Remember, Scarborough was a Republican Congressman. This video is dated in the period between McCain confirming he wasn't picking Pawlenty and before Palin was picked. Pat Buchanan gives her a couple good jabs too.
Ouch.
2008-09-01
Palin the Tax Hiker
Did McCain know Palin supported Obama's $1000 energy rebate? Did McCain know Palin passed a huge tax increase that took the form of a windfall profits tax on the oil companies?
As for the windfall profits tax on the oil companies, I found a better writeup somewhere, but it's lost into the Blog Ether. This, form the Seattle Times, will have to do:
Earlier this month, Gov. Palin praised parts of Obama's energy plan. The link to the press release was not working as of 12:30 p.m. ET. But Google saves everything.Everyone loves Obama... until they're getting paid to hate him.
Palin Pleased with Obama's Energy Plan
August 4, 2008, Fairbanks, Alaska - Governor Sarah Palin today responded to the energy plan put forward by the presumptive Democratic nominee for President, Illinois Senator Barack Obama.
"I am pleased to see Senator Obama acknowledge the huge potential Alaska's natural gas reserves represent in terms of clean energy and sound jobs," Governor Palin said. "The steps taken by the Alaska State Legislature this past week demonstrate that we are ready, willing and able to supply the energy our nation needs."
...
Governor Palin also acknowledged the Senator's proposal to offer $1,000 rebates to those struggling with the high cost of energy.
"We in Alaska feel that crunch and are taking steps to address it right here at home," Governor Palin said. "This is a tool that must be on the table to buy us time until our long-term energy plans can be put into place. We have already enjoyed the support of Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, and it is gratifying to see Senator Obama get on board."
As for the windfall profits tax on the oil companies, I found a better writeup somewhere, but it's lost into the Blog Ether. This, form the Seattle Times, will have to do:
The Norquist tax-jihadist crowd can't be happy about this, can they?Republicans in Congress this June united to defeat a proposed windfall tax on oil companies, deriding it as a bad idea that would discourage investment in U.S. oil exploration.
Things worked out far differently in the GOP stronghold of Alaska, a state whose economic fate is closely tied to the oil industry.
Over the opposition of oil companies, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Alaska's Legislature last year approved a major increase in taxes on the oil industry -- a step that has generated stunning new wealth for the state as oil prices soared.
Anchorage on Bridge to Nowhere
More from the ADN on Palin. This one is particularly touching. Palin feels bad that the Bridge-to-Nowhere Alaskans were being called "nowhere."
But Palin was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it.
The Alaska governor campaigned in 2006 on a build-the-bridge platform, telling Ketchikan residents she felt their pain when politicians called them "nowhere." They're still feeling pain today in Ketchikan, over Palin's subsequent decision to use the bridge funds for other projects -- and over the timing of her announcement, which they say came in a pre-dawn press release that seemed aimed at national news deadlines.
"I think that's when the campaign for national office began," said Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein on Saturday.
Awwwww. What a precious little liar she is.
It's also hilarious that although the bridge itself was cancelled, she still used all the money. Net effect of her "reform" (even if it existed) to US Taxpayer? Zero.
McCain doesn't haveJudgement, and Neither does Palin
It turns out that not only is McCain temperamentally unfit for the job of President, Palin's judgment and temperament are not equal to the task either, if her actions surrounding delivery are any measure of the woman. This all comes from details presented in an Alaska Daily News article from the time:
Jesus. A 44 year old woman, in premature labor, with a baby that has known genetic defects, gets on a plan rather than delivering in Texas. Really. Even if you have the absolute most charitable interpretation of these events, it still shows her judgment to be fatally flawed - even when her own health and the health of her new child were at risk.She claims she flew from Texas to Anchorage after she was having contractions and leaking amniotic fluid. This simply doesn't make sense. I am a physician and I deliver babies (my last delivery was about 36 hours ago).
...
There is very little chance that a 44 year old woman who was pregnant with her fifth child would last 8 hours with ruptured membranes and contractions. Especially when the baby was approximately 4 weeks early; She would have delivered this baby on the plane.
The article states the following events (in Alaska time):
Thursday (April 17th, 2008?):
1AM - Palin (in Texas) calls her doctor (in Alaska) saying she is leaking fluid but only contracting occasionally. "Palin said she felt fine but had leaked amniotic fluid and also felt some contractions that seemed different from the false labor she had been having for months."Playing the back seat doctor here, my advice would have been get in the car and go to the nearest hospital with a maternity ward. This is called Premature Preterm Rupture of Membranes (PPROM) and it is dangerous.
