Tag: John McCain

The Myth Of Maverick McCain

Myth of Maverick McCainJohn McCain’s image, as propounded by his spinners (aka: the Media) is that of a maverick who shuns political opportunists and slaps the hands of greedy, special interest self-promoters. It’s an image that gets projected repeatedly by pundits and lazy journalists whose writing seems to be on auto-pilot. They reason that if it was said it about him last year (or last century), it must be true this year as well. This flawed logic even extends to government watchdog groups.

The Austin American- Statesman reports that McCain is circulating a letter from Public Citizen that attests to his commitment to good government:

“We are compelled to note something that has been lost in the recent criticism of Sen. McCain’s association with lobbyists: Regardless of how many lobbyists are working on his campaign or raising money for him, John McCain fought for 14 long, hard years for reforms that seriously limit lobbyists power.”

“Regardless of how many lobbyists…” ??? That’s an awfully broad stroke of forgiveness, ya think?

Times distorts Obama’s public financing “pledge”

Cross-posted on [Kos]

Here is what Obama said with respect to public financing:

If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.

Here is what the “liberal” New York Times said he said:

If he won the nomination, he would limit himself to spending only the $85 million available in public financing between the convention and Election Day as long as his Republican opponent did the same.

The Times article does not quote Obama’s actual statement, nor does it link to it. Instead, it continually mischaracterizes it.

The authors are David Kirkpatrick and Jeff Zeleny.  Kirkpatrick, you may remember, “covered” conservatives for the Times for several years.  

The slant of the article is pure McCain spin, for example, stating that Obama’s statement constituted a “pledge” to spend only the $85 million public financing if his opponent would do the same. This is not what Obama said.  Saying that he would “aggressively pursue a publicly financed general election” clearly can encompass, for example, limits on Section 527 Swift Boat type groups.  But instead, the Times characterizes these as “new conditions,” which Obama is now adding to his initial “pledge.”

On the other hand, the article whitewashes McCain’s clear violations (e.g, using the pledge as collateral for a loan) as “technicalities.”  The impression is therefore created that Obama is the one with the real problem of “reneging” on a “pledge” to support public financing.

Kirkpatrick & Zeleny absurdly state that:

The issue may be more sensitive for Mr. Obama, though, because has run in part on his record as an advocate of stricter government integrity rules, including the public financing system.

I guess they haven’t heard that one of McCain’s raisons d’etre for being the straight-talkin’ “maverick” is his supposed commitment to public financing.

Finally, the Times rolls out the usual “reform” suspects, who have not been troubled by McCain’s blatant shenanigans, but are deeply concerned about Obama: The very serious Fred Werthheimer states:

This whole idea started with Senator Obama, and we think he and whoever the Republican nominee is ought to follow through, said Fred Wertheimer, founder of the advocacy group Democracy 21.

Yes, Fred.  The “whole idea” is to have real public financing that would not permit Ari Fleischer’s quarter billion dollar smear group to relentlessly go after Obama.

Either now, or shortly after he gets the nomination, Obama should consider laying out his entire conditions for true public financing (which would include muzzling Ari’s 2008 version of the Swift Boat liars).    

Riddle me this: We want out, but think McCain better to ‘handle’ Iraq?

The American people overwhelmingly think invading Iraq was a mistake, want the war and occupation to end and our troops to come home, the polls say.

The Democratic presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, say they want to do that — not as quickly as we would like, but at least their goal is to get out.

John McCain, the Republican nominee, says it’s fine with him if US troops stay in Iraq for another 100 years, or, as he said once,10,000 years.

Yet people say they think McCain would be better than the Democrats in handling Iraq policy, according to a new Bloomberg-LA Times poll today.  The LA Times reports:

The findings underscore the difficulties ahead for Democrats as they hope to retake the White House during a time of war, with voters giving McCain far higher marks when it comes to experience, fighting terrorism and dealing with the situation in Iraq.

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton have made ending America’s involvement in the war a centerpiece of their campaigns. And even though a clear majority of those polled said the war was not worth waging, about half of registered voters said McCain — a Vietnam vet who has supported the Bush administration’s military strategy — was better able to deal with Iraq.

What dimension are we living in, anyway?  Bizarro World.

So much for that draw down of US troops.

“To surge or not to surge!  That is the question!  Whether it is nobler to send more Americans off to face possible death, or to say I was wrong.”  

