KICKING THE INFIGHTING UP A NOTCH.... Ben Smith's impressive item earlier about the infighting among McCain campaign aides has caused quite a stir, but just as importantly, it's also caused more McCain aides to start pointing fingers more aggressively.

McCain sources say Palin has gone off message several times, and they privately wonder if the incidents were deliberate. They cited that she labeled robocalls -- recorded messages often used to attack a candidate's opponent -- "irritating" even as the campaign defended their use. Also, they pointed to her telling reporters she disagreed with the campaign's decision to pull out of Michigan.

A second McCain source tells CNN she appears to be looking out for herself more than the McCain campaign.

"She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone," said this McCain adviser. "She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else.

"Also, she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: Divas trust only unto themselves as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom."

This is only going to get worse, as various factions fight to preserve their careers by destroying their campaign colleagues, hoping to avoid blame in the event of a defeat.

Kevin noted that today's buzz is likely "just the barest teaser of the bloodshed that's going to erupt between McCain and Palin loyalists after the election." If the McCain campaign comes up short, that's certainly true. We're 10 days from Election Day and multiple McCain insiders are dishing to CNN about Sarah Palin being a power-hungry diva?

What do you suppose McCain's top aides will be saying in 11 days?

THE PENNSYLVANIA GOP.... It's not as if one state Republican Party office is known for being especially well respected, but the Pennsylvania GOP seems to be competing for some kind of prize in absurdity.

A new e-mail making the rounds among Jewish voters in Pennsylvania this week falsely alleged that Mr. Obama "taught members of Acorn to commit voter registration fraud,'' and equated a vote for Senator Barack Obama with the "tragic mistake" of their Jewish ancestors, who "ignored the warning signs in the 1930's and 1940's."

At first blush, it was typical of the sorts of e-mails floating around with false, unsubstantiated and incendiary claims this year.

But where most of the attack e-mails against Mr. Obama have been mostly either anonymous or from people outside of mainstream politics, this one had an unusually official provenance: It was sponsored by the Pennsylvania Republican Party's "Victory 2008" committee.

And it was signed by several prominent McCain supporters in the state: Mitchell L. Morgan, a top fund-raiser; Hon. Sandra Schwartz Newman, a member of Mr. McCain's national task-force monitoring Election Day voting, and I. Michael Coslov, a steel industry executive.

After the email caused an uproar, leaders of the state party repudiated it, telling reporters that some of the email was "accurate," but some of the attacks couldn't "substantiated."

This is the same Pennsylvania Republican Party that recently issued a press release describing Obama as "a terrorist's best friend," and the same Pennsylvania Republican Party that apparently was involved in promoting the Ashley Todd hoax.

That's a lot of nonsense in a short period of time for one state party.

THE HUGE ETHICS SCANDAL ON THE BACKBURNER.... It's vaguely surreal that in the midst of a competitive presidential campaign, one of the candidates for national office is embroiled in a major ethics scandal, and the political world is largely ignoring it.

Two weeks ago, an independent investigation launched by the Alaskan legislature into Sarah Palin's abuse-of-power scandal wrapped up on Friday with a fairly devastating report -- Palin violated the public trust, violated state ethics laws, and lied about it. Soon after, Palin, driven either out of ignorance or illiteracy, said the report had cleared her of "any hint of any kind of unethical activity," which is the opposite of reality.

The investigation into Palin's scandal is not yet over.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin finished giving three hours of depositions Friday night to the state Personnel Board, which is looking into whether she unfairly fired Alaska's public safety director this summer, her attorney told CNN.

Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate, gave her deposition in St. Louis.... Her husband, Todd Palin, also was supposed to testify separately Friday but it was unclear if he had done so.

Personnel Board investigator Timothy Petumenos took the governor's testimony.

Now, the Petumenos probe should be more favorable to Palin. It's run, after all, by Alaska's personnel board, which is made up of members who answer to the governor, which makes it far from independent. My suspicion is that Republicans support this inquiry because they want one more report -- in this case, a less objective one -- to clear Palin of any wrongdoing. The new talking point would be, "One investigation cleared Palin, one didn't, so let's just forget the whole thing."

