Reading Assignments

REVISIONIST HISTORY: PART 1
I picked up the new issue of GQ during lunch today (having a newsstand in the office is a nice perk), and read several well-written pieces on a variety of subjects. But the Editor's Letter by Jim Nelson is one of the best things I've read about the destruction of education and history unfolding in Texas. It cuts right to the bone, and cops just the right attitude. Read the whole thing.

HEADS UP, HE NEVER HAD ANY...
Daniel Larison rips the Band-Aid off the tire-swinging media types lamenting the departure of John McCain's Integrity. It breaks down perfectly how McCain thrived so many years by fooling some of the people, some of the time. And now when his transparent policy shifts should be fooling NO ONE, the morons in the media are waxing nostalgic.

REVISIONIST HISTORY: PART 2
Today's big, bad, brave bullying Teabaggers would shit their pants and die on the spot if they actually encountered real communism, facism or tyranny. An interesting post by a historian on the fallacies spread by these ignorant jackasses, and why it's a mistake not to confront it.

Proof We Elected the Right Guy

Thanks to 60 Minutes and Mark Halperin's new 352-page gossip column, by now you've all heard that:

• Harry Reid used the word "Negro" and he should resign. (1)

• Bill Clinton told Ted Kennedy that Obama is a coffee-slave. (2)

• Sarah Palin is a pathological liar and dumber than a box of Todd's snowmobile parts (3)

• Poor John Edwards is the totally innocent filling in the Oreo cookie of his nasty, harpy wife and seductive mistress. (4)

• Cindy McCain was busted making out with someone other than her husband. (5)

So how does that prove Obama was the right candidate to become President? As Balloon Juice commenter JenJen astutely points out:

You know, one important point completely missed by our Awesome Liberal Media as they thumb through the index of Mark Halperin’s shitty book is this: There are literally ZERO revelations about the President, or his campaign staff, in this book. Nada. Goose Eggs. Nothing. And that says a lot about our President, and his campaign staff, who apparently were far too aware to give Halperin even one toss-off quote.

(1) Reid made a clumsily-worded but entirely valid and accurate statement on racism in America. Much as I hate Reid, this isn't the reason he should lose his job.

(2) According to the hearsay from an unnamed source regarding a second-hand conversation with a now-deceased person.

(3) 100% true.

(4) Because between chemo treatments, terminal cancer patients should be watching their husband's backs and keeping their dicks zipped for them.

(5) "This is excellent news for John McCain."

Weatherproof

Weather was nasty in Pennsylvania today. McCain canceled his rally, but Obama played on...




Some awesome shots—check 'em all out at Shakesville.

'Hero' for the "Hero"

NOTE: Audio NSFW.

The Daily Lie

I should have started this weeks ago...

Every day for the rest of the campaign, I'm going to give you one of the brazen lies of John McCain or Sarah Palin. The hard part will be choosing which one...Let's kick it off with this one:



Prove it, you lying asshole. Video? Audio? Hell, even a still photo or pencil sketch?

Yeah, that's what I thought...

Some Context

An excellent comment from a thread at John Cole's:

If Bill Ayers is such a scary terrorist, why are Bush, Cheney, and McCain just letting the guy walk around free? If he’s the most evil person ever, shouldn’t McCain spearhead some sort of operation to capture him? Laura Bush has killed more people than Bill Ayers. I think the only people to die from a weatherman bomb were a couple of people from the group who blew themselves up. I mean, we’re talking about terrorists named after a Bob Dylan lyric for Chrissakes.

I don’t want to defend any sort of bombing, but you gotta remember that during that period, black people would get KILLED for looking for a job in a white neighborhood. JFK, RFK, and MLK were all KILLED. the national guard KILLED students at Kent State. There dozens and dozens of riots. Uprisings at Ivy League schools. Even the daughter of William Randolph Hearst became a terrorist. It was a violent time in America. People drove through riot-burned streets only to go home and watch the news which showed their children coming home from the other side of the world in a body bag. There were concerns amongst the rightwing that the black soldiers coming home from war would be starting a guerrilla war revolution in the streets of American cities. It was a crazy crazy time. And Obama was about 8 when all that was happening.

