Much chatter on the Internet about John McCain's appearance on The View on Friday morning. This guy won't do a press conference, but he'll do daytime talk. Nevertheless, it was quite instructive, for McCain lied to the ladies.
He told them that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, his running mate, did not accept federal earmark funds. But Barbara Walters and Joy Behar had it correct when they declared she had. As the Anchorage Daily News has reported, Palin in 2007 sought "52 earmarks valued at $256 million in Palin's first year. This year, the governor's office asked the delegation to help them land 31 earmarks valued at $197 million." (When I appeared on NPR's Diane Rehm Show on Friday morning, even conservative writer Stephen Hayes had to acknowledge that Palin is exaggerating when she claims she opposed the infamous Bridge to Nowhere.)
Palin's earmark record has been widely reported. Is McCain clueless? Maybe he's out of the loop because he does not know how to use the Internet on his own. Or is he deceitful?
In a way, the View gals let him off easy. Referring to two recent McCain ads--one falsely accusing Barack Obama of sexism by using the "lipstick on the pig" phrase, the other falsely accusing Obama of having supported teaching "comprehensive sex education" to kindergartners--Joy Behar said to McCain, "Now we know that those two ads are untrue, they are lies. And yet, you at the end of it say you approve these messages. Do you really approve these?"
McCain replied, "Actually they are not lies. And if you see some of the ads running against me." He then hammered on the "lipstick" point, saying that Obama should not have used that old expression. (See the exchange here.)
The "lipstick" battle is an easy one for McCain to win--or play to a disingenuous draw. He looks as if he is defending the honor of his running mate, even if there is no truth to the fundamental charge that Obama was maligning Palin. But the sex ed ad is utterly indefensible. Behar missed her chance. She ought to have said to McCain, "Can you prove that Obama advocated teaching comprehensive sex-ed to kindergartners? I will donate $10,000 to your favorite charity, if you can. If not, you will have to come back on this show and admit your campaign lied. Deal or no deal, Senator?"
Behar was so close to what colud have been a game changer. At least, a media game changer. (Real life is another thing.)
But United States democracy ought not to depend on Joy Behar pressing John McCain. The bigfoots of the news media should be prepping to give McCain this sort of treatment. It's no wonder McCain has been ducking press conferences of late. He cannot back up what he and his campaign have been saying about either Obama or Palin. But eventually McCain will have to come out of his cave and face some reporters somewhere. And they ought to be ready with tough questions. If this does not come to pass, then the moderators of the debates should step in and serve up the difficult queries. It shouldn't take a stand-up comic to get a presidential candidate running a dishonorable campaign to face the music.
Meanwhile, an advocacy group has taken on McCain regarding his campaign's phony sex-ed ad, noting that McCain was actually denouncing Obama for supporting a bill that sought to protect children from sexual predators. Any parent of small kids ought to cheer the group's effort...and remember how McCain has crassly exploited the issue of sexual abuse for political gain.
Comments
The three Ps.
Power was the motive
Patriotism was/is the means
Paranoia is the oppertunity.
And so the US government begins suborning democracy at home and invading third world countries, supported by its own mislead public. History repeats itself.
We live in sad times.
http://tinyurl.com/3lnl8l
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 4:32 PM
obama should use the phrase, "putting lipstick on a pig" over and over again regarding mcsame's absurd claims.
this would simultaneously point out mcwar's true policy and rebut mcfossil's attacks.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 4:36 PM
It Takes an on-line blog To Reveal Biden's family ties -
"Biden's Son and Brother indicted -
A son and a brother of Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) are accused in two lawsuits of defrauding a former business partner and an investor of millions of dollars in a hedge fund deal that went sour, court records show."
I guess this is not the son and brother Joe knew!!!!
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 4:44 PM
a choice between kucinich and ron paul might be an election worth dwelling on but this McBama '08 selection is just a grand theatre of the absurd.
despite the hypocrisy, pandering and war-mongering of both sides i still think that the obama/biden ticket is the lesser of two evils and will vote accordingly, even if the fix is already in.
http://tinyurl.com/4ntzf8
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 4:44 PM
despite denmac's obvious disdain for the obama/biden ticket (i disdain them as well), i would be willing to bet that he also considers them to be the lesser of two evils and will vote as such.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 4:47 PM
RE: "a choice between kucinich and ron paul might be an election worth dwelling on but this McBama '08 selection is just a grand theatre of the absurd."
Just wondering how a "9/11 Was an Inside Job" whacko chooses between a jug-eared, UFO-visited little white guy, and a cantankerous, angry little white guy?
Cheers
I wonder how
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 4:52 PM
DC,
Ever since Jon Stewart was taken seriously by so many (young and old) the "real" journalists (read: talking heads) started losing anything meaningful in their message.
Of course the comics are the only ones to ask about the lies - too bad for us.
Thanks for all of your work!
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 4:59 PM
and i wonder how the american people can be so scaredy-cat foolish as to believe that the destruction of two 1/4 mile tall massive steel towers in only 10 seconds each (11 floors per second) can officially be called a "gravity driven collapse" when that official explanation not only defies the laws of physics as established by none other than sir isaac newton but is directly (and obviously) contradicted by numerous videos of said event showing massive explosions from within said towers and numerous testimony of 1st responders stating that these explosions did occur?
i further wonder why one would resort to childish name calling.
cheers yourself.
i wonder why.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 5:04 PM
WOW, the Dems just don't know when to shut up!!!! -
"Whoopi to McCain: ‘Should I Be Worried About Being a Slave Again?’"
So Dem Whoopi makes racist slurs, Dem Pam Anderson makes pornographic sexual slurs, and Dem Matt Damon ... well, is Matt Damon.
Those Libs have lost the will to fight. This is getting TOO EASY!!!
Oh, and (I know capt says polls don't matter, unless Obama is ahead in them) the latest polls show a DOWNTURN in the number of voters buying Barry's jive.
Can you say "DESPERATION"?
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 5:09 PM
as_if!
No offense meant with the use of the word "whacko".
Since the left thinks it's an OK word to use to describe Sarah Palin (as Lincoln Chaffee did), I thought it was a term of endearment!
By the way, I didn't use the rest of Chaffee's quote, and also refer to you as "cocky".
Peace.
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 5:15 PM
Go Figure, The Ladies at "The View" do the job of journalists w/ video.
John McCain was on The View today and it was an awful roasting. He was pinned up and down the couch.
