd groaned with disapproval.

Later, McCain was again pressed about Obama's "other-ness" and again he refused to play ball. "I don't trust Obama," a woman said. "I have read about him. He's an Arab."

"No, ma'am," McCain said several times, shaking his head in disagreement. "He's a decent, family man, [a] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign is all about."

At another point, McCain declared, "If you want a fight, we will fight. But we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments." Supporters booed then also. "I don't mean that has to reduce your ferocity," McCain responded. "I just mean to say you have to be respectful."

The episode reflected the intensity of the anger that many McCain-Palin supporters have for Obama -- anger that was stoked, in large part, by McCain itself. It also underscored just how difficult a situation McCain has walked himself into. Hours before he attempted to calm nerves, the Senator's campaign sent out a statement to reporters defending the remarks of its crowd members.

"Barack Obama's attacks on Americans who support John McCain reveal far more about him than they do about John McCain. It is clear that Barack Obama just doesn't understand regular people and the issues they care about," read a statement from spokesman Brian Rogers. "Even worse, he attacks anyone who dares to question his readiness to serve as their commander in chief in chief. Raising legitimate questions about record, character and judgment are a vital part of the Democratic process, and Barack Obama's effort to silence and shame those who seek answers should make everyone wonder exactly what he is hiding."

One Democratic activist was eager to take advantage of McCain's more conciliatory remarks on Friday, quickly posting a video described as McCain's "new attack ad":

Earlier on Friday, Barack Obama had criticized John McCain recent campaign appearance saying it was "easy to rile up a crowd by stoking anger and division."

"I think that folks are looking for something different," he said. "But that's not what we need right now in the United States. The times are too serious."

In responding to this charge, Rogers attempted to deliberate simplify and obscure some of the rhetoric that has recently come from McCain supporters. Videos taken of people heading into McCain-Palin rallies have shown individuals who label Barack Obama as a terrorist, a communist and a threat to the well-being of the country. At a town hall meeting in Wisconsin on Thursday, several attendees urged the Republican nominee to attack his opponent on the Ayers issue and Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who McCain himself has said should be off limits.

The rabid nature of the scene has startled longtime political observers and even former associates of McCain himself.

John Weaver, the Senator's former top strategist, has said McCain is making a tactical mistake by letting abusive hecklers have their voices heard during his forums. David Gergen, a longtime Washington strategist, has warned that the rhetoric from these attendees could "lead to some violence."

Veteran Republican Congressman Ray LaHood criticized Sarah Palin in particular, saying her rhetoric did not "befit the office she's running for."

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney denounced the recent campaign stops as dangerous and expressed alarm that the top of the Republican ticket would not protest the crowd's language.

"Sen. John McCain, Gov. Sarah Palin and the leadership of the Republican party have a fundamental moral responsibility to denounce the violent rhetoric that has pervaded recent McCain and Palin political rallies. When rally attendees shout out such attacks as "terrorist" or "kill him" about Sen. Barack Obama, when they are cheered on by crowds incited by McCain-Palin rhetoric -- it is chilling that McCain and Palin do nothing to object."

Veteran reporter Dan Balz has opined that "McCain's tactics are over the line, with no restraint in sight, and threaten to provoke reactions among partisans on both sides that will continue to escalate."

And Frank Schaeffer penned a solemn and critical column (first published in the Baltimore Sun) personally addressed to McCain himself: "If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism and portraying Mr. Obama as "not one of us," I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence."

McCain, through Rogers' statement, is gambling that the voices of caution don't matter as much as the sentiments of the people. But he is also implicitly arguing that even the vilest rhetoric sent Obama's way is fair game when chalked up to concerns about the Illinois Democrat's past associations and judgments. And he's acknowledging that he won't lift a finger to dissuade the raging tempers.

Four years ago, John Kerry flirted with the idea of making John McCain his running mate. Today, he is denouncing the Arizona Senator for "a stunning failure of leadership," and running a nasty, hate-filled campaign.

In a letter to supporters, the Massachusetts Democrat -- no stranger to smears himself -- ramps up his criticisms of McCain to new heights. In addition to airing disgust with the tone of the McCain crowds, he rips Gov. Sarah Palin for making "outrageous charges that only a few years ago would have disqualified someone from serious consideration for national office."

The letter reads:

John McCain has shown a stunning failure of leadership. His campaign, in a time of economic crisis and foreign policy drift, has degenerated into a negative and nasty campaign of smears.