Nylund October 9th, 2008 at 10:22 am

That Laura Bush line is the Quote of the Freaking Month. But it's true, these Weatherman guys were more Keystone Cops than al Queda—even the bombs they DID manage to plant, they called ahead to warn everyone to get out. And considering the state of affairs of the day, I'm not sure anything less would've attracted attention. [NOTE: Not a defense, morans.]

Another 1,000 Words

[h/t open thread at Kos]

Thirteen Minutes

...is all it takes to reduce John McCain' reputation of a Maverick™ and reformer to rubble.



How much would a thirteen minute ad cost?

Prediction: Look for some horrendously produced rip-off / response video from the McCain camp—only, unlike this one which is 100% true and skewers McCain with his own defense attorney—The GOP version will be complete fabrication about Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers rowing a boat out to Hawaii to indoctrinate an eight-year-old boy to be their Manchurian Black Panther candidate for President forty years later...

1,000 Words

[h/t Kleiman]

Galloping to a Lead

I don't remember the numbers, but on the radio I heard Gallop had Obama opening up big leads in the "key" swing states...something along the lines of an 8-point lead in Ohio and Florida and 15 in PA. That's big news because they are key electoral states, but also areas he was supposed to struggle.

As evidenced by those swings, a lot can change in a short amount of time, but I see this looking increasingly difficult for McCain to stage a comeback on his own. He has damaged his own image severely over the last couple weeks, and I don't think Palin is going to do anything to help his cause...

The Knight in Shining Terry Cloth. . . [with updates on phones and fools]

Total. Fraud. [link]

After declaring he’d return to Washington to help with the bailout negotiations immediately after last night’s debate, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) never went to Capitol Hill today. In fact, McCain stayed largely holed up in his Arlington apartment, leaving only to go to his campaign headquarters just around the block, the New York Times reports:

Asked why Mr. McCain did not go to Capitol Hill after coming back to Washington to help with negotiations, [McCain adviser] Mr. Salter replied that “he can effectively do what he needs to do by phone."

Yeah. 72 hours ago the planet was tipping off its axis, tv appearances canceled, campaigns suspended, and debates should be rescheduled so Johnnie Drama could fly to D.C. to personally, with his bare hands, wrest an economic solution from a hapless Congress, Treasury and President...

But today, when nobody's paying attention, McCain can handle his "role" in the negotiations in his bathrobe from one of his thirteen houses.

UPDATE [even better]: I suppose that's understandable, because when he DID show up in person it went like this

Bush turned to McCain, who joked, "The longer I am around here, the more I respect seniority." McCain then turned to Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to speak first.

Boehner was blunt. The plan Paulson laid out would not win the support of the vast majority of House Republicans. It had been improved on the edges, with an oversight board and caps on the compensation of participating executives. But it had to be changed at the core. He did not mention the insurance alternative, but Democrats did. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, pressed Boehner hard, asking him if he really intended to scrap the deal and start again.

No, Boehner replied, he just wanted his members to have a voice. Obama then jumped in to turn the question on his rival: "What do you think of the [insurance] plan, John?" he asked repeatedly. McCain did not answer.

If there were video of that exchange it would end this thing right fucking now.

UPDATE 2: Josh Marshall has the next two paragraphs...

[...] McCain did not answer.

One Republican in the room said it was clear that the Democrats came into the meeting with a "game plan" aimed at forcing McCain to choose between the administration and House Republicans. "They had taken McCain's request for a meeting and trumped it," said this source.

Congressional aides from both parties were standing in the lobby of the West Wing, unaware of the discord inside the Cabinet room, when McCain emerged alone, shook the hands of the Marines at the door and left. The aides were baffled. The plan had been for a bipartisan appearance before the media, featuring McCain, Obama and at least a firm statement in favor of intervention. Now, one of the leading men was gone.

Awesome. THAT is the difference between tactics and strategy, Senator McCain.

UPDATE 3 [you can't make this stuff up]:

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) praised Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) for returning to Washington to help the bailout negotiations, saying his presence was vital to the negotiations:

"John didn't phone this one in.... You can't phone something like this in. Thank God John came back."

