Category: politics

News of US politics

Liberals are Cool – Hold Your Heads Up

Seth Anderson0 comment

Bob Herbert is of the tiny minority of actual, unabashed Liberals employed by the media. Can we replace the Charles Krauthammers of the world with some more Liberals like Bob Herbert? Please?

Ignorance must really be bliss. How else, over so many years, could the G.O.P. get away with ridiculing all things liberal?

Troglodytes on the right are no respecters of reality. They say the most absurd things and hardly anyone calls them on it. Evolution? Don’t you believe it. Global warming? A figment of the liberal imagination.

Liberals have been so cowed by the pummeling they’ve taken from the right that they’ve tried to shed their own identity, calling themselves everything but liberal and hoping to pass conservative muster by presenting themselves as hyper-religious and lifelong lovers of rifles, handguns, whatever.

So there was Hillary Clinton, of all people, sponsoring legislation to ban flag-burning; and Barack Obama, who once opposed the death penalty, morphing into someone who not only supports it, but supports it in cases that don’t even involve a homicide.

[From Bob Herbert – Hold Your Heads Up – Op-Ed – NYTimes.com]

A few liberal accomplishments? How about:

Civil rights, women’s rights, Social Security?

Liberals went to the mat for them time and again against ugly, vicious and sometimes murderous opposition. They should be forever proud.

The liberals who didn’t have a clue gave us Social Security and unemployment insurance, both of which were contained in the original Social Security Act. Most conservatives despised the very idea of this assistance to struggling Americans. Republicans hated Social Security, but most were afraid to give full throat to their opposition in public at the height of the Depression.

Medicare:

Liberals who didn’t have a clue gave us Medicare and Medicaid. Quick, how many of you (or your loved ones) are benefiting mightily from these programs, even as we speak. The idea that Republicans are proud of Ronald Reagan, who saw Medicare as “the advance wave of socialism,” while Democrats are ashamed of Lyndon Johnson, whose legislative genius made this wonderful, life-saving concept real, is insane.

When Johnson signed the Medicare bill into law in the presence of Harry Truman in 1965, he said: “No longer will older Americans be denied the healing miracle of modern medicine.”

Reagan, on the other hand, according to Johnson biographer Robert Dallek, “predicted that Medicare would compel Americans to spend their ‘sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was like in America when men were free.’ ”

Basically everything good that the government at least attempts to do is the result of a Liberal pushing through policy under strong opposition from the right-wing.

Humiliation imposed by custom and enforced by government had been the order of the day for blacks and women before men and women of good will and liberal persuasion stepped up their long (and not yet ended) campaign to change things. Liberals gave this country Head Start and legal services and the food stamp program. They fought for cleaner air (there was a time when you could barely see Los Angeles) and cleaner water (there were rivers in America that actually caught fire).

Liberals. Your food is safer because of them, and so are your children’s clothing and toys. Your workplace is safer. Your ability (or that of your children or grandchildren) to go to college is manifestly easier.

It would take volumes to adequately cover the enhancements to the quality of American lives and the greatness of American society that have been wrought by people whose politics were unabashedly liberal. It is a track record that deserves to be celebrated, not ridiculed or scorned.

Much more on that exact subject in Eric Alterman’s book:


“Why We’re Liberals: A Political Handbook for Post-Bush America” (Eric Alterman)

The American Idol candidate

Seth Anderson0 comment

Roger Ebert has some astute thoughts about the inexplicable appeal of Sarah Palin to a certain portion of the electorate.

I think I might be able to explain some of Sara Palin’s appeal. She’s the “American Idol” candidate. Consider. What defines an “American Idol” finalist? They’re good-looking, work well on television, have a sunny personality, are fierce competitors, and so talented, why, they’re darned near the real thing. There’s a reason “American Idol” gets such high ratings. People identify with the contestants. They think, Hey, that could almost be me up there on that show!

My feeling is, I don’t want to be up there. I want a vice president who is better than me, wiser, well-traveled, has met world leaders, who three months ago had an opinion on Iraq. Someone who doesn’t repeat bald-faced lies about earmarks and the Bridge to Nowhere. Someone who doesn’t appoint Alaskan politicians to “study” global warming, because, hello! It has been studied. The returns are convincing enough that John McCain and Barack Obama are darned near in agreement.

