I was on a radio program the other day, facing off against a typical, brain-dead (spoiled, filthy rich) Hollywood leftist. He vomited out one (of course) anti-American leftist talking point after another. Each of them I easily batted away with fact, evidence and reason only to see him jump to another (of course anti-American) leftist talking point. Finally, out of talking points (never actually having been challenged before at his Hollywood hot tub parties where political discourse consists of "Bush is Hitler," "Yeah, he's Hitler," "Wanna get high?") my "competition" shouted out "I don't care about the facts!!!"
He's not alone. The dismissal of facts is central to the Modern Liberal as facts are things used by people trying to be right. In their world it is the effort to be right that is the cause of all evil. If no one ever tried to be right then we wouldn't get into disagreements and fights. War would not be the answer because if right doesn't exist, what would you fight over?
Funny, however, when just a little while later the same leftist threatened to punch me in the nose for exposing his moronity. I, again, put him in his place by reminding him that "war is not the answer." Of course, to the leftist violence IS the answer to shut up fellow Americans, just not to stop Islamic fascists.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
67 comments:
Vote for Obama
McCain lacks the character and temperament to be president. And Palin is simply a disgrace.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Oct. 13, 2008, at 10:44 AM ET
I used to nod wisely when people said: "Let's discuss issues rather than personalities." It seemed so obvious that in politics an issue was an issue and a personality was a personality, and that the more one could separate the two, the more serious one was. After all, in a debate on serious issues, any mention of the opponent's personality would be ad hominem at best and at worst would stoop as low as ad feminam.
At my old English boarding school, we had a sporting saying that one should "tackle the ball and not the man." I carried on echoing this sort of unexamined nonsense for quite some time—in fact, until the New Hampshire primary of 1992, when it hit me very forcibly that the "personality" of one of the candidates was itself an "issue." In later years, I had little cause to revise my view that Bill Clinton's abysmal character was such as to be a "game changer" in itself, at least as important as his claim to be a "new Democrat." To summarize what little I learned from all this: A candidate may well change his or her position on, say, universal health care or Bosnia. But he or she cannot change the fact—if it happens to be a fact—that he or she is a pathological liar, or a dimwit, or a proud ignoramus. And even in the short run, this must and will tell.
On "the issues" in these closing weeks, there really isn't a very sharp or highly noticeable distinction to be made between the two nominees, and their "debates" have been cramped and boring affairs as a result. But the difference in character and temperament has become plainer by the day, and there is no decent way of avoiding the fact. Last week's so-called town-hall event showed Sen. John McCain to be someone suffering from an increasingly obvious and embarrassing deficit, both cognitive and physical. And the only public events that have so far featured his absurd choice of running mate have shown her to be a deceiving and unscrupulous woman utterly unversed in any of the needful political discourses but easily trained to utter preposterous lies and to appeal to the basest element of her audience. McCain occasionally remembers to stress matters like honor and to disown innuendoes and slanders, but this only makes him look both more senile and more cynical, since it cannot (can it?) be other than his wish and design that he has engaged a deputy who does the innuendoes and slanders for him.
I suppose it could be said, as Michael Gerson has alleged, that the Obama campaign's choice of the word erratic to describe McCain is also an insinuation. But really, it's only a euphemism. Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear had to feel sorry for the old lion on his last outing and wish that he could be taken somewhere soothing and restful before the night was out. The train-wreck sentences, the whistlings in the pipes, the alarming and bewildered handhold phrases—"My friends"—to get him through the next 10 seconds. I haven't felt such pity for anyone since the late Adm. James Stockdale humiliated himself as Ross Perot's running mate. And I am sorry to have to say it, but Stockdale had also distinguished himself in America's most disastrous and shameful war, and it didn't qualify him then and it doesn't qualify McCain now.
The most insulting thing that a politician can do is to compel you to ask yourself: "What does he take me for?" Precisely this question is provoked by the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin. I wrote not long ago that it was not right to condescend to her just because of her provincial roots or her piety, let alone her slight flirtatiousness, but really her conduct since then has been a national disgrace. It turns out that none of her early claims to political courage was founded in fact, and it further turns out that some of the untested rumors about her—her vindictiveness in local quarrels, her bizarre religious and political affiliations—were very well-founded, indeed. Moreover, given the nasty and lowly task of stirring up the whack-job fringe of the party's right wing and of recycling patent falsehoods about Obama's position on Afghanistan, she has drawn upon the only talent that she apparently possesses.
It therefore seems to me that the Republican Party has invited not just defeat but discredit this year, and that both its nominees for the highest offices in the land should be decisively repudiated, along with any senators, congressmen, and governors who endorse them.
I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that "issue" I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity. Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the "experience" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke. One only wishes that the election could be over now and a proper and dignified verdict rendered, so as to spare democracy and civility the degradation to which they look like being subjected in the remaining days of a low, dishonest campaign.
Just as the "antiwar" leftist harbors violent tendencies (as inherited from their murderous, ideological forebears from the Bolsheviks to Robespierre and Marat), so, too, are they dictatorially self-righteous when accusing the right of judgmentalism.
oh, evan, come on! you don't name the radio station. you don't name your opponent. i just gotta hear it koz i know that you really got your ass handed to you, as usual.
McCain's False Claims On Bill Ayers
False Claims By The GOP Nominee About The Former Weather Underground Leader Tied To Obama
WASHINGTON, Oct. 13, 2008
(CBS) A recent web advertisement from Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain makes two false claims about a connection between Bill Ayers and Senator Barack Obama.
1. “Ayers and Obama ran a radical education foundation, together.”
The foundation they are referring to is the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), set up in the early 1990’s with funding from the Annenberg Foundation to reform public schools. Walter Annenberg is a well-known philanthropist and conservative Republican.
“This was not the Bill Ayers and Barack Obama show,” says Ken Rolling who was the Executive Director of the CAC and ran the organization, “It was not created by two people, it was created by a hundred people.”
Was it radical? Rolling says that’s in the eyes of the beholder, but he confirms that the CAC funded programs with the following purpose: teacher training, music education, support for new school council candidates, afterschool programs, education research, improvements for literacy and arts programs and initiatives to strengthen parental involvement in public schools.
“The idea that the Annenberg Challenge was somehow the extension of the Weather Underground of the 1960’s, that is just one of the most lunatic contentions I can imagine,” says Mike Flannery, political editor at the CBS Chicago affiliate WBBM who has covered Chicago politics for 35 years.
Flannery says the other people on involved in the CAC with Obama and Ayers were "business types and Republicans."
Obama chaired the board of the CAC but he did not serve on the board with Ayers. Ayers served on a separate advisory board.