Barbara Walters in particular, who tends to stand down on these occasions really went after the old man. She really tried to pin him on picking such a right wing nut for the VP. She specifically confronts him about what qualifies her as a reformer. Notably they tell him that she did give out earmarks and McCain LIES and says she never did so as a governor. Joy outright calls his ads about "lipstick" and comprehensive sex education for kindergartners "LIES"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyQpmN-nH64
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:16 PM
Obama Campaign Response:
Today on "The View," John McCain defended his campaign's latest ad campaign, which has been debunked repeatedly as both false and sleazy. In running the sleaziest campaign since South Carolina in 2000 and standing by completely debunked lies on national television, it's clear that John McCain would rather lose his integrity than lose an election.
*****
Either John has lost his mind or he doesn't care.
Maybe that'll get out the "base" and the crazy vote?
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:18 PM
""It Takes a Stand-Up Comic To Ask McCain about His Lies""
maybe stand up comics have the true cajones to actually "call a spade a spade" while most so-called journalists are nothing more than enabling agents of distraction.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 5:19 PM
McCain and Palin's Top 20 Lies, Myths and Flip-Flops
Agents of change? Symbols of feminism? A roundup of these and other ridiculous tall tales coming from McCain's increasingly desperate campaign.
The corporate media won't say it and the Obama campaign isn't saying it enough, so we're saying it loud and clear: John McCain is a liar. And so is the woman he now shares the Republican ticket with. Yes, Sarah Palin is a liar, too. Together they are responsible for one of the most inaccurate and misleading presidential campaigns, in a business known for inaccuracy and misdirection. But even by the standards of American politics, the McCain-Palin ticket seems to be in a race with itself to set new standards of low.
This isn't opinion, this is fact. Time and time again, on the campaign trail, in press briefings and in interviews, McCain and Palin flip-flop on the issues, propagate myths they know to be false, and flat-out lie to the American people.
Unlike the McCain campaign, we have to back up our assertions, so here is a quick, short and cited list of the top 20 lies, myths and flip-flops that have come from the McCain/ Palin ticket so far.
http://www.alternet.org/election08/98502/
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:20 PM
You can put Mickey Mouse ears on a Marxist, it's still a Marxist!!!!
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 5:21 PM
New Obama Ad: "McCain can't even use a computer or send an email!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ2I0t_Twk0
"1982, things have changed in the last 26 years, but John McCain hasn't"
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:41 PM
no worries denmac!
meanwhile, the u.s. has attacked yet another country - this time pakistan, a country that DOES possess WMD.:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4689294a12.html
this attack was not only unprovoked but initiated silently and in secret from afar (with missiles) and killed a good number of innocent women and children.:
http://tinyurl.com/4zt5tc
this is the kind of shit that is being done in the name of "freedom and democracy" and paid for by u.s. taxpayer dollars and is NEVER reported by the enabling agents of distraction that are the so-called "journalists" of today.
i don't know about the rest of you but i would rather that my tax dollars go towards the education of children first.
i am ashamed to be associated with the enabling of heinous actions such as these.
god help us all.
^ha.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 5:45 PM
In response to another McCain ad, titled "Change or more of the same," the Obama campaign sent out another strongly worded response raising the issue of McCain's integrity in conducting his campaign messaging.
"The McCain campaign's lies make it clear that John McCain would rather lose his integrity than lose this election. The fact is, John McCain has voted for millions in earmarks and his running mate has requested more pork per person than any governor in America -- including $2 million to study the mating patterns of crabs. Barack Obama has stood up to the lobbyists and corruption in Washington, and will bring real change that puts middle-class families first," said Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor.
****
OUCH! The lies are too obvious - McCain is going to be in trouble if his being a liar sticks - the "rather lose his integrity than the election" is a well earned response.
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:51 PM
From The New York Times:
"The most disheartening aspect of a scurrilous Republican ad falsely accusing Barack Obama of promoting sex education for kindergarten children is its closing line: 'I'm John McCain, and I approved this message.' This from that straight-talker of yore, who fervidly denounced the 2004 Bush campaign's Swift Boat character attacks on John Kerry's military record." [Editorial, 9/12/08]
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:52 PM
Time Magazine:
[McCain] "is responsible for one of the sleaziest ads I've ever seen in presidential politics, so sleazy that I won't abet its spread by linking to it...." [Joe Klein, 9/10/08]
"A different category of dumb charge." [Ana Marie Cox, 9/10/08]
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:53 PM
Annenberg Political Fact Check:
"The claim is simply false..." [FactCheck.org, 9/10/08]
The Chicago Sun-Times:
"McCain echoed a sexy--but misleading-- line of attack made last year by Mitt Romney..." [9/10/08]
McClatchy:
"This is a deliberately misleading accusation." [9/9/08]
The Atlantic:
"The gap between the implication (Obama has liberal, radical views about sexuality) and the reality in this ad is pretty big and fairly consequential." [Marc Ambinder, 9/9/08]
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:53 PM
Obama Implies McCain Puts Other Countries First
A pretty scathing charge from Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., this morning as he spoke to the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers and assailed Sen. John McCain's, R-Ariz., position on free trade.
"Just ask the machinists in Pennsylvania who build Harley-Davidsons," Obama said of McCain's record. "Because John McCain didn’t just oppose the requirement that the government buy American-made motorcycles, he called Buy American provisions 'disgraceful.' Just ask the workers across this country who have seen their jobs outsourced. The very companies that shipped their jobs overseas have been rewarded with billions of dollars in tax breaks that John McCain supports and plans to continue.
"So, when American workers hear John McCain talking about putting 'Country First,'" Obama said, "it’s fair to ask –- which country?"
Um ... isn't that pretty much the dictionary definition of questioning someone's patriotism?
(ABC Political Punch)
*****
Well as McCain said - "I'm not questioning his patriotism, I'm questioning his judgment"
It's about time.
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:58 PM
Dear Senator McCain
September 12, 2008 3:25 PM
Here is Gov. Palin's list of earmark requests from February 2008.
Will you please stop telling the American people that she never asked for or received any pork barrel projects?
Respectfully,
Jake
List here:
http://stevens.senate.gov/earmarks/Approps-StateofAlaska.pdf
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 5:59 PM
Note how the M$M narrative is now - Obama off his stride hits back hard. (because McCain lies?)
Odd there were calls for a game changer when Barack was further ahead in the polls?
Curious that?
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 6:32 PM
kucinich v ron paul IMO are certainly at least 1 step above zionist war-mongers obama v mccain and would, for a real peace loving populace at least, have been much better choices than zionist obama v mccain.
the u.s. could have been friendly to iraq & iran and purchased cheap oil from them for many decades to come, all the while developing eco-friendly means of energy, and established a position of moral & ethical leadership, but instead opted for a position of aggression, much to the detriment of the american people and the rest of the world.
oh well, go red/white/blue!
death made in america!
http://tinyurl.com/pbkyh
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 6:46 PM
From his lips to GAWDS ears!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I270syK9_zw
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 6:53 PM
NOW we know something about Palin....