The reports are piling up of ugliness at the campaign rallies of John McCain and Sarah Palin. Audience members hurl insults and racial epithets, call out "Kill Him!" and "Off With His Head," and yell "treason" when Senator Obama's name is mentioned. I strongly condemn language like this which can only be described as hate-filled.

According to reports, every ad paid for by the John McCain campaign is now a negative ad -- every single one! McCain allows his running mate to make outrageous charges that only a few years ago would have disqualified someone from serious consideration for national office.

We cannot stand by and allow this to happen. We need to fight back, spread the word about what kind of low campaign he's running, and make sure people know the truth.

Kerry, like Obama, has set up a website to debunk smears in real time. And he directs supporters to the link: http://www.truthfightsback.com/page/content/smearpolitics

His strained relationship with McCain serves as a reminder of how much the political dynamics have changed in the past four years. It also begins to raise the question: what kind of reception will McCain receive either if he goes back to the Senate as a campaign loser or has to work with Congress as the next president?

For the fifth straight day, McCain's campaign is going after Barack Obama for his association with Bill Ayers. Only this time the attack comes in the form of a disjointed, nearly incomprehensible, national television ad that ties the former 60s radical to the subprime mortgage crisis.

Titled "Ambition," the spot - as Howard Wolfson noted - is "practically schizophrenic." After accusing Obama of showing back judgment in his associations, the ad blames "Congressional liberals" for fighting against more regulation. This from a self-proclaimed champion of deregulation.

"Obama's blind ambition," the script reads. "When convenient, he worked with terrorist Bill Ayers. When discovered, he lied. Obama. Blind ambition. Bad judgment. Congressional liberals fought for risky sub-prime loans. Congressional liberals fought against more regulation. Then, the housing market collapsed costing you billions. In crisis, we need leadership, not bad judgment."

Because the spot is (likely) paid for with money from the joint McCain-RNC committee, McCain is forced to include a reference to another candidate - in this case "congressional liberals." And as such, the key accusations are dull if not confusing.

In the end, the ad is so transparent in its real goal - to keep discussion of Ayers on cable news - one has to wonder when the media will stop letting itself be played like a fiddle. The campaign says the spot will be televised "nationally."

Omaha, Nebraska is a district that leans Republican in a state that hasn't gone Democratic since 1964. It has one electoral vote -- but that could very well push Barack Obama over the top if the race comes down to an Electoral College tie. How serious is the Senator about competing in the state?

A new fundraising memo from Obama Deputy Campaign Manager Steve Hildebrand reaffirms the notion that the senator is, in fact, committed to pulling that one electoral vote from the state's proportional system. Moreover, he could very well help flip a congressional seat from Republican to Democratic in the process.

In a letter sent to supporters, Hildebrand acknowledges that the race for the President "could come down to how well Senator Obama does in [Nebraska's] 2nd."

"With this in mind," he writes, "we've made a serious investment in the Omaha-based district. Last month, we opened a campaign office and hired John Berge to be our state director. We've been out canvassing neighborhoods, knocking on doors, and reaching out to voters.

"We're also waging an aggressive air war here, too. The Omaha media market stretches across the Missouri River and into the homes of voters in Council Bluffs, IA, where we've been reaching out to these voters for some time."

To this point, the Obama campaign has spent at least $350,000 on television advertisements in Omaha to the McCain campaign's zero. The district is of enough concern for the Republican Party that this past Sunday, McCain dispatched Sarah Palin to campaign there.

Even if Obama is unable to pull off the feat -- keep in mind, no Democrat since Bobby Kennedy has even campaigned in Nebraska -- his efforts there could have significant ripples.

There is a fierce congressional race currently being waged in Omaha, the state's largest city. Jim Esch, who ran for the House seat and lost in 2006, is making another go at Republican incumbent Lee Terry. This time he's aided by a strong political environment and an economic downturn that voters are blaming, by and large, on the GOP. National Democrats are pouring resources into the race. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has invested six-figures into television in the district.

Certainly, having Obama at the head of the ticket helps. Omaha has a growing African-American population. And Hildebrand's letter implicitly suggests that the money the presidential campaign raises will be flushed back into the city in the form of political ads that help the entire Democratic ticket.

"Be a part of history by helping Barack Obama and Jim Esch win the 2nd Congressional District of Nebraska. Please contribute $250, $100, or $50 today!" he writes. "This race is so close that one more TV ad or one more phone call can make all the difference. Both Jim Esch and Barack Obama are counting on your support to help them both win this district."