2. “They wrote the foundation’s bylaws together.”
“They didn’t sit over a coffee table somewhere and say ‘let’s do it this way,’ they were involved with a large group of people,” Rolling says, “They did not actually write them.”
Rolling says Ayers served on a voluntary advisory board that hired a lawyer to write the bylaws that were eventually approved by the entire board of directors - one of the votes for the bylaws came from Obama.
Flannery says the negative attention that is being paid to the CAC is mystifying to Chicago reporters, "Those of us who have covered politics in Chicago the way I have for 35 years simply don't recognize the caricatures and the ridiculous descriptions of this group."
Oh, GOOD...I always let Hitchens make MY decisions, so NOW I'll vote for the idiot socialist who WAS hired by Ayers to run Annenberg whether the left likes admitting it or not.
My favorite moment was when an Obama supporter screeched at Ari Fleischer that "the political debut in Ayers' living room was NOT a campaign event, it was a COFFEE" I guess if you don't serve food too, it doesn't count.
Sort of like when Obama makes slips and says he was "inartful" or "misspoke" and the media says "OKAY!"
You can't make up this crap by our media. Ever seen a media SO in the bag for someone FARRAKHAN admires? good job, folks...slam Evan; he must scare the living ....... out of you. I can see why. Someone escaped the idiot liberal thinking elitist bunch and actually THINKS!!!
Obama seizes bigger lead in Monday's Gallup Poll
By Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
So much for John McCain's momentum. Barack Obama is back to a huge lead in Monday's Gallup Poll, 51-41 percent.
That wipes out three days of shrinking poll numbers for Obama; the lead had been down to 50-43 percent on Sunday.
Still, Obama now has been at or above the 50 percent level for 10 straight days, an encouraging fact for Democrats.
Meanwhile, McCain and Sarah Palin are engaging in negative campaigning that apparently is turning off a lot of Americans.
Meanwhile, Obama has stayed on message, with his "I have a plan" comments about the economy, health care and other concerns of Americans.
Of course, McCain is hoping for a last-month miracle, which could come in any number of ways.
The prime way: Making a better appearance in Wednesday night's debate with Obama.
Republican Dennis Hopper Endorses Obama
B-b-but he was in this wingnut movie!Republican movie actor Dennis Hopper is so Republican that he starred in that shitty wingnut movie not even Republicans bothered to see, "An American Carol." But now the hippie icon and Republican-since-Reagan is in the tank for You Know Who, That One, Barack Obama. “I voted for Bush, father and son, but this time I’ll vote for Obama,” Hopper said in Paris, which is also in the tank for Obama. “I pray God that Barack Obama is elected.” [AFP]
Chris Cillizza
Post/ABC Poll: McCain's Structural Problems
The new Washington Post/ABC News national poll puts John McCain behind Barack Obama by 10 points -- his biggest deficit in the survey since the general election began in June.
But, that's not the worst news in the poll for McCain. A detailed look inside the poll shows just how toxic the national political environment has become for Republicans and suggests that McCain's attempts to deprecate Obama and portray him as a risky pick have, to date, backfired.
To wit:
* Just eight percent of the national sample believe the country is headed in the right direction while a stunning 90 percent believe it is off in the wrong direction. EIGHT PERCENT!
* Twenty-three percent of voters approve of the job that President Bush is doing -- his lowest rating ever in the Post poll and an approval score that rivals the lowly showing by President Harry Truman in a 1952 Gallup poll.
* Obama's favorable rating are rising (!) while McCain's are faltering. Nearly two-thirds of voters (64 percent) view Obama favorably in the latest poll while 33 percent view him unfavorably. In a September Post poll, Obama's fav/unfav was at 58/36. Compare that to McCain's favorable ratings, which slipped from 59 percent in September to 52 percent now, and his unfavorable ratings, which rose from 36 percent last month to 45 percent now.
* Obama has substantial edges over McCain when voters are asked which candidate is better equipped to handle the issues of the day. That includes a 16-point edge on the economy and a 29-point margin on health care -- the two issues nearly six in ten voters cite as most critical in the fall election. McCain's lone advantage over Obama comes on the issue of terrorism. Forty-nine percent of Americans believe the Arizona senator is better equipped to handle that issue while 43 percent name Obama.
* Nearly seven in ten voters believe Obama is "mainly" addressing the issues while just 26 percent say he is attacking his opponent. McCain, on the other hand, is seen as "mainly" attacking his rival by six in ten voters while just 35 percent said he is focused on issues.
* Fifty-five percent of the voters believe Obama is a "safe" choice for president while 45 percent said he would be a "risky" choice. On McCain, the sample split right down the middle; 50 percent said he was a "safe" and 50 percent said he would be a "risky" pick for the White House.
That laundry list of data is a stark showcase of the tough odds that McCain faces as he seeks to turn the race around over the next 22 days.
Not only is every leading indicator pointing to this being a change election focused on economic uncertainties but the data in the Post/ABC poll also suggests that McCain's recent tactic of questioning Obama's judgment via his past associations with former Weather Underground member Bill Ayers is not working.
Given these results, it's not terribly surprising that McCain unveiled a new campaign stump speech this morning in Virginia in which he a) cast himself as the underdog b) offered a firm break with Bush and c) toned down the character attacks on Obama.
The most important line in McCain's new speech? "We cannot spend the next four years as we have spent much of the last eight: waiting for our luck to change," said McCain in an explicit criticism of the Bush approach to governance.
That new line -- designed to draw a broad line of demarcation between McCain and Bush -- comes even as the Post/ABC poll shows that a majority (51 percent) of voters believe that McCain would "mainly continue" taking the country in the same direction as Bush. Forty-six percent said McCain would lead the country in a "new" direction.
Unless McCain can convince voters -- sometime VERY soon -- that he is not the heir to the Bush legacy, this race, judging from the Post/ABC data, is darn near unwinnable for McCain.
It's a testament to the power of the McCain brand, in fact, that he has been able to keep the contest as close as it has been for the last few months given the absolutely disastrous national political environment.
But, without a drastic change in the political dynamics of the race (and that is ALWAYS possible), McCain's window of victory continues to shrink.
Hitch Joins All-Star Roster of Anti-McCain "Smart" Republicans
Noted Bush-supporting former Trotskyite Christopher Hitchens has endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president! In Slate today, the beloved British alcoholic raves about how Obama isn't a sad old man, like McCain, or an offensive joke, like Sarah Palin. Hitch, like a Nader voter, declares that there are no substantial differences between the candidates, but McCain's temperament is too unstable, and Obama's is much more reassuring. This is basically the argument of a number of noted conservative intellectuals who have, in recent weeks, either endorsed Obama, resigned themselves to an Obama presidency, or simply unendorsed McCain. As the intellectual conservatives abandoned Bush, now they find themselves abandoning the GOP.