Based on what I've seen in today's interview with Charlie Gibson, this is what I now know about Governor Palin:
Palin wants Roe v. Wade overturned.
She opposes a ban on semi-automatic weapons.
She's opposed to all earmarks, except those that came from her state, because those were the GOOD kind of earmarks. Except, there's no such thing as a good earmark, and they should be banned. (Unless they're the good kind, like the kind that she requested.) (But even they should be banned.) (Even though they're good.)
She believes Obama now "regrets" not choosing Clinton. (Apparently Biden is just killing the ticket? Do you suppose Obama will have something to say about that?)
Palin wasn't exactly for the Bridge to Nowhere, she was for infrastructure, which included the Bridge, but she wasn't for the Bridge, because she opposed it, even though she was for it. Sort of. But not really.
The three Bush economic policies she'd change would be to cut spending (though she hasn't said where, or by how much), do something about taxes (not sure what), and "reform agencies," whatever that means.
It's all so clear now....
http://tinyurl.com/3zgenn
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 7:19 PM
The Sorrow and the Pity
When it comes to foreign policy, Sarah Palin doesn't know what she's talking about.
[...]
It is stunning that Palin, McCain, and their spin masters persist in claiming that she has experience in foreign affairs by dint of governing a state that borders Russia.
Let's be clear about the nature of this border. Alaska's farthest-flung islands, along the Bering Strait, come close to the Chukchi Peninsula of Chukotka, an autonomous region of Russia on the country's northeastern tip—as far from Moscow as New York is—whose 50,000 residents are best known to most Russians as the subject of off-color jokes involving cannibals.
There are no issues between the United States and Russia in this region, except for the occasional tussle over fishing rights (in which, even so, Gov. Palin has never involved herself). No one entertains the remotest fantasy of, say, Russia invading North America through the Bering Strait.
http://www.slate.com/id/2199937/
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 7:23 PM
300 million people in this country and what are we given? 2 choices that IMO both leave a very great amount to be desired.
can anybody else relate to this feeling of despair for the future of america?
as well, we are faced with the knowledge that not only has there been obvious various voter fraud in the last couple of elections, but the people who noticed and reported this fraud and promised to remedy it have not done so.
is this not cause for despair or is it easier to simply pretend that it never happened?
but it did happen, so what does our collective silence (led by ever silent "journalists") say about ourselves?
at this point i am becoming ever less proud to refer to myself as an american.
and this is not even scratching the surface of what i feel is the american fallacy.
rest assured that if there had been an internet access during the clinton years i would have loudly railed against their heinous outrages as well - and that goes double for the bush sr years.
i am no hypocrit and I will not hestitate to CALL A SPADE A SPADE!
jha.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 12, 2008 7:25 PM
‘Jim Crawford’ Republicans
The GOP is working to keep eligible African-Americans from voting in several states.
It was a mainstay of Jim Crow segregation: for 100 years after the Civil War, Southern white Democrats kept eligible blacks from voting with poll taxes, literacy tests and property requirements. Starting in the 1960s, the U.S. Supreme Court declared these assaults on the heart of American democracy unconstitutional.
Now, with the help of a 2008 Supreme Court decision, Crawford vs. Marion County (Indiana) Election Board, white Republicans in some areas will keep eligible blacks from voting by requiring driver's licenses. Not only is this new-fangled discrimination constitutional, it's spreading.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/158392/output/print
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 7:38 PM
"AP poll: Obama losing on experience to … Sarah Palin
The poll suggests that perceived inexperience is more of a problem at the top of the Democratic ticket than in the No. 2 spot for Republicans.
Eighty percent say McCain, with nearly three decades in Congress, has the right experience to be president. Just 46 percent say Obama, now in his fourth year in the Senate, is experienced enough.
Fully 47 percent say Obama lacks the proper experience — an even worse reading than the 36 percent who had the same criticism about McCain running mate Sarah Palin, serving her second year as Alaska governor after being a small-town mayor."
Barry will regret making Palin the focus of his attacks - on several levels.
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 7:41 PM
Palin: Okay! Okay! I Didn't Quite Say "Thanks, But No Thanks," Alright?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvqH6GnE3k0
****
That's what most normal people call a lie.
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 7:56 PM
Late Night Snark Hits the Campaign Trail
"It's autumn in New York. The leaves are falling. Earlier today, John McCain admitted he doesn’t know how many rakes he owns."
---David Letterman
-
"There are only 56 days until the election. I saw that they’re selling Sarah Palin action figures. Sad incident at Toys R Us today---a Sarah Palin doll shot My Little Pony."
---Jimmy Kimmel
-
"Well, it's a very strange political campaign. I mean, out on the campaign trail, John McCain and Sarah Palin are talking about how they stood up to the Republican party, they fought the Republican establishment, and they battled Republicans. Their message: vote Republican."
---Jay Leno
-
"Sarah Palin has been getting briefed on what she needs to know to be John McCain’s vice president. The first thing they taught her was CPR."
---Conan O'Brien
-
"New Rule: Republicans must stop saying Obama is an elitist and just admit you don't like him because of something he can't help, something that's a result of the way he was born. Admit it---you're not voting for him because he's smarter than you."
---Bill Maher
(kos)
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 8:01 PM
TPM Reader MM adds some thoughts ...
She introduced herself to the world stage by delivering a speech that she knew was a lie.
What kind of a person does that?
What does that say about her moral character?
How can the American people believe anything she says from here?
That was what she presented as evidence A#1 of her stature as a reformer!
I mean...
WTF?
I mean, she's as bad as McCain ...
--Josh Marshall
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 8:08 PM
From NBC’s Aram Roston
ANCHORAGE, AK -- Todd Palin, the husband of Sarah Palin, is on a list of thirteen witnesses for whom investigator Stephen Branchflower is seeking subpoenas in the ethics investigation surrounding the Alaska governor.
The state's House and Senate Judiciary Committees moved to approve Branchflower's request during an ongoing hearing this afternoon.
The investigation was initiatied by the state legislature to look into a possible abuse of power by Gov. Palin for firing Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. Critics allege that Palin axed Monegan because he refused to fire a state trooper undergoing bitter divorce proceedings with Palin’s sister.
Branchflower says there are 33 people with whom he wishes to speak in order to conduct the investigation, including Palin herself. Of that list, he has already talked to or deposed 16 people relevant to the inquiry.
Earlier today, in the second in a series of “mythbusters” calls from the Obama campaign, Democratic Alaska State Rep. Les Gara accused the McCain campaign of stonewalling the investigation of “Troopergate” and “twisting arms” to convince Republican lawmakers involved in the probe not to send subpoenas to some witnesses involved in the case.
“It’s almost like Karl Rove is here directing a character assassination campaign to get out of what was a bipartisan investigation,” Gara said.