[Click to read more from The American Idol candidate :: rogerebert.com :: People]

Huge

Personally, I despise the America Idol Caribou Barbie and all she stands for, but the ratings for McCain’s little Red Corvette remain disturbingly high. Don’t people realize she is a serial liar? A television talking head trained to read the words of others with phony sincerity?

Why this lifelong Republican may vote for Obama

Seth Anderson0 comment

Well, even if the operative word is may, Michael Smerconish’s column is food for thought, perhaps a brief sentence will suffice for that Republican blowhard you know is on the proverbial fence about this particular election.

I can’t help myself. So strong is my belief that we’ve failed in our responsibility to 3,000 dead Americans that I am contemplating voting for a Democratic presidential candidate for the first time in my life. It’s the chronology I find so compelling.

We’re at the seven-year anniversary of 9/11, lacking not only closure with regard to the two top al-Qaida leaders but also public discourse about any plan to bring them to justice. To me, that suggests a continuation of what I perceive to be the Bush administration’s outsourcing of this responsibility at great cost to a government with limited motivation to get the job done. Of course, I may be wrong; I have no inside information. And I’d love to be proven in error by breaking news of their capture or execution. But published accounts paint an intriguing and frustrating picture.

To begin, bin Laden is presumed to have been in Afghanistan on 9/11 and to have fled that nation during the battle at Tora Bora in December of 2001. Gary Berntsen, who was the CIA officer in charge on the ground, told me that his request for Army Rangers to prevent bin Laden’s escape into Pakistan was denied, and sure enough, that’s where bin Laden went. Then came a period when the Bush administration was supposed to be pressing the search through means it couldn’t share publicly. But as time went by with no capture, the signs became more troubling.

[Click to continue reading Why this lifelong Republican may vote for Obama | Salon ]

Strange also how this Republican talking head is a long-time member of the so-called Liberal Media, but has no need to hide his long-term Republican bona fides. Almost as if Republican media is a given.

Palin Lies About Obama

Seth Anderson0 comment

As we noted earlier, Palin lied about Obama’s record in her speech last night, and the corporate media didn’t bother fact checking before repeating the lie. In fact, this line was touted as one of her best zingers.

In reporting on Gov. Sarah Palin’s September 4 speech at the Republican National Convention, numerous print media, including the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, Time Magazine, the Dallas Morning News, Reuters, and an article and a column by Debra Saunders in the San Francisco Chronicle, uncritically reported Palin’s claim that Sen. Barack Obama “is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate,” without noting that Obama has played key roles in the passage of reform legislation at both the federal and state levels. For example, Sen. John McCain, a co-sponsor of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, thanked Obama for his work on the bill.

Obama was a lead co-sponsor of that bill (S.2590), which sought to “require full disclosure of all entities and organizations receiving Federal funds” — an amount that approximately totals $1 trillion in federal grants, contracts, earmarks and loans. While signing the bill into law on September 26, 2006, Bush recognized Obama as a sponsor of the legislation, saying, “I want to thank the bill sponsors, Tom Coburn from Oklahoma, Tom Carper from Delaware, and Barack Obama from Illinois.” Moreover, in a press release upon Senate passage of the bill, the bill’s primary sponsor, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), referred to the legislation as the “Coburn-Obama Bill.” In media reports, the bill has also been referred to as the “Coburn-Obama” legislation or bill.

[There’s plenty more details at Media Matters – Media report Palin’s claim that Obama has not “authored … a single major law or reform” without noting laws he has passed]

No wonder newspaper circulation is falling – if one has to go to the web to get actual facts, why bother subscribing to a newspaper? What are the newspapers delivering? Press releases interspersed with advertising?

Bristol Palin and Campaign Narratives

Seth Anderson0 comment

The Orange Overlord1 has a couple of things to say about the Sarah and Bristol Palin kerfuffle.

Vincent Rossmeier of Salon: Do you think Barack Obama responded correctly to Sarah Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy?

Yeah, of course. It’s not his job to be digging into that. If the Republicans are going to be all high and mighty about people digging into the lives of candidates’ families, all I can do is laugh, given the treatment that Michelle Obama has been given by Republicans — maybe not John McCain proper, but every surrogate beneath him.

