Why I am Not voting for John McCain Part I:

Why I am Not voting for John McCain:
Part I:
By Larry Bernard

I am first going to put a caveat out there I like to call the John Kerry-Katherine Harris clause. While I hate to say this but if Hillary proves to be as Harris and Kerry were completely out of her mind and a danger to the public good I may swallow my statement and vote against Hillary and by process of elimination electing McCain. But I first want to spell out why I am not going to vote for John McCain

I ) Your party should earn your vote, not be entitled to your vote. and the Moral Hazard problem is key to why your party doesn't have an entitlement to your vote

Moral hazard is the prospect that a party insulated from risk may behave differently from the way it would behave if it were fully exposed to the risk. Moral hazard arises because an individual or institution does not bear the full consequences of its actions, and therefore has a tendency to act less carefully than it otherwise would, leaving another party to bear some responsibility for the consequences of those actions. For example, an individual with insurance against automobile theft may be less vigilant about locking his car, because the negative consequences of automobile theft are (partially) borne by the insurance company.

When we live in a country where our national political system makes incumbents basically protected from the consequences of their actions (a few exceptions exist but it is the rule) The Moral Hazard should be an important principle we keep in mind when we vote. Is this party/Candidate giving me something to vote for or something to vote against. And if the case is the latter it should only be done in the most extreme of cases. FDR transformed the electorate by saying to African American voters (primarily in the south) "What has the republican party done for you lately."

The answer lead to a calcification of Democrat voting in the south which lead to some of the worst of the Jim Crowe years. If we vote for a party just because we will not get our interests met at best, or at worse we can be like those who suffered during segregation empowering those who oppress us. And as the Republicans in the 20s and 30s expected the Party of Lincoln to maintain those votes they did nothing to keep them and so they deserved to lose. And if we keep voting for bad outcomes we will keep getting bad results.

II ) Trust:
When you vote for a Political figure they may have a record, they may have campaign promises but we live in a Representative Republic and by handing them your small power of citizenship your saying "I trust you to, for the most part, get done what I want done in Washington/Your state capital here." Most candidates do this by establishing an Identity.In this Presidential Primary of the candidates left over Mike Huckabee established himself as "The Hip Pastor". Huck plays the base and is concerned with the kind of issues the hip young pastor at your church would be into. Mitt has (to varying degrees of success) tried to sell himself as "Turnaround CEO Mitt." Hillary Clinton established a brand and Identity for herself that just is "Hillary" and Obama has established himself as the hope of a new Generation. But none of these is as bought into as "Maverick" John McCain.

mav·er·ick (mvr-k, mvrk)
n.
1. An unbranded range animal, especially a calf that has become separated from its mother, traditionally considered the property of the first person who brands it.
2. One that refuses to abide by the dictates of or resists adherence to a group; a dissenter.
adj. Being independent in thought and action or exhibiting such independence: maverick politicians; a maverick decision

But has John McCain went against the popular culture and its beliefs or has he went against the popular culture of the Republican party and its beliefs. One shows courage because it presents potential risk, whereas the other gets you political attention. Furthermore as an incumbent republican senator the weight of the party establishment would back him just as much as it would back Lincoln Chafee and Arlen Specter. And Democrats would be disinclined to run against him because he breaks with the Republican party to support their issues. So in being Maverick John McCain until today has put forward no risk and thus he is not being independent but he is being a follower of social norms dictated by popular culture. The closest he has come to rocking the boat is in his support for the Iraq war, but he has also talked about us torturing and brutalizing people (something which the evidence on is weak or lacking) and made it part of a central critique of attacking the Bush management of the War in Iraq and the Department of Defense. So even when he broke from his going with popular opinion he did so in a way that popular opinion could support him. When people have been concerned about violent video games, John McCain was there. When people have been concerned about Steroids in Sports John McCain was there. if John McCain could get himself a piece of popular discontent he does, and he does in a way that shows a lack of political principle or guiding Ideology. So John McCain isn't what he says he is and Isn't what people think of him as.

III ) Lack of political courage.
During the run up on the McCain-Kennedy amnesty package John McCain and his proxies made derogatory comments to those who disagreed with his bill. His proxies (including proxies for the president) went so far as to call those who disagree with the John McCain Bigots and promote fear of Hispanics voting for Democrats over Republicans if we don't do this. Their are good reasons, and noble reasons to oppose the plan Senator McCain championed. but the fact Senator McCain went forward with this shows a lack of political courage that has happened throughout his career. When Soldiers and sailors needed help with Agent Orange John McCain did not take the courage of fighting for them as a member of Congress fresh out of the DoD until he knew it would pass. When running in 2000 their was a controversy over Bob Jones University, the position of political courage in that race was taken by Alan Keyes who told them their positions restricting Inter racial dating was immoral and unchristian. John McCain could have made that speech but he didn't. After losing the 2000 election and seeing his key staffers not getting Bush White house jobs according to many Democrat sources John McCain considered Jumping parties. John McCain was even talked to about joining the Democratic party ticket in 2004. John McCain stood up for the Vietnamese government against the State Department (with John Kerry) enabling them to get a free trade agreement when they were abusive of human rights. He called people Frauds and con artists for advocating that POW's still remained in Vietnam without any evidence of such wrongdoing. When people disagree with him he either shrugs from political courage or makes derogatory comments about them. John McCain has used Bob Dole's war experience to insulate Bob Dole's criticism of attacks on him from the kind of scrutiny and debate they deserve.

