McCain Will Have to Go With Pity Before Too Long

Isn't it time for McCain to fire the people he just put in place? The Wall Street Journal tries to pigeonhole the candidates and the respective "roles" that they are playing. The McCain Media Mancrush isn't completely over yet:

Sen. McCain appears to play up the idea that he is running behind.

"I'm the underdog in this campaign. I'm the underdog. Have no doubt about it," he told supporters at a Nevada fund-raiser on Tuesday on Lake Tahoe. "That's a place I enjoy because that invigorates me, it makes me campaign harder, it energizes our supporters and our friends."

Sen. McCain enjoys the underdog role, and arguably is at his strongest when he's behind. He ran as the underdog in the GOP primary almost until the end.

Analysts said the danger to Sen. McCain's approach, such as with his new ad, is it can be seen as whining about Sen. Obama's successes rather than promoting Sen. McCain's own. And it remains unclear if it will stoke voter concerns about Sen. Obama or reinforce his front-runner status.

As his attacks falter, and they will because there's no substance to anything he's doing, McCain is probably going to have to use pity before too long. As in, take pity on my disasterous campaign and help me finish with a respectable number of electoral votes this fall.

Hat in hand, McCain will have no coattails this Fall, and may face the worst beating of any candidate since Mondale. That's not hyperbole--that's a recognition of the fact that Americans typically don't vote for underdogs or show anyone pity or mercy. They want a President, not a charity case.

--WS

McCain Picks Pawlenty?

Everyone knows these guys from the Corner are, like, totally in the know and have all of the inside knowledge, right?

If Pawlenty Was McCain's Pick, His Schedule Would Presumably Suddenly Change

A source tells me that Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is John McCain's choice, and that the announcement is coming very soon. But I checked with the American Legislative Exchange Council, who Pawlenty is scheduled to address Wednesday at 11:30. As far as they know, his speech is still on.

So I urge skepticism. Maybe Pawlenty is the choice, and it's coming later. Or perhaps this was just an overreaction to the news that Pawlenty is going to Iowa Saturday for the state Republican party.

We all better hope and pray that it's Pawlenty. Talk about not-ready-for-prime-time and fully in the pocket of lobbyists and the Christian conservatives...

Check out the all black outfit...is the suburban Johnny Cash in a mock turtleneck look really going to play well next to John "Cotton Hill" McCain?

UPDATE: Pawlenty's record as the Governor who keeps telling people that the bridges are safe got a rude awakening over the weekend. Could a 1,200 pound piece of concrete be an issue this fall if McCain picks Pawlenty?

--WS

Throwing Everything Against the Wall

If you want to know what desperation looks like, spend some time watching the McCain campaign. Isn't it time to fire some people? Like the idiots who write the ads and determine the strategy and the idiots who send McCain out there without any kind of preparation so that he looks like "Cotton Hill" on a Dulcolax bender...?

If you think (and I do not) that Obama’s a sociopath who sees wounded soldiers as nothing but political chips to be played in an election card game, surely we can agree that he’s nevertheless savvy enough to grasp how horribly bad it would look to have photographers with him on a hospital visit in the middle of a campaign. If there were pictures on the wires of him shaking hands with bedridden vets while media vultures crowded around for close-ups, conservatives would have ripped him for it properly and mercilessly and he knows it.

Oh, of course you don't think that! You wrote it, but you don't think that! The worst thing in the world for the McCain campaign is to see US troops cheering and waving at Obama. Hey, do you think that the fact that they're FOR the guy who has a plan to get them out of the worst fucking quagmire in the history of this country so they don't get killed or crippled propping up a government that now welcomes "dissenters" has anything to do with it?

And do you really think that the guy who wants to keep filling Landstuhl up with broken, battered and wounded troops for the next hundred years should try to make political points over their situation against the guy who wants to stop the flow of blood-soaked bandages into Landstuhl? I mean, really. Does anyone think about these things rationally anymore? Obama doesn't hate the wounded troops--he just wants there to be fewer and fewer of them.

Desperate fucking idiots is all they are. Flailing, losing, drowning, sinking and irrelevant. A noun, a verb, and shriek "the surge!" and hope someone cares.

How many Republican members of Congress have donated money to the McCain campaign? How many of them are staying away from the convention? How many of them roll their eyes and shiver at the thought that McCain might--might--run again in 2012?

--WS

What If They Held a Convention And No One Came?

This does not surprise me in the least--would you want to be seen hugging John McCain?

Nine of 12 targeted Republicans running in the most competitive Senate races this fall are either skipping the Republican convention in St. Paul, Minn., or have not decided whether to attend.

Among those who will not attend are Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, who is not close to presumptive presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona, and Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who is a McCain loyalist. Stevens and Collins will use the convention week to focus on their campaigns.

Also sending regrets is former Rep. Bob Schaffer of Colorado, running for the seat being vacated by retiring GOP Sen. Wayne Allard.

Six others -- Sens. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and Gordon Smith of Oregon and challengers John Kennedy of Louisiana and Rep. Steve Pearce of New Mexico are still on the fence. Their spokesman offered responses ranging from "there are no plans yet" to "no decisions have been made."

By contrast, most Democrats in those races are either planning to attend the party's late August convention in Denver or are leaning toward attending the event that will formally make Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois the party's nominee for president.

They're not giving McCain even token support, either. Few Republican members of Congress are giving him money now that he has secured the nomination.

Basically, you're going to see a sham of a convention in St. Paul. The Republican Party is running away from the nominee and doing whatever they can to secure their seats.

--WS

Quibbling Over Positive News

While it is true that the "peace walls" in Belfast, Northern Ireland still exist--and that Barack Obama may have made a mistake in suggesting that they have come down--the fact remains that things are vastly different for people in Northern Ireland.

"Not only have walls come down in Berlin, but they have come down in Belfast, where Protestant and Catholic found a way to live together," Barack Obama told 200,000 gathered for his speech at the Victory Column. Only trouble is, that's not the case - since Good Friday peace agreement in 1998, the walls dividing Belfast's sectarian enclaves (known as the "peace line") have been going up, not coming down.

