Reminding you again why McCain is unfit for the presidency.

sorry for the lack of updates. i'm swamped. here's a great article to fill the void.


He Just Can’t Quit W
By FRANK RICH
Published: October 18, 2008

OLD Mr. Straight Talk has become so shaky a speaker that when he does talk straight, it’s startling. On Wednesday night, John McCain mustered exactly one such moment of clarity: “Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago.”

Thanks largely to this line, McCain’s remaining base in the political press graded his last debate performance his best. The public, not so much. As with the previous debates, every poll found Barack Obama the winner, this time by as much as two-to-one ratios. Obama even swept the focus group convened by the G.O.P. pollster Frank Luntz in the once-impregnable McCain bunker of Fox News.

Perhaps voters were unimpressed by McCain’s big moment because they can figure out the obvious rejoinder: Why didn’t McCain run against President Bush four years ago — as he had four years before that? Instead McCain campaigned for Bush’s re-election, cheered for Bush policies he once opposed and helped lower himself and America into the pit where we find ourselves today.

The day after the debate, McCain put up a new ad trying yet again to shake the president. “The last eight years haven’t worked very well, have they?” he asks, as if he were an innocent bystander the entire time. But no matter what McCain says or does, he still can’t quit the guy. Heading from a Midtown hotel to a fund-raiser the night before facing Obama onstage on Long Island last week, the McCain motorcade lined up right next to the New York red-carpet premiere of Oliver Stone’s “W.” A black cat would have been a better omen.

The election isn’t over, but there remain only three discernible, if highly unlikely, paths to a McCain victory. A theoretically mammoth wave of racism, incessantly anticipated by the press, could materialize in voting booths on Nov. 4. Or newly registered young and black voters could fail to show up. Or McCain could at long last make good on his most persistent promise: follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell and, once there, strangle him with his own bare hands on “Hannity & Colmes.”

Even Republicans are rapidly bailing on a McCain resuscitation. It’s a metaphor for the party’s collapse that on the day of the final debate both Nancy Reagan and Dick Cheney checked into hospitals. Conservatives have already moved past denial to anger on the Kubler-Ross scale of grief. They are not waiting for votes to be counted before carrying out their first round of Stalinist purges. William F. Buckley’s son Christopher was banished from National Review for endorsing Obama. Next thing you know, there will be a fatwa on that McCain-bashing lefty, George Will.

As the G.O.P.’s long night of the long knives begins, myths are already setting in among the right’s storm troops and the punditocracy alike as to what went wrong. And chief among them are the twin curses of Bush and the “headwinds” of the economy. No Republican can win if the party’s incumbent president is less popular than dirt, we keep being told, or if a looming Great Depression 2 is Issue No. 1.

This is an excuse, not an explanation. It absolves McCain of much of the blame and denies Obama much of the credit for their campaigns. It arouses pity for McCain when he deserves none. It rewrites history.

Bush’s impact on the next Republican presidential candidate did not have to be so devastating. McCain isn’t, as he and his defenders keep protesting, a passive martyr to a catastrophic administration. He could have made separating himself from Bush the brave, central and even conservative focus of his campaign. Far from doing that, he embraced the Bush ethos — if not the incredible shrinking man himself — more tightly than ever. The candidate who believes in “country first” decided to put himself first and sell out his principles. That ignoble decision is what accounts for both the McCain campaign’s failures and its sleaze. It’s a decision McCain made on his own and for which he has yet to assume responsibility.

Though it seems a distant memory now, McCain was a maverick once. He did defy Bush on serious matters including torture, climate change and the over-the-top tax cuts that bankrupted a government at war and led to the largest income inequality in America since the 1930s. But it isn’t just his flip-flopping on some of these and other issues that turned him into a Bush acolyte. The full measure of McCain’s betrayal of his own integrity cannot even be found in that Senate voting record — 90 percent in lockstep with the president — that Obama keeps throwing in his face.

The Bushian ethos that McCain embraced, as codified by Karl Rove, is larger than any particular vote or policy. Indeed, by definition that ethos is opposed to the entire idea of policy. The whole point of the Bush-Rove way of doing business is that principles, coherent governance and even ideology must always be sacrificed for political expediency, no matter the cost to the public good.

Like McCain now, Bush campaigned in 2000 as a practical problem-solver who could “work across the partisan divide,” as he put it in his first debate with Al Gore. He had no strong views on any domestic or foreign issue, except taxes and education. Only after he entered the White House did we learn his sole passion: getting and keeping power. That imperative, not the country, would always come first.

One journalist who detected this modus operandi early was Ron Suskind, who, writing for Esquire in January 2003, induced John DiIulio, the disillusioned chief of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, to tell all. “There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus,” DiIulio said. “What you’ve got is everything — and I mean everything — being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis.”

