Tag Archives: McCain

It Isn’t About Leadership. It’s About Perception.

I’ve spent the past 15 hours or so, when not sleeping, watching the talking heads. I’ve even tuned in to Fox news just to make sure their eyeballs haven’t exploded trying to work their poor abused heads around the idea that capitalism is what got us into this mess. Rest assured; Fox News has learned nothing from the current crisis.

It’s been an instructive 15 hours (aside from the sleeping bit).  The pundits all seem to be focusing on

a. Whether or not “The Bailout* ” is a good thing and

b. Whether John McCain rushing back to Washington and suspending his campaign is a gambit or concern.

None of them seem to be able to answer A, and the jury is hung on B. Only one person, The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza, got it right. Last night while discussing the move by McCain to suspend his campaign and the debate, Chris said “Anyone who thinks that anything a candidate does this close to an election isn’t about politics, doesn’t know much about politics.” And the truth shall set you free.

Don’t think it’s true? Well, let’s take a look at what’s being said by the McCain camp. This morning, John McCain’s spokeswoman Nicole Wallace actually sidestepped the question to both Joe Scarborough and Matt Lauer. She told Scarborough “Is that what you thought? I think the American people will remember the bipartisan message coming from both candidates.” Really, Ms Wallace? Is that why John McCain rushed out to make the first statement? So that everyone would remember the joint statement that came later? Way to underestimate the intelligence of the American people. The reason for that was fairly transparent, and we all know it. It was politics, pure and simple. Ms. Wallace’s remarks to Matt Lauer here. In both cases, she seems reluctant to actually answer the question put to her, namely: “If the joint message about fixing the problem was what was important, what was your guy doing if it wasn’t upstaging?” I’m more than a little annoyed that two seasoned journalists were unable to force an answer to that question and let it go at a ridiculous hand waving justification.

Neither Sen. McCain nor Sen. Obama are part of the committee attempting to solve this economic crisis. At this point, the Repugs are dragging their feet against passing anything in order to correct the situation, and there’s no foreseeable solution. If no one blinks, what then? We put the election on hold, too?

Sen. Jim Demint just said that “new thinking” is needed on the issue, and he “trusts the free market.” Okay, Sen. Demint; isn’t that WHAT GOT US INTO THE PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE?!  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said infusing presidential politics in the situation will only muddy the waters. Chuck Hagel said last night that everyone in Washington knows the meetings in the Oval Office isn’t where the work gets done; it’s the breakaway meetings AFTER those meetings that actually accomplishes something.

Which leads us right back to: Why the hell are we ONLY focusing on this crisis? We also have TWOT (the war on terror) going on. Should we put government on hold until Sen. McCain comes up with a solution for that as well? And….WHO has a messiah complex again, please?

Ladies and gentlemen, let us buy a clue, if necessary. We cannot simply keep putting things on hold because something comes up. We deserve to know who will be leading us, regardless of which candidate is chosen. It IS our country, after all. We’re the ones making the decision. We deserve to have all the data we can get before we make what may well be the most important choice of our lives.

Senator McCain, step up. Heroes do not run from a challenge, sir.

*I think it’s deserving of Caps. In 75 years, school kids are going to learn about the Great Globalization Crisis of ’08. They’re gonna want to know why we were so stoopid.

McCain Calls for Suspense of Debate; Concern or Calculated Ploy?

So, once again, I’m sitting here watching MSNBC, and they’re talking about how Barack Obama now has a 9% lead in the polls over John McCain. And as they say it, they receive a notice saying that John McCain now wants to put the debate on hold until the crisis is solved, and Barack Obama needs to “come back to Washington to help fix it.”

I must say, it was a brilliant stroke. McCain has been looking for a way to stop the bleeding and get back in front since this crisis broke. I watched Sen. McCain, and am now watching Sen. Obama, who is saying that Sen. Tom Colvin suggested to both candidates that they reach out to each other and make a joint statement. Which I find interesting. He’s now going over his four point demands for the bill, which include that Wall Street execs not get “golden parachutes” for their reckless greed.