Seems to me, the only time progress WAS happening was when McCain was nowhere near negotiations—the deal is almost done before he parachutes in, he screws it all up, sits on his hands in the big meeting, and then backs down and goes to the debate. He then spends Saturday hanging around the house LITERALLY PHONING IT IN, drops by the campaign office and then he and Barbie go out to dinner with the Liebermans.

Yeah, sounds like he played a VITAL role, Sen. Huckleberry. As Benen said,

""Thank God John came back"? There's partisan hackery and then there's THIS kind of partisan hackery."

Late Night Awesome

Don't leave Dave Letterman holding the bag and expect him to cover for you...



John McCain gambles and loses AGAIN. He cancels on Letterman, telling him "he's needed immediately in Washington and the campaign is suspended"...then he goes down the street and tapes an interview with Katie Couric.

Bad move.

Letterman leads the show with five solid minutes of just wailing on McCain, and then brings in Keith Olbermann to fill the time!

Which video is going to be passed around the internet and watched by more people? Letterman's drubbing or Couric's foot massage?

I don't think that's even close...

UPDATE: This morning on ABC News radio: A wrap-up story on Letterman hammering McCain, including a clip; zero coverage of Couric interview.

His Campaign Has Fallen And It Can't Get Up

And everyone seems happy to kick McCain when he's down...
Ezra:

He's a kid pulling the fire alarm because final is coming up and he hasn't studied. Such a panicked response to declining poll numbers and major national events does not inspire confidence. You don't get to call time out when you're president.

Big Media Matt:

I think walking and chewing gum at the same time is part of the president’s job.

Dr. Josh

What's changed today in the financial crisis other than John McCain's poll numbers tanking? Isn't this the campaign equivalent of faking an injury when you're down late in the 4th quarter?

Benen:

McCain, who has played no direct role in the negotiations thus far, wants to swoop in and tell everyone what they need to do. This from a man who hasn't shown up for work at all in literally months.

Rep. Barney Frank:

"It's the longest Hail Mary pass in the history of either football or Marys."

Obama, FTW:

Obama, speaking to reporters in Florida, turned down McCain's offer to delay the debate. "Presidents are going to have to deal with more than one thing at a time," he said. "It's not necessary for us to think that we can do only one thing, and suspend everything else."

“IT'S A TRAP!” or “This is good news for John McCain.”

As I mentioned previously, last week was pretty busy for me, so I am just catching up on pretty much everything that happened during that time...

My initial thoughts were that this economic meltdown couldn't have come at a better time for Obama—or more precisely—a worse time for McCain. I read the unanimous rejection of the Bush Bailout Plan by anyone with a brain. I saw some more palatable plans suggested (see below). But the one post I read that is really sticking with me is this one at Hullaballo, wherein Digby directs us to a possible GOP jujitsu move:

Republican incumbents in close races have the easiest vote of their lives coming up this week: No on the Bush-Pelosi Wall Street bailout.

God Himself couldn't have given rank-and-file Republicans a better opportunity to create political space between themselves and the Administration. ...Let this be the political establishment (Bush Republicans in the White House + Democrats in Congress) saddling the taxpayers with hundreds of billions in debt (more than the Iraq War, conjured up in a single weekend, and enabled by Pelosi, btw), while principled Republicans say "No" and go to the country with a stinging indictment of the majority in Congress...

And it will work, too. These GOP cocksuckers threw open the vaults and let their buddies ransack the economy for eight years, and now, just as the scope of the theft is uncovered, and the Dems step in to re-lock the door, the GOP shouts "Look!" and pins it all on them.

And nobody is better poised to work this angle than McCain—he can demagogue the shit out of this: Pander to conservatives by "standing up to" the spending, play anti-government and anti-corporate "maverick" by bucking Bush on the issue, and at the same time he can blame the Democratic majority for passing the massive giveaway.

There is not a question in my mind that this could play out that way and not just cost Obama the election, but have an impact on the Congress.

Perfectly timed, no? And the last several years show that the Democrats are all to willing to try and kick the football every time Lucy tees it up.