Ultimately, when it comes to Bristol Palin, the issue isn’t, oh well, she’s a bad girl. We’re progressives; we don’t care if she got pregnant. That’s between her and her family and she’s got to deal with it; and in fact, progressives believe in having the services available to make her life better and to help her in what’s going to be a very, very difficult journey ahead. The issue is, of course, that Sarah Palin is a strong supporter of abstinence-only education. Here we have a situation where they claim that abstinence-only will prevent teen pregnancy when her own daughter has gotten pregnant. There are legitimate policy questions that go beyond the fact of Bristol Palin to the kind of governor [Sarah Palin] would be, the way she would help govern this country were she the vice president. And I think that is obviously, legitimately fair game.

Salon: Do you think the Palin pick was a game changer, whether good or bad, and how do you think this will affect the election long-term?

There’s no doubt that it was a game changer. All you have to do is go to Daily Kos and see that we haven’t written about McCain in a week now, right? It’s a singular obsession with Palin. She’s the gift that keeps on giving. To me, it seems pretty obvious that McCain wanted [Tom] Ridge or [Joe] Lieberman but he’s too weak within his own party to get the candidate he wanted, so he had to go with someone to appease the right wing.

They saw that Obama was going to be able to rally the Clinton supporters with Hillary Clinton’s help. They probably saw Obama’s speech and saw how incredible and dynamic and how powerful it was and realized that a safe pick wasn’t going to give them any hope of victory in November so they had to shake things up. They threw a Hail Mary with Sarah Palin, they didn’t vet her, so they had no clue who she was. They saw that she was attractive and very popular in Alaska — remember, Alaska is actually a swing state. It was in play; Obama was competitive in the polls. So they locked down Alaska. And she’s clearly popular with the right and they’ve embraced her because of her radical right-wing views on the role of religion in government, and it completely, utterly, on that Friday, took Obama off the airwaves.

[Click to read more of How to build a vast left-wing conspiracy | Salon Books]

I never did pick up a copy of Crashing the Gate; maybe by 2012, I’ll be caught up enough on my reading.

The Orange Overlord continues:

Salon: The Palin nomination directed everyone’s attention away from Obama. So in that, at least, the selection was effective.

But it’s mind-boggling to me. In the middle of Labor Day weekend, I had the highest traffic day of my existence. This is higher traffic than the 2004 federal election. Higher traffic than the 2006 general election. Usually on long weekends, people disappear. They hang out with family and friends. No one wanted to do anything but [talk about] Sarah Palin.

Now, I don’t think she’s turning out the way they expected it; they expected people to be excited that there was a woman on a ticket and all that. Now people are thinking this was a gimmick and instead of putting country first, he went for someone who would actually knock Obama off the news cycle. So she was a news cycle pick. It bought them a day or two. But now that people are really starting to look into who she is, there are a lot of unpalatable things about her and her record, and I think it’s turning into a nightmare pick for them. Will she stay on the ticket? The Christian right loves her. They’ve decided she is practically the second coming.

Salon: Isn’t that a good thing for McCain?

It is a good thing for McCain, but it means they’ve completely abandoned the center and they’re not going to get any Hillary supporters out of it. We’re in an election where the number of Republicans is shrinking, the number of Democrats is growing and they cannot win on the base strategy alone. We can. For the first time, we can win on the base strategy. We’re not running that, but we could. They’re running a base strategy when Republicans are becoming an extinct species.

And you can’t get rid of her. To take somebody who’s been so warmly embraced by the Christian right and then to dump her for somebody who’s more palatable to the center? Talk about open warfare. It would be worse than having picked Lieberman from the start. To me, it’s fantastic, right? He’s boxed himself in, he can’t get out. So they’re left having to defend somebody. And let’s not forget another important point that I almost forgot because it’s so obvious, is that they’ve completely negated the experience argument. That was probably the only argument against Obama that had any salience.

Footnotes:
  1. aka Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, aka Kos, of Daily Kos [↩]

Poverty Pimp

Seth Anderson0 comment

The Wednesday night gang of thugs at the RNC kept sarcastically referring to Barack Obama’s service as a community organizer12. I puzzled over what was the implied meaning of the phrase in twitter discussions3, but I think billmon has teased out what the Rethuglicans meant:

It kept popping up in all the speeches tonight — Romney’s, Guiliani’s and of course Alaska Barbie’s:

I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a “community organizer,” except that you have actual responsibilities.