Atlantic blogger Andrew Sullivan was once a very prominent, very influential conservative. As recently as last year, even as he largely abandoned Bush, he was still complimenting McCain. Now, not so much.
Times columnist David Brooks scarcely deserves to be called an intellectual, but as we're using that term strictly to mean "East Coast elitists who write about politics professionally" he'll have to do. This "I'm disappointed in McCain but he'll be a good president" column was but a prelude to Brooks' statement during an interview that Obama was a perceptive intellectual surrounded by impressive people and Sarah Palin is a cancer.
Christopher Buckley was hardly a doctrinaire conservative. As a satirical novelist and a smart-ass, one imagines he's not too pleased with the rise of creationist rubes in his beloved GOP (his dad made that fucking bed, obvs, but that's neither here nor there). And Chris claims he wrote in George H.W. Bush in 2004 rather than vote for the son. But that's far different from explicitly endorsing a Democrat, as he did last week. Once again: Obama's temperament and obvious intelligence sealed the deal.
Charles Krauthammer is basically a reliable party hack, always willing to subvert his own intelligence for the good of the party. But the once-influential psychiatrist can't help but see that his movement is not served by the buffoonery of the McCain campaign. He wrote this mild quasi-endorsement of Obama this month:
Obama has shown that he is a man of limited experience, questionable convictions, deeply troubling associations (Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko) and an alarming lack of self-definition — do you really know who he is and what he believes? Nonetheless, he's got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament. That will likely be enough to make him president.
And, also at The Atlantic, Ross Douthat, who wrote a book about how Republicans can save themselves, finds himself bewildered by McCain's campaign and unimpressed with the Ayers bullshit and Sarah Palin.
So. Is all that a trend? In the way that the closing of the New York Sun was indicative of the slow death of a movement if not necessarily caused by that death, we think we're seeing the further erosion of the always uneasy GOP pact between libertarian true believers, Christan fundamentalist true believers, nationalists, "just keep my taxes low" rich assholes, and the crowd that just likes to hitch their wagons to winners. A reorganization is on the way. Then most of these listed commentators will probably hop back on the bandwagon.
Also this is how we were originally planning on reporting the Hitch endorsement:
BREAKING: HITCH SMOKES TWO PACKS, DRINKS 5TH OF SCOTCH, ENDORSES TERRORIST
lol...in other words Sayet got his butt kicked just like he does on his blog. Then he lost control and threatened the guy who called his bluff. Psychet then scurried back to his computer to declare victory.
The question of who the vile-ent party is has been pretty well put to rest with the recent events at McCain's rallies which are now inspiring disgust and denunciation across the political spectrum and around the world.
Just the last couple days, Hitchens -- who was praised by some GOP dingaling just the other day on here -- Dennis Hopper and Christopher Buckley!!, son of the Godfather of conservatism, Wm. F, have gone Obama. Meanwhile Bill Kristol calls McCain's campaign "stupid" and is now being attacked by that campaign...even though he's joined in that assessment by half the party, including today, Tommy Thompson.
now, this is getting downright scary:
October 13, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Fire the Campaign
By WILLIAM KRISTOL
It’s time for John McCain to fire his campaign.
He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic. If the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed.
He may be anyway. Bush is unpopular. The media is hostile. The financial meltdown has made things tougher. Maybe the situation is hopeless — and if it is, then nothing McCain or his campaign does matters.
But I’m not convinced by such claims of inevitability. McCain isn’t Bush. The media isn’t all-powerful. And the economic crisis still presents an opportunity to show leadership.
The 2008 campaign is now about something very big — both our future prosperity and our national security. Yet the McCain campaign has become smaller.
What McCain needs to do is junk the whole thing and start over. Shut down the rapid responses, end the frantic e-mails, bench the spinning surrogates, stop putting up new TV and Internet ads every minute. In fact, pull all the ads — they’re doing no good anyway. Use that money for televised town halls and half-hour addresses in prime time.
And let McCain go back to what he’s been good at in the past — running as a cheerful, open and accessible candidate. Palin should follow suit. The two of them are attractive and competent politicians. They’re happy warriors and good campaigners. Set them free.
Provide total media accessibility on their campaign planes and buses. Kick most of the aides off and send them out to swing states to work for the state coordinators on getting voters to the polls. Keep just a minimal staff to help organize the press conferences McCain and Palin should have at every stop and the TV interviews they should do at every location. Do town halls, do the Sunday TV shows, do talk radio — and invite Obama and Biden to join them in some of these venues, on the ground that more joint appearances might restore civility and substance to the contest.
The hope for McCain and Palin is that they still have pretty good favorable ratings from the voters. The American people have by no means turned decisively against them.
The bad news, of course, is that right now Obama’s approval/disapproval rating is better than McCain’s. Indeed, Obama’s is a bit higher than it was a month ago. That suggests the failure of the McCain campaign’s attacks on Obama.
So drop them.
Not because they’re illegitimate. I think many of them are reasonable. Obama’s relationship to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is, I believe, a legitimate issue. But McCain ruled it out of bounds, and he’s sticking to that. And for whatever reason — the public mood, campaign ineptness, McCain’s alternation between hesitancy and harshness, which reflects the fact that he’s uncomfortable in the attack role — the other attacks on Obama just aren’t working. There’s no reason to think they’re suddenly going to.
There are still enough doubts about Obama to allow McCain to win. But McCain needs to make his case, and do so as a serious but cheerful candidate for times that need a serious but upbeat leader.
McCain should stop unveiling gimmicky proposals every couple of days that pretend to deal with the financial crisis. He should tell the truth — we’re in uncharted waters, no one is certain what to do, and no one knows what the situation will be on Jan. 20, 2009. But what we do know is that we could use someone as president who’s shown in his career the kind of sound judgment and strong leadership we’ll need to make it through the crisis.
McCain can make the substantive case for his broadly centrist conservatism. He can explain that our enemies won’t take a vacation because the markets are down, and that it’s not unimportant that he’s ready to be commander in chief. He can remind voters that even in a recession, the president appoints federal judges — and that his judges won’t legislate from the bench.
And he can point out that there’s going to be a Democratic Congress. He can suggest that surely we’d prefer a president who would check that Congress where necessary and work with it where possible, instead of having an inexperienced Democratic president joined at the hip with an all-too-experienced Democratic Congress, leading us, unfettered and unchecked, back to 1970s-style liberalism.