10:30pm - Palin arrives in Anchorage (approximately 22 hours after membranes ruptured, you start to get worried at 12 hours).
11:30pm - Palin checks into Mat-Su regional in Wasilla, Alaska. (It seems kind of strange that she wouldn't have gone to Providence in Anchorage which has the highest level maternity care in the state. You would want a child with genetic defects to be delivered in a bigger place with more services available.)
Friday (April 18th?):
6:30am - Child is born. It sounds like she was about 36 weeks along. She was induced to deliver. That makes it seem as if she really had ruptured her amniotic sack, otherwise you would try to stop labor with medications....
That is the important point. It is poor judgment to get on a plane when you are pregnant and leaking amniotic fluid. If she knew her child had this disorder and got on a plane with leaking amniotic fluid, then she shows incredibly poor judgment.
McCain's Temperament - Unvetted Pick for VP
The pick of Sarah Palin confirms what you had been growing to suspect about McCain's temperament. He's reckless. He's a gambler. He's unsteady.
First, we've got all the backstory about McCain's blowups, wherein other Republicans say McCain acted aggressively in inappropriate situations. He roughed up a Sandinista. He screamed "Fuck You" to Senator Cornyn over the immigration battle. In fact, here's a list from the College Conservative Movement of the Top 10 McCain Temper Explosions.
Second, factor in the gambling habit of Senator McCain, a man who has been known to play for 14 hours at a time and for thousands of dollars. Craps is a game where skill plays no part. It is a game of irrationality. You will always lose to the house, and yet he plays compulsively. It is a game that psychologically rewards the double-down, and that is exactly what McCain has done with the choice of Sarah Palin. He doubled-down, and then threw snake-eyes.
McCain himself admits that he is often hasty:
Now we've got the additional data point of his VP pick Palin - by all accounts an unvetted, hasty choice, and one that he was forced to adopt. Going into the day of decision, McCain still had his heart set on Leiberman, but was vetoed by his advisers who told him with certainty that there would be a revolt at the convention if his pick were Pro-Choice. Pawlenty and Romney would be seen as status-quo, safe Republican choices, and McCain felt the need to gamble. He may, in fact, be right. A hail-mary, election-changing vice presidential pick may have been his only chance to win... but I doubt it. He could have gone safe and still won. Now it all rides on his ability to throw the dice with luck - even when the decision is who will lead a war-time America.
It turns out the McCain Camp didn't even search the Wasilla newspaper archives.
He picked her after meeting her twice, one of which was a cell phone "interview," and yet he went on to say she was his "partner and soulmate." Soulmate is laying it on a little thick, don't you think? Does Cindy know? Is he trading up again?
Anonymous people inside his campaign claim she was fully vetted, but Andrew Halcro, an Alaska Republican, says otherwise:
Of course, the campaign has a vested interest in appearing to have fully vetted the pick. Then again, reality may get in the way of that spin:
In fact, before publishing this post, I got another tidbit on the vetting from Josh Marshall:
First, we've got all the backstory about McCain's blowups, wherein other Republicans say McCain acted aggressively in inappropriate situations. He roughed up a Sandinista. He screamed "Fuck You" to Senator Cornyn over the immigration battle. In fact, here's a list from the College Conservative Movement of the Top 10 McCain Temper Explosions.
Second, factor in the gambling habit of Senator McCain, a man who has been known to play for 14 hours at a time and for thousands of dollars. Craps is a game where skill plays no part. It is a game of irrationality. You will always lose to the house, and yet he plays compulsively. It is a game that psychologically rewards the double-down, and that is exactly what McCain has done with the choice of Sarah Palin. He doubled-down, and then threw snake-eyes.
McCain himself admits that he is often hasty:
At the very least, the process [to select Palin] reflects Mr. McCain’s history of making fast, instinctive and sometimes risky decisions. “I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can,” Mr. McCain wrote, with his top adviser Mark Salter, in his 2002 book, “Worth the Fighting For.” “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”That kind of decision making is acceptable, if not desirable in a Senator. It is flatly unacceptable in a President. Especially so when you add that McCain's will openly joke about starting wars, and finding ways to kill Iranians (whether with Bombs of Cigarettes).