I want to spell out first and foremost that these reasons are non-ideological. While I don't believe John McCain fits the mold of American political Conservatism even if John McCain fit that mold and Ideology we would still have problems.He is still promoting ignoring the Moral Hazard of identifying in party over beliefs. He still isn't trustworthy because he relies on a false identity as some one who rocks the boat when he has a political career of going with the flow. Its about character and Character matters a whole lot to me now when I look at who I select for President. I could go into other aspects of his general character that while they don't fit into this rubric they are none the less concerning. John McCain rails against those who are unduly influenced by money in politics yet if you ask the Senator to name names he cannot name one. If you look at the Senators legislative pursuits and you will find a wish list from his own major donors. He married a wife which helped him further his political career and left his sick wife who stood by him during the worst of the worst.

When we look at these character flaws however we will see them manifest in his policy and his ideological breaks from the republican party

W0rd

An editorial which gets to the heart of things in Iraq

The Bush administration disputes the "civil war" moniker. And it's not a semantic argument. Just Tuesday, The New York Times reported that "the Iranian-backed group Hezbollah had been training members of the Mahdi Army, the Iraqi Shiite militias led by Moktada al-Sadr." It's not the only outside influence.


Such a proxy war is not a civil war. Neither is it unreasonable or naive to believe that sans those proxies, Iraq might not be the hellhole it now is. Nonetheless, this remains a matter for the Iraqis to settle.

And yet we want IRAN to help us stop the conflict

and here is another

Such advice is worse than wrong-headed, it is a denial of reality. Iran and Syria have one primary interest — U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and ultimately out of the entire Middle East. So much is clear from the daily pronouncements of the Terhran Mullahs, led by the Iranian strongman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the long-standing refusal of the Baathist regime controlling Syria to stop expediting the inflow of foreign fighters to Iraq to kill Americans and foment civil unrest between Iraq’s Sunni minority and the Shiite majority. The only stability Iran seeks in Iraq is the kind made possible by the sort of puppet regime Ahmadinejad wants in Baghdad. This is why Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei told Iraq’s President Jalal Talibani yesterday that Iran will send troops if requested to do so by Iraq.

There is another crucially important denial of reality akin to the “managing defeat” syndrome. Evidence is rapidly accumulating that major Western media organizations are being had on a daily basis by the propaganda efforts of the Jihadist insurgency. A frequently appearing source in Iraq stories from AP, Reuters and other mainline news organizations is “Capt. Jemil Hussein” of the Iraqi police. Hussein was the main source in the Nov. 24 story claiming six Iraqi civilians were burned alive by insurgents outside a mosque. Hussein is one of 14 questionable sources with Middle Eastern names identified by the U.S. military in news stories from Baghdad reporting growing chaos and allegations of U.S. atrocities.

and we expect Iran and Syria to help us.

And some folks expect media accuracy

So will Bush sell out the Iraqi people?

Character matters.... really

The L. A. Slimes actually does a good job talking about why character matters when it comes to Senator John McCain

The first clue to McCain's philosophy lies in two seemingly irrelevant items of gossip: His father was a drunk, and his second wife battled addiction to pain pills. Neither would be worth mentioning except for the fact that McCain's books and speeches are shot through with the language and sentiment of 12-step recovery, especially Steps 1 (admitting the problem) and 2 (investing faith in a "Power greater than ourselves").

Like many alcoholics who haven't quite made it to Step 6 (becoming "entirely ready" to have these defects removed), McCain is disarmingly talented at admitting his narcissistic flaws. In his 2002 book "Worth the Fighting For," the senator is constantly confessing his problems of "selfishness," "immaturity," "ambition" and especially "temper," though he also makes clear that his outbreaks of anger can be justifiable and even laudable when channeled into "a cause greater than self-interest."

"A rebel without a cause is just a punk," he explains. "Whatever you're called — rebel, unorthodox, nonconformist, radical — it's all self-indulgence without a good cause to give your life meaning."

What is this higher power that ennobles McCain's crankiness? Just as it is for many soldiers, it's the belief that Americans "were meant to transform history" and that sublimating the individual in the service of that "common national cause" is the wellspring of honor and purpose. (But unlike most soldiers, McCain has been in a position to prod and even compel civilians to join his cause.)

George Bush's history of substance abuse is extremely formative on his thinking process. It lead him to his christian faith and his views on god-centered and faith-centered life. This leads him to the sense of calling he has had on National Security issues. Bill Clinton's life was formed by an alcoholic father in the analysis of Dick Morris (which I agreed with) his ability to have an almost elastic ability to be all things to all people. These are negatives which these men turned into positives. What did Senator John McCain do with a similar negative to Clintons? He surrendered himself to a higher and transformational power (the government) because of his background as a military man.