On the face of it, it’s a pretty weird repetitive theme. Obama’s done lots of stuff — teaching, state legislature, writing books, etc. — but “community organizer” seems like an odd one to fixate on. The words themselves have generally positive connotations, particularly that first one: everybody is in favor of “community” (as long as its their community).

Which is exactly the point, I think. Used the way the GOP speakers used the words tonight (i.e. with a sneer), community = ghetto and organizer = activist.

It essentially was a coded way of pointing out Obama’s work in, with and for the black community (see? even I’m doing it) on the South Side of Chicago. Also the fact that his work involved helping low-income people stand up for their legal rights, as opposed to a GOP-sanctioned “real” job like business owner or career military officer (or moose hunter.) They were trying to put Obama back on the same level as Jesse Jackson — i.e., the black protest candidate — and mocking him for it.

To cut right to the nasty, they were using “community organizer” as a euphemism for “poverty pimp.”

And, as a special bonus, to a GOP audience (country club division, at least) organizer = union. What could be worse than a black, radical activist union organizer from the South Side of the Chicago?

[Click to read more Daily Kos: billmon – Why the repeated attacks on “community organizers”?]

re-defeat bush
[re-defeat bush]

No word spoken at the RNC wasn’t approved by John McCain, don’t forget.

Footnotes:
  1. as Atrios points out, a key component to George Herbert Walker Bush’s Thousand Points of Life Inaugural Address speech in 1989 [↩]
  2. Said 41: I have spoken of a thousand points of light, of all the community organizations that are spread like stars throughout the Nation, doing good. We will work hand in hand, encouraging, sometimes leading, sometimes being led, rewarding. We will work on this in the White House, in the Cabinet agencies. I will go to the people and the programs that are the brighter points of light, and I will ask every member of my government to become involved. The old ideas are new again because they are not old, they are timeless: duty, sacrifice, commitment, and a patriotism that finds its expression in taking part and pitching in. [↩]
  3. join in, its fun! [↩]

Some Fact Checking of last nights speechifying

Seth Anderson1 Comment

The lie per sentence ratio of last night’s RNC speech-a-thon was pretty elevated, even for a political convention.

FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin “got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States.”

THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor’s election, and got 909 in her 1999 re-election race, for a total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes in 23 states and the District of Columbia where he was on the ballot during the 2008 presidential primaries.

[From Print Story: Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention – Yahoo! News]

or this one:

PALIN: “There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate.”

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

More on that topic from last February, if you are interested.
Lies from Mittens:

FORMER MASSACHUSETTS GOV. MITT ROMNEY: “We need change, all right — change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington — throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin.”

THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.

and the Alaskan Barbie again:

PALIN: “I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere.”

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a “bridge to nowhere.”

Media Matters for America has noted

during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign, Palin reportedly supported the proposal to build a bridge between Ketchikan, Alaska, and Gravina Island and suggested that Alaska’s congressional delegation should continue to try to procure funding for the project.

After reportedly expressing support for the bridge in a September 21, 2007, press release, Palin specifically cited the unwillingness of Congress to provide sufficient funds for the project — “[d]espite the work of our congressional delegation” — in explaining why she had “directed the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to look for the most fiscally responsible alternative for access to the Ketchikan airport and Gravina Island instead of proceeding any further with the proposed $398 million bridge”:

“Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer,” said Governor Palin. “Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island,” Governor Palin added. “Much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened.”

Digby publishs an email from “an Alaskan housewife” who purportedly knew Palin since 1992.

CLAIM VS FACT

•”Hockey mom”: true for a few years
•”PTA mom”: true years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since
•”NRA supporter”: absolutely true
•social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships
(said she did this because it was unconsitutional).
•pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.
•”Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation
•”Experienced”: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on
supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.
•political maverick: not at all
•gutsy: absolutely!
•open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.
•has a developed philosophy of public policy: no
•”a Greenie”: no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.
•fiscal conservative: not by my definition!
•pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.
•pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents
•pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla’s history.
•pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union doesn’t make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

No Shortage of Contrasts

Seth Anderson0 comment

Our eyes have not deceived us, the RNC is white, male and corpulent.