Both men seem to be earnest in their sincerity. My question is: How much of it is pandering, and how much is honest concern for making sure this issue gets solved?

Post speeches edit: I think it’s interesting to note that Sen. McCain did not open the floor to any questions whatsoever, and when Sen. Obama opened for questions and was asked about the debate, he said “I think it’s important that we go on with it….the next president is going to have to be able to do more than one thing, and it’s important for the American people to see that.”

Texas Supreme Court Tells Libertarian Candidate to Sit Down and Shut his Piehole.

As reported at this site, Bob Barr, the presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party, has filed an injunction claiming that neither John McCain nor Barack Obama had submitted the necessary paperwork to be considered as candidates for President of the United States, and demanding that they be removed from Texas ballots, thus putting into question the status of Texas’ 34 electoral votes.

And as predicted, the Supreme Court of the state of Texas has told Barr to shut the hell up.

[But}…the Democratic and Republican state parties had filed official documents with the Secretary of State stating their presumed presidential candidates. The Democrats threw in Joe Biden’s name and the Republicans said they would report back with the name of their vice presidential contender, which they did.

Apparently, the Supreme Court felt that was sufficient, especially in light of the catastrophic alientation of voters if neither of the major party candidates could appear on the November ballot.

C’mon. Let us be honest. It’s not surprising, sure, but it isn’t about the “alienation of voters” nearly as much as it’s about the fact that McCain can’t win without Texas. He needs us BAD, as badly as Obama needs California. I don’t doubt, though, stubborn as the citizens of my adopted state seem to be, they still would’ve shown up, and still would’ve written McCain’s name in on the ballot if such was necessary.

McCain Lies at 54 and Counting….

A rather industrious website has sprung up called “McCainpedia.” It has a fact checker showing how many lies and distortions John McCain has told about himself, his running mate, and Barack Obama. It’s currently at 54. When it reaches his age, should we throw a party?

Elitist!! or: I LIKE that Obama’s Smart

Look out, it’s the Kerry Catch Phrase, wielded by a terrified neocon near you. But this time…it doesn’t seem to have the sticking power it did when John Kerry was the Dem candidate.

Maybe it’s because it’s hard to pin that tag on a man who owns one house while attempting to support a man who admits he doesn’t know how many he owns. Maybe it’s because it doesn’t seem to fit a guy who worked his way up from blue collar roots through school on a scholarship and succeeding beyond all expectations, just like every “pull yerself up by your bootstraps” conservative says people SHOULD do. Or just maybe people are finally recognizing that “a guy you can have a beer with” doesn’t necessarily know a whole hell of a lot about foreign policy. Or the economy. Or infrastructure. Or governing wisely. Maybe it’s finally sinking through that what you need in that particular case is someone who is known more for his academic accomplishments than for his father getting him into Harvard after squeaking through Yale with a C average. Who knows?

If it makes me elitist that I want a president who won’t make me cringe with anticipatory embarrassment every time he opens his mouth to a foreign dignitary…so be it. If it makes me elitist that I want a president who knows more about the economy than I do, I’ll happily take that label. And if it makes me elitist that I care more about whether or not a candidate is in the deep pockets of more lobbyists in Washington than Rick Santorum instead of what his religions really is? Then guilty as charged. I’m elitist. When it comes to my country, you bet I’m elitist. Because I think my country deserves better than “regular people” in the driver’s seat. I think my country deserves the best. Isn’t that what we’re constantly saying we are? Put up or shutup.

I’m Offended!! The culture of Palin

Sarah Palin gets offended a lot. She got offended by Barack Obama’s “lipstick on a pig” comment. She got offended by Joe Biden pointing out that Bush & McCain’s policies are a step backward for women, and that by following them, she is not helping women. Not only is Sarah Palin offended, GOP women are offended, and are expecting “all American women” to be offended as well.

Okay, couple things here.