Heh!  Like I’m going to say I was wrong about something – G.W. Bush, Presnit USA

Back, oh a few months ago, the Bush/Petraeus/Cheney/Liberman/McCain Surge™ was going swimmingly!  We were told that it was going so VERY WELL that before the year 2008 was over, we would be reducing the number of American soldiers in the Iraqi theater down to less than the number of troops that were there pre-Bush/Petraeus/Cheney/Liberman/McCain Surge™.

Well.  Not so much.

If you would be so kind as to read on below.

The Candidates and the Occupation of Iraq

One of the least reported issues in the continuing war and occupation of Iraq is that of plans for permanent military bases and a long term occupation of Iraq by the US Military. John McCain has made the statement that the US should stay in Iraq for the next 100 years.

As per CNN last month, at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, a crowd member asked McCain about a Bush statement that troops could stay in Iraq for 50 years. “Maybe 100,” McCain replied.

Let’s look at the responses from Hillary and Obama.

The two following quotes are from the CNN link noted above in the introduction.

“He said recently he could see having troops in Iraq for 100 years,” Clinton said at an Arlington, Virginia, rally last week in a line she’s repeated on the campaign trail. “Well, I want them home within 60 days of my becoming president of the United States.”

Obama took a similar tack.

“Sen. McCain said the other day that we might be mired for 100 years in Iraq — which is reason enough not to give him four years in the White House,” Obama has said on several occasions.

and the come-back from McCain…

John Weaver Is Not Jane Doe

by dday, Hullabaloo (digby’s place)

Thursday, February 21, 2008

(reprinted with permission- ek hornbeck)

Apparently, the talking point that the broadcast media all settled on today is that the McCain/Vicki Iseman story is irresponsible because it’s based entirely on unnamed sources.

Um, people?

The only on-the-record source the New York Times used in their John McCain story says he gave his quote to the paper in December and immediately shared it with the Arizona senator’s top strategists.

John Weaver, formerly McCain’s top strategist, tells Politico that after hearing repeatedly from Times reporters working on the story, he asked for written questions and then provided an e-mail response.

“They asked about the Union Station meeting and so I answered their questions,” Weaver says. “I forwarded it to Steve, Charlie and Mark within minutes of sending it to the Times.”

Steve Schmidt, Charlie Black and Mark Salter are all top advisers to McCain.

Weaver very simply said that Iseman was involved in the campaign and that could hurt McCain’s image as a straight-talking reformer. This doesn’t presume an intimate relationship, it presumes a relationship with a lobbyist. And this is a big problem.

Some wingnut welfare recipients are calling this the words of a “disgruntled staffer.” Some Republican hack on The Situation Room was asked directly “Do you mean John Weaver?” and she said “It hasn’t been disclosed.” Well, you know, yes it has.

And the floodgates ought to open once you recognize that McCain’s campaign and professional life are crawling with lobbyists:

McCain’s campaign staff had more lobbyists on it than any other back in June. And, after the staff massacre in July, the person he hired to be his new campaign manager (resurrecting his position from the failed 2000 campaign)? Uber-lobbyist Rick Davis. Who is Rick Davis? Try this on for starters:

“So now that very same Rick Davis will be taking over as campaign manager. Who is he? Fittingly for the most lobbyist-infested campaign in the race (on either side), Davis is yet another lobbyist. Davis founded Davis, Manafort & Freedman, Inc., through which he served clients ranging from Nigerian dictator Gen. Sani Abacha to “mafia-like” Argentine legislator Alberto Pierri. Davis has had a long association with McCain – one tangled up in webs of special influence. In 1999, while Davis was working for McCain, two of his firm’s clients, COMSAT and SBC, “had major (and controversial) mergers pending before the Federal Communications Commission in 1999, and both mergers were approved.” The FCC was under the legislative oversight authority of McCain’s Commerce Committee, yet McCain refused to recuse himself from the proceedings.

Davis was also a central figure in McCain’s Reform Institute scandal, an under-reported affair in which the “Maverick” Senator used a nonprofit, tax-exempt “reform” organization to trade political favors for corporate cash.”

He had plenty of lobbyists on his campaign back in 2000, too. This is the real problem here, a huge dent to the Straight Talk Express’ image. This is why Mitt Romney’s throwing up repeatedly today.

I agree that the focus ought to be on the fact that someone who claimed he’s completely free and clear of the culture of corruption you’d expect from a guy who’s spent 24 years in Washington is getting caught.