At Wednesday night’s debate at Hofstra, McCain might want to volunteer a mild mea culpa about the extent to which the presidential race has degenerated into a shouting match. And then he can pledge to the voters that the last three weeks will feature a contest worthy of this moment in our history.
He’d enjoy it. And he might even win it.
stupid walnuts says: " My friends, we've got them just where we want them."
yeahrightsure, ten points ahead in the polls--right where you want them.
walnuts sounds a lot like evan...evan had dat ole modern, eeeeevil liberal rat whur he wanted him....yup, yup, yup...
Wait, are you saying that you were actually scared by the threats of some effete limp-wristed Hollywood liberal?
Yeah, we're the ones who are oblivious...lol. 90% SAY COUNTRY's ON THE WRONG TRACK!!
Discontent Buffets the Nation; Bush CratersOct. 13, 2008
A tornado of economic discontent is buffeting the nation, sending satisfaction with the country's direction to a 35-year low, George W. Bush's approval rating below Richard Nixon's worst – and Barack Obama, boosted by economic empathy, to his best-yet advantage in the presidential race.
In this latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, a record 90 percent of Americans say the country is on the wrong track, while only 23 percent approve of the job President Bush is doing.
(ABC Graphic)
More PhotosGiven the global economic crisis, a record 90 percent of registered voters say the country is seriously off on the wrong track, the most since this question first was asked in 1973. At 23 percent, Bush's job approval rating has fallen below Nixon's lowest; it's a point away from the lowest in 70 years of polling, set by Harry Truman in early 1952. Bush's disapproval, meanwhile, is at an all-time record – 73 percent.
Dora said...
Wait, are you saying that you were actually scared by the threats of some effete limp-wristed Hollywood liberal?
A oouple posts ago he was preening about how the liberal never has the guts to get in anyone's face...lol.
Now he's whining about one of the violent ogres frightening him out of his rubber diaper...in response to which he goes all flower child and talks about war never being the answer.
Tooooooo funny.
The LIBERAL is whatever the peabrains want it to be at the moment...as long as it never has ANYTHING to do with reality.
Karin says: The LIBERAL is whatever the peabrains want it to be at the moment...
but, karin, the liberal is always eeeeeeeeeeevil.
McArthur, Ohio
Barack Obama is gaining support in the rural, conservative town of McArthur, Ohio, reflecting nationwide trends in which the Illinois senator has been consolidating support among independents and in some traditional Republican strongholds.With just three weeks until the election, political analysts say absent an October surprise it will be difficult for Republican John McCain to turn things around. That’s a challenge his campaign, which has been written off before, says it is delighted to take up.
But the test before McCain is stark, even here in Vinton County in the rumpled Appalachian hills of southeast Ohio where George W. Bush won by 10 points in 2004.
It’s an area with strong beliefs about such issues as gay marriage and abortion, but one that also faces severe economic challenges.
When social issues dominate the agenda, Republicans tend to do well here. When the economy dominates, the Democrats can mount serious challenges. That’s what Obama is doing here.
In the past four days, both McCain and Obama have campaigned here. Obama has even chosen to prepare for Wednesday night’s debate here in Ohio.
The economy and the financial crisis top most voters’ agendas here, as they do nationwide.
The Buckeye State has long been a national bellwether, crucial to winning the White House. No Republican candidate has ever won the presidency without winning Ohio’s 20 electoral votes. And no Democrat has done so either, at least in recent history.
“It’s a bellwether state for a reason: because it really does look like America,” says Michael Burton, a professor of political science at Ohio University in Athens. “There’s a northeast that looks like the Northeast, there is a western side that looks like the Midwest and a southern tier that has a very Southern feel to it.”
That’s evident here on Main Street in McArthur. It’s the county seat. It has one stoplight. The old brick court house sits across from the Main Street Diner and the Hotel McArthur.
The median income in the county is $25,000. That’s one reason Patty Elkins, who owns the diner, says she can’t raise her prices. A grilled cheese sandwich costs $1.50. It’s also the reason, she believes, Democrat Obama has traction here.
“This is a very poor part of the country and Ohio – it’s the poorest,” says Ms. Elkins, whose family has owned the diner since 1984. “People here are ready for change, they just can’t afford higher oil prices, higher food prices – they just can’t afford it - so they’re leaning toward someone that’s saying: ‘I’m going to take care of the economy, I’m going to take care of the healthcare system and try to straighten this out.’”
Laura Harms and her daughter Jennifer were having lunch in a booth nearby. Ms. Harms comes from a “staunch, very staunch Republican” family.
“You go in and you check the little box so you vote only straight Republican,” she says.
But Harms has always had an independent streak. She says she likes to vote for the best person. In 2004, George W. Bush got her vote. But this year, as far as she’s concerned, the best man is Obama, and both she and her daughter are voting for him.
“Right now I’m so ticked by the way Republicans are doing things,” she says. “[And] when McCain was asked how many houses he owned and he said, ‘I don’t know,’ I was like, ‘Whoa! Forget you buddy, you can’t even begin to identify with me and my daughters.”
Just around the corner from the diner is the Republican headquarters for Vinton County. It’s a small storefront festooned in red, white, and blue with yard signs for statewide Republicans stacked out front. Cecil Reid, who was minding the shop, says they ran out of McCain/Palin yard signs a couple of days ago. He says the county is changing, but he believes McCain will still do well here, primarily because he believes Obama could never identify with lots of people here.
“I’m a Christian and I definitely believe Obama’s got Muslim in him, I don’t go for that,” says Mr. Reid, a retired county employee who now works part time at a grocery store. “Plus McCain has the experience and I believe he can bring us out of this economy.”
Reid believes the strength of the fundamentalist Christian movement here could ultimately help McCain. Indeed, one reason George W. Bush had a 10-point margin here in 2004 is because of a gay marriage amendment on the ballot.
“The turnout in places like Vinton County and southeast Ohio spiked in large part because of very smart political organizing around the gay marriage amendment,” says Professor Burton. “That significantly helped Republicans like Bush.”
Another social issue for some people here is race. Aaron Brooks, who was heading to an appointment at the county courthouse, says he’s a Democrat but he’s supporting McCain over Obama. “He’s black,” says Mr. Brooks. “It’s not that I don’t think he’ll do a good job; it’s just that I don’t think he’ll do a good job for us white people. That’s just the way I feel.”
Pollsters have also picked up lingering questions among some voters about Obama’s race. But they believe this campaign will come down to economic issues. They also believe Obama’s candidacy could in the end have a healing effect.
“These are the last vestiges of racial bigotry in this country,” says pollster John Zogby, author of “The Way We’ll Be” about the direction of the country. “But as the election goes, there’s no question the financial crisis of the last few weeks has really undercut McCain/Palin.”