If politics strongarm everything, you end up with the rampant cronyism, nonexistent long-term planning and abrupt, partisan policy improvisations that fed the calamities of Iraq, Katrina and the economic meltdown. Incredibly, McCain has nakedly endorsed the Bush-Rove brand of governance in his own campaign by assembling his personal set of lobbyist cronies and Rove operatives to run it. They have not only entangled him in a welter of conflicts of interest, but they’ve furthered cynical political stunts like the elevation of Sarah Palin. At least Bush and Rove didn’t try to put an unqualified hack like, say, Alberto Gonzales half a heartbeat away from the presidency.

As if the Palin pick weren’t damning enough, McCain and his team responded to the financial panic by offering their own panicky simulation of the Bush style of crisis management in real time. Fire the S.E.C. chairman and replace him with Andrew Cuomo! Convene a 9/11 commission to save Wall Street! Don’t bail out A.I.G.! Do bail out A.I.G.! Reacting to polls and the short-term dictates of 24-hour news cycles, McCain offered as many economic-policy reboots in a month as Bush offered “Plans for Victory” during the first three years of the Iraq war.

Now McCain is trying to distract us from his humiliating managerial ineptitude by cranking up the politics of fear — another trademark Bush-Rove strategy. But the McCain camp’s quixotic effort to turn an “old washed-up terrorist” into a wedge issue as divisive as same-sex marriage is too little, too late and too tone-deaf at a time when Americans are suffering too much to indulge in 1960s culture wars. Voters want policies that might actually work rather than another pandering, cynical leader who operates mainly on the basis of his “gut” and political self-interest.

The former Bush speechwriter David Frum has facetiously written that McCain could be rescued by “a 5,000-point rise in the Dow and a 20 percent jump in home prices.” But the economy, stupid, can’t be blamed for McCain’s own failures, any more than Bush can be. Even before the housing bubble burst and Wall Street tumbled, voters could see that the seething, impulsive nominee isn’t temperamentally fit to be president.

That’s where the debates have come in. There may have been none of those knockout blows the press craves, but the accretional effect has been to teach the public that McCain isn’t steady enough to run the country even if the economy were sound, and that Obama just might be.

In Debate No. 1, you could put the volume on mute and see what has proved to be the lasting impressions of both candidates start to firm up. In Debate No. 2, McCain set the concrete: he re-enacted the troubling psychological cartography of his campaign “suspension” by wandering around the stage like a half-dotty uncle vainly trying to flee his caregiver. After the sneering and eye-rolling of McCain’s “best” debate on Wednesday, CNN’s poll found the ever-serene Obama swamping him on “likeability,” 70 to 22 percent.

At least McCain had half a point on Wednesday night when he said, “I am not President Bush.” What he has offered his country this year is an older, crankier, more unsteady version of Bush. Tragically, he can no sooner escape our despised president than he can escape himself.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/20/us/politics/20powell.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Sometimes when people write articles that become famous based on ideas that I've had for some time, I get irritated. Other times, I'm just glad the message is in print. The following article is in the category of the latter.

Thank you Maureen.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/opinion/08dowd.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Authoritarian Palin Politics

The Times published a damning article on Sarah Palin yesterday, and it quickly shot up to the top emailed story. It is a little lengthy, but it did a good job of not repeating the usual information that plagues articles critical of the governor. The overall sense that I walked away with from teh article was that Palin has more similarities to the current administration than I previously realized. My number one concern is that she has surrounded her administration with secrecy, even to the point of using private email addresses for state business (which removes information on governance from the public view). There are also repeated stories of administrators being released under suspicious circumstances. I am concerned that she is one who silences those with whom she disagrees and presents a totally different face to the public. Evidence of this is her insistance on using social issues to gain votes (even when running for mayor of a 9000 person town!) rather than discussing relevant issues to her constituents. I think she is a politician of the sickest order. Our country has suffered under bad foreign policy and diplomacy over the last eight years because of a leader unwilling to foster critical debate. This has been one of the central promises of the Obama campaign- open debate! He is made fun of for having a huge foreign policy team, but at least he is interested in including a number of people in his decision making process. Sarah Palin has sought to increase government action at the cost of representation of people. This is fundamentally opposed to the system of government put in place by our forefathers. Look for yourself!

I am distressed at her rise to fame, and concerned that the American people are not carefully enough combing her record. I encourage everyone to do some research from all sorts of sources! Contrast journalistic accounts of her with her public personae! It is truly alarming!

a border crossing, eh?