In private, there is a debate among Obama aides as to how likely it is the Senator will score Omaha's electoral college vote. But party officials are by and large bullish about the chances of Esch's riding to victory on the Senator's coattails.

"If we keep doing what we are doing in the next couple weeks," Matt Connealy, the executive director of the Nebraska Democratic Party, told the Huffington Post last week, "we may even flip the congressional district in Omaha."

If Gov. Sarah Palin, by John McCain's estimation, "knows more about energy than probably anyone in the United States of America," then why is she getting such basic facts about our nation's energy production wrong?

At a townhall event in Wisconsin on Thursday, Palin was asked by a concerned questioner whether it was true that the United States was shipping 75 percent of its Alaskan oil overseas. She responded by proclaiming it impossible, since Congress had put strict bans on the amount of oil and gas that America could export.

Not so. As the Associated Press reported:

No Alaska oil has been exported since 2004, and little if any since 2000, according to the Energy Information Administration and the Congressional Research Service.

And Congress has never imposed outright bans on oil exports. Congress prohibited exports of Alaska oil in 1973 when the Alaska oil pipeline was built. But that ban was lifted in 1996 when there were large volumes of Alaska oil coming down from the North Slope and U.S. demand was soft.

The Alaska ban has never been reinstated.

Unfortunately, for Palin, this was not merely an inconsequential misstatement but rather another in a series of errors when it comes to discussing what is supposed to be her policy strength. For a while on the trail, the Alaska Governor was fond of declaring that her job - as head of state - "has been to oversee nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of oil and gas."

That too was incorrect. As the Washington Post's Fact Checker noted:

Alaska is the ninth largest energy supplier in the United States, accounting for a modest 3.5 percent share of the nation's total energy production...

... After the non-partisan Factcheck.org pointed out Palin's error in her interview with Gibson, the Alaska governor revised her claim somewhat, limiting it to oil and gas. But data compiled by the Energy Information Administration contradict her claim that she oversees "nearly 20 percent" of oil and gas production in the country. According to authoritative EIA data, Alaska accounted for just 7.4 percent of total U.S. oil and gas production in 2005.

One thing Palin did get right was her assertion that the U.S. does not ship three-quarters of its Alaska-drilled oil to other countries. The amount, in actuality, is quite minimal (523 million barrels of petroleum product), especially compared with the amount that the country imports (roughly 4 billion barrels).

As the 2008 campaign nears its conclusion, the presidential transition efforts of the two major candidates have become a study in contrasts: Sen. Barack Obama has organized an elaborate well-staffed network to prepare for his possible ascension to the White House, while Sen. John McCain has all but put off such work until after the election.

The Democratic nominee has enlisted the assistance of dozens of individuals -- divided into working groups for particular federal agencies -- to produce policy agendas and lists of recommended appointees. As evidence of their advanced preparations, officials provided a copy of the strict ethics guidelines that individuals working on the transition effort are required to sign.

John McCain, by contrast, has done little. Campaign spokespersons did not respond to requests for elaboration. But one official with direct knowledge, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, expressed concern with McCain's approach. The Arizona Senator has instructed his team to not spend time on the transition effort, according to the source, both out of a desire to have complete focus on winning the election as well as a superstitious belief that the campaign shouldn't put the cart before the horse.

Virtually every modern non-incumbent presidential candidate has organized, during the course of the campaign, a transition effort to prepare for the early months of a potential administration. These teams help build lists and vet individuals who could serve in key government posts. They hammer out proposals to facilitate policy making from day one. And they work closely with outgoing administration officials to better understand the true lay of the political land.

Governance scholars consider the process invaluable, particularly as the nation struggles with a major economic crisis, two active wars, and a range of domestic security threats. "Our enemies understand how potentially vulnerable we are in the transition from one administration to the next," Clay Johnson III, former Executive Director of the Bush-Cheney Presidential Transition, said recently at a forum on transition planning. "This is something we need to be very, very seriously prepared for."

With 100 or so days before the next president takes office, Obama's transition effort has been organized into roughly a dozen teams of six to eight people to plot out the approach for each agency, according to a Democratic official. The ethics code governing the process prohibits staff from working on subjects that could be deemed a financial conflict of interests, either to that member or that member's family.