Recent polls here have Obama ahead by as much as five percent. But 6 percent are still undecided. Tressa Sexton is one of them. She’s a registered Republican, she says “only because of my husband.” But she says she’s really a Democrat. She’s still not sure who she’s going to vote for, in part, because she doesn’t trust politicians in general.
“They can say what they want to say, but if you look at the economy over the last few years it’s all been for the big people,” she says.
Meanwhile, the Marist Poll reported Monday that the presidential race across Ohio “is no longer a statistical dead heat.”
Among registered voters, Obama now outpaces McCain 48 percent to 40 percent. Among likely voters including those who are undecided yet leaning toward a candidate, Obama has 49 percent compared with 45 percent for McCain.
McCain attended ACORN rally
Mon Oct 13, 2008
More humor.
Miami, Florida – February 20, 2006
― Leaders from a diverse array of sectors will hold a rally in Miami on Thursday, February 23, 2006, in support of comprehensive immigration reform in an effort to keep immigration reform at the forefront of the public debate. Leaders from both political parties, immigrant communities, labor, business, and religious organizations will gather to call on Washington to enact workable reform.
The rally will feature Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) as the headline speaker along with elected officials, immigrants and key local and national leaders. Sen. McCain is one of the chief sponsors of the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act; bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform legislation introduced last Congress and scheduled for consideration by the Senate in the coming weeks. A similar rally with Sen. McCain is planned for New York City on February 27 [...]
The rally in Miami is being sponsored by the New American Opportunity campaign (NAOC) in partnership with ACORN, Catholic Legal Services - Archdiocese of Miami, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, Florida Immigrant Coalition, Miami Dade College, People for the American Way/Mi Familia Vota en Acción, Service Employees International Union, and UNITE HERE.
That was a great event, and I'm glad McCain headlined it. But it does make it a bit more difficult for his campaign to press this line of attack, doesn't it? We even have a picture:
Picture of McCorpse smiling next to black guy.
This campaign is one of a kind. Every time it settles on a line of attack, it always undermines it days later.
Yes, the lib is always evil whether in his now convenient incarnation as spineless milksop or in his now convenient role as fire breathing, violent revolutionary ready to execute wingbats in a firing squad or take off their heads with a guillotine.
McClatchy Debunks Latest Conservative, Racist Pack of Lies
Oct 13, 2008
McClatchy does its due diligence yet again, and slams down the last-gasp attempt of conservative mouth-breathers to save this election by blaming the financial meltdown on poor people.
As the economy worsens and Election Day approaches, a conservative campaign that blames the global financial crisis on a government push to make housing more affordable to lower-class Americans has taken off on talk radio and e-mail....
Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis.
Subprime lending offered high-cost loans to the weakest borrowers during the housing boom that lasted from 2001 to 2007. Subprime lending was at its height from 2004 to 2006.
Federal Reserve Board data show that:
* More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions.
* Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
* Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing law that's being lambasted by conservative critics.
The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets reported Friday.
It wasn't ACORN helping minorities get affordable homeloans. It wasn't Jimmy Carter's fault for signing the Community Redevelopment Act in 1977.
Who was in charge from 2004 to 2006, when "subprime lending was at its height"? That's right, the Republicans who are trying to make this Jimmy Carter's fault. Even the Bush administration says so--that would be the "President's Working Group in Financial Markets," and the President in question isn't Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton.
It's always easiest for Republicans to put the blame on minorities and poor people, as if the American dream were reserved for only the "right" Americans, the ones on the Right. This is just one more cynical attempt to squeeze the last bit of utility out of the southern strategy, to keep fear and hatred against minorities whipped up and to keep Democrats--particularly the Black man who will be President--out of office.
Typically, you boneheads overcompensate again with your "We're-Mad-As-Hell-And-We're-Not-Going-To-Take-It-Anymore!" marching orders.
First there was Kerry "not fighting back" after being "swiftboated," and vowing "Never again."
So he tried to... sue.
His cheerleaders (like you little shits) were gloating and (as usual) crowing prematurely of victorious, litigated revenge.
You got nowhere (i.e. you were full of shit).
Then, manicured, baby-hands Wexler comes out with his book "Fire-Breathing Liberal."
Oo. I'm scared (at least he had the balls--however pea-sized--to admit he was a liberal, and damn proud of it, too: RAAAARRRR!!).
Then Obama starts to play toughguy by saying (about McCain) "He don't know who he's messing with" and ordering--just today--"Get in their faces."
Of course, fathead/karl/midnite here (who's just a poorly-parented pussy with a big, foul mouth) overcompensates and goes over-the-top when spewing his vile, hateful shit against conservatives/Republicans/Christians like like Hitler at a rally drumming up genocidal impulses against the groups he hated.
Actually, I don't think this bonehead is overcompensating at all but is just taking the "call to arms" opportunity to vent his sneering malice and repulsive personality to bully and intimidate like the lowlife thug that he is (if not a mindless zombie).
And I'm afraid I have bad news for you:
Dow up 936.
McCain should let Mrs. Palin make the decisions. After all, McCain is not long for this world. His reward is in the other one.
That's a hell of a morale boost, Devon. I'm really glad we're on the same time.
oh, john! reductio ad Hitlerum.
confused john says: like Hitler at a rally drumming up genocidal impulses against the groups he hated.
now, john, who has really been drumming up those primitive impulses of her basey base?
Thank you, John. Is that your name, your job or your function?
Devon, you KKKons mustn't fight amongst yourselves.
Haven't you heard?
You're an endangered species.
Mrs. Palin appears to be failing her Lord, now.
But I think she will find the way before the elections which are coming very soon and carry the day all more drama as she makes a last minute appeal to voters waking up at the last moment as in a miracle.
Jesus to was buried then rolled away the stone.
John, I'm surprised. According to Evan, the liberals are the ones who are always mindlessly comparing people to Hitler. And its instructive to see "Republican/Conservative/Christian" like yourself calling people "pussies." And big deal about the market being at 936 - that's one day. Don't pin your hopes on that helping Mccain.
Monday, October 13, 2008
WASHINGTON NEWS
Did Bush Contribute To Mortgage Crisis?
Newsweek asks, "Remember the ownership society?" President Bush "championed the concept" in 2004, "envisioning a world in which every American family owned a house and a stock portfolio, and government stayed out of the way of the American Dream." Bush "pushed new policies encouraging homeownership, like the 'zero-down-payment initiative,' which was much as it sounds -- a government-sponsored program that allowed people to get mortgages without a down payment. More exotic mortgages followed, including ones with no monthly payments for the first two years. Other mortgages required no documentation other than the say-so of the borrower."