This may yet be tricky, however. Petumenos is a Democrat who contributed to Palin's 2006 opponent for governor, Tony Knowles. Complicating matters slightly, the Anchorage Daily News reported that the personnel board's investigation of Palin has been "broadened" to include "other ethics complaints against the governor."

But stepping back, it's amazing this scandal is barely generating a whisper in political circles. A candidate for national office has been found to have violated ethics laws, recently, in a major abuse-of-power scandal. The Obama campaign isn't pressing the issue, reporters seem to find this irrelevant, and most voters probably have no idea that the scandal is ongoing. As far as I can tell, John McCain hasn't said a word about any of this, and reporters haven't even asked for his perspective on his running mate's

It's odd. If Joe Biden were recently found to have abused the powers of his office and lied about it, and was still under investigation as Election Day neared, I have a hunch it'd be a bigger deal.

SATURDAY'S CAMPAIGN ROUND-UP....Today's installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn't generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers.

* The Obama campaign unveiled a two-minute ad this morning that emphasizes Obama's economic plan and how he'd pay for it. McCain and Bush aren't mentioned.

* The National Republican Senatorial Committee has officially given up on winning Colorado's open U.S. Senate seat, which obviously spells trouble for Bob Schaffer.

* In other Senate news, Obama cut a new TV ad for Oregon's Jeff Merkley, the first commercial Obama has done for a Democratic Senate candidate this year.

* In Ohio, a new Ohio Newspaper Poll shows Obama leading McCain by three, 49% to 46%. A month ago, this same poll showed McCain up by two.

* In Colorado, a new Rocky Mountain News/CBS4 poll shows Obama leading McCain by 12, 52% to 40%.

* In New Hampshire, Rasmussen shows Obama leading McCain by four, 50% to 46%.

* In Iowa, Rasmussen shows Obama leading McCain by eight, 52% to 44%.

* Nationally, Newsweek shows Obama leading McCain by 12, 53% to 41%.

A CAMPAIGN DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF.... The Lord of the Flies climate at McCain campaign headquarters continues, with a pro-Palin faction reportedly at odds with the loyal Bushies McCain brought in to run the operation.

Even as John McCain and Sarah Palin scramble to close the gap in the final days of the 2008 election, stirrings of a Palin insurgency are complicating the campaign's already-tense internal dynamics.

Four Republicans close to Palin said she has decided increasingly to disregard the advice of the former Bush aides tasked to handle her, creating occasionally tense situations as she travels the country with them. Those Palin supporters, inside the campaign and out, said Palin blames her handlers for a botched rollout and a tarnished public image -- even as others in McCain's camp blame the pick of the relatively inexperienced Alaska governor, and her public performance, for McCain's decline.

"She's lost confidence in most of the people on the plane," said a senior Republican who speaks to Palin, referring to her campaign jet. He said Palin had begun to "go rogue" in some of her public pronouncements and decisions.

"I think she'd like to go more rogue," he said.

According to the piece in the Politico, Palin's people blame handlers for not letting her be herself. McCain's people blame Palin for being unprepared and unable to answer questions coherently. Palin's people don't want the governor to get the blame if the ticket loses, and McCain's people resent the lack of loyalty and discipline.

Putting aside which faction is right, watching both sides go at it with unattributed sniping through the media suggests the air at headquarters is getting increasingly toxic. That doesn't necessarily mean McCain's going to lose in 10 days -- voters may not care that he's the head of a dysfunctional operation, with staffers divided against themselves -- but it is another hurdle to clear.

As for Palin blowing off the campaign's advice, I have no idea whether that's going to help, but it can't get much worse -- voters don't like her, and even Republicans don't welcome her as the party's future.

THE RETURN OF THE MAYBERRY MACHIAVELLIS.... Ross Douthat makes an interesting observation about how the McCain campaign approached policy issues, or in its case, doesn't.

One of the many fascinating things about Robert Draper's Times Magazine story on the McCain campaign is what isn't included in its account of the attempts to brand (and rebrand, and rebrand) John McCain's candidacy: Namely, any real discussion of policy. From Draper's account, the McCain campaign staff has gone around and around trying to figure out how to sell their candidate -- as a fighter! as an experienced leader! as a maverick! etc. -- but hardly ever seemed to have spent much time thinking about how these narratives would mesh with or be reinforced by the actual policy agenda the campaign was advancing.