Part of what Obama is saying is true, though, and the changes in Belfast, Derry, and other areas of Northern Ireland have been dramatic. For example, in 1998, the number of sectarian deaths is counted at over 55 for the year; so far this year, there has been one death related to "sectarian" issues. I don't think there is anyone arguing that what is in place is ideal, but it's a hell of a lot better than the years where people were dying every week. The fact that the sectarian violence has virtually ceased and that there are people negotiating through the political process speaks volumes. Obama should have called for the elimination of the peace walls, rather than claim that the vastly improved situation was brought about by their removal. The peace walls might serve a purpose in certain areas, but they should begin to come down, and people in Northern Ireland are saying just as much.

Obama needs to remember that every single item, statistic and term he uses now is going to be parsed and picked through, and that there are people who are blatantly ignoring the whoppers that McCain is spewing every day. A slip like this is going to be magnified by Republicans, and the Obama campaign needs to reduce these incidents wherever it can.

--WS

You Know, Pawlenty Would Be a GREAT Pick

Sorry--just feeling like a concern troll this morning.

Is there serious consideration that Senator John McCain will pick Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty? Let's hope so. He has quite a few negatives that will help pigeonhole McCain on a number of issues:

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty drew more attention as a likely short-lister earlier this week after McCain brought him up unsolicited in New Hampshire, telling a private meeting of delegates they were “really going to like him.”

At a media availability inside a Bethlehem, Pennsylvania grocery store Wednesday, McCain was asked about talk Pawlenty was at the top of the list.

At first, McCain demurred, saying “you know that I can’t mention any names. We have a process going on.’

Pressed on whether he had anything positive to say about him, McCain quickly said, “Oh, Tim. I’m sorry. He’s a great, fine person.”

Pawlenty is a special-interests candidate, through and through. He has seen campaign contributors like Piper Jaffray receive fines for giving him money. When in doubt, he always goes with a religious right view on the issues. He vetoed a bill that would have kept phthalates, flame retardants, or other polymers or chemicals from being used in maternity care--how stupid is that? You get a bill like that, you sign it. So, aside from being a bit of a wingnut, and being, well, boyishly young in comparison to John "Cotton Hill: McCain, Pawlenty recently vetoed home foreclosure relief in Minnesota:

In a move that political analysts say could hurt Tim Pawlenty's VP chances, the governor vetoed the Foreclosure Deferment Bill on Thursday. The measure would've kept nearly 15,000 Minnesotans from losing their homes by giving them the time and authority to renegotiate their loan terms while they make a required good-faith effort to pay. Pawlenty claims the temporary foreclosure freeze would make credit more expensive an add an "additional business risk into mortgage agreements."

About the only thing going for Pawlenty is that he has a pulse. Other than that, he's probably no worse than any other pick McCain could make. McCain has ties to lobbyists, a dismal voting record when it comes to taking care of people, and religious right maniacs braying at him constantly. Tim Pawlenty helps drive home those negatives with his own baggage.

--WS

Will Bobby Jindal be the Chosen One?

There are no pluses for McCain to pick Bobby Jindal. None. I don't care what anyone says--if McCain is stupid enough to pick Jindal, it means he has no intention of winning the Presidency and just wants to make a pick that helps Republicans in the distant future.

John McCain will huddle with vice presidential aspirant Bobby Jindal during a trip to New Orleans later this week, sources close to the campaign confirm to The Fix.

McCain's trip to Louisiana on Wednesday was the cause of much head scratching in the political world as it was not in keeping with a week of planned stops in battleground states.

But, the meeting with Jindal, who has been the state's governor since 2007, suggests that McCain himself is deeply engaged in the process of picking his second-in-command and that the youthful Jindal is under serious consideration.

Remember--Jindal is 37 years old, believes in exorcisms, and has about as much experience as a 37 year old can have, which isn't very much. Here's what Jindal wrote in 1994, in the New Oxford Review.

Strangely, I found myself repeating the Hail Mary until it became a chant. Being a recent convert to Catholicism, I had yet to accept the Catholic doctrines concerning Mary and considered any form of Marian devotion to be idolatry. Though I had never before prayed a Hail Mary in my life, I suddenly found myself incapable of any other form of prayer. Somehow, Mary's intercessions allowed me to find peace during that long night; I knew that I had survived the worst and that I would exit with my faith intact. It terrified me to recall how close I came to turning away from Christ out of fear.

The crucifix had a calming effect on Susan, and her sister was soon brave enough to bring a Bible to her face. At first, Susan responded to biblical passages with curses and profanities. Mixed in with her vile attacks were short and desperate pleas for help. In the same breath that she attacked Christ, the Bible's authenticity, and everyone assembled in prayer, Susan would suddenly urge us to rescue her. It appeared as if we were observing a tremendous battle between the Susan we knew and loved and some strange evil force. But the momentum had shifted and we now sensed that victory was at hand.

While Alice and Louise held Susan, her sister continued holding the Bible to her face. Almost taunting the evil spirit that had almost beaten us minutes before, the students dared Susan to read biblical passages. She choked on certain passages and could not finish the sentence "Jesus is Lord." Over and over, she repeated "Jesus is L..L..LL," often ending in profanities. In between her futile attempts, Susan pleaded with us to continue trying and often smiled between the grimaces that accompanied her readings of Scripture. Just as suddenly as she went into the trance, Susan suddenly reappeared and claimed "Jesus is Lord."

With an almost comical smile, Susan then looked up as if awakening from a deep sleep and asked, "Has something happened?" She did not remember any of the past few hours and was startled to find her friends breaking out in cheers and laughter, overwhelmed by sudden joy and relief.

Dare to dream.