Poll: Bush's disapproval rating hits record high
President Bush has one of the worst approval ratings in modern American history, according a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.
The survey suggests 25% of Americans approve of the president's performance in office.
A record 71% say they disapprove of the way he's handling his job.
Only 4% didn't have an opinion about Bush's performance.
(By comparison, historical Gallup data show that Harry Truman's approval rating fell as low as 22% in 1952, but his disapproval rating never exceeded 67%.)
In election news, USA TODAY's On Politics blog says the poll shows Democrat Barack Obama leading Republican John McCain among likely voters.
Devon, you KKKons mustn't fight amongst yourselves.
You are right. I am just so enraptured of Mrs. Palin, that I forgot myself. She, like Mr. Sayet, knows that there are good guys and then there are the bad guys. And, not everybody knows that. Do you agree, John?
I do, Devon.
Hi Evan,
Would like to hear the encounter if it's available online. Seems you're getting the "copy & paste" opinion crowd pretty riled up (again)! :-D
yeah, evan, i'd love to hear it. ;)where can we get it online?
A Dose of Reality on the ACORN Hysteria
It's worth taking a moment to step back from the slew of charges leveled over the last week at ACORN, the community-organizing group that Republicans and the McCain campaign have been trying to turn into a bogeyman for fears about vote fraud (and, of course, tie to Barack Obama).
The GOP has accused ACORN of submitting fraudulent voter registration forms numbering in the hundreds or thousands, in battleground states including Ohio, Indiana, Nevada, and Missouri.
But the most important point that's getting lost in the Fox-generated hysteria is that, according to voting experts, even when fraudulent voter registration forms are submitted, they virtually never lead to fraudulent votes being cast. Richard Hasen, a law professor at Loyola and an authority on voting law, wrote in a 2007 op-ed published last year in the Dallas Morning News and noted recently by TPM, that "the idea of massive polling-place fraud (through the use of inflated voter rolls) is inherently incredible," because of the sheer logistical challenges it would require to carry out on a large scale.
In many states, ACORN is required by law to turn in all the forms it collects, though the law differs from state to law, according to experts.
ACORN has consistently said that it flags suspicious forms for election officials. Indeed, in Nevada where last week an ACORN office was raided in an investigation headed by the Secretary of State, ACORN was already cooperating with authorities.
According to a statement from the group which has not been disputed by state officials, in July, ACORN set up a meeting with county elections officials and the Secretary of State's office to urge them to take action on information ACORN had provided. Since then, "ACORN has provided officials with copies and--in some cases--second copies of many of the personnel records and the 'problem card packages' and cover sheets with which we originally identified the problem cards."
It's also worth noting that similar allegations were made against ACORN in the last few election cycles, and several investigations were conducted, none of which found evidence of widespread voter fraud. Many of these were conducted by US attorneys, who were pressured by GOP political figures to investigate the issue, then fired after they failed to come up with sufficient evidence.
So as the GOP campaign to make an issue out of ACORN continues -- and we'll be keeping you posted as it does -- remember that the number of fraudulent votes that will be cast in November as a result of the group's voter-registration activities is close to zero. But the number of valid voters who could potentially have obstacles placed in their way of voting, as a result of the Republican campaign, is far larger.
"riled up."
Is that anything like rolling in the aisles.
?
...forgot that.
Someone said: devon said...
Thank you, John. Is that your name, your job or your function?
I did not say such a thing. Someon is using my name there was another post also with an imposter.
I don't suppose there is an MP3 of the broadcast?
hmmmm, repeated calls for the audio of your supposed face off, evan, and silence on your end. oh so telling.
Frank Schaeffer, the bestselling author of Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back. He's the son of the late evangelist Francis Schaeffer, considered himself a lifelong Republican. He voted for John McCain in 2000. McCain even endorsed one of Schaeffer's earlier books on military service. But on Friday, Frank Schaeffer published an op-ed piece in the Baltimore Sun excoriating McCain for "feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate." The op-ed is entitled "An Open Letter to John McCain."
"John McCain: If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism and portraying Mr. Obama as 'not one of us,' I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence.
"At a Sarah Palin rally, someone called out, 'Kill him!' At one of your rallies, someone called out, 'Terrorist!' Neither was answered or denounced by you or your running mate, as the crowd laughed and cheered. At your campaign event Wednesday in Bethlehem, Pa., the crowd was seething with hatred for the Democratic nominee -- an attitude encouraged in speeches there by you, your running mate, your wife and the local Republican chairman.
"Shame!
"John McCain: In 2000, as a lifelong Republican, I worked to get you elected instead of George W. Bush. In return, you wrote an endorsement of one of my books about military service. You seemed to be a man who put principle ahead of mere political gain.
"You have changed. You have a choice: Go down in history as a decent senator and an honorable military man with many successes, or go down in history as the latest abettor of right-wing extremist hate.
"John McCain, you are no fool, and you understand the depths of hatred that [surround] the issue of race in this country. You also know that, post-9/11, to call someone a friend of a terrorist is a very serious matter. You also know we are [a bitterly divided country] on many other issues. You know that, sadly, in America, violence is always just a moment away. You know that there are plenty of crazy people out there.
"Stop! Think! Your rallies are beginning to look, sound, feel and smell like lynch mobs.
"John McCain, you're walking a perilous line. If you do not stand up for all that is good in America and declare that Senator Obama is a patriot, fit for office, and denounce your hate-filled supporters when they scream out 'Terrorist' or 'Kill him,' history will hold you responsible for all that follows.
"John McCain and Sarah Palin, you are playing with fire, and you know it. You are unleashing the monster of American hatred and prejudice, to the peril of all of us. You are doing this in wartime. You are doing this as our economy collapses. You are doing this in a country with a history of assassinations.
"Change the atmosphere of your campaign. Talk about the issues at hand. Make your case. But stop stirring up the lunatic fringe of haters, or risk suffering the judgment of history and the loathing of the American people -- forever.
"We will hold you responsible."
Anchorage Paper Calls Palin Response to Troopergate 'An Embarrassment'
By E&P Staff
Published: October 14, 2008 10:10 AM ET
NEW YORK Since its release late last Friday, the Alaska legislatures "Troopergate" has drawn much attention, and Gov. Sarah Palin has claimed numerous times that it actually found no ethical misdeeds on her part -- even as it charged her with a serious "abuse of power." The main paper in her home state is not buying it.
The Anchorage Daily News' angry editorial today was topped with the headline: "Palin vindicated? Governor offers Orwellian spin." It opens: "Sarah Palin's reaction to the Legislature's Troopergate report is an embarrassment to Alaskans and the nation.