Now we've got the additional data point of his VP pick Palin - by all accounts an unvetted, hasty choice, and one that he was forced to adopt. Going into the day of decision, McCain still had his heart set on Leiberman, but was vetoed by his advisers who told him with certainty that there would be a revolt at the convention if his pick were Pro-Choice. Pawlenty and Romney would be seen as status-quo, safe Republican choices, and McCain felt the need to gamble. He may, in fact, be right. A hail-mary, election-changing vice presidential pick may have been his only chance to win... but I doubt it. He could have gone safe and still won. Now it all rides on his ability to throw the dice with luck - even when the decision is who will lead a war-time America.
It turns out the McCain Camp didn't even search the Wasilla newspaper archives.
He picked her after meeting her twice, one of which was a cell phone "interview," and yet he went on to say she was his "partner and soulmate." Soulmate is laying it on a little thick, don't you think? Does Cindy know? Is he trading up again?
Anonymous people inside his campaign claim she was fully vetted, but Andrew Halcro, an Alaska Republican, says otherwise:
The campaign of John McCain has sent a staff of eight people into Alaska to conduct background checks and vetting on Governor Sarah Palin. Word is they have have eight rooms reserved at a Wasilla hotel.Sending people to vet the VP after you announce the pick. That is being a maverick, alright.
Of course, the campaign has a vested interest in appearing to have fully vetted the pick. Then again, reality may get in the way of that spin:
There clearly was not a real vetting done on Sarah Palin. You get an idea of Obama's vetting when Tim Kaine says that Obama's vetters asked him what his high school girlfriend's middle name was, then came back and told him "She says she was never your girlfriend." It is supposed to be an intensive process, reflecting your - not just a quick googling. This stuff will be trickling out for days.Phillips has been active in the Ted Stevens re-election steering committee and remains in close touch with Sen. Lisa Murkowski and other party leaders, and she said nobody had heard anything about McCain's people doing research on his prospective running mate.
"We're not a very big state. People I talk to would have heard something."
In fact, before publishing this post, I got another tidbit on the vetting from Josh Marshall:
...George Stephanopoulos appears to have more. George says the McCainers are sending a "rapid response team of about ten operatives that includes lawyers" to do the aforementioned deeper vet. A lot of attention is being given to Gov. Palin's daughter's situation. The much bigger deal is the expanding trooper-gate investigation, the fact that Palin lied in her Friday speech about her purported opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere, her apparent former membership in the secessionist Alaska Independence Party, and more. Individually, you can come to your own judgment about how consequential these stories are. What they show pretty clearly now -- in addition to the news that the McCain campaign is only now sending in a vetting team -- is that John McCain didn't do any serious vetting of Palin before he invited her to join his ticket and, he hopes, become Vice President of the United States.McCain's temperament is just not suited to this job. We can't have a President that thinks he can beat the odds. We need a President that stays cool.
Conservative Blog Check-in... non-Palin version.
First, in a call-to-arms diary, by jdripper, called Wake Up GOP, Or Else...
Second:
Don't worry, though, Erik. Just because they want to effect the genesis of another storyline about McCain's resurgence of positivity, that doesn't mean they have to stay that way. They'll go negative again soon enough.
He invaded Iraq and Tommy Franks with 140,000 men conquered another country. Anyone reading this are you aware that Tommy Franks war plans and the execution of them are now being taught in every military school on this planet. After making a bad choice when he replaced Tommy Franks President Bush corrected that and named David Petraeus as the new commander. The Iraq war is now won.Oy. " The Iraq War is now won." These people are either dangerously incompetent, or dangerously rosy-eyed. This is the same stupid Pollyanna thinking that got us into this damned war. "Iraq will be an ally of Israel. The Sunnis and Shiites have never had a history of violence. The Shiite dominated government will be a bulwark against Iran." Fairy tales, all of it. And then, to top it off, we were told that the war was going badly because we at home weren't cheering hard enough. The TinkerBell Strategy. Oy.
Second:
BREAKING: Convention Back On?Well, sure. This was the other strategy available to them - the one that I mentioned a month ago. First, through the summer when "no one pays attention," go heinously negative on Obama. Then reclaim your maverick, reform/change mantle at the convention for the start of the general election with a "clean campaign." Cynical, but it just might work. Just like with Palin.
The GOP Convention may very well get back on. Rumors are floating around the XCEL Center that the convention may be geared back up a few notches after Gustav came in weaker than expected.
Here, though, is what some of the behind the scenes people are bristling about: The McCain Campaign has ordered all punches against the Obama campaign taken out of speeches for the entire convention duration.
...Nice guys finish last, Senator McCain.