--WS

Enjoy Your Time in the Wilderness

Patricia Cohen details how the conservative movement is trying to reform and reorganize itself in advance of a Fall debacle at the ballot box. At the end of the article--which ought to prove that I read the whole thing, right?--is a gem from Megan McArdle:

Indeed, to Ms. McArdle, the possibility of a Republican defeat holds a certain romantic appeal. “Younger people are kind of excited about being in the wilderness,” she said, evoking the pre-Reagan years when Republican thinkers plotted their revolution at nonprofit organizations and in bars instead of in the Executive Office Building and congressional majority offices. The longer you’re in power, the more you want to preserve it. “That’s where the Republicans are right now, and it’s demoralizing for think tankers.” Desperation has a way of focusing the mind. As Ms. McArdle said, “When they’re out of power, they have to think in a clearer way.”

When the Republicans were out of power in 1993, they turned, in desperation, to a bomb-throwing backbencher named Newt Gingrich, who favored destructive personal politics and overwrought lunacy diguised as public policy as his means of getting things done. How'd that turn out?

Young people are "excited" about being in the wilderness? Which young people? Because the only enthused, motivated and active young people who are actually accomplishing anything in this country support Barack Obama.

You mean to tell me that a group of people--young conservatives--who can't be bothered to join the military in order to help fight the war they enthusiastically support are, all of a sudden and out of the blue, going to enjoy "adversity?"

Adversity is the one thing that modern conservatives cannot stomach or stand. If they believed in it, they wouldn't have rolled over for George Bush and they certainly wouldn't have rolled over for John McCain. If adversity was something conservatives in this country as a whole could take, they would have nominated Senator Sam Brownback on principle and rejected the likes of McCain and Romney out of hand. Instead, they rolled over and took it.

There's a dirty little secret out there that the media refuses to reveal or discuss--at some, but not all of the McCain events, there are empty seats and people are packed in close to the candidate to ensure that all of his campaign event visuals show supporters, not empty seats.

[judge for yourself--is the crowd being prevented from seating themselves in the top 8 or 9 rows of the bleachers? this photo was taken prior to a John McCain event in Kansas City, MO on July 17, 2008 --hat tip to Show Me Progress.]

You can see the effects of being in the "wilderness" now. And that means empty seats and indifference, and that's not necessarily the best place to be in American politics.

--WS

Yes, He Will Cut and Run--Because He Wants A Legacy

Now that the so-called surge has "worked" in the collective wisdom of the Washington DC establishment, the acceleration of the withdrawal of US troops can start--so that George W Bush can depart the Presidency with troops being drawn down. He can do this because coverage of the war is non-existent, it makes people feel good about him, and it allows him phony coverage so he can claim he "won" the Iraq war, handed it off to someone else, and brought the boys home by Christmas.

The Bush administration is considering the withdrawal of additional combat forces from Iraq beginning in September, according to administration and military officials, raising the prospect of a far more ambitious plan than expected only months ago.

Such a withdrawal would be a striking reversal from the nadir of the war in 2006 and 2007.

One factor in the consideration is the pressing need for additional American troops in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and other fighters have intensified their insurgency and inflicted a growing number of casualties on Afghans and American-led forces there.

More American and allied troops died in Afghanistan than in Iraq in May and June, a trend that has continued this month.

Although no decision has been made, by the time President Bush leaves office on Jan. 20, at least one and as many as 3 of the 15 combat brigades now in Iraq could be withdrawn or at least scheduled for withdrawal, the officials said.

The desire to move more quickly reflects the view of many in the Pentagon who want to ease the strain on the military but also to free more troops for Afghanistan and potentially other missions.

Prepare to be sickened by the praise for the Bush Administration. They know the only chance McCain has is to eliminate the Iraq War as an issue, so the Bush Administration and the DC Establishment is going to do whatever they can to praise Bush for his "leadership" and to show that only John McCain can be trusted to "finish the job."

This cynical, unrealistic and untenable position on the war is all these people have left. They are fighting tooth and nail to keep the American people from seeing the costs of the war--in deaths and injuries, in lost souls and wandering, homeless Veterans. They desperately need to draw down to around a hundred thousand US troops or slightly less--so they can say that there are "more" troops deployed in Europe, Japan and Korea than in the Middle East. It's a sham, and no one should buy it.

--WS

A Tale of Two Campaigns

I think I've mastered time travel

That is the only explanation, because I could swear I woke up in 2004 this morning.

Either that or John W. McBu$h has taken a particularly odious page out of aWol's 2004 campaign and started the campaign for the general with a stacked town-hall audience. As the indispensable Oliver Willis noted the McCain campaign went to New York City, the most diverse city in the country - perhaps the world - and couldn't find any minorities willing to attend.

Or so it seemed at first.


Toward the end of the broadcast, Shepard Smith revealed that the McCain campaign had put the shoe on the other foot and misled Faux Noise, which usually just misleads the populace...

“I reported at the top of this hour that the campaign had told us at Fox News that the audience would be made up of Republicans, Democrats, and independents," Smith said. "We have now received a clarification from the campaign and I feel I should pass it along to you. The McCain campaign distributed tickets to supporters, Mayor Bloomberg, who of course is a registered Republican, and other independent groups.”


He really is running for a third bu$h term! He is even reprising the 2004 campaign, right down to the most odious campaign methods! How long will it be before his campaign vets attendance and only lets the sycophants who will sign a loyalty oath in to attend McSame events?

That was a damned classy ending...

Hillary gave a damned strong concession speech, and Obama was quite gracious in his acceptance. Maureen Dowd won't like it of course, but then, nobody likes Maureen Dowd, so who cares?

Now everyone needs to show the class shown by both of the candidates. The rabid supporters need to let it go and be gracious - in both camps.

It isn't about anyones hurt feelings, it is about finding a way out of Iraq and saving the Supreme Court. Anyone so aggrieved that they are going to vote for McCain, or not vote at all, well, you're either certifiably fucking crazy, or you are the most selfish prick the world has ever seen. Get over yourself.

On to November.

UPDATE 4:15 Central

I just went to the Obama website to sign up to volunteer and do my p[art to get him elected President of the United States, and this is what I saw...



And it gets better...Below the fold is the video of Obama's speech after her endorsement...




