McCain just out and out lies

It's been a long time since I was shocked at the idea a politician might fib, fabricate, stretch or wiggle the truth. Really.

But today, John McCain pulled one that puts 'I did not have sex with that woman' to shame.

Marking the passage of the Jim Webb bill to give GI Bill benefits to soldiers fighting in Iraq, McCain notes:

"I'm happy to tell you that we probably agreed to an increase in educational benefits for our veterans that not only gives them increase in their educational benefits, but if they stay in for a certain period of time than they can transfer those educational benefits to their spouses and or children. That's a very important aspect I think of incentivizing people of staying in the military."

"Probably" is there because "we" didn't do a damn thing. The Senate voted but we didn't show up.

But really the lie involves the word happy. This is the bill that some feared would encourage soldiers not to re-enlist and opposed.

Among those who opposed it were the GOP twins President Bush and John McCain. When Obama called McCain on it, McCain flipped out with an "how dare you, I served, you young whippersapper."

But he still opposed it.

I suppose you could say he's happy the Senate overrule that bastard John McCain, but really. I guess you could say oral opposition (like oral sex?) isn't really opposition (sex) if you wanted to pull a Clinton.

But Mr. Straight Talk Express? Never.

Sadly, we can't expect McCain to be called on it. I blogged recently about the lie he told newsweek -- saying he hadn't said something in a speech when he had, and you can watch the video from any Internet connection -- and, yet, newsweek hasn't called him on it.

I'm betting only the blogosphere will call him on this.

I've Heard This One Before - And Before

Listen up, Corporate America: We're all on to you. When we call and hear "We're experiencing higher-than-normal call volumes" EVERY TIME we call, it's not us. It's you. And I'm guessing that you're not really experiencing high call volumes, but you just don't want to pay any of those pesky "salaries" to customer service reps. Doesn't really help the bottom line, does it?

Corporate swine ...

Does he know the diff between Iraq and Iran?

Is it a Freudian slip or campaign strategy?

Illinois Republican Mark Kirk is in the blogosphere's doghouse today for a quote posted at Daily Kos, from a radio broadcast in which he said he supports a polict "where if we see Obama there's a shoot-on-sight order."

Now, officially he was talking about Osama bin Laden and just got mixed up. OK. I'll take at his word it's not part of the GOP smear campaign to paint Obama as a closet Muslim raised in a madrassa and sympathetic to terrorists. Or trying to encourage some gun nut.

But riddle me this, Illinois voters. If the man confuses a presidential candidate from his own state with the mastermind of 9/11, should we let him hold public office? Lord no.

Another good journalist bites the dust

Back in the 1990s, the image of esteemed journalists collecting cash from corporate interests for hobnobbing with them, like politicians lending an ear to their money men, steamed a columnist named David Broder. He said:

"It’s clear that some journalists now are in a market category where the amount of money that they can make on extracurricular activities raises, in my mind, exactly, and, clearly, in the public’s mind, exactly the same kind of conflict-of-interest questions that we are constantly raising with people in public life. . . .

"People think that we are part of the establishment and therefore part of the problem. I mean, what bothers me is the notion that journalists believe, or some journalists believe, that they can have their cake and eat it too, that you can have all of the special privileges, access and extraordinary freedom that you have because you are a journalist operating in a society which protects journalism to a greater degree than any other country in the world, and at the same time you can be a policy advocate. You can be a public performer on the lecture circuit or television. I think that’s greedy."

What he might add today: Greed is good. Harpers reports that Broder has joined the ranks of the bought-and-paid-for corporate journalist.

Guess when you're esteemed enough, you don't need credibility. This should help convince the public journalists aren't part of the problem.

" ... a lot of the information that we accept as true, and will pass on to others as true, is dependent upon our own self-interests. Anyone who claims otherwise is expert at deluding themselves or is knowingly lying ..."

Remember, the media is only as liberal as its conservative corporate owners allow it to be. Enlightened self-interest that helps you meet your Wall Street numbers ...

Mr. Obama meets Mr. LieberMcCain

This is the most interesting political news I've heard since McCain kept confusing sunnis and shiites while fact-finding in Iraq. (He likely thinks Obama should visit the Big Sandbox more often so he could be confused, too.)

Seems Sen. Obama met Sen. ol' Joe Lieberman on the Senate floor the other and pulled him aside, having heard what the erstwhile independent has been running around saying about the Democratic nominees and supporting Republican 100-year-warrior McCain.

Joe, of course, is the two-faced politician who ran halfheatedly with Gore a few years back, but recently has been hanging out with GOP while caucusing with Democrats to main some sembalance of power in the Senate.

He's also endorsed McCain, raising the possibility of a Zell Miller-like diatribite again the party's candidate, since Joe seems to think opposing ill-planned wars in Iraq means you support I'm-a-dinner-jacket and a new holocaust.

Man, I would have loved to hear that talk:

Obama: Hey Joe, got a sec?

Joe: well, um, not really I have an interview planned with fox news about your.. well, I mean

Obama: Over here Joe. Now.

To which they proceed to a quiet corner while Joe -- shaking with the fear of an old white guy faced with a young black man -- fidgets nervously.

Joe: OK, no one can hear. You can yell. I know you're not happy. But understand, liberals won't give me money any more. I have to court cons.

Obama: Oh, I'm not going to yell.

Joe: Then what?

Obama: Simple. Come November, we're going to hang GW Bush's legacy from the rafters with this tragic, ill-run war. We're going to hang McCain right beside it. Watch your step or you'll be hanging up there, too.
We're taking the White House. We'll have a much bigger margin in the Senate. The GOP will have rent space if it wants a place on Capitol Hill. You get that?

Joe: Well, um, I am an independent, not a Republican.

Obama: Right. And come next year, we won't need you to hold a majority. Majority leadress Clinton may hang with you now, but she plays the power gain. When you're irrelevant, she won't even have a junior aide return your calls. Your committee seats, your caucus seats. Gone. So if you aren't careful, there's an office on the senate subway deep underground with 'independent' and your name on it.

Joe: Well then, I might just switch to the GOP, then.

Obama: Yea? You think your state's democrats will help you then? Do you think your GOP buddies will help you when they're barely hanging on.

Joe: Well um, OK.

Obama: OK what?

Joe: OK... sir.

---

read about it here: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/06/obama-confronts.html

It's official: hopeful change vs. grumpy mcsame

first off, poor Hillary Clinton. The sad spectacle of failing to step aside with grace after Obama's clear win, while trying to win a spot as his vice president, just shows how desperate she is to rescue the tarnished clinton legacy.

I can only assume she's convinced she has to leverage such a bid at risk to the party and the country, because otherwise, she's not going to get it. And she shouldn't. She's an amazing woman and a tough campaigner -- but no presidential candidate would saddle themselves with a vice presidential spouse so desperate for the spotlight.

That said, the speeches last night made the race quite clear. McCain proclaims change, but he's voted with Bush 95% of the time, and he's reversed himself on the difference that counted most. He opposed the Bush tax cuts as budget busters too weighted to the rich; he was right. Now he wants to extend them.

And after three decades in Congress, during which the country built up a huge pile of debt, he can hardly portray himself as an agent of change. He's either been part of the problem or ineffectual at solving problems.

And really, he comes across as Bob Dole in 1996. He got the bid because the other GOPers lost, and he deserves it, and if you don't like it, screw you. He's too old and too tired to try to court voters.

Sure, I wish Obama had a couple more terms in Congress than he does. But if we waited for two terms under McBush, he'd also have any more problems to solve.