Under the code - a copy of which can be viewed here - lobbyists will be able to serve on the Obama transition team provided it has been more than a year since he or she lobbied on the subject to which they have been assigned. Current federally registered lobbyists will not be "permitted to serve in a titled role for the Obama Transition Project," nor for that matter will they be allowed to "contribute to or collect contributions for the Obama Transition Project."

There is less known about what the McCain campaign has been doing, partially because there are fewer details to unearth. The GOP nominee has tasked his transition to William Timmons, a well-known Washington hand and long-time lobbyist. According to a source close to the effort, Timmons has held conference calls with campaign officials and is plotting out various aspects to the impending transition. There is not, at this time, an ethics policy in place, the source says.

A call to Timmons went unreturned. "Bill does not talk to the press but I'll tell him you called," said his secretary. "Thank you."

The disparate approach that each campaign has taken to the transition process is in some ways a reflection of the personality of the candidates themselves. Obama's efforts have been criticized as presumptuous by the McCain campaign. But veterans of the process argue that the well-organized plan that Obama is pursuing will help ensure smooth continuity between administrations, not to mention avoid embarrassing political hiccups.

"Government is becoming more complex and the time it is taking to put a leadership team in key departments is taking longer," said P.J. Crowley, who heads the Homeland Security Presidential Transition Initiative at the Center for American Progress. "I think that if a campaign is waiting until November 5 to start the transition process, they are going to be behind. It is not being presumptuous -- it is being prudent to be prepared before the election so that you can at least make the transition process effective as possible and be ready to govern on January 20."

The president and CEO of the Center for American Progress, former White House chief of staff John Podesta, is reportedly heading up Obama's transition team.

McCain, in contrast, appears willing to tackle important aspects of his potential transition in real time. It is a stance that fits the Senator's sometimes ad hoc approach to politics, and one that allows him to focus staff and resources on the pending election. McCain's transition would also be less drastic than Obama's since, in all likelihood, there will not be as vast an ideological and staff shift.

But this approach could create significant obstacles down the road. For example, as Crowley notes, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had only a fraction of his leadership team in place on 9/11 - roughly eight months after President Bush took office.

"It is irresponsible not to have a well organized, thoughtful vigorous transition, right now," said Mickey Kantor, a Clinton administration official who was there for the 1992 transition and who has consulted with the Obama campaign about its efforts. "I am surprised that John McCain would take that position. This government is very complicated. And I don't care how many years you have spent on it you don't truly understand it until you get to the middle of it."

After referring to the various proposals that comprise his domestic policy agenda, John McCain offered an absolute head-scratcher of a line during a campaign speech on Wednesday.

"Across this country this is the agenda I have set before my fellow prisoners," he declared. In the prepared remarks he was supposed to say "fellow citizens."

McCain didn't skip a beat, lambasting Obama for, of all things, being "less clear" about his vision for the country. "The same standards of clarity and candor must now be applied to my opponent," he declared.

The remark came during the Senator's campaign stop in Pennsylvania in what was already a controversial appearance. An hour before McCain took the stage, an introductory speaker revved up the crowd by referring to Barack "Hussein" Obama twice. McCain's campaign has distanced themselves from the remark.

For the second day in a row, Norm Coleman's Senate campaign tripped all over itself when trying to explain reports that the Minnesota Republican had lavish clothing bought on his behalf by a wealthy businessman and prominent GOP donor.

During a press conference on Wednesday, Cullen Sheehan, Coleman's campaign manager, literally refused to answer the yes or no question, repeating nine times: Coleman "reported every gift he has ever received."

Here is a portion of the transcript (the rest of which is below):

REPORTER: On a different subject is there a reason that the Senator won't say whether or not someone else bought some suits for him.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Rachel, the Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: That wasn't my question, Cullen.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received. We are not going to respond to unnamed sources on a blog.

REPORTER: So Senator Coleman's friend has not bought these suits for him? Is that correct?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: Why would say that? Why wouldn't you give us an answer yes or no on that?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has recorded every gift he has ever received.

The obfuscation would be comical if not for the incredible damage it has done to the Coleman campaign. Revelations that the Senator had received the clothing gifts from Minnesota businessman Nasser Kazeminy emerged earlier this week in a posting by Harpers Magazine. Coleman offered what amounted to a non-denial denial when asked about the matter, blaming the entire episode on the vitriol of the blogosphere.