There is a way around this...overwhelming opposition to Paulson's plan, and crafting one along the lines of Dodd's but with more than a five-man oversight panel. They need MAJOR regulatory reforms, and punitive measures. And as Ed Kilgore notes:

Democrats are right to demand significant substantive concessions before offering their support for the Paulson Plan. But just as importantly, they need to demand Republican votes in Congress, including the vote of John McCain. If this is going to be a "bipartisan" relief plan, it has to be fully bipartisan, not an opportunity for McCain to count on Obama and other Democrats to save the economy while exploiting their sense of responsibility to win the election for the party that let this crisis occur in the first place.

Kilgore's right, this plan only works if the Democrats inoculate themselves by making sure it's bipartisan. Bring it to the floor, and make the Republicans, starting with McCain, vote "yea" first.

UPDATE: Kleimann climbs onboard:

And — this is the part I didn't guess up front — the Democrats don't trust the Republicans not to double-cross them by allowing a bailout to pass (thus satisfying the Republicans' paymasters) while mostly voting against "the Bush-Pelosi bailout" and running as populists.

[...] At minimum, Harry Reid should announce right now that no bill will reach the Senate floor unless both Presidential candidates have signed on as sponsors.

Too bad Harry Reid has never shown the strategy or stones to pull that off.

What's Wrong With This Cover?

Let me help you out. Pretend you walk up to a newsstand. You're looking for the new issue of People. There it is, right there in the rack. The rack that covers the bottom portion of the cover. And who is placed inexplicably low on the cover? The McCain's adopted daughter Bridget. WTF?

I have been a magazine art director for 15 years, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that this was a deliberate decision by the magazine. Nothing gets more attention than the cover, and there are a host of people that weigh in on even the tiniest of details.

For each and every cover, the prioritization and placement of text and every important element takes into account the newsstand rack, the mailing label, you name it. Nothing is placed anywhere without a reason and careful consideration.

The art director, editor and photographer determined that the "MEET THE McCAINS" copy could afford to be placed low because PEOPLE generally gets prominent placement and is often unobstructed. And in racks where it is partially obscured, Cindy and John McCain are instantly recognizable.

This was probably one of dozens of shots taken, and one of multiple arrangements of the subjects, but I cannot think of any reason why any of the shots would have included putting an adult on a foot-high riser.

But the decision to place Bridget, of all the children, that far down is simply awful. It would be questionable to place anyone sitting that much lower than anyone else, but the fact that they chose her, and the likely reason why is what's disgraceful.

It is straight-up racism. Now, I'm not implying that this is the result of racist actors, but race IS the reason. She was deliberately minimized on the cover with certain elements of the public in mind. The fact that she is blocked on some racks is a bonus to them for their decision to isolate her from the family to start with.

What they have done is relegate her to the spot usually reserved for the family dog.

There is no good reason she should not be placed one "head" higher. The only possible reason I can rationalize is that the decision was in part to give prominence to the chest of [minor celebrity] Meghan directly behind her. But that is not sufficient reason. If boobs were an element that they wanted to capitalize on, they simply would have moved Meghan slightly to the right and made sure Bridget was at the right height, but off Meghan's chest to the left.

So, my experience tells me it was no accident that they chose to run with a shot with the "different" child banished to the lower corner, and it is a fucking disgrace.

For the record, this is all on People. I don't have any reason to attribute any blame to McCain. Hell, as was pointed out in comments elsewhere, John and Cindy might even've thought "Hey, Bridget's right there in the front row!"

[h/t Shakesville]

UPDATE: Still the Palin cover at the CVS around the corner. Why did they use a shot of the baby asleep? Now I have to question if it is to minimize his Downs appearance.

Which VP Cares About Women?

Could somebody please explain why any woman who supported Hillary Clinton should now vote McCain/Palin? Or for that matter, why any self-respecting woman—pro-choice or pro-life—should be swayed by the fact that McCain's VP pick is female. Because it would appear that Sarah Palin's record on womens' issues is even worse than McCain's: When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, it was the city's policy to charge rape victims for the cost of the rape kit to collect forensic evidence.

Wasilla was the only town in all of Alaska with this policy, and the state legislature had to pass a law to specifically stop the town's practice. A move that elicited complaints from Palin's hand-picked police chief and the mayor herself.

