I thought that it was priceless that in the middle of the Democractic Convention that a man who joked about a woman being raped by a gorrilla would pretend to now
be Hillary Clinton's BFF with indignant claims that "Obama passed her over for VP"!
Yeah, right......I guess he thinks that Hillary forgets the awful comments he made
about Chelsea when she was a young impressionable girl having to endure the GOP hacks like McCain making comments about her appearance!
Just what a teenager needs to get their wobbly legs planted on terra firma....NOT! NOW he picks out a complete unknown woman from Alaska because I guess he still forgets that we can Google her background and he thinks that women are so stupid that they will RUSH TO THEIR SIDE with this appointment of a woman for VP. NO WAY! Check her out....As governor of Alaska, she was "has come under the scrutiny of an investigation by the Republican-controlled legislature into the possibility that she ordered the dismissal of Alaska's public safety commissioner because he would not fire her former brother-in-law as a state trooper."
An EEOC nightmare in the making and a continuation of the same Monica Goodling
hiring practice of only hiring people who swore allegence to Bush. These guys are scary, sexist and apparently without immagination. I hope this bites him on his
elbow and shows him that women are NOT stupid. HE IS! I don't like the idea of this
woman being one heartbeat away from the Oval office with a candidate for President
who has Cancer and a swollen cheek. If he thinks Obama isn't capable with four years in the Senate, years in the Illinois State House AND a career of teaching the Constitution.....this woman isn't fit to be Barack's driver.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
And None Dare Call It Treason
August 22, 2008
By Patrick Buchanan
Who is Randy Scheunemann?
He is the principal foreign policy adviser to John McCain and potential successor to Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski as national security adviser to the president of the United States. But Randy Scheunemann has another identity, another role.
He is a dual loyalist, a foreign agent whose assignment is to get America committed to spilling the blood of her sons for client regimes who have made this moral mercenary a rich man. From January 2007 to March 2008, the McCain campaign paid Scheunemann $70,000 -- pocket change compared to the $290,000 his Orion Strategies banked in those same 15 months from the Georgian regime of Mikheil Saakashvili.
What were Mikheil's marching orders to Tbilisi's man in Washington? Get Georgia a NATO war guarantee. Get America committed to fight Russia, if necessary, on behalf of Georgia.
Scheunemann came close to succeeding.
Had he done so, U.S. soldiers and Marines from Idaho and West Virginia would be killing Russians in the Caucasus, and dying to protect Scheunemann's client, who launched this idiotic war the night of Aug. 7. That people like Scheunemann hire themselves out to put American lives on the line for their clients is a classic corruption of American democracy.
U.S. backing for his campaign to retrieve his lost provinces is what Saakashvili paid Scheunemann to produce. But why should Americans fight Russians to force 70,000 South Ossetians back into the custody of a regime they detest? Why not let the South Ossetians decide their own future in free elections? Not only is the folly of the Bush interventionist policy on display in the Caucasus, so, too, is its manifest incoherence.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates says we have sought for 45 years to stay out of a shooting war with Russia and we are not going to get into one now. President Bush assured us there will be no U.S. military response to the Russian move into Georgia.
That is a recognition of, and a bowing to, reality -- namely, that Russia's control of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and occupation of a strip of Georgia cannot be a casus belli for the United States. We may deplore it, but it cannot justify war with Russia.
If that be true, and it transparently is, what are McCain, Barack Obama, Bush, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel doing committing the United States and Germany to bringing Georgia into NATO? For that would commit us to war for a cause we have already conceded, by our paralysis, does not justify a war. Not only did Scheunemann's two-man lobbying firm receive $730,000 since 2001 to get Georgia a NATO war guarantee, he was paid by Romania and Latvia to do the same. And he succeeded.
Latvia, a tiny Baltic republic annexed by Joseph Stalin in June 1940 during his pact with Adolf Hitler, was set free at the end of the Cold War. Yet hundreds of thousands of Russians had been moved into Latvia by Stalin, and as Riga served as a base of the Baltic Sea fleet, many Russian naval officers retired there. The children and grandchildren of these Russians are Latvian citizens. They are a cause of constant tension with ethnic Letts and of strife with Moscow, which has assumed the role of protector of Russians left behind in the "near abroad" when the Soviet Union broke apart.