You could also say that John McCain's being in the Hanoi Hilton has also put him firmly at the alter of government power. Whereas many organizations (which he was later as a member of congress and the senate antagonistic towards) put pressure on the government to do right by folks like John McCain his mind still in that cell in Hanoi views the government as the source of his salvation.

Looking at Bill Clinton we see a similar negative trait which haunts his political destiny. Bill never served so he didn't have the spine to put boot on the ground in a war he might lose. Somalia early in his presidency assured him that his instincts are correct.

We have a man who formatively is cloaked in the tounge of the addict, and a man who still deep in his mind is formed and tested in a torture cage in vietnam. are these formative experiences a help or a hinderance to his views on the future?

"Our greatness," he wrote in "Worth the Fighting For," "depends upon our patriotism, and our patriotism is hardly encouraged when we cannot take pride in the highest public institutions." So, because steroids might be damaging the faith of young baseball fans, drug testing becomes a "transcendent issue," requiring threats of federal intervention unless pro sports leagues shape up. Hollywood's voluntary movie-rating system? A "smoke screen to provide cover for immoral and unconscionable business practices." Ultimate Fighting on Indian reservations? "Barbaric" and worthy of government pressure on cable TV companies. Negative political ads by citizen groups? They "do little to further beneficial debate and healthy political dialogue" and so must be banned for 60 days before an election if they mention a candidate by name.

and I think I will just end it as the L.A Times did... talking about my favorite Arizona political figure

Goldwater, a man who seemed to emanate from Arizona's dust, was the paragon of limited government, believing to his core that the feds shouldn't tell you how to run a business or whom you can sleep with. McCain, on the other hand, is a third-generation D.C. insider who carpetbagged his way into office, believing to his core that "national pride will not survive the people's contempt for government."

Post Election Post 2: Thanks Liddy

My theme for these series of posts is going to be a simple one. And it may seem a bit hard but my perspective is very different. Their are two kinds of folks in this party those who view the party as their province and are part of its aristocracy and those of us who found ourselves at home in the GOP. The former is like some vestigial reptilian appendage to the days when a rich and privileged few ran this party and ran it without an ideological focus or purpose.

And the next person I want to thank for screwing this up for us is part of that establishment, part of that privileged elite of the party. Liddy Dole was part of the K-Street mob and worked her way up using her husband. She led one of the most moral branches of the most immoral organizations (The Red Cross). Liddy was not a person I liked, but Liddy is part of why we are where we are today. And like the President conventional wisdom will spare her.

With a party war chest all about the small to medium donors do we get an intellectual white knight? Do we get a passionate true believer? We get the wife of the boring, dogged... and pretty tied former leader of the Senate. We get a man who lost when he was on the national ticket twice, and lost a third time. Is this how you reach out to those folks who give you 20, 30, 50, or 100 dollars? Is this how you get to the people who can give just the legal limit and afford no more? Of course its not but the fire of the party had been overthrown in the senate so the leadership of Ice needed to try to bear its abominable fruit.

I will get to Bill Frist a bit later... but this is where I rake Liddy dole over the coals.

The truth came down to it that walking into the Pre-Election cycle at the end of 04 the Party had plenty of opportunities. I will focus on the one that I feel was most squandered as a very emblematic problem of where opportunities were blown and that's here in Florida.

Katherine Harris has quite simply a horrendous track record here in Florida. Long histories of Political corruption, long ties to dirty money... But Harris had a pass called the election of 2000..... And *Allegedly* a pass called her staying out of the Senate race for hand picked "Friend of George" Mel Martinez. Harris would have lost to Mel in 2004 and lost handily and if she did we would not be where we are today. But the President I don't know out of a sense of "owing" here or out of a sense of wanting a quiet anointing of Mel gave her a "06 is your year promise." Under the regime of Brother Lott I doubt that would have happened... but this was with the Eunuch guarding the harem of Bill Frist and his little pillow warmer liddy dole.

So because the Brahmin's had to have one of their own Harris came into the fray. It was clear some one needed to recruit some one to beat her. But Liddy did not have the ties to the money men that George Allen had or heck even George Allen’s street cred with the average republican. She wasn't one of us so what she got was well.... a bit sub par.

You look at the elections and we darn near had another Democrat shut out (the CFO race is a unique matter which didn't prove the rule) Harris had lots of negative baggage and that was before she said word one. If a competent republican was standing up for the Senate Seat the Democrats would have had to dump money into the Nelson campaign.... lots of money. That would be lots of money that couldn't crack the Nut in Virginia. Lots of money that couldn't kill some of the gains that were starting in Maryland. and that’s without a pickup.

The entire Dynamic of the race would have changed if Chuck Schummer had to fight it out on the airwaves of Miami, Tampa, Orlando, and Jacksonville. The lack of a credible Primary opponent for Harris meant that money could be used in better places. And we see with West Virginia and Nebraska a similar failure to get people on the board who can win.

They weren't playing to win... they were playing to keep the other guy from winning and that’s why they failed.