"She claims the report 'vindicates' her. She said that the investigation found 'no unlawful or unethical activity on my part.'
"Her response is either astoundingly ignorant or downright Orwellian."
An excerpt follows.
*
In plain English, she did something "unlawful." She broke the state ethics law.
Perhaps Gov. Palin has been too busy to actually read the Troopergate report. Perhaps she is relying on briefings from McCain campaign spinmeisters.
That's the charitable interpretation.
Because if she had actually read it, she couldn't claim "vindication" with a straight face.
Palin asserted that the report found "there was no abuse of authority at all in trying to get Officer Wooten fired."
In fact, the report concluded that "impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired."
Palin's response is the kind of political "big lie" that George Orwell warned against. War is peace. Black is white. Up is down.
Gov. Palin and her camp trumpeted the report's second finding: that she was within her legal authority to fire Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. But the report also said it's likely one of the reasons she fired him was his failure to get rid of her ex-brother-in-law trooper.
That's not "vindication," and surely Gov. Palin knows it.
Evan, in your most recent blog, you use a non-existent word, "moronity." Why won't you tell your readers how to gain access to your debate with your Limousine Liberal opponent? My guess is that he trounced you in argument, as did Obama with Mccain in the first two Presidential debates and as he will do tomorrow night.
Polls: Obama On A Roll
October 14, 2008
With just over three weeks until Election Day, the two presidential nominees appear to be on opposite trajectories, with Barack Obama gaining momentum and John McCain stalled or losing ground on a range of issues and personal traits, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll taken Oct. 8-11.
Obama's edge in national polls is, on average, more than 7 percentage points, according to the website realclearpolitics.com.
In the Post-ABC national poll, Obama is leading 53 percent to 43 percent among likely voters, and for the first time in the general-election campaign, voters gave the Democrat a clear edge on tax policy and providing strong leadership.
McCain has made little headway in his attempts to convince voters that Obama is too "risky" or too "liberal." Rather, recent strategic shifts may have hurt the Republican nominee, who now has higher negative ratings than his rival and is seen as mostly attacking his opponent rather than addressing the issues that voters care about.
The Post-ABC survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
—Washington Post, Bloomberg News
Anchorage Daily News Editorial: "Sarah Palin's reaction to the Legislature's Troopergate report is an embarrassment to Alaskans and the nation. Her response is either astoundingly ignorant or downright Orwellian."
you know, anonymous, evan sometimes talks to imaginary "leftists." i suspect that this is one of those times and that this posting will soon disappear since it is becoming quite obvious what the sad case really is.
I have been doing some checking on Sayet's story. Apparently there was some kind of on air exchange where Sayet got emotional and it turned a little embarassing for all concerned. What happened afterward is anyone's guess, but he probably tried to redeem his ego with the guy and then got put down again.
This whole movement is crumbling in some very strange ways. The right seems to be having a collective mental breakdown...violence, outbursts, unseemly behaviour, lies repeated desperately even after they're exposed...they've lost all discipline and sense of proportion.
It's going to be fun to see the carnival that's coming.
suze "analyzed":
"hmmmm, repeated calls for the audio of your supposed face off, evan, and silence on your end. oh so telling."
Very telling. He doesn't feel like he has to prove anything to you and just ignores you.
William Ayers: Funded by Republicans
Thu, 10/09/2008
The more the McCain campaign tries to tie Barack to William Ayers, the more ridiculous they look. But hey-- at least the economy is doing well!
After his stupid, youthful days with the Weather Underground organization, William Ayers became a normal, productive member of society. After recieving his PhD in the 1980's, he became a professor of education at the University of Illinois, wrote 15 books, and served as an advisor to Chicago Mayor William Daley. As Daley told the New York Times recently, "He's done a lot of good things in this city and nationally... This is 2008. People make mistakes. You judge a person by his whole life."
In 1995, Bill Ayers was part of a team that helped create the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an education reform project that worked with half of Chicago's public schools. Barack Obama, then working as an attorney and law school professor, was elected chairman of the eight-member board of the CAC. The board included individuals of diverse political backgrounds, including Ray Romero, the President of Ameritech; Stanley Ikenberry, the former President of the University of Illinois; and Republican Arnold Weber, who had served in the Nixon White House.
Arnold Weber-- Republican. Donated to John McCain. Worked with William Ayers
In their best efforts to portray Barack as out of the mainstream, some on the right have tried characterizing the Chicago Annenberg Challenge as a dangerous fringe organization. What they do not discuss is the fact that the CAC was funded by a foundation belonging to Walter Annenberg, the billionaire Republican philanthropist who served as Richard M. Nixon's ambassador to the U.K. Annenberg and his wife, Leonore, gave the CAC $50 million in the 90's.
The Annenbergs-- Republicans. Bankrolled William Ayers with $50 million
But Walter and Leonore weren't just giving money to educational foundations started by William Ayers. They were also giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Republican National Committee and various other Republican groups, as well as to a whole host of Republican candidates, including the following:
George W. Bush $4000
Mitt Romney $5000
Strom Thurmond $1000
Fred Thompson $500
Rick Santorum $3000
Rick Santorum-- former Republican Senator. Received $3000 from Ayers' backers.
Why would billionaire Republican philanthropists give millions of dollars to a program that was working with William Ayers? Why would George W., Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson and all those other Republicans accept money from the people who were funding this William Ayers-associated group? Why won't McCain discuss these connections between the Republican Party and Ayers?
Here's the icing on the cake: just yesterday, the McCain campaign put out a press release bragging about the fact that Leonore Annenberg has endorsed him for president. Yes, you heard it-- a McCain backer bankrolled William Ayers with millions of dollars.
More icing: You know that Republican Arnold Weber I mentioned earlier? The one that served on the board of the CAC with Barack? Not only did he work with William Ayers in the 90's, he has also donated at least $1000 to the McCain campaign. That's right-- McCain is accepting money from associates of William Ayers, and so far has not given the money back.
I'm feeling a little cheated. Months ago I was promised an October surprise. It's already October 9th, and all I've heard is that Barack knows a guy who's been working with McCain supporters and Republicans since the mid 90's.
lol...why'd he feel he had to tell us about his great victory in the first place?
johnny says: Very telling. He doesn't feel like he has to prove anything to you and just ignores you.
um, what about all of that "fact, evidence and reason" that evan's sputtering about and of which he has never offered even the smallest scrap. he makes all of these assertions, but he doesn't back them up. he's lying.