"Obama aides described the new revisions to Palin's account as part of a growing pattern of deception. "The McCain campaign said Governor Palin opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, but now we know she supported it. They said she didn't seek earmarks, but now we know she hired a lobbyist to get millions in pork for her town and her state. They said she visited Iraq, but today we learned that she only stopped at the border. Americans are starting to wonder, is there anything the McCain campaign isn't lying about?" Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor asked in a statement e-mailed to reporters.

"A short time later, the Obama campaign circulated a new Bloomberg story that questions whether the McCain campaign has been sending out false crowd estimates.

"On two occasions since Palin joined the ticket, McCain aides have cited law enforcement sources in claiming enormous crowds -- but law enforcement officials interviewed by Bloomberg denied having given such estimates."

see article from the Washington Post.

also may want to take a look at the Bloomberg info mentioned above.

Palin

The interesting thing about politics, is that sometimes issues are very clear and other times they aren't. What is ironic, is that when issues are clear for some, they're blurry for others. I'm hoping that there is one thing that we can all agree upon, regardless of party affiliation:

the vice president of the United States of America should have more foreign experience than I do, a 23 year old graduate student.

I'm also not all that thrilled, that I'm more educated than a potential vice president of the United States.

so can we all just congratulate her for her volunteer work on the PTA and her historic election as the governor of Alaska, and leave it at that? I mean, is this really something that we need to talk about, need to process?

Does anyone else need to be reminded of the last time we elected someone because we felt like he was "like us?" We need people with experience but also judgement. Someone who encourages dissent. George Bush had a nice accent but because of his lack of experience and confidence he was able to be manipulated by his own vice president.

Didn't we realize over the last eight years that the vice president could have very real power and that someone who is overly ideological and under-qualified can really cost the American people quite a bit? the lives of their daughters and sons, their reputation, the safety of their people when they travel. All these things have been compromised in large part because of the work of our current vice president.

John McCain is really really old. Sarah Palin needs to be considered not only as a VP candidate, but also as a candidate for our highest political office, the most powerful position in the world. Would she, as someone with no international experience, really be confident enough to foster critical debate among some of the most brilliant minds in America about economic, political and social issues in Japan, Russia, Bolivia, Jamaica and Angola? Could she find these countries on a map?

There is not critical debate at the white house unless it is fostered. You really want me to believe that a hockeymom will ask the right questions? will surround herself with the right people? Will give herself fully to an office that requires twenty hour days, with five children?

I just don't buy it.

But I grew up in the midwest. I know there are people sitting at their kitchen tables tickled pink that a woman with a down syndrome baby might lead our country and it really just pushes my buttons that someone could be so selfish that they would think only of their one pet issue than of the economic well being of not only their nation, but the hundred other nations supported by our foreign aid programs. Now is not a time for one issue politics.

Just another reason to lose respect for JMcC

Below is another example of why I think McCain is running a dishonest and disappointing campaign. The article discusses the distortions by the McCain staff of statements made by Obama about Iran. The article takes the quotations that are misused and places them back into context to show how the ad is misleading. And get this: The full statement was even released by the McCain staff, so they knew the context!!!! This was a blatant attempt to mislead people about Obama's stance on Iran. This leads me to ask a series of questions, including: Why doesn't McCain attack his actual stance, rather than create a new one to attack? If he can't manage the message coming out of his campaign, is he prepared to oversee our arms of diplomacy? If he can't even tell the truth about another American to the American people, what will he say in our name to others?

Please see article on McCain's latest ad.

Here is Obama's actual stance on Iran, not taken out of context. His comments on other issues are available on his website. Let's critique candidates' actual policy plans, rather than lie about them.

From the Obama Campaign Webpage (emphasis in italics is my own):

"Iran

• The Problem: Iran has sought nuclear weapons, supports militias inside Iraq and terror across the region, and its leaders threaten Israel and deny the Holocaust. But Obama believes that we have not exhausted our non-military options in confronting this threat; in many ways, we have yet to try them. That's why Obama stood up to the Bush administration's warnings of war, just like he stood up to the war in Iraq.
• Opposed Bush-Cheney Saber Rattling: Obama opposed the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which says we should use our military presence in Iraq to counter the threat from Iran. Obama believes that it was reckless for Congress to give George Bush any justification to extend the Iraq War or to attack Iran. Obama also introduced a resolution in the Senate declaring that no act of Congress – including Kyl-Lieberman – gives the Bush administration authorization to attack Iran.
• Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress."

God speed friends.

PS. Hillary, you looked great last night! I like you in orange... :)

Catholic church, you piss me off!

Sorry Mom, I know you don't like it when I use the p-word. But this time, I really really mean it.

Recent articles featured in the NY Times and the Gainesville Sun have highlighted inappropriate abuses of power within the Catholic church. I'm not talking about scandals. I'm talking about priests forgetting their place. In an article titled, "Catholic heritage defines Biden," Eric Gorski (AP) reports that Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput has publicly called Joe Biden to refrain from taking communion because he is pro-choice. The same man suggested John Kerry should be denied the sacrament during the previous election.