Don't worry, though, Erik. Just because they want to effect the genesis of another storyline about McCain's resurgence of positivity, that doesn't mean they have to stay that way. They'll go negative again soon enough.
2008-08-30
Palin Reaction from Conservatives
Sullivan, ObamaCon:
No one on McCain's staff even argues she's ready to take over, or even close to it. It's also silly to believe that only by taking this massive gamble on a total unknown could McCain have a chance. He's been running pretty even with Obama until very recently. This pick is an enmorous risk for his campaign and an even more enormous risk for the country.After the last eight years, do we really want a president who takes massive gambles, consulting with a tiny core of loyalists, without thinking through the consequences, and who hires unknown and untested people to run a government already badly mismanaged because they help his political coalition.
This is the third term of Goerge W. Bush - with less caution.
Yes.
Charlie Black, McCain's lobbyist extraordinaire says:
"She’s going to learn national security at the foot of the master for the next four years, and most doctors think that he’ll be around at least that long"
Oy!
Steve Bennen accumulates conservative reaction:
It's probably fair to say most sensible people would find it tough to defend John McCain's choice of running mates, but I've been genuinely curious to see how Republicans respond to yesterday's Sarah Palin announcement. I don't mean campaign surrogates or Fox News personalities, who don't have a choice; I mean more traditional Republican voices who actually have to consider this decision on the merits (or lack thereof).
* Charles Krauthammer: "The Palin selection completely undercuts the argument about Obama's inexperience and readiness to lead.... To gratuitously undercut the remarkably successful 'Is he ready to lead' line of attack seems near suicidal."
* Noah Millman, presenting a defense for Palin: "I realize, of course, that she's totally unqualified to be President at this point in time. If McCain were to die in February 2009, I hope Palin would have the good sense to appoint someone who is more ready to be President to be her Vice President, on the understanding that she would then resign and be appointed Vice President by her successor."
* Ramesh Ponnuru called it "tokenism," adding, "Can anyone say with a straight face that Palin would have gotten picked if she were a man?"
* David Frum: "The longer I think about it, the less well this selection sits with me. And I increasingly doubt that it will prove good politics. The Palin choice looks cynical.... It's a wild gamble, undertaken by our oldest ever first-time candidate for president in hopes of changing the board of this election campaign. Maybe it will work. But maybe (and at least as likely) it will reinforce a theme that I'd be pounding home if I were the Obama campaign: that it's John McCain for all his white hair who represents the risky choice, while it is Barack Obama who offers cautious, steady, predictable governance.... If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?"
* Kathryn Jean Lopez: "As much as I loathe Obama-Biden, I can't in good conscience vote for a McCain-Palin ticket. Palin has absolutely no experience in foreign affairs. Considering both McCain's advanced age and the state of the world today, it is essential that the veep be exceedingly qualified to assume the office of president. I simply don't have any confidence in Palin's ability to deal effectively with Iran, Russia, China, etc." [Update: Lopez was quoting an email, not expressing her actual views. My apologies.]
* Mark Halperin: "On the face of it, McCain has failed the ultimate test that any presidential candidate must face in picking a running mate: selecting someone who is unambiguously qualified to be president."
The phrase "jump the shark" keeps coming to mind.
Ouch.
The Current Buchanan
First, Pat Buchanan's his response to the Obama nomination acceptance speech:
BUCHANAN: “I stand with Obama! It was a genuinely outstanding speech, it was magnificent. I saw Cuomo’s speech, I saw Kennedy in ‘80, I even saw Douglas MacArthur, I saw MLK; this is the greatest convention speech and probably the most important because unlike Cuomo and the others, this was an acceptance speech, this came out of the heart of America, and he went right at the heart of America. This wasn’t a liberal speech at all. This is a deeply, deeply centrist speech. It had wit, it had humor, and when he used the needle on McCain, he stuck it into McCain and it was funny. It was Kennedy’s speech in ‘80. ”About Sarah Palin, his ardent supporter back in the day:
I like the new Buchanan better than the old. He's McCain in reverse, because he no longer has Republican political ambitions.Biggest political gamble I believe just about in American political history...that is not hyberbole. I can think of no choice of VP that approaches this.
Palin and Her Lack of Interest
You wouldn't expect McCain's VP pick would be as experienced in foreign policy as Joe Biden, who is a walking encyclopedia of long-winded expertise and opinion. Heck, maybe a VP pick doesn't need to have any foreign policy experience - generally a problem for governors.