Like I said, a damned classy ending to a historic primary. Now let's get busy and elect Barack Obama president.

~~BG

The GOP is ass-in-the-air scared of Obama's fundraising prowess

With Hillary calling it a day and suspending her campaign, the reality of the Obama phenomenon is causing heartburn for a new group of campaign advisers...John McCain's finance team. A look at the campaign finance data doesn't offer up a single bit of good news for team Mc$ame, and hopes that they can compete with Obama's ability to rake in the bucks are nonexistent.

Just look at the numbers, they don't lie. Through April Obama raised $272 million, and now he is reaching out to the Clinton donors who raised over $200 million in the same time frame.

Obama has over 1.5 million donors, and combining the donor lists of the two main Democratic rivals for the nomination yields a donor base of over 2.5 million donors (and a huge pool of campaign volunteers).

This huge financial advantage will allow Obama to compete in states that are considered "reliably red" in most election cycles. This will force McCain to spend his precious and limited resources to beat back attacks in friendly territory.

In the general election, Obama could afford to set up large operations in Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, New Mexico and a host of other states – maybe even McCain’s own Arizona..

That would force McCain to pick the mid-size state battles he could afford while also trying to hold off a free-spending Obama in such essential big states as Ohio, Missouri and Florida.

“McCain has to make every dollar count in the general election and Obama will have money to burn,” said Evan Tracey, co-founder of Campaign Media Analysis Group.

And the cherry on top of this sundae of republican misery?

Mc$ame is a spectacularly lousy fundraiser. April was his best fundraising month, taking in a mere $18 million, and that was the month he secured the nomination. By contrast, the month Kerry secured the nomination in 2004, he took in $44 million. “What’s been striking about the McCain money is that there hasn’t been any big surge,” says Anthony Corrado, an expert on campaign finance. “There are no big spikes; there is slow growth.”

Meanwhile, I just wrote my first check to the Obama campaign. It goes out in the mail in couple of hours.

~~BG

John McCain Takes Care of Another Patron

Arizona developer Steven A. Betts claims he never discussed a deal with Senator John McCain that turned 35,000 acres into a development project for an estimated 12,000 new homes to be built by his firm.

[Senator] John McCain championed legislation that will let an Arizona rancher trade remote grassland and ponderosa pine forest [in Prescott, AZ] for acres of valuable federally owned property that is ready for development, a land swap that now stands to directly benefit one of his top presidential campaign fundraisers.

Initially reluctant to support the swap, the Arizona Republican became a key figure in pushing the deal through Congress after the rancher and his partners hired lobbyists that included McCain's 1992 Senate campaign manager, two of his former Senate staff members (one of whom has returned as his chief of staff), and an Arizona insider who was a major McCain donor and is now bundling campaign checks.

When McCain's legislation passed in November 2005, the ranch owner gave the job of building as many as 12,000 homes to SunCor Development, a firm in Tempe, Ariz., run by Steven A. Betts, a longtime McCain supporter who has raised more than $100,000 for the presumptive Republican nominee. Betts said he and McCain never discussed the deal.

Steve Benen picks up the rest of the thread, and highlights some of McCain's other dealings with big money donors:

When considering John McCain’s history of unethical behavior, the list usually starts (and ends) with the Keating Five scandal in the 1980s, for which McCain was rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for having shown, at a minimum, poor judgment. While McCain took on the role of a “reformer” in the scandal’s aftermath, his ethical lapses have hardly disappeared.

The NYT noted a few weeks ago, for example, that McCain went to considerable lengths in 1999 to help one of his top campaign fundraisers buy the land at an Army base that was being closed. McCain helped his benefactor get the land — and special water rights — for just $250,000, which the donor then sold two years later for $30 million. (The donor, Donald Diamond, was rather candid about buying influence with politicians: “I want my money back, for Christ’s sake. Do you know how many cocktail parties I have to go to?”) It’s the kind of obvious influence peddling McCain swears he never gets involved with.

Today, the WaPo has a front-page item highlighting yet another real-estate controversy in which McCain helped out one of his most generous supporters.

When asked by the Washington Post about the timing of the land deals and of the campaign contributions that were made by the interested parties, the McCain Campaign issued a denial:

Question from the Washington Post: On several occasions, Sen. McCain worked on land exchange legislation that involved property in which campaign donors had a financial stake. Among them: A 1994 swap in the Las Vegas area involving the land Developer Del Webb Corp and its lobbyist; legislation in 1991 and 1994 regarding land swaps involving Donald R. Diamond; a trade proposed in 1997 involving the preservation of 2,250 acres of Sonoran desert that allowed for development in the Tonto National Forest, including land owned in part by Great American Life Insurance, the company run by Carl Lindner. How does Mr. McCain explain the close timing of campaign contributions to his efforts on those land exchange deals?

[McCain Campaign] RESPONSE: Rather than offer a single explanation describing the events leading up to Senator McCain’s legislative involvement in all the land deals to which you refer, we are willing to try to answer specific questions you may have on each. What can be said about all of them, without further specific questions, is that Senator McCain did absolutely nothing to help, improperly or inappropriately, any campaign donor on any land deal.

Regular readers will recall the case of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman and note that, in certain circles, trading campaign contributions for favors is considered an indictable offense:

...Siegelman emerged as one of the few Democratic stars, winning the Governor's race in 1998. He lost the seat in a close and contested race in 2002, but polls in 2003 showed that he had a good chance of recapturing the governorship. Then came the first indictment from the U.S. Attorney in Birmingham, charging Siegelman with using his position to rig a state bidding process. A judge dismissed the case in 2004 for lack of evidence. Just as Siegelman was preparing to run for Governor again, a second round of charges was brought in 2005 by the U.S. Attorney's office in Montgomery. His trial in 2006 overlapped with Alabama's Democratic primary, in which Siegelman had initially been a heavy favorite.

The investigation into Siegelman began as an inquiry into a contract held by [Clayton Lamar (Lanny)] Young [Jr.] to build a state warehouse in Alabama. Young was a well-liked figure in Montgomery who, by his own account, was in the habit of handing out cash, checks, rides on his private airplane and other goodies to members of both political parties. In return, he apparently hoped to receive favorable treatment for his garbage dumps and other lucrative state-related business.