Thanks to the lobbying of Scheunemann and friends, Latvia has been brought into NATO and given a U.S. war guarantee. If Russia intervenes to halt some nasty ethnic violence in Riga, the United States is committed to come in and drive the Russians out. This is the situation in which the interventionists have placed our country: committed to go to war for countries and causes that do not justify war, against a Russia that is re-emerging as a great power only to find NATO squatting on her doorstep.
Scheunemann's resume as a War Party apparatchik is lengthy. He signed the PNAC (Project for the New American Century) letter to President Clinton urging war on Iraq, four years before 9-11. He signed the PNAC ultimatum to Bush, nine days after 9-11, threatening him with political reprisal if he did not go to war against Iraq. He was executive director of the "Committee for the Liberation of Iraq," a propaganda front for Ahmad Chalabi and his pack of liars who deceived us into war.
Now Scheunemann is the neocon agent in place in McCain's camp. The neocons got their war with Iraq. They are pushing for war on Iran. And they are now baiting the Russian Bear.
Is this what McCain has on offer? Endless war?
Why would McCain seek foreign policy counsel from the same discredited crowd that has all but destroyed the presidency of George Bush?
"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence ... a free people ought to be constantly awake," Washington warned in his Farewell Address. Our Founding Father was warning against the Randy Scheunemanns among us, agents hired by foreign powers to deceive Americans into fighting their wars. And none dare call it treason.
Copyright 2008, Creators Syndicate Inc
By Patrick Buchanan
Who is Randy Scheunemann?
He is the principal foreign policy adviser to John McCain and potential successor to Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski as national security adviser to the president of the United States. But Randy Scheunemann has another identity, another role.
He is a dual loyalist, a foreign agent whose assignment is to get America committed to spilling the blood of her sons for client regimes who have made this moral mercenary a rich man. From January 2007 to March 2008, the McCain campaign paid Scheunemann $70,000 -- pocket change compared to the $290,000 his Orion Strategies banked in those same 15 months from the Georgian regime of Mikheil Saakashvili.
What were Mikheil's marching orders to Tbilisi's man in Washington? Get Georgia a NATO war guarantee. Get America committed to fight Russia, if necessary, on behalf of Georgia.
Scheunemann came close to succeeding.
Had he done so, U.S. soldiers and Marines from Idaho and West Virginia would be killing Russians in the Caucasus, and dying to protect Scheunemann's client, who launched this idiotic war the night of Aug. 7. That people like Scheunemann hire themselves out to put American lives on the line for their clients is a classic corruption of American democracy.
U.S. backing for his campaign to retrieve his lost provinces is what Saakashvili paid Scheunemann to produce. But why should Americans fight Russians to force 70,000 South Ossetians back into the custody of a regime they detest? Why not let the South Ossetians decide their own future in free elections? Not only is the folly of the Bush interventionist policy on display in the Caucasus, so, too, is its manifest incoherence.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates says we have sought for 45 years to stay out of a shooting war with Russia and we are not going to get into one now. President Bush assured us there will be no U.S. military response to the Russian move into Georgia.
That is a recognition of, and a bowing to, reality -- namely, that Russia's control of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and occupation of a strip of Georgia cannot be a casus belli for the United States. We may deplore it, but it cannot justify war with Russia.
If that be true, and it transparently is, what are McCain, Barack Obama, Bush, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel doing committing the United States and Germany to bringing Georgia into NATO? For that would commit us to war for a cause we have already conceded, by our paralysis, does not justify a war. Not only did Scheunemann's two-man lobbying firm receive $730,000 since 2001 to get Georgia a NATO war guarantee, he was paid by Romania and Latvia to do the same. And he succeeded.
Latvia, a tiny Baltic republic annexed by Joseph Stalin in June 1940 during his pact with Adolf Hitler, was set free at the end of the Cold War. Yet hundreds of thousands of Russians had been moved into Latvia by Stalin, and as Riga served as a base of the Baltic Sea fleet, many Russian naval officers retired there. The children and grandchildren of these Russians are Latvian citizens. They are a cause of constant tension with ethnic Letts and of strife with Moscow, which has assumed the role of protector of Russians left behind in the "near abroad" when the Soviet Union broke apart.
Thanks to the lobbying of Scheunemann and friends, Latvia has been brought into NATO and given a U.S. war guarantee. If Russia intervenes to halt some nasty ethnic violence in Riga, the United States is committed to come in and drive the Russians out. This is the situation in which the interventionists have placed our country: committed to go to war for countries and causes that do not justify war, against a Russia that is re-emerging as a great power only to find NATO squatting on her doorstep.