Hilzoy takes a closer look at this and draws a great contrast between VP candidates as a result...

[...] when Sarah Palin was mayor, Wasilla used to charge rape victims for their forensic exams. It's abhorrent, especially when you note that as mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin had no problem raising [millions] to build a sports center, but drew the line at paying for rape exams.

But there are two points that are worth underscoring. First, this would have been bad enough if it was just a matter of being decent to women who have been raped. But it's not. Unless the police catch the guy in the act, forensic exams provide some of the best evidence against a rapist. Not collecting this evidence means significantly lowering your chances of convicting the man who did it. That means that the people who pay for this idiotic policy are not just the rape victims whose tests are not done, but any women their rapists might go on to rape in the future. Not collecting the evidence that would put rapists behind bars means more rape victims in the future.

You'd think that $5,000 to $14,000 a year would be a small price to pay for putting violent sex offenders behind bars. Apparently, Sarah Palin disagrees.

Second, Alaska had to ban this practice in order to qualify for funding under the Violence Against Women Act, which was, of course, sponsored by Joe Biden

[...] One Vice Presidential nominee turned her back on past and future rape victims. Another was looking out for them.

Oh, and guess who voted against the Violence Against Women Act? John McCain

So, in Sarah Palin's Mavericky World of Reform™, if you are raped not only are you the only crime victim forced to pay for your own investigation, but you get the added bonus of being forced to have the rapist's baby as well.

Feel the Feminism!

UPDATE: Sickening specifics from McClatchy (which has rapidly become the only useful news organization). [Emphasis mine]:

Eight years ago, complaints about charging rape victims for medical exams in Wasilla prompted the Alaska Legislature to pass a bill -- signed into law by [former Governer Tony] Knowles -- that banned the practice statewide.

"There was one town in Alaska that was charging victims for this, and that was Wasilla," Knowles said

A May 23, 2000, article in Wasilla's newspaper, The Frontiersman, noted that Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies regularly pay for such exams, which cost between $300 and $1,200 apiece.

"(But) the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests," the newspaper reported.

It also quoted Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon objecting to the law. Fannon was appointed to his position by Palin after her dismissal of the previous police chief. He said it would cost Wasilla $5,000 to $14,000 a year if the city had to foot the bill for rape exams.

"In the past we've charged the cost of exams to the victims' insurance company when possible," Fannon told the newspaper. "I just don't want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer."

It was all about the tax burden. This is a town that Palin was comfortable putting $20 million in debt to build a rink for the "hawkey moms", but couldn't scrape up the relative change in the couch cushions to have the police pay to collect it's own fucking evidence? In a state where residents get an oil royalties check every year? Oh, and did I forget to mention that rape in Alaska is double the national average, and the state has led the country in per capita rapes 26 of the last 30 years?

Holy. Fucking. Bullshit.

I had no intention of blogging politics tonight. In fact, last night I became so despondent about the damn election, I didn't think I wanted to waste my time anymore.

That didn't last long.

McCain launched another ad today, and even though his past several ads have been totally dishonest and infuriating, nothing approaches what he does in this one.

[blood. boiling.]

It's an "education" spot. The ad warms up by pulling some out-of-context quotes from newspaper articles to claim Obama is bad for "supporting the public school monopoly" or some bullshit, but that's just the pretext for bringing up the most dishonest and offensive attack I think I've EVER seen in a political ad.

McCain's shop takes an awkward photo of Obama, silhouettes it out of its setting, and uses it as the visual for a claim that basically accuses Obama of being, at best, a leering pervert—or, at worst, a fucking child molester.

[voiceover] Obama's one accomplishment? Legislation to teach "comprehensive sex education" to kindergartners.

Learning about sex...

...before learning to read?

Barack Obama.

Wrong on education. Wrong for your family. "

That's a goddamn outrage.

I know exactly what that claim is misrepresenting, because right wing asshats tried to make hay with this a year or two ago... In Illinois, Obama supported a program that has nothing to do with "sex education" in the sense McCain implies—it was a program to teach children about inappropriate touching to help protect them from predators.