Think about what we're supposed to expect from a McCain administration. What is it that he really wants to do if elected to the presidency? He offers a lot of vague rhetoric about "reforming" things, but no one's sure what that means.

Seriously, after two full years of campaigning, does McCain even have a policy agenda? McCain spends a lot of time making personal attack against Obama, but off the top of your head, try to name three big, unique policy ideas that McCain takes seriously and wants to implement. It's surprisingly difficult.

McCain seems to like coastal drilling -- which he opposed up until fairly recently -- but that wouldn't affect the marketplace for a decade. McCain seems to like Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy -- which he also opposed up until fairly recently -- but that's just a continuation of the last eight years. McCain seems to like Bush's Iraq policy, but that's also just more of the same. He seems to hate earmarks quite a bit -- despite the earmarks he's requested as a long-time Washington insider -- but since they constitute a tiny fraction of the budget, it's hardly a consequential policy proposal.

If all of this sounds familiar, there's a very good reason.

In an interview with Esquire magazine, [John J. DiIulio Jr., a domestic policy advisor to George W. Bush] said: ''There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. What you've got is everything, and I mean everything, being run by the political arm. It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis.''

The two are identical. Bush and McCain have sought power for power's sake.

SCHEUNEMANN HAS A TEMPER TANTRUM.... Randy Scheunemann may be John McCain's top foreign policy advisor, but it appears he has the kind of temperament usually found in his boss.

Yesterday morning, the Atlantic's Marc Ambinder noted the "internal dissension" at McCain campaign headquarters, including a faction that has "begun to whisper about Gov. Sarah Palin to reporters." This faction, Ambinder explained, believes Palin, "perhaps unwittingly," keeps saying things that take the campaign off message, including her ridiculous attack on Obama "palling around with terrorists" -- a line that the campaign had reportedly not cleared in advance.

Soon after, Scheunemann contacted Ambinder via email.

Just read your post. This is on the record. This is cleared by HQ. It is a fact that Barack Obama was palling around with terrorists. It was a fact before Governor Palin said it in a fully vetted speech and it is fact today. It is bullshit to claim or write anything else.

Temper, temper, Randy. Keep this up and people might start wondering about the erratic and intemperate nature of the McCain campaign, which doesn't seem to keep its cool under pressure.

First, it's kind of odd that Scheunemann believes it's a campaign-approved "fact" that Obama "palled around with terrorists." For one thing, Obama never "palled around with" Bill Ayers, who presumably is the basis for this absurd smear. If the McCain gang has evidence to the contrary, it's hiding it well. For another, note the "s" at the end of "terrorists." Scheunemann believes it's a "fact" that there are multiple terrorists that Obama keeps on speed-dial?

Second, if the volatile Scheunemann really wants to play this game, it's worth taking a moment to consider his close associations with some strikingly unsavory characters.

It is a fact that Randy Scheunemann was a stooge for Ahmad Chalabi. It was a fact before the McCain campaign launched ridiculous smears and it is a fact today. It is, to borrow a phrase, "bullshit to claim or write anything else."

Remember, we are talking about a man who would, in a McCain administration, have a key role in shaping U.S. foreign policy. Something to keep in mind.

READY ON DAY ONE.... Last month, Joe Lieberman was asked whether he believes Sarah Palin is prepared to lead if something should happen to John McCain after the election. "Well, you know, let's assume the best," Lieberman said, adding, "Let's assume that nothing bad will happen."

Yesterday, Lieberman, who's generally toed the party line when it comes to Palin, slipped again.

In a discussion with journalists from his home state of Connecticut, Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democrat-turned-independent but staunchly in the Republican presidential nominee's camp, offered a somewhat ambiguous assessment today of Gov. Sarah Palin's readiness to be president.

Asked by the Stamford Advocate whether Ms. Palin was prepared to be commander in chief, Mr. Lieberman said: "Thank God, she's not going to have to be president from Day One. McCain's going to be alive and well."

Lieberman added that Palin will get ready, thanks to the fact that she's "smart," and would get "on-the-job training" as the nation's vice president.