But if that was her only fatal flaw I could almost forgive her but things got worse. We have the fact she did (for good reasons) the detriment of our party in the Rhode Island Primary. I am not going to fight the case that Laffey could have won. But what I am going to roll out is this... when the Senate Campaign needed all its people ready to fight early and fight often Liddy Dole ordered these people to get a black eye. And we look at the Missing Link and we see the deepest Irony of all. A man whose wife bought in hook line and sinker to the Presidents foreign policy agenda says we have to remove one of the people who stood up to it to punish him. Link ran away from Bush and it was going to damn him. But by trying to save him from his damnation the party lost its money and lost some of the fire it needed in its belly.

The Senate ran to the left end of its own and some other issues I will lay out a bit later on. But when we needed a good Offensive Co-Ordinator we instead got a green rookie with no fire and no skills to fall back on

Thanks Liddy.... at least this means I won't see you waste your time running for President ever in my lifetime

The Post-Election Post #1 Thanks George

Well folks I have been fighting my blogging doldrums but the election came up and so as some one who has talked a lot in the past (a lot) about the political system I need to say some stuff.

I really wanted to do more on this election but it felt like... it really felt like this election was a whole lot of nothing. Their were things that mattered to me at stake in this election but it really didn't seem to me like it mattered to the people who were running this election. My buddy Ken Kerns, as well as my Buddy Mark Griffis and I joke about how the people in charge don't know what their doing and really this election makes it feels almost like solid fact.

In the end it came down to this it’s very clear that to the American voter the Republicans didn't deserve to win.... and that's why the Democrats took control. In the weeks and months ahead that's not going to be how the tea leaves are read... indeed just today we see the white house failed to leave the mark of blood so it had to sacrifice one of its own.

This sacrifice makes me truly worry about my country. Don Rumsfeld was not a man who was brought on to lead a War on Terror. He was brought on to remodel the Military and he has had 6 years of progress on it.... which stop now I fear, and that's to our detriment down the road. We need to have a military that is ready for the wars we fight another 10 or 20 years from now... not have a military ready only for the conflicts that lay in our field of vision. He was sacrificed for political convenience and I fear for this country we will have other sacrifices to come.

The only salvation I think is the Democrats are going to want to keep the war festering for as long as they can to keep the door open on the anti-war vote for 2008 .... But, I truly fear even that notion because then they will know as our enemies did when we pull out of Saigon. And if we do to the Iraqi people what we did to the People of South Vietnam in the end our military might well be confirmed as a paper tiger. We ran from Somalia, We Ran far away from even trying in Rwanda, We ran from Lebanon, We ran from Indochina, and now perhaps running from Iraq. If this happens I fear for the world because the last time the strength of the United States withdrew like this we saw the rise of Hitler... and even that analogy has its flaws.

Rome began its fall when Rome built the gates to keep the barbarians out and focused on itself. As it did that soon it needed the Barbarians to man the gates against other Barbarians. We look to Europe and we see the Barbarians are at the gate there... are we going to repeat that folly and build our own gates now?

You look at it the election was not an endorsement on ending the policy in Iraq... yet that's what The President has now anointed it so.

Here are some more words on the oil our president is anointing his wounds with

On at least one Persian Gulf issue, Gates has been associated with a different approach than the one now being pursued. In the summer of 2004, Gates and former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski co-chaired a task force sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations that argued for opening a dialogue with Iran. The task forces report contended that the lack of American engagement with Iran had harmed American interests, and advocated direct talks with the Iranians. “Just as the United States has a constructive relationship with China (and earlier did so with the Soviet Union) while strongly opposing certain aspects of its internal and international policies, Washington should approach Iran with a readiness to explore areas of common interests while continuing to contest objectionable policy,” said the report, entitled “Iran: Time for a New Approach.”

China and the Soviets did not break international law in the way the Iranians are doing, yet the man who will be running our defense department now doesn't see it that way. A man who crafted this new approach with the architect of the Carter foreign policy..... Is this what we want? Do we want to bring Carterism into our government?

When the people of Iran cry out for new leadership, when they cry out for freedom and a western way of life we should not be breaking bread with the men who execute them. We should not be enabling the people who are destroying the economy. Because if engagement was truly the key the powers of Europe should have had the matter all settled.... engagement isn't a panacea.

And yet you look at the Ballot measures. Eminent Domain reform (which Pelosi does not favor) Passed, Bans on Gay marriage passed in almost all the states they came up on. Restrictions on Illegal aliens at a state level -even in states the democrats did well in- passed. Why did we lose? We lost because George W. Bush is not, and never was the heir to Ronald Reagan. He was not one of us and never was, but he mesmerized congress into following him.... and in the process lead them to their doom.

He sold us on prescription drug plans... plans we didn't like. In the election the plan that was better funded then the Democrat alternative was sold as a great evil to seniors who we were told only a few years earlier had to choose between eating and buying their medication. So clearly this plan did not bring us a more "compassionate" face to the public because the democrats would still find a way to crucify us for it. But the congress sold its soul and they sold it in the Bipartisan marketplace.

he told us we needed to interfere more into our school systems, but again instead of making an issue a plus like he said... instead of "softening" the image of the bad old evil conservatives we ended up being worse then before. Test scores were good in some areas but raw data isn't a comforting retort to the emotion of waging war on poor schools. He tried to take their issue and make it his through their methods and that simply isn't how you advance the issues.