But Palin doesn't even seem to be interested in Foreign Policy. After four long years of the Iraq War, she still doesn't think she's paid enough attention to have opinions. She's just "been too focused on her state." As if Alaskans weren't also being asked to serve and sacrifice.
Salon writes:
But Palin doesn't even seem to be interested in Foreign Policy. After four long years of the Iraq War, she still doesn't think she's paid enough attention to have opinions. She's just "been too focused on her state." As if Alaskans weren't also being asked to serve and sacrifice.
Salon writes:
You would think that a candidate for VP, someone just one 72-year-old, cancer-ridden heartbeat from the Presidency, would at least have a record of being interested in foreign policy. Instead, she actively avoids it.A clip search doesn't show any substantive comments from Palin about Iraq during her short term as governor of Alaska, in 2007 or 2008, or at any point prior to that. That includes instances when she was specifically asked about the war.
In an interview with Alaska Business Monthly shortly after she took office in 2007, Palin was asked about the upcoming surge. She said she hadn't thought about it. "I've been so focused on state government, I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq," she said. "I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe."
Seven months into the surge, she still either had not formed any opinion on the surge or the war or just wasn't sharing. "I'm not here to judge the idea of withdrawing, or the timeline," she said in a teleconference interview with reporters during a July 2007 visit with Alaska National Guard troops stationed in Kuwait. "I'm not going to judge even the surge. I'm here to find out what Alaskans need of me as their governor."
Palin and Buchanan
Sarah Palin heard Buchanan's infamous Culture War speech, and she was right there with him. In fact, he called her a "brigadier" for him. Indeed:
That's a hell of a speech. That speech is reflective of the Republican Party declaring war on half the country, who for the most part just want to be left alone, and treated equally. "Fags" are not the enemy. No American should be made to feel like an enemy because of their sexuality, their race, or their religion.
Buchanan has his own page on the website of the Anti-Defamation League, which says he has "racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel and anti-immigrant views" and offers quotes going back well before 1996, including his 1990 description of Capitol Hill as "Israeli-occupied territory."This is the speech that she was right along side him for:
That's a hell of a speech. That speech is reflective of the Republican Party declaring war on half the country, who for the most part just want to be left alone, and treated equally. "Fags" are not the enemy. No American should be made to feel like an enemy because of their sexuality, their race, or their religion.
Republicans for Identity Politics
Sarah Palin:
Talk about a long bomb of a pick.
“It was rightfully noted in Denver this week that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all!”This exact form of identity politics is exactly what the GOP has always said is bad for the individual, and bad for America. You could pile quotes about Hilary Clinton from the right wing pundits into a staggering tower. "Vote for me because I have ovaries," would feature prominently.
Talk about a long bomb of a pick.
McCain's Taste in Women
Some facts:
Is this going to be called sexist?
- McCain's wife is a beauty pageant winner
- McCain's running mate is a beauty pageant winner.
- McCain's first wife was a successful bathing suit model until a disfiguring accident.
Is this going to be called sexist?
Palin Wants Polar Bear Off Endangered Species List
These guys shouldn't be considered endangered, eh?
There you go, Palin. That's what Polar Bears think of you.
There you go, Palin. That's what Polar Bears think of you.
Palin did NOT Oppose Bridge to Nowhere
So, in her initial pitch, she said that she was against that infamous Alaskan Bridge to Nowhere. This seemed weird to me, since it was the congress critters that put it in the budget, so I started checking it out. Here's her quote from the announcement:
So, she was for the bridge when she thought Ted Stevens and Don Young, bribed Republican politicians that they are, could get them the cool $250 million without drawing attention. It was only when the Democrats shined the light on them that she flipped and tried to pretend that she had said "thanks, but no thanks."
She flat out lied in her first speech. The introduction to the nation of this political unknown! Talk about a hail mary.
I told Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that bridge to nowhere.Unsurprisingly, this is flatly not true. Instead, she only voiced opposition when it was clearly a political loser and she was looking to higher office. The best quote proving this is the first, but others follow:
5. Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?or:Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now--while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist. Anchorage Daily News October 22, 2006
She cited the widespread negative attention focused on the Gravina Island crossing project. 'We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative,' Palin said." Ketchikan Daily News 9/28/06or:
People across the nation struggle with the idea of building a bridge because they’ve been under these misperceptions about the bridge and the purpose,' said Palin, who described the link as the Ketchikan area’s potential for expansion and growth. Ketchikan Daily News 8/8/06One of the keys to understanding this is that line about getting the bridge done while their "Congressional delegation is strong." In other words, let's get this under the radar before we lose our majority in the coming midterms. Furthermore, the Alaska Republican delegation in particular is corrupt to the bone - perhaps the most corrupt Republicans that haven't been thrown in prison yet.