  1. I don’t care if Sarah Palin is offended. That’s right. I said it. I just. Don’t. Care. Sen. Obama and Sen. Biden are discussing the issues. If Gov. Palin is offended NOW, about two comments by her competitors, how’s she going to react when she’s under the kind of scrutiny Dick Cheney has taken for the past eight years? Gov. Palin, if you get offended that easily, you went into the wrong line of work.
  2. “It’s SEXIST!” Grow up. It’s not sexist, it’s fact. “Lipstick on a pig” is a saying Sen. McCain used last year about Hillary Clinton’s healthcare program. Was he being sexist, or was he addressing the issue? You can’t have it both ways.

All this hoopla has made one thing perfectly clear to me. Sarah Palin isn’t interested in arguing the issues. If she were interested in the issues at all, she’d quit looking for things to be offended about and start arguing about why her policy stances are superior. She can’t, so she’s attacking the only way she can. By getting offended. Because if she argues issues and policy, she will lose every time.

To Sarah Palin’s followers: You want to be offended? Fine. I’ll give you something to be offended about (wow, shades of my mom). Alaska has the highest per capita rape rate of any state in the nation, and it’s only gotten worse since Sarah Palin became governor. It also has the highest alcoholism and suicide rates of any state. What has Sarah Palin done to address those issues? Her idea of “fiscal responsibility”? Accepting the “bridge to nowhere” money and plugging it into other projects. Despite her self congratulatory insistence that she turned that project down. She didn’t. She took taxpayer cash and spent it on state projects. Hmmmm….what do Republicans call it when Dems do that? Oh, yeah. PORK BARRELL SPENDING.

Offended yet? No? This should put it over the top. Despite her anti-woman stances on abortion, her do-nothing laissez-faire attitude toward important state issues like rape, alcoholism, and suicide (they’re just not glamourous enough, I guess), her pro-censorship and her blatant anti-science stance, you superficial airheads still support her. ‘Cuz she’s a mommy with a Down’s Syndrome baby and she’s pretty. and tough. And when actual issues are pointed out and discussed, I see absurd comments like this in response:

I get soooo irritated with people belittling Palin’s foreign policy experience. Palin is the commander-in-chief of Alaska’s Coast Guard and during the months she’s been commander-in-chief last I checked the aggressive bordering country of Russia has not attacked to get it’s territory back. I don’t think this is just a coincidence.

as seen here. It’s comments like this that further entrench the idea that women don’t have the grasp of politics that men have. And if I have to explain it to you? That makes it even worse. Comments like this embarrass me on behalf of my gender.

Women have more to offer than being “hot,” or being a baby factory or a beauty queen. But we’re never going to shake that perception if we don’t start ignoring the superficial and concentrating on what’s really important. If we don’t stop making our decisions based on appearance and start making our decisions based on issues, all we’re going to get is more of the same. Time to wake up, ladies. We have the national stage. We have what it takes to make the right choices. Just this once, let’s base that choice on what’s really important. As for being offended….well….I’m going to use one of my mom’s favorite sayings. “Get up, you ain’t hurt.”

Texas out of the electoral process?

I’m not sure whether to be amused or impressed.

According to this story, the Bob Barr presidential campaign faxed the Texas Secretary of State office yesterday citing Texas Election Code § 192.031, which requires that filings must be submitted “before 5 p.m. of the 70th day before presidential Election Day,” listing the “names of the party’s nominees for president and vice-president.”  Neither the Obama nor the McCain campaign submitted ther paperwork prior to August 26, 2008, 5pm, and it looks as though Mr. Barr is going to be a stickler about it.

Now…don’t get me wrong. I’m sure the RNC and DNC will find loopholes and all will be well and all will be well and all manner of things will be well. But….what if they dont? Does it mean Texas’ electoral votes for Obama and McCain don’t count? Does it mean the popular vote will decide and voters will have to do a write in? Both possibilities are intriguing; without Texas, McCain can’t win the general. And what if it’s decided to go with the popular vote? Despite being a “red” state, there are plenty of Obama supporters here…the vote would be split.

I’ll be watching this story with interest….