Young testified that he had furnished Siegelman with an all-terrain vehicle and a motorcycle, lavishing money on the Governor and his aides. But he was an equal-opportunity influence monger. Early in the investigation, in November 2001, Young announced that five years earlier, he "personally provided Sessions with cash campaign contributions," according to an FBI memo of the interview. Prosecutors didn't follow up that surprising statement with questions, but Young volunteered more. The memo adds that "on one occasion he [Young] provided Session [sic] with $5,000 to $7,000 using two intermediaries," one of whom held a senior position with Sessions' campaign. On another occasion, the FBI records show, Young talked about providing "$10,000 to $15,000 to Session [sic]. Young had his secretaries and friends write checks to the Sessions campaign and Young reimbursed the secretaries and friends for their contributions."

Further updates as necessary.

Graham is the Smithers to McCain's Montgomery Burns

Not really a McCain Media Mashup of Existing Mancrushes, but close.

I would not consider myself a reader of the Politico. It seems to be inside baseball for people who are a little too into baseball. But this story is as good as any to look at when it comes to the McCain Media Mancrush. The Politico is an outfit that tries to do politics better than everyone else, but who's buying? Who's really this far into politics?

If anyone else called him “little jerk,” Sen. Lindsey Graham might be offended.

But the jab comes from Sen. John McCain, so he wears it like a badge of honor.

“If John’s not belittling you, you’re in trouble,” Graham said. “He calls me lots of other names, too, but they’re not appropriate for the newspaper.”

Obligatory cheap shot: He calls you names? Like he does his wife? Does he call you a trollop and a cunt?

McCain and Graham aren’t just friends. They’re inseparable, so much so that colleagues, staffers and journalists have begun making cracks about the relationship between the freshman senator from South Carolina and the man who would be president.

Some call Graham a lapdog. Others say he acts as though he’s one of McCain’s legislative aides. One Senate aide, who called Graham and Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) “Pips” to McCain’s Gladys Knight, said that Graham “fawns over McCain like there’s no tomorrow.” In the run-up to this week’s hearings for Army Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, The Washington Post’s Tom Ricks said Graham “sometimes seems like McCain’s ‘Mini-Me.’”

“I think it’s almost a father-son relationship,” said Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), a friend of both senators and another member of their Senate clique. “I think Lindsey looks to [McCain] and relies on him. But I think John draws on Lindsey’s energy and relies on him for a laugh.”

McCain spokeswoman Melissa Shuffield said the two senators “have the kind of friendship that will outlast their political careers.”
The two have grown so close that a Fox News anchor felt compelled to ask Graham last week if he might be McCain’s running mate — a suggestion Graham laughed off by saying that McCain “doesn’t have anything I want or need.”

That’s not exactly true. As Graham himself admits, his close relationship with McCain affords him opportunities and access that most neophyte senators don’t usually enjoy — as long as he’s willing to put up with the abuse that goes along with it all.

I want you all to understand something--Graham is the senior senator from South Carolina. Do you think that a form of "buyers remorse" has set in for the people of South Carolina, as it has for the people of Connecticut?

Tuesday morning was typical. As a curtain raiser for Petraeus’ appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, McCain, Graham and Lieberman appeared together outside the Capitol at an event organized by Veterans for Freedom.

The TV cameras turned out to catch the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, but Graham got some of the attention and a bit of the ribbing. “Lindsey Graham was a colonel — that’s the good news,” McCain told the crowd. “He’s also a lawyer — that’s the bad news.”)

Tuesday was McCain’s first day back at the Capitol in a few weeks. The last time he was there — for votes on the massive budget bill — he and Graham could be seen walking side by side in the Russell building and riding together on the Senate subway. During the late-night vote-o-rama, the two men cracked jokes in the back of the chamber like two grade school pranksters.

“Lindsey! Lindsey! Get over here!” McCain said, his raspy voice wafting up to the gallery, when Graham strayed momentarily and walked in the other direction.

Now, explain to me why the Burns-Smithers comparison doesn't work. (I am not suggesting, nor will I acknowledge anything relating to sexual orientation.) Yeah, I'm being lazy--the quickest way to construct a blog post is to wrap it around "The Simpsons" and steal some of their intellectual property. But I believe that I have done so in a way that honors this country. So, it's all good...right?

McCain is No Ronald Reagan

McCain-Watch: the ongoing saga of McCain and the Media's Mancrush. (Another Media and McCain Mancrush Mash-up Moment...)

I've been looking for a way to try to explain this, but it wasn't until I saw this article at The Washington Independent that I knew what to do. Holly Yeager hasn't gotten the memo--you're supposed to fall all over yourself in the grips of a twitching mancrush.

The Washington Independent is becoming a favorite source of good material--Check them out. They're better than the Huffington Post, they have good substantive stories every day, and they don't fall into the trap of throwing celebrity driven bullshit on their front page to grab readers, if you want me to be honest about it.

Anyway, Yeager puts together a good story about McCain by using multiple sources, positive and negative quotes, positive and negative points, and you know, some basic analysis. Analysis that seems independent to me. Yeager didn't get the memo that you're supposed to sit there enraptured, make shit up when you get to the deadline, and then turn on anyone who criticizes McCain like someone just took your cookie at the kindergarten table.

Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in all but name, has spent this week on an autobiographical road trip, seeking to pull attention from the still combative Democratic contest by highlighting important places in his remarkable life story. But if the “Service to America Tour” has shown the strength of McCain’s biography, it has also underscored his real weakness as a speech-maker.

We’re talking style here, not substance. But in oratory, this is not a minor detail. In formal speeches – like those delivered this week at his Alexandria, Va., high school and at the U.S. Naval Academy, where he graduated in 1958, despite what he called "an impressive catalogue of demerits" – McCain (R-Ariz.) appears dependent on a teleprompter, delivering even the most personal passages with an odd detachment. In his telling, his difficult five-and-a-half years as Vietnam prisoner of war might have happened to someone else.