I get the sense Lieberman probably doesn't realize how ridiculous this sounds. We should be thankful, he says, that Palin won't have to take the lead on Day One. But what if she does? McCain, a cancer survivor, would be the oldest president ever elected. What if something tragic happens on the first day, or the second, or maybe sometime in the first week, before Palin's "on-the-job training" can begin?

Lieberman may be one of McCain's most sycophantic allies, but even he seems worried about Palin holding national office. It's not a good sign.

REDEFINING 'SMALL BUSINESS'.... The McCain campaign has a nasty habit of redefining words when the existing definition doesn't suit its purposes. This week, "small business" no longer means what most of us think it means.

This morning, John McCain talked about taxes in his latest weekly radio address, insisting that Obama's tax plan would risk "bankrupting small businesses." McCain didn't explain how he arrived at this conclusion, especially given the fact that Obama's plan actually offers all kinds of tax breaks to small businesses.

But it appears the problem is one of definitions. The McCain campaign taxes a comically expansive view of what constitutes a "small business."

Ever since John McCain discovered "Joe the Plumber," he has exalted "small business" owners -- inviting them to announce their professions on signs at rallies -- as the country's only virtuous economic movers.

But now McCain has begun to define the term upward, leaving no mogul or tycoon behind.

On Thursday in Sarasota, Governor Charlie Crist introduced J. Robert Long, the CEO of Marine Concepts as a "small businessman." The man McCain dubbed "Bob the Boat Builder" spent, as Crist noted, most of his career at Wellcraft Marine, which reported revenues of $67 million last year, according to Yahoo! Finance.

Tonight in Colorado, Senator Lindsey Graham, a close friend of the McCains, described Cindy as "a great small businesswoman." Her "small" business -- Hensley & Co., a family-owned Anheuser-Busch distributor that is the third largest among the 800 in the country -- had revenues of nearly $200 million last year, according to Yahoo.

This does explain a few things. McCain's tax plan, for example, would offer ExxonMobil a total of $4 billion in new tax breaks. As McCain sees it, this is probably his way of helping a small business.

WHAT DID THE MCCAIN CAMPAIGN PUSH AND WHEN DID IT PUSH IT?.... It's highly unlikely that Steve Schmidt, Rick Davis, and other senior McCain campaign aides were actively involved in pushing the Ashley Todd hoax. It's equally unlikely that anyone at the Crystal City headquarters had foreknowledge of the disgusting stunt and/or was involved in its coordination.

But now that the charade has ended and Todd will be held responsible for her deception, it's not unreasonable to expect a fuller accounting of the McCain campaign's role.

When it comes to national media, TNR's Gabriel Sherman spoke with two reporters who are are traveling with the McCain campaign and they said they "had not been told of the now-bogus assault story" on Thursday. Last night, however, NBC's Brian Williams noted on the air, "The McCain campaign steered reporters' attention to the story" on Thursday. It sounds like a point in need of clarification.

Moreover, Greg Sargent reports that McCain campaign officials in Pennsylvania actively pushed the hoax on local reporters, and promoted quotes from the attacker who didn't exist.

John McCain's Pennsylvania communications director told reporters in the state an incendiary version of the hoax story about the attack on a McCain volunteer well before the facts of the case were known or established -- and even told reporters outright that the "B" carved into the victim's cheek stood for "Barack," according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.

John Verrilli, the news director for KDKA in Pittsburgh, told TPM Election Central that McCain's Pennsylvania campaign communications director gave one of his reporters a detailed version of the attack that included a claim that the alleged attacker said, "You're with the McCain campaign? I'm going to teach you a lesson."

Verrilli also told TPM that the McCain spokesperson had claimed that the "B" stood for Barack. According to Verrilli, the spokesperson also told KDKA that Sarah Palin had called the victim of the alleged attack, who has since admitted the story was a hoax.

What's more, there were, in fact, two Pittsburgh television stations that specifically quoted the McCain campaign on Thursday night as part of its coverage of the Todd story.

Given this, the connection between this racist, demagogic hoax and the McCain campaign, at least at the state level, is fairly obvious -- and in need of an explanation.

Will McCain hold anyone in his Pennsylvania office responsible for what transpired? Has anyone been disciplined or fired? Is McCain comfortable with his campaign's role in race-based fear mongering?

At this point, we're still waiting for some kind of reaction and/or repudiation from McCain campaign headquarters.