So, she was for the bridge when she thought Ted Stevens and Don Young, bribed Republican politicians that they are, could get them the cool $250 million without drawing attention. It was only when the Democrats shined the light on them that she flipped and tried to pretend that she had said "thanks, but no thanks."
She flat out lied in her first speech. The introduction to the nation of this political unknown! Talk about a hail mary.
2008-08-28
Summer Melt
There's that mythical northwest passage opening up. Despite last winter's heavy snow and freeze, we're still on track for record ice loss. I'm sure this evidence will convince the deniers, right? They did send around all those triumphant e-mails crowing about how much ice there was back in February, so I'm sure they're following developments closely. I'll hold my breath. Don't disappoint me GlobalWarmingHoax.net, or you'll have my suffocation on your conscience!
Americans Wont Work for $50/hr!
How is this not the ballgame? I remember seeing this back during the primaries and thinking, "my God. That was the most insulting thing I have ever heard in my life. He thinks any American would rather be homeless or on welfare than do a menial task for $50/hr? My. God. If the immigration thing hadn't killed him already, this would." See how right I was?
The man has had servants his entire life. He's the son and grandson of Admirals. He was provided for by the Navy until he married a bear heiress. It makes perfect sense that he wouldn't have any idea about the lives of real Americans.
Brits Disapprove of McCain's Reckless Georgia Reaction
The WaPo reports:
Sen. John McCain has repeatedly proclaimed that it is time to kick Russia out of the "Group of Eight" organization of industrial powers, even before Russia's recent conflict with Georgia. But the idea has not been embraced by many foreign policy experts, who tend to view it as needlessly provocative.The Brits want Obama, just like everyone else in the world except those who thrive on division, like Al Qaeda. They see him as reckless, shooting from the hip. So does everyone else.
Today, the top diplomat of one of the U.S.'s closest allies, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband, weighed in, calling the notion "knee-jerk," though he did not mention McCain's name.
In a tough speech delivered in Kiev, Ukraine, Miliband said Russia will face consequences for its actions in Georgia. But he added: "In all international institutions, we need to review our relations with Russia. I do not apologize for rejecting knee-jerk calls for Russia to be expelled from the G8, or for EU-Russia or NATO-Russia relations to be broken. But we do need to examine the nature, depth and breadth of relations with Russia."
2008-08-27
McCain Loses Tapper!
Jake Tapper, a journalist at ABC referenced favorably and frequently by Rush Limbaugh, has had enough of John McCain's lies:
We in the media have given a lot of airtime to the TV ads of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., this week, starring as they do Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY.
There's been evidence emerging that McCain's campaign isn't really running these ads anywhere, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group.
“These were basically video press releases,” CMAG’s Evan Tracey tells the Wall Street Journal.
OK, so that's kind of dishonest of the McCain campaign.
Today's new McCain ad -- "Tiny," which you can watch HERE -- crosses a new line into dishonesty, however, beyond whether or not it's actually airing anywhere.
The script reads; "Iran. Radical Islamic government. Known sponsors of terrorism. Developing nuclear capabilities to 'generate power' but threatening to eliminate Israel.
"Obama says Iran is a 'tiny' country, 'doesn't pose a serious threat,'" the ad continues. "Terrorism, destroying Israel, those aren't 'serious threats'? Obama -- dangerously unprepared to be president."
This is a dishonest representation of Obama's words.
On May 18, on Pendelton, Oregon, Obama said that "strong countries and strong Presidents talk to their adversaries. That's what Kennedy did with Khrushchev. That's what Reagan did with Gorbachev. That's what Nixon did with Mao. I mean think about it. Iran, Cuba, Venezuela -- these countries are tiny compared to the Soviet Union. They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us. And yet we were willing to talk to the Soviet Union at the time when they were saying, 'We're going to wipe you off the planet.'
"And ultimately that direct engagement led to a series of measures that helped prevent nuclear war, and over time allowed the kind of opening that brought down the Berlin Wall," Obama continued. "Now, that has to be the kind of approach that we take. You know, Iran, they spend one-one hundredth of what we spend on the military. If Iran ever tried to pose a serio us threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance. And we should use that position of strength that we have to be bold enough to go ahead and listen. That doesn't mean we agree with them on everything. We might not compromise on any issues, but at least we should find out other areas of potential common interest, and we can reduce some of the tensions that has caused us so many problems around the world."