Scheunemann's resume as a War Party apparatchik is lengthy. He signed the PNAC (Project for the New American Century) letter to President Clinton urging war on Iraq, four years before 9-11. He signed the PNAC ultimatum to Bush, nine days after 9-11, threatening him with political reprisal if he did not go to war against Iraq. He was executive director of the "Committee for the Liberation of Iraq," a propaganda front for Ahmad Chalabi and his pack of liars who deceived us into war.
Now Scheunemann is the neocon agent in place in McCain's camp. The neocons got their war with Iraq. They are pushing for war on Iran. And they are now baiting the Russian Bear.
Is this what McCain has on offer? Endless war?
Why would McCain seek foreign policy counsel from the same discredited crowd that has all but destroyed the presidency of George Bush?
"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence ... a free people ought to be constantly awake," Washington warned in his Farewell Address. Our Founding Father was warning against the Randy Scheunemanns among us, agents hired by foreign powers to deceive Americans into fighting their wars. And none dare call it treason.
Copyright 2008, Creators Syndicate Inc
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Despite Assurances, McCain Wasn’t in a ‘Cone of Silence’
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Published: August 17, 2008
ORLANDO, Fla. — Senator John McCain was not in a “cone of silence” on Saturday night while his rival, Senator Barack Obama, was being interviewed at the Saddleback Church in California.
Members of the McCain campaign staff, who flew here Sunday from California, said Mr. McCain was in his motorcade on the way to the church as Mr. Obama was being interviewed by the Rev. Rick Warren, the author of the best-selling book “The Purpose Driven Life.”
The matter is of interest because Mr. McCain, who followed Mr. Obama’s hourlong appearance in the forum, was asked virtually the same questions as Mr. Obama. Mr. McCain’s performance was well received, raising speculation among some viewers, especially supporters of Mr. Obama, that he was not as isolated during the Obama interview as Mr. Warren implied.Nicolle Wallace, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCain, said on Sunday night that Mr. McCain had not heard the broadcast of the event while in his motorcade and heard none of the questions.
“The insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous,” Ms. Wallace said. Before an audience of more than 2,000 people at the church, the candidates answered questions about policy and social issues.Mr. Warren, the pastor of Saddleback, had assured the audience while he was interviewing Mr. Obama that “we have safely placed Senator McCain in a cone of silence” and that he could not hear the questions.After Mr. Obama’s interview, he was joined briefly by Mr. McCain, and the candidates shook hands and embraced.
Mr. Warren started by asking Mr. McCain, “Now, my first question: Was the cone of silence comfortable that you were in just now?”Mr. McCain deadpanned, “I was trying to hear through the wall.”Interviewed Sunday on CNN, Mr. Warren seemed surprised to learn that Mr. McCain was not in the building during the Obama interview.
(Elisabeth Bumiller contributed reporting)
Friday, August 15, 2008
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
McCain's Conflict of interest in a possible cold war?
(Editor's commentary)It has been no secret that John McCain's "Straight Talk Express"
has had quite a few lobbyists onboard was a real contradiction of the term epitomized with the bus's name.NOW we have McCain going after Russia taking sides in the dispute even though he has stated that he wants to keep politics out of the matter. Yeah right John. More Straight talk or is it another Lobbyist influenced tirade. Randy Scheunemann, a staff member of his campaign has been revealed to be a
former lobbyist for the Georgia until March of this year.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-05-20-mccainadviser_n.htm
Check out how he states that this "There's no room for partisanship now." Given that
you ARE running for President and your foreign issues advisor who just HAPPENED to have lobbied you as a representative for Georgia. How the HECK are you supposed to be UNBIASED with a battle between two governements if you have an advisor who up until recently was paid by them? Oh and by the way....just HOW many wars do you intend to drag us into?
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Republican White House contender John McCain said Tuesday he would support Georgia's bid to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) if he is elected president in November
I would move forward at the right time with the application for membership in NATO by Georgia," McCain told Fox News television.
"As you know, through the NATO membership, that if a member nation is attacked, it is viewed as an attack on all," said the Arizona senator, alluding to Russia's military aggression on Georgia.
"We don't have, I think, right now, the ability to intervene in any way except in a humanitarian, economic way, and do what we can to help the Georgians," he added.