Two issues used to attack his leadership, and to attack the competency of the congress he advanced because we needed to "unite" and be "bipartisan".... and a third McCain-Feingold laid out the tools we saw the Democrats use to gain parity with the GOP.... he also twisted the party into Supporting.


He tried to dip into that well a fourth time and give a bitter pill of an immigration bill, partnering again with Ted Kennedy.... but this time the Republicans in the house saw through it. They tried to reclaim its soul but it simply was too late.

George, we lost in large part due to the fact that you lead the Republican Party too far to the left. You were good at winning elections, and in 2000...2002...and 2004 you earned a lot of capital. But you do have to pay it all back and you failed at that George.

You failed to hold strong with intellectual firepower on the courts because the truth is that’s not what you believe in. You believe in micro-politics that has gotten you as far as you did.

George Winners want the ball. You can manage the clock but in the end if you can put it in for 6 you darn well do it.

George you flat out didn't want to win because winning involves working hard and potentially losing.

You picked Collin Powell to be Secretary of State during a war in which he was simply eaten alive by those who opposed our policy. When you could have brought an A game talent back into the picture or used Dr. Rice to seduce those who wished to derail what was right you stuck with what managed the clock... what you thought would earn you a couple of percentages in a couple of precincts.

You never fought this the right way, you never fought to win.

You kept Rumi in DoD when as soon as the war turned up you needed a War time conselegri.

You could have even saved Powell and slid him in

in the end George you didn't fight to win you fought to keep the other guy losing

and you saw how well just two years ago that worked for John Kerry

Thanks George.... thanks for showing what an Ivy League education produces

Bill Clinton: a comment so stupid its given me cancer

Bill Clinton in a speech about the illogicalness of conservative arguments has set standards of stupification so high I feel utterly brain dead after reading them.

"They favor unilateralism whenever possible and cooperation when it is inevitable," Clinton said without specifically mentioning members of the Bush administration.

"The problem with ideology is, if you've got an ideology, you've already got your mind made up. You know all the answers and that makes evidence irrelevant and arguments a waste of time. You tend to govern by assertion and attacks

I start out with this one first because it really is less insulting to the intelligence of the reader and the listener.

Every political leader has a foriegn policy ideology EVERY ONE. because foriegn affairs are (yes) a political science. And as such people have philisophical views about them. Now Bill could have argued that they are to ideological.... that would have at least been intellectually honest. But to attack some one for having an ideology in a speech about political logic and honest debate makes my brain explode because of just how blatantly idiotic the very notion is.

You have to have an ideology because of how we humans work. Our brains take complex situations togther and try to find rules/systems/philosophies that explain them. Its what we do as monkeys with pants. You even have ideologies that govern things in your day to day lives.

but, the MOST stupid and MOST intellectually insulting/dishonest part is right here.

"Most of us long for politics where we have genuine arguments, vigorous disagreements but we don't claim to have the whole truth and we don't demonize our opponents and we work for what's best for the American people," he said.

Bill, this comment is so insulting I am not even going to go make the basic cursory effort to find the instances where you have demonized your opponents just THIS YEAR. I am also not going to address the fact that you said because you don't have a world view your more right then some one who does is in fact a claim to the whole truth.

I won't point out the fact the chairman of the democratic party says its not the democrats job to have ideas to oppose republicans.

Bill as a former DeMolay state officer I am ashamed that a fellow former DeMolay politician can't form a better argument then this. I know that you didn't see the moral lessons in DeMolay as important and its very clear by this speech you don't even see keeping the same moral lesson in a single speech as even nessecary

Ok I am convinceed....

After seeing the latest Pat Hynes $hill fest for McCain I found the Giuliani Blog. I never thought I would be on the same page as The Anchoress but Here I am

My A Canidate as of right now is Rudy with my two B Canidates being Condi and Newt

and after looking at Team McCain in this article by the NYTimes... Rudy will need the help. Johnny Mac has insiders and name recognition.

I guess folks need to remind him how well that worked for Nelson Rockefeller.

Enviromentalists suck

I really loathe environmentalists, I may find moments of agreement with environmental philosophy but environmentalists not so much. A hat tip to Barry at Enrevanche for inspiring this rant.

For someone who says the sky is falling, he does very little. He says he recycles and drives a hybrid. And he claims he uses renewable energy credits to offset the pollution he produces when using a private jet to promote his film. (In reality, Paramount Classics, the film's distributor, pays this.)

Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.

You see rich elite people. Either scions like Mr. Gore or folks like Streisand who become paragons due to their vast fortune advocating this life style but never following it.

In otherwords the costly lifestyle of saving the planet is for the "little people." it is also not surprising that these folks advocate soaking the rich in social-economic policies in ways that tend to hit those people whose wealth comes from labor and leads to social mobility.

Likewise they advocate population control in countries with "brown people" but would always accuse their political opponents of racism.

Enviromentalism in folks like Mr. Gore is their way of ensuring they remain on top of society and that the little people only see them as they fly in their private jets to their SUVs as they have confrences about the needs of the little people.

