Fiscal Conservatism illustrated: Ronald Reagan = $200 billion deficit; George H. Bush = $300 billion deficit; Bill Clinton, the “tax & spend Liberal,” $200 billion SURPLUS; George W. Bush = $482 billion deficit. And, remember, John McCain claims to be a fiscal conservative.
Clearly, it’s time that we elect more “tax & spend Liberals,” because America can’t afford another fiscal conservative.
Cartoon by Steve Greenberg.
Someone get this man on CNN or MSNBC, he deserves to be heard and not just read. I’m just happy to see a member of the so-called mainstream media calling John McCain’s bullshit for what it is, latent racism posing as legitimate political discourse.
But I’ll let Bob Herbert put it in his own words, he writes:
Gee, I wonder why, if you have a black man running for high public office — say, Barack Obama or Harold Ford — the opposition feels compelled to run low-life political ads featuring tacky, sexually provocative white women who have no connection whatsoever to the black male candidates.
Spare me any more drivel about the high-mindedness of John McCain.
[…]
Senator McCain has only upped the ante, smearing Mr. Obama every which way from sundown. On Wednesday, The Washington Post ran an extraordinary front-page article that began:
“For four days, Senator John McCain and his allies have accused Senator Barack Obama of snubbing wounded soldiers by canceling a visit to a military hospital because he could not take reporters with him, despite no evidence that the charge is true.”
Evidence? John McCain needs no evidence.
[…]
Now, from the hapless but increasingly venomous McCain campaign, comes the slimy Britney Spears and Paris Hilton ad. The two highly sexualized women (both notorious for displaying themselves to the paparazzi while not wearing underwear) are shown briefly and incongruously at the beginning of a commercial critical of Mr. Obama.
The Republican National Committee targeted Harold Ford with a similarly disgusting ad in 2006 when Mr. Ford, then a congressman, was running a strong race for a U.S. Senate seat in Tennessee. The ad, which the committee described as a parody, showed a scantily clad woman whispering, “Harold, call me.”
Both ads were foul, poisonous and emanated from the upper reaches of the Republican Party. (What a surprise.) Both were designed to exploit the hostility, anxiety and resentment of the many white Americans who are still freakishly hung up on the idea of black men rising above their station and becoming sexually involved with white women.
[…]
Mr. Obama told [an audience]: “What they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he’s not patriotic enough. He’s got a funny name. You know, he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He’s risky.”
The audience seemed to appreciate his comments. Mr. Obama was well-received.
But John McCain didn’t appreciate them. RACE CARD! RACE CARD! The McCain camp started bellowing, and it hasn’t stopped since. With great glee bursting through their feigned outrage, the campaign’s operatives and the candidate himself accused Senator Obama of introducing race into the campaign — playing the race card, as they put it, from the very bottom of the deck.
[…]
Senator Obama has spoken more honestly and thoughtfully about race than any other politician in many years. Senator McCain is the head of a party that has viciously exploited race for political gain for decades.
He’s obviously more than willing to continue that nauseating tradition.
Amen!
UPDATE (8/4): Damn! I got my wish, here’s Bob Herbert on MSNBC up against conservative mouth piece Joe Scarborough.
In his latest attack ad John McCain compares Senator Obama to Britney Spears. Yeah, Senator Obama to Britney-friggin’-Spears. Let’s take a closer look, and see who sounds more like the tabloid princess, via Political Insider:
Speaking of celebrity, the Obama campaign sent out this interesting comparison of Sen. John McCain and Britney Spears:
Britney Spears (CNN, 10/30/03):
CARLSON: A lot of entertainers have come out against the war in Iraq. Have you?
SPEARS: Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.
CARLSON: Do you trust this president?
SPEARS: Yes, I do.John McCain (The Mike Gallgher Show, March 2008)
“No one has supported President Bush on Iraq more than I have.”John McCain (MSNBC, 8/20/06):
GREGORY: Do you have confidence in the President and his national security team to lead the war at this stage?
MCCAIN: I do. I do. I have confidence in the President, and I believe that he is well aware of the severity of the situation.
Mike Huckabee’s so-called joke about Sen. Obama being shot at is not only outrageous, it is also nonsensical. Here’s the quote, via PoliticalWire.com:
“That was Barack Obama, he just tripped off a chair, he’s getting ready to speak. Somebody aimed a gun at him and he dove for the floor.”
— Mike Huckabee, quoted by CNN at the National Rifle Association convention, referring to “an unexpected offstage noise.”
First of all, it’s not funny to joke about the assassination of the first potential African-American president, given our nation’s history. Second, the joke is nonsensical because jumping out of the way when a gun is aimed at one seems like a perfectly reasonable reaction, and it is certainly a lot smarter than just standing there as a static target.
What the hell was Huckabee even thinking about when he made such a stupid comment? Of course, he was speaking before the NRA, a solidly republican audience, and thus appealing to the base of the party, so there’s that to explain Huckabee’s asinine attempt at humor.
House republicans have been using delaying and obstructionist tactics against the Democratic majority for sometime now; however, the republicans’ vote against mother’s day as a delaying tactic is inane. As Dana Milbank suggests, What’s next for republicans, a vote against puppies and kittens?
From the Washington Post:
It was already shaping up to be a difficult year for congressional Republicans. Now, on the cusp of Mother’s Day, comes this: A majority of the House GOP has voted against motherhood.
On Wednesday afternoon, the House had just voted, 412 to 0, to pass H. Res. 1113, “Celebrating the role of mothers in the United States and supporting the goals and ideals of Mother’s Day,” when Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), rose in protest.
“Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote,” he announced.
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who has two young daughters, moved to table Tiahrt’s request, setting up a revote. This time, 178 Republicans cast their votes against mothers. [Emphasis added.]
[…]
Republicans, unhappy with the Democratic majority, have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill, but the assault on mothers may have gone too far. House Minority Leader John Boehner, asked yesterday to explain why he and 177 of his colleagues switched their votes, answered: “Oh, we just wanted to make sure that everyone was on record in support of Mother’s Day.”
By voting against it?