McCain, 71, also reiterated his call for Russia to be kicked out of the Group of Eight most industrialized nations.
"Russia no longer shares any of the values and principles of the G-8, so they should be excluded," he said.
Georgia's bid to join NATO has divided the alliance. During an April summit in Bucharest, NATO leaders deferred putting Georgia and Ukraine on a formal path to membership but agreed that the two former Soviet republics "will become members" at some point.
The formula was intended as a compromise between opposing positions taken by France, Germany and several other members, and the United States, which had pushed hard on behalf of Georgia and Ukraine's NATO aspirations.
It extended no security commitments, but it may have emboldened Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili in his dealings with the Russians, as they stepped up pressure on Tblisi.
And it infuriated the Russians who had been given assurances that the summit would not approve a further NATO expansion into the two former Soviet republics.
To distance himself from President George W. Bush on the Georgia-Russia conflict, McCain said the US leader "probably had a higher opinion of (Russian Prime Minister) Vladimir Putin than I do."
Bush once said he that upon looking into Putin's eyes he saw "his soul" while McCain said he saw "three letters: K-- G-- B."
"Yes, I saw that," McCain said Tuesday.
Asked about his Democratic rival Barack Obama's view of the ongoing conflict in the Caucasus, McCain said he respected the Illinois senator's views, adding that he believed it "important that we act in a bipartisan fashion now.
"There's no room for partisanship now."
Obama, on vacation in Hawaii, on Tuesday read a statement blaming Russia for increasing tensions in the Caucasus.
"No matter how this conflict started, Russia has escalated it well beyond the dispute over South Ossetia and invaded another country," said Obama, 47.
"There is no possible justification for these attacks," he added.
has had quite a few lobbyists onboard was a real contradiction of the term epitomized with the bus's name.NOW we have McCain going after Russia taking sides in the dispute even though he has stated that he wants to keep politics out of the matter. Yeah right John. More Straight talk or is it another Lobbyist influenced tirade. Randy Scheunemann, a staff member of his campaign has been revealed to be a
former lobbyist for the Georgia until March of this year.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-05-20-mccainadviser_n.htm
Check out how he states that this "There's no room for partisanship now." Given that
you ARE running for President and your foreign issues advisor who just HAPPENED to have lobbied you as a representative for Georgia. How the HECK are you supposed to be UNBIASED with a battle between two governements if you have an advisor who up until recently was paid by them? Oh and by the way....just HOW many wars do you intend to drag us into?
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Republican White House contender John McCain said Tuesday he would support Georgia's bid to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) if he is elected president in November
I would move forward at the right time with the application for membership in NATO by Georgia," McCain told Fox News television.
"As you know, through the NATO membership, that if a member nation is attacked, it is viewed as an attack on all," said the Arizona senator, alluding to Russia's military aggression on Georgia.
"We don't have, I think, right now, the ability to intervene in any way except in a humanitarian, economic way, and do what we can to help the Georgians," he added.
McCain, 71, also reiterated his call for Russia to be kicked out of the Group of Eight most industrialized nations.
"Russia no longer shares any of the values and principles of the G-8, so they should be excluded," he said.
Georgia's bid to join NATO has divided the alliance. During an April summit in Bucharest, NATO leaders deferred putting Georgia and Ukraine on a formal path to membership but agreed that the two former Soviet republics "will become members" at some point.
The formula was intended as a compromise between opposing positions taken by France, Germany and several other members, and the United States, which had pushed hard on behalf of Georgia and Ukraine's NATO aspirations.
It extended no security commitments, but it may have emboldened Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili in his dealings with the Russians, as they stepped up pressure on Tblisi.
And it infuriated the Russians who had been given assurances that the summit would not approve a further NATO expansion into the two former Soviet republics.
To distance himself from President George W. Bush on the Georgia-Russia conflict, McCain said the US leader "probably had a higher opinion of (Russian Prime Minister) Vladimir Putin than I do."
Bush once said he that upon looking into Putin's eyes he saw "his soul" while McCain said he saw "three letters: K-- G-- B."
"Yes, I saw that," McCain said Tuesday.
Asked about his Democratic rival Barack Obama's view of the ongoing conflict in the Caucasus, McCain said he respected the Illinois senator's views, adding that he believed it "important that we act in a bipartisan fashion now.
"There's no room for partisanship now."