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 8:10 PM
McCain Crowds Dwindle Without Palin
NEW YORK — If there were any doubts that the sidekick was stealing the show, they were put to rest when Sarah Palin took off for Alaska with a wave from the tarmac by John McCain.
His crowds suddenly dwindled. The exuberant cheering heard day after day during two weeks of joint appearances went away. And the Republican presidential candidate's schedule began to resemble the lightness of May instead of the full throttle of September.
[snip]
Without Palin later in the day, McCain went to a diner in Philadelphia.
http://tinyurl.com/53q4xr
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 8:13 PM
Leaked voicemail:
http://tinyurl.com/3tpla9
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 8:30 PM
"The day after 9/11, as part of its "get tough" makeover, the Obama campaign is mocking John McCain for not using a computer, without caring why he doesn't use a computer."
"McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes."
WHAT ARE OBAMA'S GUYS THINKING?????
Then there's this -
"In a similar vein I guess it's an outrage that the blind governor of New York David Patterson doesn't know how to drive a car. After all, transportation issues are pretty important. How dare he serve as governor while being ignorant of what it's like to navigate New York's highways."
"Bill Clinton sent two emails during his entire presidency and often admitted he didn't know squat about the internet."
If Barry doesn't want to compete, he should just drop out - his campaign continues to embarass him!!!
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 9:02 PM
RE: "Leaked voicemail:"
This would be funny, if it wasn't being passed around the net by DESPERATE Libs who think it is genuine!!!
I love the smell of DESPERATION in the evening!!!
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 12, 2008 9:07 PM
Palin Backs Off Bridge To Nowhere Lie, Admits She Supported ‘Infrastructure Being Built In The State’
During her interview with ABC’s Charlie Gibson tonight, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) seemed to admit that she has repeatedly lied to the American public. Palin has repeatedly claimed that she had said, “Thanks, but no thanks” to Congress for money to build the infamous Bridge to Nowhere.
Tonight, Palin did not object as Gibson explained that “it’s now pretty clearly documented that you supported that bridge before you opposed it.” She defended the earmarking process saying, “It’s not inappropriate for a mayor or for a governor to…plug into the federal budget”:
GIBSON: But it’s now pretty clearly documented. You supported that bridge before you opposed it. You were wearing a t-shirt in the 2006 campaign, showed your support for the bridge to nowhere.
But you turned against it after Congress had basically pulled the plug on it. […]
PALIN: I was for infrastructure being built in the state. And it’s not inappropriate for a mayor or for a governor to request and to work with their Congress — their congressmen, their congresswomen, to plug into the federal budget along with every other state a share of the federal budget for infrastructure.
What I supported was the link between a community and its airport. And we have found that link now.
Watch it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0T25ctQMsJc
As ThinkProgress has documented, Palin was a strong backer of the project and expressed her desire to renew federal funding for the project on several occasions.
According a ThinkProgress count, Palin and the McCain campaign have repeated the Bridge to Nowhere lie 31 times since August 31, when McCain first announced his pick. Palin repeated the lie herself 8 times to both national audiences and at smaller campaign stops.
Will Palin apologize for having misled the public?
****
What happened - it's no big deal? A lie - that's par for the course. Part and parcel to GOP politics. Expect more and bigger lies. Maybe it will work and people will get tired of chasing down facts and figures.
Posted by: capt
| September 12, 2008 10:47 PM
Ok, maybe I missed something and there's a perfectly good explanation, but... I see that palin is wearing different clothes in that gibson interview than what she was wearing during the 'bush doctrine' segment. Did she get a do-over on some of it the next day?? Anybody know what the deal is on that?
Posted by: Alan
| September 13, 2008 12:38 AM
hey alan, wasn't palin's 'bush doctrine' segment from the same action as her 'gibson interview'?
if she had different clothing from one to the next then that would suggest that she had an unfair advantage, ya?
but even with this unfair advantage she did fail miserably, did she not?
nice catch alan!
jha.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 12:50 AM
Both are segments of the gibson interview. The 'bush doctrine' part, she was slumped forward wearing a skirt. In the 'alright, I lied about the bridge' segment, she's wearing a pantsuit. Therefore, there was at least two different sessions.
K, some of y'all know I live between Galveston and Houston. So far the power has went out twice, but came right back on, once withing 5-minutes and the second time within 2 minutes. My "internets" are still working as well. My trees are catching hell with the wind gusts and it's raining steady, but so far so good. I chose to "hunker down" instead of "bugging out" (terms Hajji used in an email), so as to mitigate any damages as they happen, *or don't happen.
Posted by: Alan
| September 13, 2008 2:03 AM
Did y'all see this clip at "Crooks..."?
http://www.crooksandliars.com/Media/Download/32748/1/tcr-repo-man-091108.wmv
Repo Man, A Bush Economic Success Story
“I love the economy. I’m going to miss Bush. Ol’ Bush gets out of office I don’t know what we’re going to do, but I’m speaking for all repo men, Bush, we’re going to miss you buddy. Ha ha, ha ha. For real.”
Posted by: Alan
| September 13, 2008 2:09 AM
4 million + w/o power.
Jill and Crew stageing out of Lackland...
Posted by: Hajji
| September 13, 2008 8:07 AM
Alan,
Stay safe, weather like Ike SUX.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 8:52 AM
Senator Barack Obama in Dover, N.H., September 12:
"[McCain's] plan gives absolutely nothing to about 100 million American households. I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.
And my opponent can't make that pledge, and here's why. For the first time in American history, John McCain wants to tax your health-care benefits. Apparently, Senator McCain doesn't think it's enough that health care premiums have doubled, he thinks that you should have to pay taxes on them, too. That's a $3.6 trillion tax increase potentially on middle-class families. And that would eventually leave tens of millions of you paying higher taxes or losing your benefits. That's his idea of change.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aa4ipe4fhU
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 8:54 AM
"....so as to mitigate any damages as they happen, *or don't happen..."
Alan...? Alan...? ALAN!!!
Dude...no power for a long time... It is gonna suck.
-T
Posted by: Hajji
| September 13, 2008 9:28 AM
"Meanwhile check out certified Obama-fan David Wright of ABC, reporting on GMA today. After airing the Obama slur about McCain being unable to send email, without providing the explanation, Wright continues.
DAVID WRIGHT: Sarah Palin will be out on the campaign trail herself today, for the first time without her running-mate as a chaperone.
A sitting governor, wife and mother of five, in need of a "chaperone"? Imagine the howls of outrage from MSM/feminist circles if such had been said of a Dem woman VP nominee.
The smell of MSM desperation in the morning."
How does this rhetoric help Obama/Biden???? The MSM still doesn't get it!