(The Update Below the Fold- ek)

Regardless of whether McCain screwed her, he screwed *us*


Send in the Iraqi Clowns

In Baghdad, this troupe of five clowns called themselves the “Happy Family Group.” Their purpose was to bring some entertainment and relief to children whose lives had been scarred by violence and fear. They called their show, “A Child Is Just As Sacred As A Country.” By every account, the show was popular among children, an oasis of laughter in the desert of violence.  Their story over the past six months is tragic and inspiring.  It also highlights the plight of Iraqi refugees.


Picture source

Why the McCain Thing Serves the Illuminati

I have talked about people and their levels of belief in forming their worldviews, or lack thereof by referencing this link.  You may disagree with the entire concepts here but sit back and embrace the idea of the levels.


As a real life example some people are content with WWF wrestling mania or the Entertainment channel while others listen to classical music, sipping chardonnay at dinner.  While we might loath Bush and the last eight years of neo-cons the impending far left shift with Obama is my Apocalyse horse ride!

News From America!

It’s Thursday, and that means it is time to review the news from that cute little  heavily nuclear armed and aggressive country that lies on your map between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans!


Those adorable characters have certainly been busy! And speaking of Getting Busy, we simply must start off with John McCain and his lobbyist ‘friend.’ (A big wink of the all seeing eye!) As usual, those wacky Americans are in all in a tizzy and a buzz over, sex…..as if it was somehow shocking that an attractive lobbyist would seek career advancement and that a horny old goat would succumb to her charms! (was that TOO catty?) Human Nature and the birds and the bees at its best, it makes the world go round. And if the Senator who prides himself on his ethical behavior (ever since he was implicated in a billion dollar banking scandal that is!) happened to do a few favors for her…well, who can blame him! We have seen this Hollywood script before….oh wait! Our editor has just informed us that Senator McCain is the de facto Republican (an American political party….and come to think of it, weren’t they the ones who were in a uproar over “family values” just a while back? Heavens!) nominee for their presidency! We cannot help but wonder if these “shocking” developments will cause the Senator to withdraw from the race…what merry chaos would ensue!

In other news from the land of Big Macs and torture….

McCain / Iseman Open Thread

C’mon.  You know you want to.

Alaska Report

Arkansas Times

New York Times (registration required)

Did John McCain have an affair with a lobbyist and use his power for her client?

by Peter Cohan, Blogging Stocks

Posted Feb 20th 2008 7:59PM

McCain/Lobbyist Story In The New York Times Finally Drops

Marc Armbinder, The Atlantic.com

McCain linked to attractive female lobbyist

Capitol Hill Blue

For McCain, self-confidence on ethics poses its own risk

By Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick and Stephen Labaton, International Herald Tribune

Published: February 21, 2008

Google News Breaking Updates (you get it as soon as the bots find it)

McTorture: It’s A Whopper

This is how republican politicians make nice to their torture loving base.  The New York Times reports:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain said President Bush should veto a measure that would bar the CIA from using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods on terror suspects.

McCain voted against the bill, which would restrict the CIA to using only the 19 interrogation techniques listed in the Army field manual.

His vote was controversial because the manual prohibits waterboarding — a simulated drowning technique that McCain also opposes — yet McCain doesn’t want the CIA bound by the manual and its prohibitions.

Hmmm.  McCain voted against a measure– an inadequate measure imo because among the 19 permitted “techniques” are some that amount to torture– that would forbid any “innovations” not in the 19 listed techniques.  These “innovations” include waterboarding.  And how does McTorture explain the brilliant logic of that?

‘I knew I would be criticized for it,” McCain told reporters Wednesday in Ohio. ”I think I can show my record is clear. I said there should be additional techniques allowed to other agencies of government as long as they were not” torture.

”I was on the record as saying that they could use additional techniques as long as they were not cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment,” McCain said. ”So the vote was in keeping with my clear record of saying that they could have additional techniques, but those techniques could not violate international rules against torture.”

What, pray tell, are the magical, non-torture “additional techniques” beyond the 19 in the manual and waterboarding?  F*ck if I know.  Do you know?  Does anybody?  Are there such things?  You know what?  It doesn’t matter because this vote isn’t about the content of the bill.  No, it’s about rallying the Torquemadas around this candidate’s willingness to torture.

McTorture wants all of the little torture happy rethuglicans in the base to know that he’s the true successor to Flyboy McCodpiece and that he, too, will use “other techniques” (we cannot tell you what they are because that would give it away).  And just as W says that waterboarding isn’t torture, so too the undisclosed additional techniques aren’t torture, also. And how do we know that?  Because the US doesn’t torture.  Did he tell us that already?  

What slime.

Load more