Obama, on vacation in Hawaii, on Tuesday read a statement blaming Russia for increasing tensions in the Caucasus.
"No matter how this conflict started, Russia has escalated it well beyond the dispute over South Ossetia and invaded another country," said Obama, 47.
"There is no possible justification for these attacks," he added.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
In the heart of the farmland.....McCain insults FARMERS?
By MIKE GLOVER, Associated Press Writer Wed Aug 6, 4:38 AM ET
DES MOINES, Iowa - Republican presidential candidate John McCain opposes the $300 billion farm bill and subsidies for ethanol, positions that both supporters and opponents say might cost him votes he needs in the upper Midwest this November.
His Democratic rival, Barack Obama, is making a more traditional regional pitch: He favors the farm bill approved by Congress this year and subsidies for the Midwest-based ethanol industry. McCain instead has promised to open new markets abroad for farmers to export their commodities.In his position papers, McCain opposes farm subsidies only for those with incomes of more than $250,000 and a net worth above $2 million. But he's gone further on the stump.
I don't support agricultural subsidies no matter where they are," McCain said at a recent appearance in Wisconsin. "The farm bill, $300 billion, is something America simply can't afford."McCain later described the measure, which is very popular throughout the Midwest, as "a $300 billion, bloated, pork-barrel-laden bill" because of subsidies for industries like ethanol.
It's not a stand that pleases Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa.
"I would not advise him to take that position," Grassley said. "For sure, he can't lose Missouri and that's in the upper Midwest. Could he lose Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin and still be elected president? Yes, but I wouldn't advise him to have that strategy."
Grassley, a conservative Republican, and his Senate colleague from Iowa, liberal Democrat Tom Harkin, have achieved enduring success in this state largely by mastering the politics of farm issues. Harkin chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, which wrote the new farm legislation.
"I don't see any scenario in which McCain can get to the White House without carrying some upper Midwestern states," said Harkin, an Obama backer. "I've never really understood in all my years why Sen. McCain has gone out of his way to speak against and vote against policies that are important to the upper Midwest."
There's a history of close elections in the region. President Bush carried Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota and South Dakota in 2004, earning 35 electoral votes. But his Democratic opponent, John Kerry, prevailed in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois, giving him 41 electoral votes.Veteran GOP strategist Gentry Collins said McCain can defend his record on farm issues, including opposing "corporate welfare" for big operations, but he said there's more at work.
"The upper Midwest is crucial in this election, and Midwestern voters value authenticity. They value experience," Collins said. "I don't think agricultural issues are the only issues Midwestern voters care about. There are some bigger-picture issues, broader issues where he's strong."
But on another important issue to Midwesterners, McCain opposed a tax break for developing wind power. Obama supported the tax break.
"We're employing close to 2,000 people right now in Iowa in the wind energy industry," Harkin said.
McCain has been most outspoken on ethanol subsidies, and that has Republicans worried in Iowa, the nation's biggest producer of the fuel. Other top ethanol producers include Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin and Missouri."It does challenge him in states like Iowa, the No. 1 ethanol state," said Bill Northey, Iowa's Republican agriculture secretary. "It does make it tougher to make the case."
Drake University political science professor Dennis Goldford said McCain's problem on farm issues reflects a deeper issue he faces as he's courted conservative GOP activists, many of whom are deeply suspicious of him."He's essentially reverting to standard Republican supply-side economics," said Goldford. "That's where he's got a problem. He's got to find his own voice and so far he hasn't had a voice."
Iowa Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat who has campaigned for Obama, said he's puzzled by McCain's position. He points to other Republicans who have a different view. "President Bush and I just had a good conversation about how critically important ethanol is, and how Iowa is positioned so well to lead the nation," said Culver. "I have no idea why John McCain doesn't support it. It hurts him in Indiana, and Missouri and Ohio, and it's not the message right now that any of us want to hear."
Obama has a modest lead in national polls, but electoral votes will decide the election. Obama is poised to do well on both coasts, while McCain is favored in the South and some parts of the West. That leaves the upper Midwest as a swing battleground. "The Midwest is crucial in this campaign," said Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a Democrat and an early backer of Obama. "Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and perhaps Indiana are very important states. McCain is behind, and he's in danger of falling further behind."
DES MOINES, Iowa - Republican presidential candidate John McCain opposes the $300 billion farm bill and subsidies for ethanol, positions that both supporters and opponents say might cost him votes he needs in the upper Midwest this November.