Oh, and GOD BLESS THE GREAT STATE OF TEXAS, OUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE WITH YOU.
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 10:02 AM
RE: "I see that palin is wearing different clothes in that gibson interview than what she was wearing during the 'bush doctrine' segment."
Since the interview was over two days, the questions on this blog about Sarah Palin's clothes are VERY TELLING.
Libs are DESPERATE to find ANY point of criticism of Palin.
If this line of question (regarding her outfit) was NOT political in nature, then there is a second question to be asked - ABOUT GIBSON'S CLOTHING.
IF GIBSON APPEARS IN THE SAME CLOTHING OVER TWO DAYS OF INTERVIEW, WHY DID NO ONE NOTICE/QUESTION THIS????
IF HE APPEARS IN DIFFERENT CLOTHING (AS PALIN DOES), WHY WAS THIS NOT QUESTIONED ALSO??? NOT VERY OBSERVANT, ARE YOU??
IS THIS TO SAY THAT LIB DEMS SELECT THEIR VP CANDIDATES BASED ON CLOTHING CHOICE???
Well, enough of the CAPS LOCK!!!
This shows clearly that Palin's performance did not offer the left the "red meat" they seek. Tread carefully in this, dear comrades!
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 10:17 AM
She’s Not Ready
While watching the Sarah Palin interview with Charlie Gibson Thursday night, and the coverage of the Palin phenomenon in general, I’ve gotten the scary feeling, for the first time in my life, that dimwittedness is not just on the march in the U.S., but that it might actually prevail.
How is it that this woman could have been selected to be the vice presidential candidate on a major party ticket? How is it that so much of the mainstream media has dropped all pretense of seriousness to hop aboard the bandwagon and go along for the giddy ride?
For those who haven’t noticed, we’re electing a president and vice president, not selecting a winner on “American Idol.”
Ms. Palin may be a perfectly competent and reasonably intelligent woman (however troubling her views on evolution and global warming may be), but she is not ready to be vice president.
http://tinyurl.com/4hkewa
*****
If this is the new narrative - McCain is in trouble. It is not about Palin it is all about McCain and his poor judgment.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 10:23 AM
Robyn Blumner:
The McCain-Palin ticket is having remarkable success with its revolutionary campaign tactic that I call: "Lying Eyes."
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 10:25 AM
Dick Cavett:
Back here in the past, when I’m writing this, we have just seen part one of her quizzing by Charles Gibson, with mixed reviews for both. So far I have not seen her confronted with some of the things about which she has been, to put it in that awful Diplomatically Correct phrase, "somewhat less than fully truthful." (Typesetter: If space is scarce, use "lying.") As in claiming "no thanks" to the bridge money while failing to disclose that she kept it.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 10:26 AM
Michael Cooper and Jim Rutenberg:
In an interview Friday on the NY1 cable news channel, a McCain supporter, Senator Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, called "ridiculous" the implication that Mr. Obama’s "lipstick on a pig" comment was a reference to Ms. Palin, whom he also defended as coming under unfair attack.
"The last month, for sure," said Don Sipple, a Republican advertising strategist, "I think the predominance of liberty taken with truth and the facts has been more McCain than Obama."
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 10:26 AM
AP:
Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Friday defended two debunked television ads attacking Democrat Barack Obama and claimed erroneously that running mate Sarah Palin never sought money for lawmakers' pet projects as Alaska governor.
Palin sought $197 million in so-called "earmarks" for 2009. In the previous budget year, she asked for earmarks worth $256 million.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 10:27 AM
I'm thinking most American want a presidential candidate to be fact based and not a serial exaggerator and blatant liar?
Maybe I'm alone on this?
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 10:29 AM
LA Times:
McCain still lying about Palin.
John McCain got it wrong Friday when he asserted that his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, had not requested any earmarks, the spending directives lawmakers insert in spending bills that McCain has vowed to eliminate.
Palin, in fact, requested $198 million in federal earmarks in February, including such expenses as $487,000 to fight obesity in Alaska and $4 million to develop recreational trails.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 10:38 AM
Capt.
I second that emotion...
Posted by: Hajji
| September 13, 2008 10:40 AM
Wait...you wrote "most American want a presidential candidate to be fact based"..... Mebbe not...
Posted by: Hajji
| September 13, 2008 10:43 AM
oh a two day interview - that explains the change of clothes. hmmm, maybe she had to get a good nights sleep after the first day and rehearse for the second day!
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 10:44 AM
capt -
Count me in on rejecting that "serial liar" thing!
Wright - "never said those things while I was in church"!
Wright - "not the man I knew"
Rezko - "bone-headed deal"
Ayers - "honorable man"
Ayers - "just an aquaintance"
Ayers - "just a neighbor"
Iraq War - "surge will not work"
Iraq War - "surge will not work"
Iraq War - "I was not wrong about the surge"
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 10:49 AM
BTW -
Anyone other than me concerned that Rezko holds dual-citizenship - US and SYRIAN???
Just askin'
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 10:51 AM
RE: "hmmm, maybe she had to get a good nights sleep after the first day and rehearse for the second day!"
Yea, remarkable, isn't it? And Obama only took 19 months to rehearse for O'Reilly, and still wiffed!!!!
Both professionals in their own right.
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 11:00 AM
A Narrative Grows: McCain Has Terrible Judgment and is Irresponsible
I've thought from the time of her announcement that the Obama campaign should pretty much ignore Gov. Palin except when using her selection by McCain to talk about McCain.
The Times has an editorial today and an oped from Bob Herbert on the Palin/Gibson celebrity interview segments.
Both posit the narrative that the Obama campaign should run long and fast with: John McCain has epitomized his complete lack of judgment and his irresponsible behavior with his appointment of Sarah Palin.
And the narrative is about McCain, Palin is just the vehicle to tell it.
http://tinyurl.com/4dhrx4
*****
It is a shame that McCain decided he was going to lose so he lost his honor and integrity. Maybe no one will notice?
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 11:08 AM
GOP Contempt: What This Election Is Coming Down To
[...]
Unstinting ignorance, unbridled jingoism and delusional thinking. Sound familiar? And after eight years of it, sound even worse than familiar? Sound like "Change is coming"?
Oh, it's coming, all right. As the national conversation increasingly shifts from GOP charges to an examination of GOP charges and their contemptuous deployment, independent voters should start abandoning McCain-friendly territory en masse.
Because there's just no way to put, and keep without smearing, lipstick on McCain-Palin's virtual promise of World War III and the Great Depression II.
I have to believe that, at least for another 50-odd days, even while retaining my unshakable belief in democratic ineptitude. The alternative is just too depressing.
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/carpenter/184
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 11:12 AM
Some Photos of Sarah Palin's Foreign Policy Experience
http://tinyurl.com/447wnr
Now you too can be ready to face down Putin and Medvedev!