The problem, however, is that the issue fits into a bigger meme: mainly, that Coleman has often played a bit loose with ethics laws in order to repeat the superficial benefits of power. As the Huffington Post reported, Coleman has received discounts on his apartment rent, his utilities bill, and private travel as well. In addition, as Harpers reported, Coleman's wife, Laurie, has been employed by Minneapolis-based Hays Companies, a risk management firm that has donated thousands to the Senator's campaigns. Laurie, an aspiring actress, has no background in risk management.

HERE IS THE FULL TRANSCRIPT OF WEDNESDAY'S PRESS CONFERENCE

REPORTER: On a different subject is there a reason that the Senator won't say whether or not someone else bought some suits for him.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Rachel, the Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: That wasn't my question, Cullen.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received. We are not going to respond to unnamed sources on a blog.

REPORTER: So Senator Coleman's friend has not bought these suits for him? Is that correct?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: Why would say that? Why wouldn't you give us an answer yes or no on that?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has recorded every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: We haven't asked whether he has recorded every gift he has ever received and I will take his word that he has recorded every gift he has received. Has he ever received a gift of suits?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: If the answer is no, then why don't you say no.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: He has reported every gift he has ever received, Rachel.

REPORTER: What about Laurie, Mrs. Coleman's job at Hays Company? Do you know what she did there?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Again they have disclosed everything they need to disclose on the Senate ethics forms.

REPORTER: So the Senator will only go according to the Senate ethics laws or rules rather than answer questions?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: He has done everything that he is required to do, Rachel.

REPORTER: That is not my question, Cullen.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: But that is my response.

REPORTER: Senator Coleman has talked a lot about campaign finance and transparency. He'll repeat that transparency - transparency - that's what you need to have. If there are questions about whether he was a recipient of some very expensive suits and whether those they were gifted to him in an appropriate way - why not just clear it all up because it is very unclear to us?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: He does that every year as a United States Senator on his Senate disclosure forms.

REPORTER: And will we find information about clothing on those forms?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: If it exceeds a gift limit, yes.

REPORTER: So is it possible that he received these suits and it was below gift level.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: It is a little puzzling Cullen why you won't say whether or not he received these gifts and I understand that you don't have respond to everything on the blogs but you are getting questions from reporters and I don't see why you aren't answering them. Can you explain that a little to me?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Rachel, we are not going to respond to unnamed sources on blogs. That is what we are going to do from now until election is over. The Senator has disclosed everything that he is required to disclose and recorded everything that he is required to record.

REPORTER: But Cullen if the Senator did nothing wrong here and that is what you are saying then just tell us that and the issue will go away.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: Did the Senator done something wrong here?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has done nothing wrong and reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: And you don't know what Mrs. Coleman did for Hays Companies?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: And again whatever has been required to be disclosed about her income and what she does has been disclosed.

For the second time in three days, the speaker at a McCain campaign rally used Barack Obama's middle name "Hussein" in a demeaning fashion to ignite the crowd.

Speaking in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, Bill Platt, the GOP chair of Lehigh County, twice referred to "Barack Hussein Obama" minutes before John McCain and Sarah Palin were set to take the stage.

Watch the video:

On Monday, a local Florida sheriff preceded Palin's speech by declaring: "On Nov. 4, let's leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened."

McCain has distanced itself from the deliberate and malicious use of Obama's middle name in the past. When a conservative radio talk show host first discussed Barack "Hussein" Obama in February, the campaign said it was inappropriate and not reflective of the race they are seeking to run.

But it is hard not to notice how rabid the crowds have recently become at McCain events and how demonstrative they have been in their disdain for Obama. In addition to introductory speakers raising the Senator's middle name in the form of an insult, audience members have screamed out, during recent events, "terrorist," "treason," and "kill him," when the Illinois Democrat's name has been discussed.

Speaking on MSNBC, Bill Burton, Obama's national press secretary, responded to the episode with the following statement.

"People try to use it as an epithet, as a way to stir up feelings about Sen. Obama that are negative," he said. "But they ultimately have nothing to do with our challenges that we are facing right now."

UPDATE: The McCain campaign condemns the remarks. For Obama supporters and others, however, the issue is more about whether McCain will be proactive about this stuff as opposed to reactive.

"We do not condone this inappropriate rhetoric which distracts from the real questions of judgment, character, and experience that voters will base their decisions on this November." --Paul Lindsay, McCain-Palin spokesman

Later in the same event, McCain referred to Americans as his "fellow prisoners." Watch:

Back on the campaign trail, Sen, Joseph Biden relished the chance to rip into John McCain for his performance in last night's debate. After admonishing the Arizona Republican for failing to mention the word "middle class," he played the 'old man' card about as transparently as it has been played this entire cycle.