Of all these differences, the contrast in racial and ethnic demographics is perhaps most visible to viewers of the conventions, being held this year on consecutive weeks. The Republican gathering has more white delegates than in 2004, and more men as well.

According to polls of delegates conducted by The New York Times and CBS News, 93 percent of the Republican delegates are white (compared with 85 percent in 2004 and 89 percent in 2000), while 5 percent are Hispanic and 2 percent are black. The Democratic delegate pool in Denver, according to the survey, was 65 percent white, 23 percent black and 11 percent Hispanic, roughly the same as at other recent Democratic conventions.

The poll also found that men accounted for 68 percent of Republican delegates (compared with 57 percent in 2004) and about half the Democratic delegates.

[From Political Memo – Two Conventions With No Shortage of Contrasts – NYTimes.com]

The stately New York Times is too gentile to mention the other main difference, and the biggest cause of laughter in my focus group: Republicans attempting to dance, and failing. Yikes.

Putting Words in The Mouth of Palin

Seth Anderson0 comment

Fake, in other words. Fake, fake, fake.

There was a flutter of attention when McCain campaign manager Rick Davis told a group of Post reporters and editors yesterday that his team was having to rework the vice presidential acceptance speech because the original draft, prepared before Gov. Sarah Palin was chosen, was too “masculine.” While we all wondered to ourselves what might make a speech masculine or feminine, no one batted an eye at the underlying revelation: that the campaign was writing the nominee’s speech before knowing who the nominee would be.

Never mind the prehistoric days when a politician might be expected to write his or her own words; speechwriters have been around since long before television. But traditionally their job was to channel their bosses’ thoughts and ideas into poetry, or at least comprehensible English. Nowadays, apparently it’s naive to expect a speech even to reveal something of the essential views or character of the speaker. Instead, campaigns — not just the McCain campaign — draft their speeches with an eye to which demographic groups need to receive which messages, and then we in the media rate the speeches based on how well we think they hit those targets.

[From Putting Words in Palin’s Mouth – PostPartisan – Quick takes by The Post’s opinion writers]

Trained Attack Dogs
and why exactly was the original speech “too masculine”? What does that mean exactly? Were there dick jokes or something? What happened to the 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling? Guess it doesn’t apply to Republican speechifying.

McCain and His Masters

Seth Anderson0 comment

We mentioned this factoid yesterday, commenting that it reflected poorly upon John McCain that he wasn’t even in charge of his own campaign, and didn’t have the mental strength to stand up to nay-sayers in his own party. How would he perform against strong willed leaders like Vladimir Putin, for instance? I’d wager on Putin defeating Rush Limbaugh in a bar fight, or back alley brawl any day, but McCain couldn’t even stand up to the Vulgar Pig Boy, or “Mittens” Romney. Weak sauce, Johnny, weak sauce.

Only last month, friends say, Mr. McCain wanted to reach beyond his base and ask Mr. Lieberman to be his running mate; in that instance, though, party influence proved too strong, with many Republican officials and delegates insisting they would reject Mr. Lieberman because of his support for abortion rights and some gay rights laws.

[From Lieberman Highlights His Kinship With McCain – NYTimes.com]

According to Joe Sudbay of AMERICAblog, it was even more craven:

There’s more according to my sources in Connecticut (who have never steered me wrong). The word working its way through political circles in Connecticut is that John McCain actually called Joe Lieberman to ask him to be the GOP v.p. candidate. The “ask” was made. However, a revolt ensued, led by Mitt Romney and others, threatening a floor fight. That resulted in a second call a couple hours later to Lieberman from McCain pulling the offer.

There is so much in that little anecdote if my sources are accurate. First, it shows what a tool Lieberman is. Last night, Lieberman spoke at a convention where he’s actually vilified, yet he went anyway and flat out lied about Obama. More importantly, it shows what a wimp McCain is. He’s supposed to fight al Qaeda, but won’t stand up to the religious fanatics in his own party. Instead, McCain made an impulsive choice, Sarah Palin, who wasn’t vetted. McCain couldn’t have the v.p. he wanted. So, he was forced to pick someone he didn’t even know. Says a lot about John McCain’s willingness to gamble with America’s future.