Woo Hoo!
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 11:15 AM
Exposing John McCain’s Lies — Pass it on!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH0xzsogzAk
Are we finally pulling back the Curtin on the Wizards?
Ground Zero is a Symbol of Republicans' failed policies and an open Wound, that after 7 years Ground Zero is still a hole, still zero! Nothing from nothing leaves nothing and that is not Change we can believe in!
Posted by: bacaangel
| September 13, 2008 11:28 AM
palin believes that the u.s. occupation of iraq is the work of god? i'm not sure what her exact words were but something to that effect.
what a load of crap, sarah palin is just another evil fuck exactly like the rest of them, only stupider!
Sara Palin Is Not A Fundamentalist Christian
http://rense.com/general83/palin.htm
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 11:39 AM
Since the left seems to be obsessing on VP candidate appearance, here's my contribution (based on Biden's plastic surgery sojourns) -
Intro song suggestions for Joe Biden -
(You Can't Hide) Joe Biden's Eyes
Sung to the tune of Eagles "Lyin'Eyes"
(He's Got) Joey Biden Eyes
Sung to the tune of Kim Carnes' "Betty Davis Eyes"
And in a more obvious, perhaps politically incorrect vein -
Turning Japanese
Theme from the broadway musical "Hair"
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 11:54 AM
as_if!
I've been to your web site. You calling Sarah Palin "evil" and "stupid" is just a pot and kettle situation!
And watch the language, you are going to give the 9/11 Conspiracy crew a bad name!!!
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 11:57 AM
too funny!
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 11:58 AM
that is not my website.
re: 9/11, i believe in the laws of physics.
i don't care about any conspiracy crap but the laws of physics are immutable and in a real world of truth and justice would be the absolute bottom line every time.
and please don't anybody start quoting NIST absurd claims - they have strayed so far from reality that it would be comical if it weren't such a serious issue.
i'm sure that this entire forum would not be pleased if it were to become a 9/11 flame war like the last corn blog did.
i maintain my stance that the powers that be and their various lackeys such as the govt/media, etc lied to us.
it should be obvious to anyone who cares enough to actually check it out.
as for palin, she works that dominatrix librarian look of hers very well! too bad she wanted to ban some books and wants to teach creationism in schools.
i will vote for obama simply because i would rather not see mccain as president, not because i like obama.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 12:19 PM
Campaign check: Lies and half-truths outed
Each week until the election, The Chronicle will publish a compilation of "lies, half-truths and contradictions uttered by the presidential campaigns and their supporters during the previous week. Many of the distortions were not seen in California or appeared only on cable networks. Here's the rundown from the week:- Joe Garofoli
http://tinyurl.com/5evaen
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 12:26 PM
FACTCHECK.ORG
Energetically Wrong
Palin says Alaska supplies 20 percent of U.S. energy. Not true. Not even close.
Summary
Palin claims Alaska "produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy." That's not true.
Alaska did produce 14 percent of all the oil from U.S. wells last year, but that's a far cry from all the "energy" produced in the U.S.
Alaska's share of domestic energy production was 3.5 percent, according to the official figures kept by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
And if by "supply" Palin meant all the energy consumed in the U.S., and not just produced here, then Alaska's production accounted for only 2.4 percent.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/158656
"McCain: Energy. She knows more about energy than probably anyone else in the United States of America.. "
*****
I guess we should add lack of knowledge to poor judgment and reckless choices?
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 12:34 PM
Welcome to the Unofficial Dept of Peace
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aR3HQTi9bw
ZOMG!
It is a Colorado ad but - who is making this kind of thing. It is too effin funny!
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 12:46 PM
Economic damage from Ike may be less than feared
DALLAS (AP) — Because of where a weaker-than-expected Hurricane Ike landed, first impressions on Saturday were that the economic damage may not be as devastating as feared.
"If the eye of that storm had been as much as 20 miles east, we would have a lot more havoc and damage than we did," said Chris Johnson, a senior vice president at commercial property insurer FM Global.
The eye of the hurricane missed the center of Houston, as well as the largest concentrations of oil and gas refineries, Johnson said. The storm surge and rainfall in Galveston, Texas, were also weaker than predicted.
Galveston, however, remains flooded and refineries as far east as Louisiana have been affected. While preliminary estimates put the damage at $8 billion or more, the storm isn't over.
http://tinyurl.com/5tgkbg
*****
Less than feared but horrible for the people effected.
Once again the true character of America as a nation must come together and do all we can. Natural disasters can hit anybody - we all have to do what we can. Less than feared isn't saying much - it is stil very very bad.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 12:52 PM
as_if!
I admire your defense,however emotional and faulty.
1. The laws of physics are unfortunately NOT "immutable" (def. "Not subject or susceptible to change"), at least over time. Be careful when using Newton as the yardstick, he was proven incorrect on several levels by Einstein in 1905-1915, and by others numerous times since.
2. Sarah Palin never banned books - only inquired what the town libraries stance on a request would be. This seems to be well within the Town Government's jurisdiction - the inquiry, not a banning.
3. Darwinism is increasingly coming under scrutiny, for that concept is also NOT "immutable". NOT providing opposing scientific views (despite your personal opinion of the validity of the theory) is contrary to the scientific method. Remember, Darwinism is a theory based on OBSERVATION, not experiment. The Genome project appears to raise serious questions as to the "all-encompassing" value of the theory.
Those points being made, NOTHING that happened to the WTC Towers after the planes hit is outside the known laws of physics. If anything was, the physics community would be all over it. Physicists LOVE a challenge!
The pursuit of knowledge in the physics community trumps all else.
Remember, as Neal Peart once said "You can twist perception, but reality won't budge"!
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 1:02 PM
On Friday, Lehman's stock closed at $3.65 - an all-time low and down nearly 95 percent from its 52-week high of $67.73 as investors grew more convinced that Lehman may be auctioned at fire-sale prices. The stock's plunge was a humiliating beating for the 158-year-old investment bank, one of Wall Street's oldest firms.
****
Big trouble on Wall street not just Bears Stearns and Fannie/Freddie. More trouble to come thanks to a mismanaged mess of an economy.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:02 PM
Palin had kind words for Alaskan Independence Party
[...]
ALASKAN INDEPENDENCE PARTY'S DREAM IS . . . INDEPENDENCE
What does the Alaskan Independence Party stand for? Its Web site, www.akip.org, includes this statement on its home page:
"The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:
1) Remain a Territory.
2) Become a separate and Independent Nation.
3) Accept Commonwealth status.
4) Become a State.