Pat Hynes still selling out to John McCain

I am a big fan of the work of Crush Kerry/Anklebiting Pundits. But when I found out about the snafu Pat Hynes the major driving force behind the site was working for McCain while softballing him on his site. He now is posting "insider" softballs about McCain from others

But in the article what really amused me was Pat's professional justification for his work with McCain

And the following is from New Media Strategics’ philosophy statement:

We believe in the New Media conversation raging across the country and the world on subjects that define our society, our industry, and our lives—a discussion that dominates digital, video, newsprint, electronic, and countless other forums every second. An open global exchange unencumbered by spin, packaging, and interpretation.

“The New Media is all about ’straight talk,’” Hynes concluded. “It is a natural fit.”

Pat knows he wasn't hired for "Straight Talk"

Pat is a major online cheerleader for the Religous right. So this is all part of McCain's strategy of co-opting and limiting free speech to show why he is just so great.

Pat should own up to what he is really here to do.... lead the flock to the shepard john mccain

Bender smacks down Algore

And then Al Gore goes Wild....



(H/T Don Surber)

Johnny Mac does it again

If you don't think the way Johnny Mac wants you to think he won't show up..... unless you keep the press away.

Bilbray's campaign spokesman, Steve Danon, said he got the first call from McCain on Monday to talk about the political climate surrounding immigration. As calls went back and forth, Danon said he told the McCain staff that immigration was the hot issue in the district. McCain's staff later asked Danon to consider excluding press from the fundraiser. After Bilbray refused to rescind press invitations, McCain canceled late yesterday morning, Danon said.

Yes John McCain who made it harder for people to speak out with their own money doesn't want to be held accountable for his political choices to the little people through the media again.

But why should we worry if a presidential canidate loathes free speech?

Mushmouths and Milktoasts Unite

Because a Hard Core Democrat has started an organization just for you.

Now lets take a look at some of the political animals listed on their founders council...

Nicco Mele, Washington, DC. Internet strategist and webmaster for Dean 2004, founder
echoditto.com consulting services.
Hamilton Jordan, Atlanta, Georgia. Carter White House Chief of Staff, writer, investor; focused on for-profit and non-profit start-ups; most importantly, father of three.
Tom Stroock, Casper, Wyoming. Former GOP State Chairman, State Senator for 17 years, U.S. Ambassador to Guatemala (1989-93).
Gerald Rafshoon, Washington, DC. Former media advisor and White House communications director, film and television producer, father, grandfather.
Angus King, Brunswick, Maine. Former two-term independent Governor of Maine, teacher, businessman, attorney, father.

So a Dean machiner, 2 Carter Admin alumni, a Wyoming Party guy for the republicans and a guy who seems to have been as near as I can tell a political fence sitting independent.

This hardly seems Suspect at all

and we also should point out that Hamilton Jordan backed Perot in 92 which many folks view as a spoiler to target the republican party.

Now on to what these good folks believe in.

Unity08 divides issues facing the country into two categories: Crucial Issues – on which America’s future safety and welfare depend; and Important Issues – which, while vital to some, will not, in our judgment, determine the fate or future of the United States.

In our opinion, Crucial Issues include: Global terrorism, our national debt, our dependence on foreign oil, the emergence of India and China as strategic competitors and/or allies, nuclear proliferation, global climate change, the corruption of Washington’s lobbying system, the education of our young, the health care of all, and the disappearance of the American Dream for so many of our people.

By contrast, we consider gun control, abortion and gay marriage important issues, worthy of debate and discussion in a free society, but not issues that should dominate or even crowd our national agenda.

In our opinion – since the disintegration of the Soviet Union – our political system seems to have focused more attention on the “important issues” than the “crucial issues.” One result: The political parties have been built to address the interests of their “base” but have failed to address the realities that impact most Americans.

so an organization full of known democrat operatives at the top levels, and with a position that they should take a position is wanting to run a One Democrat/One Republican ticket

rrrrrrrrrrright

ALGORE and the ALGORETEERS

More Bashing on John McCain

What many people don't know is the Veteran Activist community hates John McCain with a passion. Now some of what they say about him collaberating with the enemy in Vietnam I just don't know the quality of the information on it. But in my popping over to one of their websites I have found stuff I think should be shown to the public as to why I'm never supporting McCain.

here are some issues they brought out the 2000 Campaign

1) According to Burch, beginning in 1984 when the coalition sought co-sponsors for the Agent Orange bill, John McCain refused to sign on. When Burch and his men asked other members of the House to co-sponsor, these congressmen would invariably ask, "Has John McCain signed on to this bill?" When told that McCain had not it was believed, as often happens on the Hill in matters like this, that McCain was against the bill.

It was only after more than two hundred congress members expressed their support for the bill and final passage was assured that McCain finally agreed to come on board. But McCain's foot-dragging and initial reluctance made the coalition's work much more difficult and delayed the veterans' final victory.

2) In 1988 the coalition led the charge for "Judicial Review," a new system whereby veterans rejected for benefits by the Veterans Administration would have the same right to appeal as Social Security recipients have. Again, the coalition members working the halls of Congress asking for co-sponsors to the bill found McCain in opposition.