His flat delivery often makes him seem bored with his own stories -- as he did Tuesday, when he told a crowd of current students at his alma mater, “Memory often accords our high school years the distinction of being among the happiest of our lives. I remember Episcopal in that light.”

Yeager points to something else I can't understand--this idea that a graduate of the Naval Academy should boast about being a jackass who couldn't behave or do well in school. That was a free education you got, Senator. It was handed to you instead of some other kid because of your blood line, not your brains. Why not show a touch of humility about not being able to act like a mature adult when you were given four years of a free education tens of thousands of more deserving kids couldn't get because their father and grandfather weren't Admirals? Typically, when daddy gets you into school, you act like a jackass because you have a sense of entitlement. Not that that hasn't already backfired on us, right?

McCain seems to do better when people ask him questions--albeit, they'd better not be critical of anything McCain has ever said or done:

But Medhurst, Trent, and other analysts agree that McCain does have one strong suit: the question-and-answer session.

David Kusnet, chief speech writer for Bill Clinton during the 1992 campaign and the first two years of the administration, called McCain “almost a mirror image of Ronald Reagan.” Reagan excelled at formal speeches. “But you wouldn’t want to have him do a town hall meeting,” Kusnet said. “He would get his facts wrong, or start repeating himself.”

“McCain is the opposite,” Kusnet said. “He’s not good at reading a speech, especially with a teleprompter. But he is good at a town hall meeting.”

McCain has often relied on that format, conducting more than 100 town hall meetings before the 2000 New Hampshire primary, in which he defeated George W. Bush, and at least 100 more in the state in the run-up to this year’s primary, which ended in his comeback victory.

“He’s not afraid of it and he’s willing to take all comers,” Medhurst said. “It sort of fits his personality.”

That confidence was on display at his old high school. After his formal remarks were done, McCain opened the floor to questions. “It can be about anything that’s on your mind,” McCain said. “Most anything that’s on your mind.”

The shift in format instantly set him at ease. McCain moved around the gym floor, leaning on the podium and holding his microphone with the breezy confidence of a Las Vegas lounge act. Freed from the teleprompter, he made eye contact with the crowd, talked comfortably about his high school wrestling record – “I won more than I lost” – and, after describing an unexpected victory, quoted ESPN’s Chris Berman: “That’s why you play the game.”

McCain’s campaign is expected to continue to use the town hall format as the campaign progresses. Obama, whose rhetorical prowess has been at the heart of his campaign, is also now using the setting more frequently -- recognizing that voters value the more relaxed atmosphere and the opportunity to move from lofty ideas to bread and butter discussions.

Aside from calling a questioner a "stupid little jerk" and thereby alienating the youth vote, I would agree with that. Questioners tend to fawn all over McCain like the media does. When he's being fawned over by an adoring questioner, McCain shines brightly.

McCain Flies Off the Handle

I think we need to start compiling these. A hat tip to Crooks and Liars for this little piece of fun:

Elizabeth Bumiller asks Senator McCain about his conversation with John Kerry in 2004, about becoming Kerry's running mate:

EB: Can you describe the conversation?

McCain: No, of course not. I don’t describe private conversations.

EB: Okay. Can I ask you –

McCain: Why should I? Then there’s no such thing as a private conversation. Is there (inaudible) if you have a private conversation with someone, and then they come and tell you. I don’t know that that’s a private conversation. I think that’s a public conversation.

EB. Okay. Can I ask you about your (pause) Why you’re so angry?

McCain: Pardon me?

EB: Nevermind, nevermind.

That's right. The press dare not ask McCain why he's so angry. He might snap! And then they won't get invited to his crib for free food!

Larry Wilkerson in the Nation explains a little more of what it's like to deal with McCain:

"No dissent, no opinion to the contrary, however reasonable, will be entertained," says Larry Wilkerson, a retired army colonel who was former Secretary of State Colin Powell's top aide. "Hardheaded is another way to say it. Arrogant is another way to say it. Hubristic is another way to say it. Too proud for his own good is another way to say it. It's a quality about him that disturbs me."

But what you may not have heard is an extended critique of the kind of Commander in Chief that Captain McCain might be. To combat what he likes to call "the transcendent challenge [of] radical Islamic extremism," McCain is drawing up plans for a new set of global institutions, from a potent covert operations unit to a "League of Democracies" that can bypass the balky United Nations, from an expanded NATO that will bump up against Russian interests in Central Asia and the Caucasus to a revived US unilateralism that will engage in "rogue state rollback" against his version of the "axis of evil." In all, it's a new apparatus designed to carry the "war on terror" deep into the twenty-first century.

"We created a number of institutions in the wake of World War II to deal with the situation," says Randy Scheunemann, McCain's top adviser on foreign policy. "And what Senator McCain wants to begin a dialogue about is, Do we need new structures and new institutions, both internally, in the US government, and externally, to recognize that the situation we face now is very, very different than the one we faced during the cold war?" Joining Scheunemann, a veteran neoconservative strategist and one of the chief architects of the Iraq War, are a panoply of like-minded neocons who've gathered to advise McCain, including Bill Kristol, James Woolsey, Robert Kagan, Max Boot, Gary Schmitt and Maj. Ralph Peters. "There are some who've moved into his camp who scare me," Wilkerson says. "Scare me."

Yeah, they kind of scare me, too.

If it's not the lobbyists, than it's the architects of a disasterous war who call themselves neocons who are whispering in St. John's ear.

O Death...

Did you know that the Republican Party is polling to try to figure out just how racist they can go this fall if Barack Obama is the nominee?

The Republican National Committee has commissioned polling and focus groups to determine the boundaries of attacking a minority or female candidate, according to people involved. The secretive effort underscores the enormous risk senior GOP operatives see for a party often criticized for its insensitivity to minorities in campaigns dating back to the 1960s.

