The Dow is crashing! And hard! We’ll be sure to check in on Wall Street’s dire day and assess what it means for you. What did that big bailout do anyway?

However, John McCain has decided he’s bored with listening to Americans fret over their savings, credit, economic future and so forth. So he’s trying, and hard, to have Sarah Palin change the subject to a 40 year old news story.

Enter William Ayers. Who is he? Is he a “terrorist” as Palin claims? And did Obama “pall around” with him? Ron Kuby actually knows William Ayers personally, so we’re going to straighten out the McCain smears for you … with an unexpected opinion or two in there.

Sarah Palin went from being unable to articulate a single source from which she receives her news, to quoting the New York Times, all in a single week. The article that allegedly drew Palin's attention was a lengthy piece in Saturday's Times which explored the connections (and lack thereof) to Barack Obama and Weather Underground leader Bill Ayers. It was on that basis that Palin claimed that Obama was "palling around with terrorists" (false), and that this issue has not been addressed before (also false).

Now I know Bill Ayers and his family, so maybe I should be recused from this blog. Oh, this is the new journalism--there are no recusals. Okay. I'll continue. While John McCain was killing Vietnamese in a country that did not attack us and posed no threat to us, Bill Ayers was engaged in the symbolic destruction of property in an effort to end the war. I know the Obama campaign won't say this--and cannot say this because America's warriors are sacrosanct, no matter how wrong the cause for which they fought or how horrific their actions in fighting for that cause. We killed a million Vietnamese during that war, Bill Ayers killed no one.

BAILOUT TAKE 2

Kuby will give you the latest on the new bailout bill that actually passed the House this time. What’s it mean for your taxes and your credit. What’s in this one that wasn’t there before.

To help us with this finer economic matters Nobel Prize Winning Economist, Joseph Stiglitz will join Kuby.

All around Washington expert, Brent Budowski, will explain why the bill passed and how arms are twisted.

PALIN vs BIDEN

And of course we’d be remiss if we didn’t share with you the finer moments of last nights highly rated VP debate. Sarah Palin skates by on low expectations and Joe Biden shows us how Presidential he can be.

We’ll also fact check some of the statements that were’nt 100% honest.

Plus, movie reviews, mailbag, McCain cuts and runs from Michigan and much much more.

She did not start speaking in tongues, or writhing around on the floor in the throes of religious mania. 

She didn't even stumble too badly, except at the rare moment when her handlers missed a talking point--such as when she was asked whether she agreed with Cheney as to the Veep belonging to both and neither the Executive and Legislative branch, and she burbled about the Constitution's "flexibility."  Biden crisply responded by a reference to Article I. It was, perhaps, the best contrast in the actual knowledge level of the two candidates, but it took place over an issue the American people do not understand and about which they do not care.

Sadly, Gwen Ifill appeared so cowed by the rightwing attacks that she refused to pull Palin back to the topic, or to expose her for avoiding it.  And why no question about abortion?

Palin "won" the debate only in the sense that she did not self-destruct.  But she hardly made a compelling case for her knowledge or ability.  As she correcty noted in response to a question, "I've only been at this for five weeks...."  

She did not start speaking in tongues, or writhing around on the floor in the throes of religious mania. 

She didn't even stumble too badly, except at the rare moment when her handlers missed a talking point--such as when she was asked whether she agreed with Cheney as to the Veep belonging to both and neither the executive and legislative branch, and she burbled about the constitution's "flexibility."  Biden crisply responded by a reference to Article I. It was, perhaps, the best contrast in the actual knowledge level of the two candidates, but it took place over an issue the American people do not understand and about which they do not care.

Sadly, Gwen Ifill appeared so cowed by the rightwing attacks that she refused to pull Palin back to the topic, or to expose her for avoiding it.  And why no question about abortion?

Plain "won" the debate only in the sense that she did not self-destruct.  But she hardly made a compelling case for her knowledge or ability.  As she correcty noted in response to a question, "I've only been at this for five weeks...."