The senator from Arizona never signed on.

3) In 1991 when new evidence of living American servicemen missing in Vietnam surfaced, the coalition - in conjunction with those "mainstream" veterans organizations, the VFW and American Legion - led the charge for a Senate Select Committee to investigate whether or not any American POWs were left behind in Southeast Asia and whether some might still be alive. All these veterans groups wanted a senate panel instead of an executive branch panel because no one believed the executive branch could be trusted to investigate itself.

Senator McCain initially opposed the Senate committee. Later, when the Senate ultimately created the panel, McCain was appointed a member.

4) As a member of the Senate POW Committee, McCain "distinguished himself" by repeatedly insulting wives, mothers and children of POWs and MIAs and accusing many veterans groups fighting for the POW cause of "making a living off this issue." He made similar charges in the South Carolina primary when the National Right to Life Committee endorsed Bush: "It is a shame when they take a cause and turn it into a business."

The last two issues cover the Kerry/McCain commission which is why the field was ripe for the swift boat veterans. Much as John Kerry has never apologized for attacking the people who believed with a passion that we left men behind, and we needed to get them out....His attacking them seems almost like his mode of attacking blogs and others who are out their trying to speak freely unburdened by the establishment.

The first two issues however I think are even more signifigant. When we look at issues of the US government being responsible for the men and women who fought and struggled in Vietnam.... a place which John McCain trumpets as part of his Charecter... he couldn't be bothered to help their human suffering. He couldn't be bothered to give the governments basic response and decency to those men who sacrificed for it. Thats not Presidential metal.

another matter of Charecter that John McCain has displayed that I want to take a further look at.

or who divorced the wife that stood by him while he was a POW, after she became crippled in an accident.

I want to read up on why John McCain divorced his first wife. Because on its face a woman who supported him while he was in the Hanoi Hilton deserves his trying harder then most to keep that marriage.

also his new wife and family makes the whole Keating 5 scandal something that should be brought up for media attention.

"While Sen. John McCain's wife and father-in-law were investing with Charles H. Keating, Jr. in a shopping center, McCain was helping Keating battle federal regulators who questioned his operation of Lincoln Savings and Loan . . . [photo caption] Documents show that Sen. John McCain's wife, Cindy, and father-in-law, James W. Hensley (second from right) are the largest investors in Fountain Square Shopping Center. Their partnership is managed by subsidiaries of American Continental Corp., run by Charles H. Keating, Jr. (right). But John McCain contends there was no conflict in his helping Keating battle federal regulators." The Arizona Republic - October 8, 1989

I never remembered the fact McCain's wife and father in law were investors with Keating on various developments hitting the National media. This again ads to the charecter of who John McCain is, and what kind of President he would be.

While a lot of these stories are old news I think they are instructive about Who John McCain is as a man.

Johnny Mac employs Morons.

I am loathe to post things as a rule from The Huffington Post because frankly they are usually massive trainwreck bad, and not in the good way. However John McCain's chief of staff drags me back in.

it very unlikely any of you will ever posses the one small fraction of the character of John McCain.

And in these comments we see from his Chief of Staff a small fraction of his charecter. He appoints as a key aid some one who thinks REPLYING ON THE HUFFINGTON POST IS A GOOD IDEA.

But here i think is the key to this huberous.

The Senator's intention was to discuss with Americans, not any particular subset of Americans, but his fellow countrymen, the things that he feels are important to remember in our political debates: that we owe each other our respect just as we owe each other our best advocacy for the things we believe are important for our country.

BS. As some one who has done my share of Public speaking it was abudently clear that this speech was made to help sell John McCain as a religous conservative. Focusing on his "Youthful indescression" of lacking humility. Now some of you may have decided to enshrine some of the senator's hatred of free speech into this so it could truely go on the road to institutions like The New School which are an abomination to those who believe in free speech but don't try to sell us on the fact he was trying to present this to All Americans.

But not only that he is truely ignorant who John McCain IS

He has managed to endure much worse. McCain was once offered release from imprisonment and torture because of his father's position as a senior military officer.

First of all the use of his being tortured as an appeal to authority is disgusting, but whats worse is their isn't a fundemental truth to this appeal to authority because the North Vietnamese TORTURED PEOPLE.... it was what they did. Now then, you want to say Johnny Mac was tortured worse because of who his father was.... -I- can give you that. But to say had he been some Joe Schmoe aviator that he would have went untortured is part of why most vietnam vets in this country hate the senator, because he is disconnected even from them.

He has, over and over again, risked personal ambitions for what he believes, rightly or wrongly, are in the best interests of the country.

Is that why the Senator says he would eliminate the first amendment.... THE FIRST of our constitutional guaretees to save this country from corruption he can never define

The huberis of Johnny Mac's chief of staff shows his utter lack of charecter as a leader, and the fact he would use the Senator's time in the Hanoi Hilton as an appeal to authority shows that the senator lacks the charecter to appoint key people around him with the ability to do what is best for the country

John McCain: Sabotage 08 tour

In an effort to Sabotage his own presidential ambitions for 2008 our boy Johnny Mac spoke at the New School and well... I think I am going to have to second -some- of the words of a speaker before McCain at the school.