The RNC project is viewed as so sensitive that those involved in the work were reluctant to discuss the findings in detail. But one Republican strategist, who asked that his name be withheld to speak candidly, said the research shows the daunting and delicate task ahead.

Republicans will be told to “be sensitive to tone and stick to the substance of the discussion” and that “the key is that you have to be sensitive to the fact that you are running against historic firsts,” the strategist explained.

I think Republicans should just remind people how things used to be in this country because, if there's one thing that wins elections, it's the Southern Strategy they used with great efficiency for a number of years...and don't forget to tell people about how cool it is to be a member of a secret society!

Delusionary Rants From Red State

Did you know Obama's middle name is Hussein? I didn't know that until Erick from Red State told me that.

Here's more of his delusionary rant, updated with polite comments:

God Bless Texas
By Erick
“The Democrats, God bless 'em, are about to hand us the prototypical liberal boogeyman as their nominee.”A week from tomorrow, Texas will either prolong the bloody battle for the Democratic nomination or give the nomination to a self-admitted former cokehead. Either way, we should thank Texas.

George W Bush is running to be the Democratic nominee? And you think that we're not going to talk about Iraq, torture, the politicization of the Justice Department, Brownie, Katrina, Scooter, Shooter, or the crappy economy? You think we're not going to show people Walter Reed, abandoned Veterans, and stories about troops who have been treated like cattle when they went to get treated for PTSD and for severe physical injuries? You think we're not going to show people defective body armor and chewed up Humvees and ask why the Marines had to beg for years and go without Mine Resistant Vehicles? You think we're not going to remind people that gas is over three bucks a gallon? You think we're not going to explain in detail the politics of fear and the corruption of the Bush Administration? You think the fact that Obama is going to have several hundred million dollars to run with while McCain could be held to spending 6 million dollars over the next six months means what, exactly? You think we're a liberal bogeyman--dude, your party is the real bogeyman. How many losing issues do you want us to HANG you with?

Let's presume, if we will, that Texas goes for Barack Hussein Obama, a name that is not quite poll tested and mother approved. That presumption is not a safe one because even now the forces of Clinton are going into hispanic communities and churches to remind them that hispanics would be minority number one in a Clinton administration and minority number three in an Obama administration, behind blacks and everybody else. With thirty percent of the voting strength in the Texas Democratic Primary, Hispanics could help Hillary pull it off.

Don't tell mama I'm for Obama, and given the demographic shifts in this country, I'd say Obama's name is "mother approved." His name is no weirder than Napoleon Dynamite, P Diddy and He Hate Me, and people love weird names.

And it's funny that Erick mentions Hispanics--given the insane, vitriolic attacks of the last two years, the Republican Party is never going to win the Hispanic vote. Ever. I mean, maybe in 80 years. And even then, there'll be enough anchor babies around to persuade people not to vote Republican. Oh, and they're going in Churches because, well, the Republicans have kinda pissed off evangelicals, too. Something about the Republican establishment being so far up Guiliani's rear end they got a little of that Lindsey Graham type poisoning Rush was talking about.

In any event, I presume Obama will win. And we should delight in his victory. Hillary has been too timid to throw a punch. We will not be.
We will remind people that Obama admitted using cocaine. While the left loves to accuse George Bush of doing the same, one of these two men wrote a book and admitted he did so. And that man's name is not Bush.

Uh huh. Run with that. See what it gets you. We'll remind people that McCain brought over 70 lobbyists in to run his campaign, abandoned his first wife after she was crippled, committed adultery with an heiress who financed his political career, and comes from a state that has more indicted and corrupt politicians than, well, Chicago, if you want to be honest about it. We'll run every quote from Bush in 2000 attacking McCain's character. We'll find all of those nice quotes from John McCain that have him screaming "FUCK YOU" at people in the pristine setting of the US Congress like he's a crack whore wronged in a rough session of bartering. We'll run the "100 years in Iraq" quote every day, in every media market, on every channel. Then we'll just do what we did in 1996 and show people video of McCain stumbling around, falling off stages and looking confused and tired. If all you can come up with is something Obama admitted to in his own book, I think you're screwed. The last time someone tried to hang a Democrat with something that they wrote in a book, we were treated to a literary discussion about the merits of James Webb's fiction, and George Allen can attest to how that turned out for him.

We will point out that when Obama was in the Illinois Senate he voted to allow porn shops to open within 1,000 feet of churches and elementary schools.

Ha ha ha ha! A thousand feet? Sounds like a zoning dispute. You're actually going to try to win a national election over a local zoning dispute? Pardon me while my eyes glaze over from boredom.

Likewise, Obama voted against trying high school students as adults if they committed gun crimes on school grounds — I'm sure the folks in Colorado will love that vote.

I think the people can understand a compassionate vote that doesn't destroy the lives of children before they're adults, and a gun crime doesn't mean that they've killed someone. So if a kid brings a gun to school, you want to have them locked up in an adult prison? What if it's a first offense. What if it's a kid who's scared and being bullied. Better yet--how about you let a judge decide?

Obama says he only wants gun owners to be able to use their guns for sport and he has a record to prove it. Obama supported allowing criminals to sue their victims if their victims shot them.

I think you're tied up in knots on that one. It doesn't pass the common sense test of who can and who can't sue someone. It sounds like one of those manufactured scenarios used to trip up simple pieces of legislation.

Crucially, for those pro-life voters who right now seem to be fawning over Obama, we'll remind them that he is to the left of Hillary on abortion — going so far as to oppose the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

Pro-life voters who vote for the Democrat know what they're getting. I don't think you're going to preach to the choir on that one and achieve anything. Either they vote for the Democrat or they don't, and one vote on one piece of legislation isn't going to make a difference.

For years the Democrats have tried to get away from the anti-gun, big government, high tax, abortion on demand liberal label. They've gone so far as to rebrand themselves progressive. Obama champions the failed schemes of the last one hundred years, repeatedly rejected by the voters, to fix what he claims are the failed policies of the last eight years. The Democrats, God bless 'em, are about to hand us the prototypical liberal boogeyman as their nominee.