Watch HERE.
That is not even close to Obama saying Iran is a "tiny" country that "doesn't pose a serious threat."
Not even close.
Ouch. And don't you just love Obama's actual words? Don't they ring true? This is the rational, non-machismo-based foriegn policy of a moral nation. McCain's approach is the first term Bush approach, and it has proven to be dangerous.
2008-08-26
Drill Here, Drill Now, Get A Few Guys Rich
This is in response to a conservative chain e-mail slamming the Democrats over ANWR, and generally blaming all the energy woes of this country on the party that has not been in power for the last decade. I had a lot of fun writing it, so I figured I'd post it:
The first thing that needs to be said is that John McCain opposes drilling in ANWR! Still. He still does, even after the flip-flop on energy policy a week ago. So that makes this a moot distinction, politically. Hardly worth arguing about, since it's certainly not a reason to vote for McCain over Obama.
But more important is pushing back against the idea that these flip-flops on domestic oil production will help us in any way, since Newt Gingrich is holding up "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" as the "Republicans one chance" at a victory in November. So here are the facts about Newt's proposal. World oil supply is about 85 million barrels per day (mbpd). America uses about 24mbpd. America produces only 8 mbpd. ANWR and the coastal shelves will not start producing for 10 years after the leases are given. When they do produce, it will amount to less than 0.9mbpd! The most optimistic projections show that for oil prices in 2025, this will only reduce oil prices by $1.44... PER BARREL! It's already $143/barrel now! There are 42 gallons in a barrel, from which you get about 28 gallons of refined gas, so that's roughly $0.05 per gallon of gasoline you've saved by potentially ruining this pristine area. (By the way, the pessimistic projections showing it only saving you 41 cents per barrel) Furthermore, this oil wont really be ours in any appreciable way, since Oil is a fungible, world-wide commodity. We could produce 40mbpd in this country and still be subject to the whims of price spikes because the world's supply is not meeting demand.
All of that being said, I'm not sure I really oppose it anymore, given how far behind these Republicans have allowed us to slip by not acting for energy independence sooner when they had complete control. I'm sure safeguards will be in place to avoid wholesale exploitation and ruination of the land, and as long as they are enforced I'm fine with carefully developing those lands. (Enforcement is another reason you want a Democrat in the White House, by the way - no cronies). We are going to need the oil to get us over the transition. But pushing it as a significant part of a solution is just more of the same Republican malarkey that we've been operating under for decades, and that has resulted in those of us in the middle class getting squeezed ever lower! The gap between rich and poor has become a chasm. The trickling down has not happened, and it's had nearly three decades to try! It is time to try something new in this country. It is time to stop being so divided. Obama is an arguably conservative* Democrat, so he can get it done. He wont view Republicans as targets to be vilified, as the Bush/Cheney/Rove White House has done to the Democrats.
Here's some nice charts showing McCain favoring the ultra rich with his tax cuts, and the effects of trickle down economics - stagnation and decline of the middle class:
So come home you Reagan Democrats! You have nothing to fear from the Democratic Party these days. Guns have been off the table for a decade, Welfare reform is on the table, the Democrats are doing massive outreach to the evangelical community, and everyone is treating the troops with respect (even if we no longer respect their Commander-in-Chief). It's time to change course from the new-school Republican policies that have lead to the gradual destruction of the middle class, massive government growth, devaluation of the dollar, and humiliation in the eyes of the world! This is our time! This is our chance to unite for the future! Yes! We! Can!
-Kepler
*: The "study" saying that Obama is the most liberal senator is what we call a load. That National Journal Study is a right-wing rag that always magically finds that the Senators/Governors that are most likely to win the nomination are the "most liberal," based on their arbitrary picks. Obama is arguably conservative because the liberals are pissed off at him over his decision to vote for the FISA compromise, because he decided that National Security interests trump civil penalties for the TeleComms. He has worked with Sen. Brownback, Sen. McCain, Sen. Warner, Sen. Lugar, and Senator Coburn, just to name a few. Hell, he did a bunch of work with Coburn, a guy so rabidly conservative that he was worried that "lesbianism is so rampant in some of the schools in southeast Oklahoma that they'll only let one girl go to the bathroom." He passed Google for Government, a tool that allows public searching of all government spending, with Coburn, in fact. Now, when the government is wasting money they can't just hide it like that Republican Senator did with his Bridge to Nowhere. Obama's a Conservative Dem, when you look at the record and don't watch too much Fox News.