"He will tell us we are young and too naive to have valid opinions," Rohe said. "I am young and though I don't possess the wisdom that time affords us, I do know that pre-emptive war is dangerous. And I know that despite all the havoc that my country has wrought overseas in my name, Osama bin Laden still has not been found, nor have those weapons of mass destruction."

In truth this really gets to the heart of why Johnny Mac hates free speech so much. "All animals are equal, but some are more equal then others." is at its core the very nature of who John McCain is by his policies and what he stands for.

"When I was a young man, I was quite infatuated with self-expression, and rightly so because, if memory conveniently serves, I was so much more eloquent, well-informed and wiser than anyone else I knew," McCain said. He added that he would have been right at home in the opinionated world of blogs.

And again his endightment of youthful folly which at Liberty University at least played into the "humility and piety" factor makes almost no sense at the New School. And it further shows him as distant and unconnected to his audience

and of course it also shows him up because that really is who he is now.

For those of you who think the Republicans are doomed in 06

oh noez ( and in the NYTs to)

n a heated meeting last week, Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois and Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, challenged Mr. Dean on his 50-state program, saying it was undercutting Democratic hopes of taking back the House and the Senate, Democrats said. They warned that Mr. Dean was squandering an opportunity by sending money to parties in states that are a long way from becoming Democratic.

Democrats informed about the meeting described it as contentious and said Mr. Emanuel left abruptly when Mr. Dean declined to agree. Mr. Emanuel, in an interview, said he had left the meeting to cast a vote in Congress. He described their differences as a "fundamental difference about short-term versus long-term objectives — it is not hostile."

So we are talking about the people running the campaign to retake the house and senate both feel that dean's 50 state strategy could cost them control in 06.

If they lose in 06 look for Dean to be pushed under the train, and run for President

Hildabeast Watch

Just as John McCain the other media front runner has done clinically stupid things which should be a slam dunk opposition research case.

Here is Hillarry trying to make a spin.

NEW YORK (AP) -- After telling an audience that young people today "think work is a four-letter word," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton apologized to her daughter, she said.

"I said, 'I'm sorry, I didn't mean to convey the impression that you don't work hard,'" Clinton said Sunday in a commencement address. "I just want to set the bar high, because we are in a competition for the future."

Here is the original.

Clinton touched off the generation war Thursday, saying Gen Y'ers "don't know what work is. They think work is a four-letter word."

She added: "America didn't happen by accident. A lot of people worked really hard. They've got to do their part, too."

Clinton grumbled that today's youths "think they're entitled to go right to the top with $50,000 or $75,000 jobs when they have not done anything to earn their way up."

She made no mention of her daughter, Chelsea, 26, who snagged a six-figure consulting spot in the New York office of London-based McKinsey & Company after receiving her master's degree from Oxford in 2003.

But lets look at the past for Hillary who got her Senate seat not based on what she had done for the State of NY, or even as some one who lived their but because her husband was President.

Ran a faux health care reform commission (the real work was done by some one else in the background)

Made partner when her husband Bill was elected governor.

Got to invest money in sweetheart deals when Bill was governor of Arkansas.

Had Rich parents and went to one of the 7 elite all women's schools and to a ivy leauge law school.

She and Bill both got soft teaching gigs at the university of arkanasas that didn't have experience as lawyers to get.

She has with on a small time when bill lost a re-election as governor till Bill left the White house spent her entire married life in public housing where food, entertainment, vehicles, and the basics most of us worry about on a daily basis were provided for free.

So I have to ask Hillary, when did you work hard? when did you do your part for the economy?

John McCain -thank you-

For Reminding me why I never wish to vote for you...ever (H/T Tapscott)

I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I’d rather have the clean government."

Thanks John

Woah... first announcement for the 08 race

WHAT: Press Conference where former United States Senator Mike Gravel (D-Alaska, 1969-1980) will announce his Candidacy for the Democratic Nomination for President of the United States.

WHEN: Monday, April 17, 10 a.m.

Some of what he stands on....

The former senator said he decided to run for president about a year ago because of his anger over Iraq and after friends urged him to use the chance to push his two main policy goals: direct democracy and a revamped federal tax code.

Gravel advocates a constitutional amendment and federal statue establishing legislative procedures for citizens to make laws through ballot initiatives on most national and local issues.

“The American people are frustrated with the level of dysfunction of government,” Gravel said. “And if you ask the American people, they want to be empowered. But people are giving their power away on Election Day to politicians.”

He supports the Fair Tax, which would eliminate the IRS and all corporate and individual income taxes, replacing them with a 23% national sales tax on new goods and services.

“What we need to do to safeguard our economy is to turn Americans into savers rather than consumers,” Gravel said. “The United States, the biggest economy in the world, would become the biggest tax haven of the world,” he said, creating jobs and investment.

The Fair Tax Act of 2005, backed by 55 Republican Congressmen, has stalled in both houses. Critics say it is based on unreasonable assumptions about how easily it can finance government.