What failed schemes? Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and fiscal responsibility? Raising taxes on the rich? Helping middle class families send their kids to school? Trying to phase in health insurance coverage for millions of Americans that isn't mandatory? Diplomacy? Common sense approaches to solving problems? Reaching across the aisle to work with Republicans, like Dick Lugar, on nuclear non-proliferation? Moving into a post-partisan era? Abandoning the politics of fear? Pick one, and let me know what you're rambling about.

By the time it's all over, the only defense Obama is going to have is to resort to the standard liberal playbook and scream racism when anyone dares point out his voting record. And the public we have not heard from year, the public that swings elections but generally does not engage in primaries, are going to come running to John McCain begging him to save the nation from the liberal anti-gun former cokehead whose feminist wife hates America.

No, they're not. What they're doing now--and what they'll do all through the summer and fall, is hear someone speak plainly about America. They'll listen to what this man says and make up their own minds. Fewer and fewer Americans are buying the rhetoric that says we can't do this, can't do that, we have to be afraid in our homes, we have to have endless war and permanent poverty.

America has rejected liberalism. Obama thinks he can repackage it in new rhetoric and move it to the left of Hillary. He cannot. I relish the fight against the man who has no problem with porn shops across the street from elementary schools and terrorist leaders in the White House. That'll go over real well.

Dude, in case you haven't figured it out--Americans openly and honestly like porn. Jay Leno has the better looking porn stars appear on his show and do skits. They're spending more on it than any time in our history. We live in a world where a person can make a stock trade on their phone, check the weather in Hong Kong, listen to a Norwegian death metal band play live in Narvik, snark at your lame site on a comment thread, give a shout out to a friend on FaceBook, and watch three hourglass shaped women douse themselves with soy sauce and mount a confused midget. Show me a zoning law that can deal with that!

The stigma you're trying to exploit might have had some play in 1978, but today? With the Internet, the Hotel Room and video games? Try updating yourself a little on your outdated ideas of what people think is right and wrong. You ask a kid what's more wrong--naked people fucking or naked people being tortured and I think you're going to be surprised at how far on the wrong side of THAT issue the Republicans really are. I mean, you're all for the naked Abu Ghraib pyramid, but I can't go buy a DVD of consenting adults having a much better looking heterosexual version of the naked pyramid? And you conservatives are making tons of money off of it. There's more slap and tease on Fox than there is on HBO half the time and there are quite a few companies with conservative leanings that are raking in the cash off porn in hotel rooms. That's probably why the Justice Department hasn't done a Meese Commission Report during the Bush Administration--too many Republicans would be explaining their own purchasing habits. Obligatory references to Mark Foley, David Vitter and Larry Craig, notwithstanding.

America doesn't reject liberalism or conservatism permanently; the American people go through cycles where they adapt and change different aspects of each philosophy. Look at the trends in American politics from 1900 to 1950--everything from complete dominance by liberals, rejection of conservatism, then back again. The cyclic nature of American preferences for solving problems and choosing who leads the country simply means you guys get to play the part of Herbert Hoover for a while, and thankfully, the American people have shown that they loved Hoover a hell of a lot more than they like Bush.

The only thing better than an Obama candidacy is a Hillary one after a bloody primary fight. As a result, God bless Texas.

You mean the state that will probably throw John Cornyn out of office? The state that is trending more Democrat, now that they've had a taste of Tom DeLay and corruption? Texas gets bluer by the day, thanks to the decision of the Republican Party to demonize Hispanics. Good luck, Erick. I think you and your cheesy little website are going to be an afterthought before too long. How's the technical upgrade going?

Need some cash?

Bitches Get Stuff Done

Here's delusion for you, in a nutshell:

[Ralph] NADER: Let me put it in context, to make it a little more palatable to people who have closed minds. 24% of the American people are satisfied with the state of the country, according to Gallup. That’s about the lowest ranking ever. 61% think both major parties are failing. And according to Frank Luntz’s poll, the Republican, 80% will consider voting for an independent this year. Now you take that framework, of people feeling locked out, shut out, marginalized, disrespected and you go from Iraq to Palestine to Israel. From Enron to Wall Street. From Katrina to the bungling of the Bush administration to the complicity of the Democrats in not stopping him on the war, stopping him on the tax cuts, getting a decent energy bill through and you have to ask yourself, as a citizen, should we elaborate the issues that the two are not talking about? And the…all the candidates, McCain, Obama and Clinton, are against single-payer health insurance. Full Medicare for all. I’m for it. As well as millions of Americans and 59% of physicians in a forthcoming poll this April. People don’t like Pentagon waste, the bloated military budget, all of the reports in the press and the GAO reports. A wasteful defense is a weak defense. It takes away taxpayer money that can go to the necessities of the American people. That’s off the table, to Obama and Clinton and McCain. The issue of labor law reform: repealing the notorious Taft-Hartley act, that keeps workers who are now more defenseless than ever against corporate globalization from organizing to defend their interests. Cracking down on corporate crime. The media—the mainstream media—repeatedly indicated how trillions of dollars have been drained and fleeced and looted from millions of workers and investors who don’t have many rights these days.

That's a wonderful laundry list of things that are wrong. And Ralph Nader thinks he is someone who can do something about those problems?

Please. Ralph Nader has absolutely no chance to do anything this year except siphon off some critical votes that a Democrat might need in a few key states. Granted, 90% of the people who will vote for Nader just want to throw their vote away because they're pissy about something and won't get behind a candidate because said candidate is not 100% perfectly in line with the single issue they are obsessed with. You're never going to find someone who's perfectly in line with the way you think and who is going to do exactly what you want them to do. Be an adult--and quit being a spoiled fucking child--and get used to being mildly disappointed about serious subjects.

You want to do ANYTHING about the issues Nader lists above? See what voting for McCain gets you.

Nader has no legacy now. He's a tired act. And I guarantee you--more Republicans give to his campaign than any other constituency because he takes votes from Democrats. Plain and simple.

Tina Fey has the best line of the year--bitches get stuff done.