P.S. Oh, and those pictures of beautiful ANWR that the e-mail says are lies? They aren't. There's a huge amount of diversity in the area, and you can frame your photographs any way you want. It will be a blight, and an inconvenience for the caribou, but I bet we can engineer around those problems with a little bit of "guidance" from an Obama Administration.
The first thing that needs to be said is that John McCain opposes drilling in ANWR! Still. He still does, even after the flip-flop on energy policy a week ago. So that makes this a moot distinction, politically. Hardly worth arguing about, since it's certainly not a reason to vote for McCain over Obama.
But more important is pushing back against the idea that these flip-flops on domestic oil production will help us in any way, since Newt Gingrich is holding up "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" as the "Republicans one chance" at a victory in November. So here are the facts about Newt's proposal. World oil supply is about 85 million barrels per day (mbpd). America uses about 24mbpd. America produces only 8 mbpd. ANWR and the coastal shelves will not start producing for 10 years after the leases are given. When they do produce, it will amount to less than 0.9mbpd! The most optimistic projections show that for oil prices in 2025, this will only reduce oil prices by $1.44... PER BARREL! It's already $143/barrel now! There are 42 gallons in a barrel, from which you get about 28 gallons of refined gas, so that's roughly $0.05 per gallon of gasoline you've saved by potentially ruining this pristine area. (By the way, the pessimistic projections showing it only saving you 41 cents per barrel) Furthermore, this oil wont really be ours in any appreciable way, since Oil is a fungible, world-wide commodity. We could produce 40mbpd in this country and still be subject to the whims of price spikes because the world's supply is not meeting demand.
All of that being said, I'm not sure I really oppose it anymore, given how far behind these Republicans have allowed us to slip by not acting for energy independence sooner when they had complete control. I'm sure safeguards will be in place to avoid wholesale exploitation and ruination of the land, and as long as they are enforced I'm fine with carefully developing those lands. (Enforcement is another reason you want a Democrat in the White House, by the way - no cronies). We are going to need the oil to get us over the transition. But pushing it as a significant part of a solution is just more of the same Republican malarkey that we've been operating under for decades, and that has resulted in those of us in the middle class getting squeezed ever lower! The gap between rich and poor has become a chasm. The trickling down has not happened, and it's had nearly three decades to try! It is time to try something new in this country. It is time to stop being so divided. Obama is an arguably conservative* Democrat, so he can get it done. He wont view Republicans as targets to be vilified, as the Bush/Cheney/Rove White House has done to the Democrats.
Here's some nice charts showing McCain favoring the ultra rich with his tax cuts, and the effects of trickle down economics - stagnation and decline of the middle class:
So come home you Reagan Democrats! You have nothing to fear from the Democratic Party these days. Guns have been off the table for a decade, Welfare reform is on the table, the Democrats are doing massive outreach to the evangelical community, and everyone is treating the troops with respect (even if we no longer respect their Commander-in-Chief). It's time to change course from the new-school Republican policies that have lead to the gradual destruction of the middle class, massive government growth, devaluation of the dollar, and humiliation in the eyes of the world! This is our time! This is our chance to unite for the future! Yes! We! Can!-Kepler
*: The "study" saying that Obama is the most liberal senator is what we call a load. That National Journal Study is a right-wing rag that always magically finds that the Senators/Governors that are most likely to win the nomination are the "most liberal," based on their arbitrary picks. Obama is arguably conservative because the liberals are pissed off at him over his decision to vote for the FISA compromise, because he decided that National Security interests trump civil penalties for the TeleComms. He has worked with Sen. Brownback, Sen. McCain, Sen. Warner, Sen. Lugar, and Senator Coburn, just to name a few. Hell, he did a bunch of work with Coburn, a guy so rabidly conservative that he was worried that "lesbianism is so rampant in some of the schools in southeast Oklahoma that they'll only let one girl go to the bathroom." He passed Google for Government, a tool that allows public searching of all government spending, with Coburn, in fact. Now, when the government is wasting money they can't just hide it like that Republican Senator did with his Bridge to Nowhere. Obama's a Conservative Dem, when you look at the record and don't watch too much Fox News.
P.S. Oh, and those pictures of beautiful ANWR that the e-mail says are lies? They aren't. There's a huge amount of diversity in the area, and you can frame your photographs any way you want. It will be a blight, and an inconvenience for the caribou, but I bet we can engineer around those problems with a little bit of "guidance" from an Obama Administration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)