And in Mexico City, "Even the powerful Catholic Church, which threatened legislators with excommunication last year if they approved the [abortion] law, has muted its political rhetoric. (In the end, the church did not kick any lawmakers out because of their votes.)"

I think these two articles highlight a gross abuse of power by the higher-ups in the Catholic church. Threatening to deny anyone communion should raise disgust and outrage from catholics around the world. Priests who see themselves as the arbiter, deciding who should and should not receive God's grace are walking a dangerous line. They seem to think that it is their position to decide who is and is not "good enough" to receive from the Lord, this same Lord who said "Come unto me all ye who labor and I will give you rest." In doesn't read, come to me those who agree with me or come to me those who are really really religious. Christ calls the weary to himself, does he not also call the weary to his own communion table? Scripture suggests that not only would Jesus himself serve communion to these legislators himself, HE ALREADY HAS! Communion is a symbol of Christ's death and resurrection, offered to all people, and certainly not denied to people because of their political views, moral values or private battles. Perhaps what is most important to remember is that Christ himself would offer communion to the women waiting in line for abortions and to the doctors who perform such actions.

Priests who threaten to excommunicate people should be punished, by the establishment for an abuse of power. And Catholics whose values actually do reflect the gospel ought to speak out against such nonsense. Those who would like to contact the Archbishop, may do so with the following information:

Archbishop of Denver
Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.
303-715-3129
shepherd@archden.org

Archbishop of Denver Website

Articles available at the following links:
Mexico City Struggles with Law on Abortion
Catholic heritage defines Biden

Prisoner of World-View

the last two paragraphs of an interesting article:

"The real danger to the McCain crew in overusing the P.O.W. line so much that it’s a punch line is that it will give Obama an opening for critical questions:

"While McCain’s experience was heroic, did it create a worldview incapable of anticipating the limits to U.S. military power in Iraq? Did he fail to absorb the lessons of Vietnam, so that he is doomed to always want to refight it? Did his captivity inform a search-and-destroy, shoot-first-ask-questions-later, “We are all Georgians,” mentality?"

the beginning

The last few weeks have been a bit of an awakening for me. After spending eleven weeks traveling from Rochester to Ohio to Morocco and back again, I needed to be in my own space... not just physically at home in my apartment, but fully immersed in my own interests, priorities and quite frankly, in my own company. And I have enjoyed it.

During the trip I was physically and mentally absent from here; I did not think much of home, except to miss its comforts. And so I have returned with a fresh interest in our present state of affairs . But others have not been absent. Most have been bombarded by political advertising, disturbing economic forecasts and even more unsettling economic realities. While others' interest in current events have been dwindling in a sea of disillusionment, my own is growing. Out of compassion for my friends and family I have decided to concentrate my rants in one place. Rather than continuously subjecting those around me to my vociferous estimations, I have decided to make my opinions optional. The flip side is, of course, that I will be less politically correct, less gentle. I am going to use this place to wrestle with my own views and clarify my own opinions of religion, politics and society. I hope this spares those dearest to me of any further inconvenience.

I will make my current biases known from the beginning. Although raised in a conservative home that many would categorize as "the religious right," I became disillusioned with republican politics as many have over the past eight years. I was taught to be a one-issue voter, but have found the strategy unsatisfactory in a complex world where many issues are important. I have yet to do any major active campaigning, although some of you have received crazy emails from me about why my political views are right and yours are wrong. I'm hoping you'll forgive my audacity because of my enthusiasm.

During the primary season I supported Hillary Clinton and made my very first political contribution (hooray!). I remember being really impressed with John McCain when I was first interested in politics years ago, however his conduct during this campaign has been disappointing and repugnant, in my opinion. If you are an avid supporter I encourage you to try and change my mind about him, but I doubt you can salvage his candidacy in my mind. I have grown to respect and support Barack Obama over time. I still remember the first argument made in his defense that interested me. My friend Sara explained to me in detail how she liked his decision making style, the thoughtful way he discussed issues. Since our conversation I have also seen how he does not try to paint complex issues as black and white, nor does he sacrifice his own values for political expediency, as I feel John McCain has. I anticipate a great many of my posts will be fleshing out my thoughts on the presidency and including links that have influenced my opinions. I hope they will be of use to you. To start with, here are a few of the best political (and other) stories I've read this week:

Hoping it's Biden by David Brooks
I appreciated this article because I lack enthusiasm over the VP choice.

For McCains, A Public Path but Private Wealth by David Halbfinger

My week as a Waiter by Frank Bruni
It's always good to remember to be kind to the waiter.

Goodnight and Godspeed. :)