Accusing a man who is the father of two young girls, who supports commmon-sense precautions that are commonly taught in schools and communities nationwide, of being some sort of perv or sex offender.

John McCain "approves this message."

What a fucking desperate, pathetic, piece of shit of a man he is.

UPDATE: Talking Points Memo has the video, Steve Benen Hilzoy has more, including details on the legislation.

FOLLOW-UP: I'm not settling for some weak-ass statement from an Obama campaign spokeperson. This calls for a direct response from Obama himself. Not in response to a reporter, but buy a fucking spot and ram this shit down McCain's throat. When McCain hasn't been trying to paint Obama as an arugula-eating elitist, he's been working the scary, angry black man angle.

Time for Obama to be angry alright. But with a twist McCain will regret. Nothing is more powerful or righteous than an angry parent. McCain just opened the door for Obama to rip his goddamn head off. Will he do it?

UPDATE 2: The Rude Pundit is on the same page...

We know the game here, the racial politics, the fear of sex that's rampant on the right. John McCain has finally released his rage and hatred, and it is a sight to behold. Watching McCain unleashed is like watching a starving tiger in a pen of gazelle. It ain't gonna be pretty. The Rude Pundit imagines McCain seeing the faces of his captors in everyone he looks at, and he's got a bayonet.

Unless the Obama campaign starts throwing shit at McCain, it will be over. Yeah, Obama wants to change politics, but ask anyone who has ever tried to subvert a system: you gotta do it from the inside. And if you cringe at the idea of Obama stepping into the muck and mire of post-Atwater poltics, then ask yourself: will he get more done by keeping his shoes clean and losing?

[...]Stay angry. Again: The McCain campaign just said that Barack Obama wants to teach 6 year-olds how to fuck. That deserves a little more of a response than it's "perverse" or whatever shit the Obama campaign just put out.

[...] In other words, Obama campaign, as so many others have advised, go on offense, and that means you have to offend.

Liars

This is the horse-made-of-bullshit Cowboy John McCain rode out of the stable the other day...



A couple of real mavericks those two...

It is filled with misleading crap, but it includes one clear, undeniable, flat-out lie. It says Palin "stopped the bridge to nowhere." Not even close to true. The U.S. Congress stopped the bridge (in effect) when they removed the earmark that dedicated the money to the bridge. And this occured before Palin was even elected governor! And during that campaign she actually supported the bridge project. Even after the bridge became a national symbol of waste and a late night tv punchline, Palin still supported it, telling residents of the area that "you aren't 'nowhere' to me."

Once she was governor, the project was a political non-starter, but she still took every dime of the federal money for the bridge and allocated it for other projects—including the roads that lead to the non-existent bridge.

Here is Obama's response ad in which attacks back with the same theme...



It's about fucking time. The ad actually uses the word "lying"—which is accurate and patently obvious—yet further than I thought they would go.

Now Obama just needs to get out in front on this shit and play some offense, not just defense.

Impressions of Palin

She's very good.

Seriously. Some of that is the context—she shared a stage with some AWFUL speakers—but she blew away the field. She is far and away the best public speaker and presenter on the GOP team, and will clearly be the highlight of this otherwise moribund convention. I fear she will be a terrific motivator for a swath of the party that has pretty much sat on the sidelines until now.

There was a laundry list of bullshit in that speech, but nobody watching that will know it, and no one in the media will call her on it.

Palin brought out pure red meat for the base. Perfectly prepared, and served with a smile. She hit every GOP applause line, and checked off the usual list of imaginary foes, and totally fraudulent talking points.

Her record is thin, her experience lacking, and the substance of her message is crap, but it won't matter, I think she just earned herself a giant fucking pass from the doubters in her party and from a media just waiting to get put back in its place.

John McCain might have made a risky campaign decision, or a bad post-election governing decision, but he clearly made a great casting decision, and I think she just aced her audition.

It remains to be seen how this message is received in the wider, non-convention arena, but she did her job tonight.

She's a gamechanger.

In Case You Forgot...

...John McCain was a P.O.W.

Look closely and you might spot Fred Thompson giving his speech at the Republican Convention Tuesday night in front of a fucking IMAX of the Hanoi Hilton.