The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, which was for Alaskans to achieve independence under a minimal government."
http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/523622.html
*****
Read this whole piece, very interesting to say the least.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:07 PM
Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party. Palin addresses AIP convention
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:09 PM
Lehman Woes Pressure
AIG, Merrill Lynch
Falling Shares - Raise Questions - About Capital
As the endgame plays out for Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., pressure is rising on two other financial behemoths to take action to convince investors to stick with them.
On Friday, credit-ratings firm Standard & Poor's threatened to downgrade American International Group Inc., citing the significant decline in the company's share price and the increase in credit spreads on the company's debt. Meanwhile, AIG will likely hold an analyst call Monday morning and could announce a series of steps aimed at reassuring investors, including possible asset sales, a person familiar with the matter said.
http://tinyurl.com/5s73d9
*****
Look like something has to give before Asian markets open Monday. Monday at the opening bell here will be interesting.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:15 PM
Biden and the Slavery Issue -
"Biden was on a roll.
Delaware, he noted, was a “slave state that fought beside the North. That’s only because we couldn’t figure out how to get to the South. There were a couple of states in the way.”
The crowd loved it."
Wow, now the Dem VP supports slavery - who knew?
Cheers
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 1:20 PM
"In running the sleaziest campaign since South Carolina in 2000 and standing by completely debunked lies on national television, it's clear that John McCain would rather lose his integrity than lose an election," Hari Sevugan, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, said in a statement.
In Dover, N.H., a voter asked Obama when he would start "fighting back." Obama, who began an aggressive ad campaign Friday, said he has a different philosophy. "I'm not going to start making up lies about John McCain," he said.
McCain's strategy reflects a calculation made by his advisers. The ads are devised to shift the debate to questions about Obama's character and qualifications, often with disputed claims. It is a bold tack for a candidate who calls his campaign bus the "Straight Talk Express," his chartered jet "Straight Talk Air."
Sipple, the Republican advertising strategist, voiced concern that McCain's approach could backfire. "Any campaign that is taking liberty with the truth and does it in a serial manner will end up paying for it in the end," he said.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:29 PM
McCain Wrong on Palin Earmarks
(Los Angeles Times)
NEW YORK -- John McCain got it wrong Friday when he asserted that his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, had not requested any earmarks, the spending directives lawmakers insert in spending bills that McCain has vowed to eliminate.
Palin, in fact, requested $198 million in federal earmarks in February, including such expenses as $487,000 to fight obesity in Alaska and $4 million to develop recreational trails.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:32 PM
Retail Sales Fall Amid Consumer Unease
Spending Folds - As Fiscal Stimulus - Plays Its Last Card
Sales at retailers nationwide slumped during last month's back-to-school shopping season, a sign that consumer spending, the main driver of U.S. economic growth, is weak.
"Without the props from the fiscal-stimulus rebates, consumer spending is slowly caving in," said Brian Bethune, chief U.S. financial economist at Global Insight in Lexington, Mass.
http://tinyurl.com/5wngz3
*****
Looks like our economy is headed for some steep declines.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:35 PM
Greenspan Says McCain Tax Plan Needs Corresponding Budget Cuts
Sept. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said the country can't afford $3.3 trillion of tax cuts proposed by Republican presidential nominee John McCain without corresponding spending reductions.
Greenspan, a lifelong Republican and longtime friend of McCain, said today on Bloomberg Television's ``Political Capital With Al Hunt'' that ``I'm not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money.''
http://tinyurl.com/5jzxmy
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:40 PM
After taking in some of Charles Gibson’s interviews with the Republican vice-presidential nominee, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, Paul Begala sounded ready to cast his vote.
"I thought one person on my television screen looked ready to assume the presidency," Mr. Begala, the CNN commentator, said by telephone on Friday. "It wasn’t Governor Palin."
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:41 PM
McCain-Palin Crowd-Size Estimates Not Backed by Officials
Sept. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Senator John McCain has drawn some of the biggest crowds of his presidential campaign since adding Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to his ticket on Aug. 29. Now officials say they can't substantiate the figures McCain's aides are claiming.
McCain aide Kimmie Lipscomb told reporters on Sept. 10 that an outdoor rally in Fairfax City, Virginia, drew 23,000 people, attributing the crowd estimate to a fire marshal.
Fairfax City Fire Marshal Andrew Wilson said his office did not supply that number to the campaign and could not confirm it. Wilson, in an interview, said the fire department does not monitor attendance at outdoor events.
In recent days, journalists attending the rallies have been raising questions about the crowd estimates with the campaign. In a story on Sept. 11 about Palin's attraction for some Virginia women voters, Washington Post reporter Marc Fisher estimated the crowd to be 8,000, not the 23,000 cited by the campaign.
http://tinyurl.com/5b7zj5
*****
McCain/Palin does lie about everything - no surprise.
If people care about the truth they lose.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 1:49 PM
denmac, good point about newton.
however one aspect of physics that was not proven wrong by einstein is that if object A were to strike object B with a force equivalent to X, then object B would also be striking object A with the same force equivalent to X.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 2:09 PM
The McCain campaign cited a fire marshal as the source of the "23,000" figure. But the fire marshal "said his office did not supply that number to the campaign and could not confirm it."
And according to the article, in another incident, the McCain camp claimed "10,000" people showed up for Palin's first public appearance, citing the Secret Service as the source for that figure. But, as the article notes, the Secret Service never gave any information like that to the McCain Campaign.
In lying to make Palin look like a "celebrity" (because being a "celebrity" is ok if you're a Republican), the McCain campaign just adds to its growing credibility problem, raising the question again and again--is there anything that John McCain's campaign won't lie about to win this election?
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 2:33 PM
Announcer: Wait a second. John McCain’s chief adviser lobbies for oil companies even from Russia and China.
His campaign manager lobbies for corporations outsourcing American jobs.
The campaign chairman he picked last year — a bank lobbyist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1OPaF8f1PQ
*****
As the problems with the Busheney economy grows so McCain's credibility shrinks!
If seven of McCain’s top advisers are lobbyists, who do you think will run his White House?
John McCain. We just can’t afford more of the same.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 2:35 PM
Palin camp clarifies extent of Iraq trip
Says she never ventured beyond Kuwait border
WASHINGTON - Sarah Palin's visit to Iraq in 2007 consisted of a brief stop at a border crossing between Iraq and Kuwait, the vice presidential candidate's campaign said yesterday, in the second official revision of her only trip outside North America.
Following her selection last month as John McCain's running mate, aides said Palin had traveled to Ireland, Germany, Kuwait, and Iraq to meet with members of the Alaska National Guard. During that trip she was said to have visited a "military outpost" inside Iraq. The campaign has since repeated that Palin's foreign travel included an excursion into the Iraq battle zone.