Droopy Dog and the Old Timers

Seth Anderson0 comment

James Wolcott of Vanity Fair got sucked into watching Joe Lieberman perform soft-shoe in front of his new bestest friends:

Lieberman’s speech redefined unctuousness. He lubricated unctuousness with his own personal brand of smiling smarm. As a few bloggers have noted, this was a speech that didn’t mention President Bush (neither did Thompson’s, I believe) but used President Clinton as an applause line. It wasn’t much applause but it was more than he got when he praised McCain for trying to address thorny issues such as global warming, campaign finance, and immigration reform–issues that the Rush Limbaugh fans either consider bogus (global warming) or feel McCain was on the wrong side of (campaign finance, immigration). The reaction in the hall to Lieberman’s speech reminded me of the SCTV bit in which Love Boat’s Gavin MacLeod (Joe Flaherty) pays tribute to One Day at a Time’s Bonnie Franklin as her face is flashed on the big screen:

“I think she’s a helluva entertainer, folks–don’t you?”

Deathly silence.

Moving right along…

As the camera snapshotted the delegates during the Lieberman speech, it underscored what a tired, old congregation has been gathered, the Republicans never more looking like the Party of the Past, yesterday’s news. It’s bad enough listening to fake Dixieland, it’s worse having to look at it.

[Click to read more of James Wolcott’s Blog: vanityfair.com]

Other than Norm Coleman’s line1 that was tailor-made for Obama’s team to use as YouTube fodder2 , Whiny Joe’s shout-outs to the forbidden topics of global climate change and immigration were the most unintentionally funny moments of the RNC, so far.

Footnotes:
  1. “John McCain has a face that says yes” [↩]
  2. I could image YouTube ads such as “John McCain has a face that says yes…to corporate lobbyists [↩]

Michael Moore Responds to Joe Lieberman

Seth Anderson1 Comment

Funny really, Joe “Droopy Dog” Lieberman still is living back in 2004 when Michael Moore was a reliable foil to Republican crowds.

(Last night, during his primetime speech from the podium at the Republican National Convention, Senator Joe Lieberman made the following statement: “… if John McCain is just another partisan Republican, then I’m Michael Moore’s favorite Democrat. And I’m not. And I think you know that I’m not.“)

Dear Joe:

John McCain IS just another partisan Republican — so that must mean you ARE my favorite Democrat!

But how can you be my favorite Democrat when you are no longer a Democrat? This is very confusing. I was in the middle of taking out the garbage and, all of a sudden, there you were, trash-talking me in front of thousands of cheering (mostly) white people on TV.

What is it with you and your Republican friends always bringing me up? Can’t you stop thinking about me? It’s starting to sound like a fetish! Stop it! Four years ago at the last Republican Convention, John McCain, in his convention speech, also trashed me, calling me a “disingenuous filmmaker” because I called all of you out in “Fahrenheit 9/11.” The crowd at Madison Square Garden went berserk. McCain didn’t know I was sitting above him in the press box, and the crowd wouldn’t stop screaming at me, so I flashed them the “Big L” loser sign and, well, nine of New York’s finest had to help me get out of there alive.

With all the problems facing the world, why is valuable time being wasted reviewing a movie and attacking a filmmaker? And now you, Joe, tonight. Do you think you’re energizing the “base” by attacking me? Better take a look at the scoreboard. While your side has spent years trying to make me the boogeyman, let’s see how it’s worked:

[From MichaelMoore.com : Michael Moore Responds to Joe Lieberman]

Lieberman slipped and called himself a Democrat a few times last night, but nobody believed Whiny Joe.

Mr. Moore continues:

Putting me in your convention speeches, attacking me nonstop on talk radio and Fox News — and thinking that this helps you — shows just how out of touch you all are.

Two-thirds of the country agree with my position on the war, two-thirds of the country agree with my position on a single-payer universal health care system, two-thirds believe in some form of gun control — name the documentary, pick the issue, and the American public agrees with Michael Moore. So get over me, will ya? You’re only hurting yourself. And I’ve got to finish taking out the garbage.

“… if John McCain is just another partisan Republican, then I’m Michael Moore’s favorite Democrat. And I’m not. And I think you know that I’m not.” Now click your heels together and say, “There’s no place like home on the Republican minority side of the aisle.”