I agree, Karin. Evan tells us that he marshalled "fact, evidence and reason" to bat away the Limousine Liberal's maladroit arguments. If that were the truth, he would readily furnish us with the opportunity to listen to the exchange ourselves, all the better to marvel at his expert performance. I suspect, however, that Evan decided to retail this fairy tale since, because Obama is moving inexorably towards victory on Election Day, there was nothing else for him to talk about.
Judge: GOP's voter purge a 'violation of federal law'Stephen C. Webster
The American Civil Liberties Union is trumpeting a judge's decision in Michigan which brings to a halt the practice of eliminating voters from rolls if their mailing address is found to be invalid.
Recently, the GOP chairman in Macomb County, Michigan, detailed a plan to use a list of foreclosed homes to challenge voters. His pronouncement drew an immediate backlash, with predictions that the plan would "backfire."
It has.
The suit, filed by ACLU national and ACLU of Michigan, along with the Advancement Project, aimed to protect voters whose registration cards were returned to government offices by post as 'undeliverable.' Judge Stephen J. Murphy of the U.S. District Court of Michigan's Eastern District concluded that the program of eliminating these voters from rolls is in violation of federal law.
The voter purge program, better known to elections integrity experts as 'voter caging,' is a long-storied GOP tactic employed against minority, student and low-income voters. In September, the Obama campaign filed a lawsuit in Michigan challenging the illegal tactic.
"You essentially send a first-class letter to a hoursehold where you suspect that that person no longer lives there but where they're still registered to vote," explained Allen Raymond, a convicted GOP elections fraudster who spent time in prison after the discovery of a phone-jamming scheme during the 2002 elections. "That letter comes back. ... Somebody [at the local polling place] then challenges that vote if that person comes in to vote."
"This is a very significant ruling for Michigan voters," said Matthew Lund, the ACLU cooperating attorney and a partner at Pepper Hamilton LLP who argued the case, in a release. "The court recognized – and repeated several times – that the state of Michigan is conducting unlawful voter purges that clearly violate the National Voter Registration Act. Michigan voters who were removed from the voting rolls for no reason other than failure to receive their ID card in the mail will now be allowed to vote in November.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN MCCAIN WAS ACORN'S '06 KEYNOTER!
Guess who was "palling around with" those wicked far-left "voter fraud"[1] extremists at ACORN?! Yup. John McCain was the keynote speaker at ACORN's February 2006 rally for immigration reform.
1 - There are no known cases of actual "voter fraud" by ACORN.
That's what McFool gets for being nice to leftists.
I googled it, and the only recent radio appearance of Sayet's I could find was an interview with Pamela Geller, not exactly a leftist.
Given Mr. Sayet's attitude and language on his own blog, even if what he said was true, he was probably just as nasty to his opponent, if not more so.
But somehow conservatives are nicer people. right.
but you will still vote for "mcfool," won't you, john?
hi, dan. i did that same google check earlier and came up with the same result.
The Note: McCain Losing Traction, Options as Final Debate Looms
October 15, 2008 8:40 AM
ABC News' Rick Klein reports in Wednesday's Note:
HEMPSTEAD, N.Y. -- This night, at least, they won’t be far apart.
As the big shots gather for one final time in the longest time that’s been the 2008 campaign, cue the careless talk over which strangers will make an appearance: Bill Ayers? Tony Rezko? The John McCain that Sarah Palin has been hoping for? The Barack Obama that Hillary Clinton had been hoping for?
But you may be right that there’s a bigger question forming a storm front over Long Island Wednesday: Does any of it matter?
So it goes like this: McCain is caught in the worst kind of no man’s land 20 days out, behind by just enough for it to keep him out of range of a second wind. Obama is not the angry young man, and he has answered the question of whether he belongs on the same stage as McCain.
McCain’s attacks (and those he might yet launch) are under the complex pressure of mixed messaging (maybe that’s not his style) and fears of backlash (don’t ask me why).
Read the rest of The Note -- and get all the latest on the 2008 election, Congress, the White House and the wide world of politics every day -- from Rick Klein by bookmarking this link.
It’s Obama who, from the previous encounters, derived the most benefit -- as reflected by the polls (14 points in the latest NYT/CBS numbers), and the race’s psychology.
And the build-up over what strategy McCain will employ makes that a story regardless: Either he finally attacks, and risks looking desperate, or he doesn’t, and risks looking like he senses that he sees the lights going out.
“Every indication -- including a New York Times/CBS News poll released Tuesday that showed Mr. Obama vaulting to a significant lead -- suggests that Mr. Obama has succeeded in erasing many of those doubts [about his candidacy], primarily through the debates,” Adam Nagourney writes in The New York Times.
“Mr. McCain is highly unlikely to let this third and final debate -- the last time in the campaign that he will command an audience anywhere near this size -- pass without a fight,” Nagourney writes. “Still, history suggests that barring a major mistake by Mr. Obama -- who has over this year not made many -- or some startling new attack or appeal by Mr. McCain, it will be hard to erase the impressions that Mr. Obama left in the first two debates.”
As for Ayers: “Speaking to a St. Louis radio station on Tuesday, John McCain said that Barack Obama's recent suggestion that McCain does not have guts to raise the Bill Ayers issue to his face ‘probably ensured’ that the former Weather Underground leader will come up in Wednesday's final presidential debate,” per ABC’s Ron Claiborne, Teddy Davis, and Arnab Datta.
Continue reading today's Note by clicking HERE.
ABC News' Hope Ditto contributed to this report.
lol, Evan's head seems to be in the sand in this one. It's the classic, neocon defensive position.
"And the build-up over what strategy McCain will employ makes that a story regardless: Either he finally attacks, and risks looking desperate, or he doesn’t, and risks looking like he senses that he sees the lights going out."
Oh, I get it. Heads you win, tails he loses. Brilliant.
There were repeated split screen moments in which Obama's talking about this or that and McCain is there just looking like he's seething -- stiff, like he can barely contain himself. Just tight and angry. As David Gergen just said on CNN watching McCain on the split screens was "almost like [seeing] an exercise in anger management."
McCain's just angry and contemptuous of Obama. And you can see that the whole campaign has just gotten under his skin. Like I said at the beginning, when McCain said "hurting and angry", I think a lot of people will think he was talking about himself.
There were repeated split screen moments in which Obama's talking about this or that and McCain is there just looking like he's seething -- stiff, like he can barely contain himself. Just tight and angry. As David Gergen just said on CNN watching McCain on the split screens was "almost like [seeing] an exercise in anger management."
McCain's just angry and contemptuous of Obama. And you can see that the whole campaign has just gotten under his skin. Like I said at the beginning, when McCain said "hurting and angry", I think a lot of people will think he was talking about himself.
It bore repeating.
Post a Comment