His Democratic rival, Barack Obama, is making a more traditional regional pitch: He favors the farm bill approved by Congress this year and subsidies for the Midwest-based ethanol industry. McCain instead has promised to open new markets abroad for farmers to export their commodities.In his position papers, McCain opposes farm subsidies only for those with incomes of more than $250,000 and a net worth above $2 million. But he's gone further on the stump.
I don't support agricultural subsidies no matter where they are," McCain said at a recent appearance in Wisconsin. "The farm bill, $300 billion, is something America simply can't afford."McCain later described the measure, which is very popular throughout the Midwest, as "a $300 billion, bloated, pork-barrel-laden bill" because of subsidies for industries like ethanol.
It's not a stand that pleases Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa.
"I would not advise him to take that position," Grassley said. "For sure, he can't lose Missouri and that's in the upper Midwest. Could he lose Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin and still be elected president? Yes, but I wouldn't advise him to have that strategy."
Grassley, a conservative Republican, and his Senate colleague from Iowa, liberal Democrat Tom Harkin, have achieved enduring success in this state largely by mastering the politics of farm issues. Harkin chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, which wrote the new farm legislation.
"I don't see any scenario in which McCain can get to the White House without carrying some upper Midwestern states," said Harkin, an Obama backer. "I've never really understood in all my years why Sen. McCain has gone out of his way to speak against and vote against policies that are important to the upper Midwest."
There's a history of close elections in the region. President Bush carried Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota and South Dakota in 2004, earning 35 electoral votes. But his Democratic opponent, John Kerry, prevailed in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois, giving him 41 electoral votes.Veteran GOP strategist Gentry Collins said McCain can defend his record on farm issues, including opposing "corporate welfare" for big operations, but he said there's more at work.
"The upper Midwest is crucial in this election, and Midwestern voters value authenticity. They value experience," Collins said. "I don't think agricultural issues are the only issues Midwestern voters care about. There are some bigger-picture issues, broader issues where he's strong."
But on another important issue to Midwesterners, McCain opposed a tax break for developing wind power. Obama supported the tax break.
"We're employing close to 2,000 people right now in Iowa in the wind energy industry," Harkin said.
McCain has been most outspoken on ethanol subsidies, and that has Republicans worried in Iowa, the nation's biggest producer of the fuel. Other top ethanol producers include Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin and Missouri."It does challenge him in states like Iowa, the No. 1 ethanol state," said Bill Northey, Iowa's Republican agriculture secretary. "It does make it tougher to make the case."
Drake University political science professor Dennis Goldford said McCain's problem on farm issues reflects a deeper issue he faces as he's courted conservative GOP activists, many of whom are deeply suspicious of him."He's essentially reverting to standard Republican supply-side economics," said Goldford. "That's where he's got a problem. He's got to find his own voice and so far he hasn't had a voice."
Iowa Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat who has campaigned for Obama, said he's puzzled by McCain's position. He points to other Republicans who have a different view. "President Bush and I just had a good conversation about how critically important ethanol is, and how Iowa is positioned so well to lead the nation," said Culver. "I have no idea why John McCain doesn't support it. It hurts him in Indiana, and Missouri and Ohio, and it's not the message right now that any of us want to hear."
Obama has a modest lead in national polls, but electoral votes will decide the election. Obama is poised to do well on both coasts, while McCain is favored in the South and some parts of the West. That leaves the upper Midwest as a swing battleground. "The Midwest is crucial in this campaign," said Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a Democrat and an early backer of Obama. "Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and perhaps Indiana are very important states. McCain is behind, and he's in danger of falling further behind."
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
John McCain and his Phoney Patriot party....
I have noted how it has become the unwritten rule that anytime that John McCain shows up anywhere that everybody is required to "thank him for his service" or "call him a hero”. This is a person whose political party put together ads that featured photos of Max Clelland morphed into photos of Osama Bin Laden. Max ALSO served in Vietnam, he left behind three limbs!
Ann Coulter even had the nerve to suggest that Clelland was "stupid enough to drop the grenade that blew him apart"! During the Iran-Contra hearings Senator Daniel Inoye commented when Oliver North claimed that he was "following orders" when he went against Congress to support the illegal clandestine sale of weapons to Iran, that "they didn't buy that excuse in Nuremburg from the Nazis and he didn't either". They called HIM a traitor? Senator Inoye, a Japanese-American from Hawaii who lost the use of one arm in service for this country?