Hatred For The American Government

swanksalot2 Comments

Simply imagine the uproar if an associate of Barack Obama voiced such an opinion of the United States – the gnashing of teeth could be heard as far away as the moon.

The founder of the Alaska Independence Party — a group that has been courted over the years by Sarah Palin, and one her husband was a member of for roughly seven years — once professed his “hatred for the American government” and cursed the American flag as a “damn flag.”

The AIP founder, Joe Vogler, made the comments in 1991, in an interview that’s now housed at the Oral History Program in the Rasmuson Library at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

“The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government,” Vogler said in the interview, in which he talked extensively about his desire for Alaskan secession, the key goal of the AIP.

“And I won’t be buried under their damn flag,” Vogler continued in the interview, which also touched on his disappointment with the American judicial system. “I’ll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.”

At another point, Volger advocated renouncing allegiance to the United States. In the course of denouncing Federal regulation over land, he said:

“And then you get mad. And you say, the hell with them. And you renounce allegiance, and you pledge your efforts, your effects, your honor, your life to Alaska.”

[From TPM Election Central | Talking Points Memo | Founder Of Group Palin Courted Professed “Hatred For The American Government”; Cursed “Damn Flag”]

Simply imagine if somebody, like a preacher at the church Obama attended, for instance1, claimed to hate America and despise the American flag. You wouldn’t even hear of any more hurricane news, the coverage would be so vigorous. However, since Sarah Palin is a Republican, such connections are not worthy of much discussion.

If you want to hear the audio of Joe Vogler, click here [MP3] Too bad there isn’t any video of the event.

Footnotes:
  1. Reverend Jeremiah Wright, remember him? [↩]

A roll-the-dice commander

Seth Anderson2 Comments

Yikes, when even the Financial Times excoriates John McCain and his damn-the-torpedos mentality, one has to wonder.

Mr McCain will not run a “safe” foreign policy. He adores rolling the dice. His decision to select Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate typifies the man. It is a big risk. It could turn out to be inspired. Or it might turn out to be a disaster. But it is not “safe”.

Mr McCain approaches international affairs in the same spirit. His instinct is always to take the radical option and to march towards the sound of gunfire.

…

The Georgian crisis also looks, at first sight, like a vindication for Mr McCain. He has been a longstanding critic of the Russian government. He saw the crisis in Georgia coming a long time ago.

When I visited Georgia last April I discovered that President Mikheil Saakashvili counted Mr McCain as one of his closest friends and allies. Mr Saakashvili told me (with a laugh) that the South Ossetians – whose rebel enclave he later attacked, with such disastrous consequences – had even shot a missile at a helicopter carrying Cindy McCain, the Senator’s wife. And the Georgian president told me proudly that Mr McCain had given him a gift – a bullet-proof vest.

Even at the time, this struck me as an ambiguous present. Was it saying, I’m behind you all the way; or was it saying, best of luck, I’ll be cheering for you – from a safe distance? Now that Georgia has been so severely mauled by Russia, the dangerous ambiguities in the policies pushed by Mr McCain and the Bush administration are even clearer. The Georgians were flattered, hugged and trained by the Americans. But when the Russian tanks rolled in, there was little the west could do.

Mr McCain says that President Teddy Roosevelt is one of his heroes. But Mr McCain’s proclamation in the aftermath of the Russia’s invasion – that “we are all Georgians now” – was the opposite of Roosevelt’s famous advice to “speak softly and carry a big stick”. It was tough talk, with very little to back it up.

Mr McCain’s failure to spell out the implications of his strong rhetorical support for Georgia may mean that he has failed to think things through – or just that he does not want to alarm voters. But the Republican needs to answer some difficult questions.

Is the US really prepared to fight Russia to protect Georgia and Ukraine – as Mr McCain’s firm support for swift Nato membership for these countries implies? Are we entering a new cold war, as his determination to isolate Russia suggests? If the tough talk is not backed up by tough action, what does that do to American credibility?

Mr McCain’s instinct certainly is to confront Russia – and indeed China. Even before the conflict in Georgia, he was arguing for throwing Russia out of the Group of Eight and forming a new League of Democracies.