The American people are looking for a steady hand and leadership, Biden said in a Tampa, Florida speech, "not an angry man lurching from one position to another."

Earlier in the program, Biden declared Obama the winner of the debate and himself the winner of last week's vice presidential contest.

"If this were a best of five series, it would be over," he declared, implying that Obama had won the first presidential debate as well.

Later in his speech, Biden ripped Gov. Sarah Palin for trying to make political hay out of Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers.

It is "simply wrong," he declared, to "raise the most outrageous inferences."

This might come to news to those who have been following the recent developments of the presidential campaign, but during the debate spin-war on Tuesday night, McCain aide Nicolle Wallace claimed that "nobody in America" cares about Barack Obama's association with William Ayers and "neither do we."

"[N]obody in America sitting around the kitchen table trying to figure out if they're gonna be able to make the mortgage or worried about the price of groceries or price of gas, nobody cares about Mr. Ayers," Wallace told Fox News. "Neither do we."

Delivered to several news outlets during the spin portion of the night's festivities, Wallace qualified her statement by saying Obama's relationship with the '60s radical - which included a one political event, brief meetings, and appearances on an education-policy board - was important in that the Senator was not being truthful with the public.

"What we care about is that Barack Obama described him as a guy in his neighborhood," she said. "He is more than a guy in his neighborhood."

But Wallace's remarks, nevertheless, contrast greatly with the tenor and the tone of much of the messaging coming from the McCain headquarters during the past several days. This past weekend, Gov. Sarah Palin brought up the Ayers issue in the context of suggesting that Obama himself is somehow anti-American.

"Our opponent," the Alaska Republican said, "is someone who sees America it seems as being so imperfect that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country."

Even earlier, McCain strategist Greg Stimple made the argument to the Associated Press that the campaigns strategy would actually be to divert attention from those "kitchen table" issues that Wallace said were so important, in favor of the more tawdry aspects of Obama's life.

"We are looking for a very aggressive last 30 days," he said. "We are looking forward to turning a page on this financial crisis and getting back to discussing Mr. Obama's aggressively liberal record and how he will be too risky for Americans."

The pose that Wallace struck was entirely different. Following her logic, Ayers was brought up as a question of Obama's trustworthiness and, in the end, was not a issue of primary concern to the majority of voters.

"You know I don't think anyone's sitting around the kitchen table or sitting in the TV room tonight watching is gonna tune in and care too much about any of those issues," she later told MSNBC. "On Mr. Ayers, this was raised by Governor Palin as another proof point in Barack Obama's very troubling record of saying one thing and doing another."

John McCain is out with a post-debate ad that, perhaps in a sign of how the affair went, doesn't even mention last night's affair.

Titled "Folks," the McCain spot instead attacks Barack Obama for being "extreme" - "the Senate's most liberal member" - and seeking to lie about it.

What's remarkable here is how stale this charge truly is. Obama has been fielding questions on the National Journal's ratings since they came out in late January 2008. And he's been right in pointing out the survey's inherent flaws (a weighted sampling of bills, a failure to take into account of missed votes, etc...).

That McCain would hope to re-litigate the issue is a sign that even his campaign feels it has yet to land an effective punch on the opposition.

The ad, the campaign says, will be televised nationally.

Discussions about health care policy provided some of the strongest voter reactions for Barack Obama during last night's presidential debate. And on the morning after, his campaign has responded by releasing a new ad on that very subject.

Titled "Taketh," the spot uses footage of Obama during the debate itself asserting that John McCain wants to tax health care rather than fix it.

"He says that he's going to give you a 5,000 dollar tax credit," Obama says. "What he doesn't tell you is that he's going to tax your employer based health care benefits, for the first time ever...so what one hand giveth, the other hand taketh away."

McCain's plan would, indeed, tax employer-provided health care benefits. It would fill in that void by issuing a $2,500 individual tax credit for individuals and $5,000 for families. The average cost per family for health insurance is $12,000. As Time's Joe Klein explained back in September.

"[M]ake no mistake: this plan will do little or nothing for those who do not have insurance now--unless they are young and healthy--and it may well hurt a fair number of workers, especially unionized workers, who get gold-plated benefits from their employers."

The ad, according to the campaign, will air across the country on national cable beginning today.