McCain claims that Obama has never done anything other than make a couple of speeches and that HE is an elitist? COME ON! Perhaps somebody should clue him in that this didn't work for Clinton either! If ANYBODY is an Elitist it is HIM! McCain lived in officer's housing for his childhood as the son of a Commander. I have lived near a base. Commanders live high off the hog. He graduated near the bottom of his class. Obama was the so of a teenage mother whose father left him as a two year old. He EARNED his way into Columbia and Harvard with his good grades. He was the first Black Editor of the Harvard Law Review. He was a man who grew up with a of minuses that McCain never knew as a spoiled pampered officer's kid who married into wealth. HE is the elitist. He votes against the service men and women and he votes against the average American too. Let's call it the way it is. He belongs to the GOP. It's a Grand Old Party and YOU ain't invited.
Ann Coulter even had the nerve to suggest that Clelland was "stupid enough to drop the grenade that blew him apart"! During the Iran-Contra hearings Senator Daniel Inoye commented when Oliver North claimed that he was "following orders" when he went against Congress to support the illegal clandestine sale of weapons to Iran, that "they didn't buy that excuse in Nuremburg from the Nazis and he didn't either". They called HIM a traitor? Senator Inoye, a Japanese-American from Hawaii who lost the use of one arm in service for this country?
McCain claims that Obama has never done anything other than make a couple of speeches and that HE is an elitist? COME ON! Perhaps somebody should clue him in that this didn't work for Clinton either! If ANYBODY is an Elitist it is HIM! McCain lived in officer's housing for his childhood as the son of a Commander. I have lived near a base. Commanders live high off the hog. He graduated near the bottom of his class. Obama was the so of a teenage mother whose father left him as a two year old. He EARNED his way into Columbia and Harvard with his good grades. He was the first Black Editor of the Harvard Law Review. He was a man who grew up with a of minuses that McCain never knew as a spoiled pampered officer's kid who married into wealth. HE is the elitist. He votes against the service men and women and he votes against the average American too. Let's call it the way it is. He belongs to the GOP. It's a Grand Old Party and YOU ain't invited.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
No wonder Gramm hears whinning....he hangs out with McCain!
New McCain Web ad mocks Obama as false Messiah
Judging by the video John McCain's campaign released to the Web on Friday, the thinking inside McCain headquarters is that, despite all the criticism it took for it, its "Celeb" ad -- the one that compared Barack Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton -- just didn't go far enough.
So the campaign stopped holding back for this latest video, which is titled "The One," a reference to a Messianic figure in "The Matrix" and its sequels and a nickname for Obama inside the McCain camp. The thrust of the ad is that Obama sees himself as a Messianic figure. "He has anointed himself ready to carry the burden of 'The One,'" the video's narrator says at one point.
In doing this, it should be noted, the McCain camp took at least two quotes from Obama out of context. It uses one controversial remark made by Obama that popped up earlier this week, "I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions." A Democratic source later told multiple news outlets that, in context, Obama wasn't speaking about himself but about America generally -- the source quoted Obama as having also said, "It has become increasingly clear in my travel, the campaign, that the crowds, the enthusiasm, 200,000 people in Berlin, is not about me at all. It's about America. I have just become a symbol.'" It's fairly obvious that Obama was joking in another similar quote used in the video.
Really, though, this truly has to be seen to be believed. After I saw it for the first time, I spent more than a couple of minutes checking around the Web to make absolutely sure it wasn't a hoax, figuring it couldn't really have been released by a presidential campaign. But it's real.
Judging by the video John McCain's campaign released to the Web on Friday, the thinking inside McCain headquarters is that, despite all the criticism it took for it, its "Celeb" ad -- the one that compared Barack Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton -- just didn't go far enough.
So the campaign stopped holding back for this latest video, which is titled "The One," a reference to a Messianic figure in "The Matrix" and its sequels and a nickname for Obama inside the McCain camp. The thrust of the ad is that Obama sees himself as a Messianic figure. "He has anointed himself ready to carry the burden of 'The One,'" the video's narrator says at one point.
