I reread the post and JW is correct. I misread the initial post as to "October Surprise." I stand by my other points. Peggy, I could care less whether you take me seriously, but if you need my sources here are but a few:

Los Angeles Times
New York Times
NPR
The Huffington Post
ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN and Fox News
Reuters, AP, Bloomberg
The Drudge Report
Obama's own words in his speeches and in commercials and coverage

As for my lack of name it is for business reasons. There are too many people in this business and others who will actually take vindictive action against you if you make strong political statements in public with which they disagree. I said what I think needs to be said, but I have no desire to have my words impact my pocketbook any more than an Obama presidency would.

Sarah Palin's kids' school practices for 8 weeks of her Mom's historic campaign are the bigger question? Really? We're poised to elect a man who (take a deep breath...) punishes dissent in the media and opposition, charges media for access at his election night party, uses class warfare to divide the country and confiscate private property to give to those not even paying taxes, has acknowledged long-associations with known radicals, openly flubs basic foregin policy practices to our likely detriment and has admitted ties and contributions to a group that a witness under oath just stated turned in maybe 40 percent legitimate voter registrations.

While I'd also have to agree with much of Anonymous' sentiment re: October Surprises, of course, I think that phrase was used tongue in cheek in the original post (I hope). But still, the apalling lack of media scrutiny and public interest in the judgement and background of Obama should frighten all. Underneath the smooth delivery is a shrewd politician who plays hardball and has shown a willingness to do almost anything to win. I feel for those who have bought into the hype and will soon be disillusioned when they finally see his true character.

I think the bigger question here is, why aren't Sarah Palin's kids in school?

The Obama kids are at home, presumably in school. I don't remember Jimmy Carter hauling Amy around with him on the campaign trail, the Clintons didn't drag Chelsea around with them, George W Bush didn't bring the teenage twins with him during his campaigns. Google the phrase "Why aren't Palin's kids in school?" and you get more than 2 million hits. This is a major topic of discussion on the web. Many people think the kids are being used as a prop, others think being on the trail with Mom is a good educational experience. I think there's a good discussion here.

I've seen no evidence that the McCain-Palin campaign actually has any real PR or communications people working on it. From tacky robocalls and pamphlets to failing to campaign in states they thought they would win and complaining constantly about the media, their program shows a remarkable lack of talent.

It's a train wreck. With clowns.

Anonymous missed the point; I don't think Sebastian is commenting on the candidate or her choices as much as he is on the fishy job title of a staffer and what a REAL communications consultant would get paid.

Anonymous -- Please post your name and the sources for your info, and I might take your post seriously.

Let's see, one candidate spends $150,000 of privately donated money for expressed campaign appearances and doesn't take ownership of the merchandise and that's an October surprise.

But another candidate has huge ties revealed to a voter corruption organization (ACORN), current ties to current anti-American subversives, has a trail of socialist and communist leanings, vows to increase spending and taxes, strongly hints he will surrender in Iraq and cut defense spending, thinly aligns himself against Israel and for the PLO - and he gets a total pass and no coverage of any of this from the press. The October surprise this time around is that Obama's most vehement defenders and surrogates are the press.