I know that in itself isn't the Bradley effect.  I don't know whether these particular people would tell a pollster they were voting for Obama despite intending otherwise.  

I'm not sure if there's any way a Bradley effect could be minimized.  Are people saying they'd vote for Obama (though they won't) after a barrage of questions about party affiliation and other downticket candidates (or in anticipation of a barrage of questions)?  What makes people practice en masse a certain type of lying (lying based on race)?  

  The San Francisco Chronicle, on September 17, said,

"In Elko, Obama tried to anticipate his critics and called on the crowd of about 1,500 to sharpen their elbows, too.

'I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face," he said.

"And if they tell you that, 'Well, we're not sure where he stands on guns.' I want you to say, 'He believes in the Second Amendment.' If they tell you, 'Well, he's going to raise your taxes,' you say, 'No, he's not, he's going lower them.' You are my ambassadors. You guys are the ones who can make the case.'

And a piece by the newspaper in my town (San Francisco), which asks:

"Even if the officeholders joining the "truth squad" are nominally stepping out of their official roles in order to put on their (political) party hats and play politics, it's inappropriate. They wield too much power to use it to wag their fingers at people who say un-nice things about political hopefuls. Prosecutors and sheriffs are, after all, normally thought of as people with the clout to put their targets behind bars."

We state employees did win an interpretation that allows us to be political volunteers on our own time, as private citizens.  But we better be sure to be doing so as private citizens.  So if we volunteer on a workday, we have to take a vacation day.

And I support this, absolutely.  I'm paid by taxpayers on both sides.  In my work, I deal with -- and have a position of power over -- taxpayers from both sides.

Suppose there were solid evidence that, as recently as six years ago, Michelle Obama was a member of an openly secessionist fringe party?

As for Sarah Palin herself, your link includes this allegation:

at least two AIP officials recall her attending the 1994 convention, though she says she did not attend.

And we give -- I just gave my students extra time on an assignment due tomorrow, and already I'm getting ecstatic emails of gratitude . . . before they go back to party down some more.  

"It's high, it's deep, he's there, and for the second straight year the Marlins have ended the Mets' season in humiliating fashion as the Marlins win, 4-2, and the Mets season is over."

As a Steelers' fan-blogger once wrote about Browns fans: "Their pain nourishes me".

CC, you may take some pleasure in this - when the Brewers went ahead 3-1, it was the bottom of the 8th at Shea.  You could hear, on the TV broadcast, as the Brewers' score was posted on the Shea scoreboard - a deep groan.  That came shortly after the Mets bullpen gave up the lead on back-to-back homers, a result (sudden bullpen collapse) I'd predicted as the proximate cause of the Mets' demise.