Mr McCain’s confrontational instincts are even more to the fore when it comes to Iran. He has said that the only thing worse than a war with Iran would be a nuclear-armed Iran. Taken at face value – and given what we know of Iran’s nuclear programme – that sounds like a commitment to attack Iran within the first term of a McCain presidency.

[From FT.com / Columnists / Gideon Rachman – McCain: A roll-the-dice commander]

I don’t the world’s leaders are very gung-ho for a McCain presidency: too much is at stake for the United States to be helmed by a belligerent and impetuous Commander in Chief.

Half-Assed Vetting Process

Seth Anderson2 Comments

John McCain and his impulsiveness is not what the country needs. He couldn’t even wait until the RNC finished vetting Sarah Palin before announcing her as his VP. Not good judgement, not good judgement at all.

A series of disclosures about Gov. Sarah Palin, Senator John McCain’s choice as running mate, called into question on Monday how thoroughly Mr. McCain had examined her background before putting her on the Republican presidential ticket.

On Monday morning, Ms. Palin and her husband, Todd, issued a statement saying that their 17-year-old unmarried daughter, Bristol, was five months pregnant and that she intended to marry the father.

Among other less attention-grabbing news of the day: it was learned that Ms. Palin now has a private lawyer in a legislative ethics investigation in Alaska into whether she abused her power in dismissing the state’s public safety commissioner; that she was a member for two years in the 1990s of the Alaska Independence Party, which has at times sought a vote on whether the state should secede; and that Mr. Palin was arrested 22 years ago on a drunken-driving charge.

Aides to Mr. McCain said they had a team on the ground in Alaska now to look more thoroughly into Ms. Palin’s background. A Republican with ties to the campaign said the team assigned to vet Ms. Palin in Alaska had not arrived there until Thursday, a day before Mr. McCain stunned the political world with his vice-presidential choice. The campaign was still calling Republican operatives as late as Sunday night asking them to go to Alaska to deal with the unexpected candidacy of Ms. Palin.

[From Disclosures on Palin Raise Questions on Vetting Process – NYTimes.com]

One day before announcing her, and moments after meeting her the first time? That’s pretty pathetic.

Evilution
[Evilution, Seattle, Washington]

Also worth noting1 is that John McCain wanted to select Joe Lieberman2 but was told by his bosses, Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh, that an wasn’t acceptable choice. Who is really making the decisions in the McCain campaign? Who would make the decisions if by some weird circumstance3 McCain snuck into the White House? Can the country afford another 4 years of a Karl Rove/Rush Limbaugh presidency?

Up until midweek last week, some 48 to 72 hours before Mr. McCain introduced Ms. Palin at a Friday rally in Dayton, Ohio, Mr. McCain was still holding out the hope that he could choose a good friend, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, a Republican close to the campaign. Mr. McCain had also been interested in another favorite, former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania.

But both men favor abortion rights, anathema to the Christian conservatives who make up a crucial base of the Republican Party. As word leaked out that Mr. McCain was seriously considering the men, the campaign was bombarded by outrage from influential conservatives who predicted an explosive floor fight at the convention and vowed rejection of Mr. Ridge or Mr. Lieberman by the delegates.

Perhaps more important, several Republicans said, Mr. McCain was getting advice that if he did not do something to shake up the race, his campaign would be stuck on a potentially losing trajectory.

With time running out — and as Mr. McCain discarded two safer choices, Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota and former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, as too predictable — he turned to Ms. Palin. He had his first face-to-face interview with her on Thursday and offered her the job moments later. Advisers to Mr. Pawlenty and another of the finalists on Mr. McCain’s list described an intensive vetting process for those candidates that lasted one to two months.

“They didn’t seriously consider her until four or five days from the time she was picked, before she was asked, maybe the Thursday or Friday before,” said a Republican close to the campaign. “This was really kind of rushed at the end, because John didn’t get what he wanted. He wanted to do Joe or Ridge.”

Dont Bring Yer Guns to Town
[Don’t Bring Yer Guns to Ketchikan, Alaska, at least to Trident Seafoods]

Footnotes:
  1. explicitly, that is, we did mention this in passing previously [↩]
  2. Whiny Joe, the former Democrat who has since been married to John McCain – a civil union, of course [↩]
  3. Diebold related perhaps [↩]