But in response to queries about the details of her trip, campaign aides and National Guard officials in Alaska said by telephone yesterday that she did not venture beyond the Kuwait-Iraq border when she visited Khabari Alawazem Crossing, also known as "K-Crossing," on July 25, 2007.
http://tinyurl.com/3o5pw8
******
This ongoing thing with all the lies is not going to help McCain, not one bit.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 2:48 PM
Jill and Crew are heading to TEXAS CITY, ( only a couple few miles from Alan, btw) the last point of land before the causeway to Galveston, with an Urban Search-And-Rescue team.
Initial (unconfirmed) reports are of likely mass casualties...possibly 250,000 residents who were ordered did not evacuate low laying areas, but they won't know until they get there and start pounding on doors.
Please keep victims, survivors and first-responders in your thoughts and/or prayers.
-T
Posted by: Hajji
| September 13, 2008 2:57 PM
At least she didn't claim to be ducking sniper fire!
She has that going for her.
lololololololo
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 3:15 PM
SARAH PALIN - ISRAEL'S BITCH
http://tinyurl.com/5o8sxx
harsh yet probably accurate
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 3:27 PM
The Nazis launched unprovoked wars of aggression and despoiled whole nations. So do we now; who cares? The Gestapo and the KGB snatched people from the street and held them without charges in secret prisons, tortured them with brute force and with exquisitely calibrated techniques approved by the highest authorities. So do we now; who cares? The Soviets spied without qualm or restraint on their own people, no warrants needed, no evidence required, just a nod from some faceless official in the security organs. So do we now; who cares? The Nazis believed that the national leader is beyond the law, that any order he gives is rightful and just and cannot be punished, simply because he has given it. So do we now; who cares? The Soviets and the Nazis treated protests against the established order as security threats and acts of terror, and repressed them with mass arrests and police violence. So do we now; who cares?
THE FALLING LAND
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m47169&hd=&size=1&l=e
just more of the same from both sides.
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 4:03 PM
Jill is very brave.
Keep us updated.
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 4:03 PM
DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE vs PALIN: brutal video
http://tinyurl.com/6xolom
JOE BIDEN: "i am a zionist"
http://tinyurl.com/62e97r
what is a zionist?
just check out the Talmud itself, the very engine that drives these zionists and their agenda that states “Tob shebe goyyim harog’, meaning “Even the best among the Gentiles deserves to be killed."
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 5:29 PM
read this about trotskeyism and the role of the VP and realize that we are fully screwed no matter who "wins" the selection.
http://tinyurl.com/58kqv7
Posted by: as_if!
| September 13, 2008 5:31 PM
Sarah Palin: The Ultimate Good Old Boy
When John McCain and Sarah Palin aren't busy lying about their own records or about Barack Obama, they spend most of their time trying to convince voters that only they can bring change to Washington. But as an article in today's New York Times makes clear, Sarah Palin represents a small town version of the worst kind of backroom, good old boy politics that we've gotten from the Bush/Cheney administration for the past eight years:
But an examination of her swift rise and record as mayor of Wasilla and then governor finds that her visceral style and penchant for attacking critics — she sometimes calls local opponents "haters" — contrasts with her carefully crafted public image.
Throughout her political career, she has pursued vendettas, fired officials who crossed her and sometimes blurred the line between government and personal grievance, according to a review of public records and interviews with 60 Republican and Democratic legislators and local officials.
It all sounds too familiar, doesn't it?
http://tinyurl.com/6ruh2f
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 5:42 PM
Why would a person lie in a church?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eKwTL8SwbI
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 5:45 PM
"I didn't decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president. . . . In truth, I'd had the ambition for a long time."
- John McCain
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 5:46 PM
From an article about McCain in the Aug. 1, 2008 Washington Post by Robert G. Kaiser:
Within months of delivering that commencement address, McCain was running for president for the first time, and violating his own credo. After losing the 2000 Republican presidential nomination , McCain and Salter wrote "Worth the Fighting For" (the title is taken from a line of Robert Jordan's in the Hemingway novel ), which gave McCain an opportunity to confess his shortcomings:
"I didn't decide to run for president to start a national crusade for the political reforms I believed in or to run a campaign as if it were some grand act of patriotism. In truth, I wanted to be president because it had become my ambition to be president. . . . In truth, I'd had the ambition for a long time."
That ambition led McCain into a moral lapse that appalled him. It involved an ongoing dispute in South Carolina over the tradition of flying the Confederate battle flag atop the state capitol, in Columbia. In a television interview, McCain said the flag was "offensive," and he appeared sympathetic to its critics. His aides were alarmed, fearing the consequences in the upcoming South Carolina primary, and they wrote a damage-control statement that McCain read repeatedly before television cameras. "I understand both sides," McCain said. "Some view the flag as a symbol of slavery. Others view it as a symbol of heritage. Personally, I see the battle flag as a symbol of heritage."
But that, McCain wrote a year later, was "a lie." The flag symbolized both slavery and the South's secession from "the country I love," and "should be lowered forever from the staff atop South Carolina's capitol."
"I had promised to tell the truth no matter what," McCain wrote in the book. "When I broke it, I had not just been dishonest, I had been a coward, and I had severed my own interests from my country's. That was what made the lie unforgivable."
via kos
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 5:48 PM
And we wonder why people doubt our credibility...
It continues to amuse me that they keep using this ridiculous "Russia is close to Alaska" thing. And the press keeps kinda taking it seriously! And the "serious" media wonder why so many people get their news from Jon Stewart?
"Russia," as a political entity, isn't a bunch of rocks in Siberia. It's Moscow. We don't dispute that, right? Right.
So let's do a little experiment. How close is Juneau, Alaska's capital, to Moscow? It's 4,559.6 miles. Meanwhile, how close is, say, Boston, the capital of Massachusetts, to Moscow? It's 4,498.8 miles. (Distances calculated using this site.)
So there you have it. Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick is more geographically qualified to speak of matters Russian than Palin is. I wish someone would make this into a commercial. They'd never trot this argument out again.
http://tinyurl.com/5fqh3v
Posted by: capt
| September 13, 2008 5:54 PM
as_if!
RE: "denmac, good point about newton.
however one aspect of physics that was not proven wrong by einstein is that if object A were to strike object B with a force equivalent to X, then object B would also be striking object A with the same force equivalent to X."
This is a common misconception. Remember that object A, in this case the plane, is in motion, and has high kinetic energy. Object B, the towers, were stationary, with low kinetic energy. The transfer of energy, X, is what caused the building damage (in addition to the heat transfer as the jet fuel burned).
Also, what many miss is that the force exerted from the falling structure increased with the square of the distance travelled, hence the debris accelerated during the collapse.
We don't need to build a supercollider to prove this physics.
Posted by: denmac
| September 13, 2008 6:51 PM
Post A Comment