In doing this, it should be noted, the McCain camp took at least two quotes from Obama out of context. It uses one controversial remark made by Obama that popped up earlier this week, "I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions." A Democratic source later told multiple news outlets that, in context, Obama wasn't speaking about himself but about America generally -- the source quoted Obama as having also said, "It has become increasingly clear in my travel, the campaign, that the crowds, the enthusiasm, 200,000 people in Berlin, is not about me at all. It's about America. I have just become a symbol.'" It's fairly obvious that Obama was joking in another similar quote used in the video.
Really, though, this truly has to be seen to be believed. After I saw it for the first time, I spent more than a couple of minutes checking around the Web to make absolutely sure it wasn't a hoax, figuring it couldn't really have been released by a presidential campaign. But it's real.
Friday, August 1, 2008
John McCain's Oil Hoax
Joe Conason in the New York Observer
Forced to cancel a planned visit to an oil platform off the Mississippi coast last week because of inclement weather—and the untimely leaking of hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil by a shipwreck in the vicinity—John McCain finally got his photo op at a Bakersfield derrick on July 28. Speaking on site, the Arizona senator delivered extraordinarily good news to the beleaguered gasoline-consuming public as he explained why we must drill offshore.
Forced to cancel a planned visit to an oil platform off the Mississippi coast last week because of inclement weather—and the untimely leaking of hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil by a shipwreck in the vicinity—John McCain finally got his photo op at a Bakersfield derrick on July 28. Speaking on site, the Arizona senator delivered extraordinarily good news to the beleaguered gasoline-consuming public as he explained why we must drill offshore.
Based on briefings that Senator McCain says he received from “the oil producers,” he said, “There are some instances [that] within a matter of months they could be getting additional oil. In some cases, it would be a matter of a year. In some cases it could take longer than that, depending on the location and whether you use existing rigs or you have to install new rigs, but there’s abundant resources in the view of the people who are in the business that could be exploited within a period of months.”
The prospect of significant new petroleum resources that could be available so soon would be excellent news—aside from the obvious impact of burning still more oil—if only what the senator said was true.
The prospect of significant new petroleum resources that could be available so soon would be excellent news—aside from the obvious impact of burning still more oil—if only what the senator said was true.
But what he said actually made no sense whatsoever, as a statement about the future development of domestic oil, the alleged need to increase drilling off our coasts or the resources that such drilling might produce. So let’s unpack that McCain statement (which was overshadowed by the news that his dermatologist had just removed a small lesion from the 71-year-old melanoma survivor’s right cheek).
It may be true that “existing rigs” could produce additional barrels of domestic oil immediately, whether on land or in the ocean, as Senator McCain suggests. If so, he might want to ask his friends in the oil business why those rigs aren’t producing more oil now, at prices above $140 a barrel. An existing rig by definition is a rig that is operating legally on property already leased for exploration—and can produce oil unencumbered by any environmental constraints on drilling. In case the senator doesn’t understand, an existing rig is where someone has already drilled a well.
Where companies would have to install new rigs, the question is whether a lease already exists or whether the government would have to grant a new lease. New drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf would mean new leases that are now illegal. But as the Associated Press reported last month, nearly 75 percent of the existing leases on federal lands held by petroleum companies are currently producing no oil. Those companies currently hold nearly 30 million acres dormant, according to the AP. Nobody in the federal government even knows whether any exploration has taken place over the past decade.
Perhaps Senator McCain should ask his friends in the industry why they aren’t exploring or producing on the leases they already control. A truthful answer would be that those leases count as financial assets whether productive or not—and adding to them enhances an oil firm’s bottom line.
The senator should also ask an oil company executive to step forward and explain how any new offshore oil lease can produce petroleum within the next few months or even a year. If that is possible, then the Department of Energy analysis of future domestic oil production is scandalously wrong.
The department’s Energy Information Agency released a study last year predicting that granting access to new offshore leases would not begin to produce any actual oil until around 2020, and would have no “significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030,” if ever.As the Republican presidential nominee—and a putative environmentalist—he suddenly seems eager to exploit voter discontent over high gasoline prices to promote offshore drilling. He may even think he can ride the energy crisis into the White House.
Voters may or may not believe the Senator’s silly claims about his “briefings” from oilmen, which mainly seem to have involved handing over a fat check. Indeed, so far the only beneficiary of his offshore drilling offensive is the McCain presidential war chest. The Washington Post recently reported that the oil industry “gushed money after [his] reversal on oil drilling” last month. They never gave him that kind of money when he talked straight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
