The beautiful world of McCain (in song)

I was reading over McCain's famous quote about how he don't know much about economics. and it brought a song to my mind. Amazing how the lyrics to this oldie fits what McCain doesn't know much about:

Don't know much about history
(Sunni? Shia? That's why I bring Joe)
Don't know much biology
(I support abstinence-only education, though the facts say it doesn't work.)
Don't know much about a science book
(Intelligent-design creationism should be taught in schools.)
Don't know much about the french I took
(According to Gallup, John McCain is less popular in France than perennial fascist candidate Jean-Marie LePen.)

But I do know that one and one is two
(and I'm a PO-double-you)
What a wonderful world this would be
(If you just stop complaining. As my man Phil Gramn, said, "We have sort of become a nation of whiners.")

Don't know much about geography
("I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border." The countries do not share s border; oops.)
Don't know much trigonometry
(The Congressional Budget Office projects a deficit of $443 billion in 2013 if President Bush's tax cuts are extended, as Mr. McCain wants.)
Don't know much about algebra
(When was the last time you pumped your own gas and how much did it cost? "I don’t recall and frankly, I don’t see how it matters.")
Don't know what a slide rule is for
(except maybe figuring out how many homes one has.)

But I do know that one and one is two
(and I'm a PO-double-you)
What a wonderful world this would be
(as long as we stay in Iraq 100 years)

Now I don't claim to be an "A" student
("The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should.")
But I'm trying to be
("I've got Greenspan's book.")
So maybe by being an "A" student baby
(but not a Harvard elitist, mind you.)
I can win your love for me

But I do know that one and one is two
(but I was wrong about the tax cuts, too,)
What a wonderful world this would be

McCain flap is reverse sexism

So I feel a need to speak out on a yet-unexpressed part of the flap over John McCain not knowing how many houses he owns.

(A problem that plagues many of us working class folks. I mean, I know I have two or three houses my wife doesn't know about, and I figure she does, too. Until the wills kick in, we'll never know. And it's hard to tell the condo in Malibu from the ones on Maui or St. Croix, since they're all on Ocean Drives.)

But really, we don't expect Giuliani's former mistress to know about his finances, even now that she's his wife. Spitzer pulled down a big salary, and I'll bet his girl toy didn't know more about him that his hotel room number.

And face it, rich guys have been marrying poorer women for years, and we never expect them to know much more than how to find their way back to one home. That's the definition of traditional marriage.

McCain's marriage is untraditional. Cindy makes the real money, pays the housing and airfare bills, and pretty much wears the pants. John McCain was the catch who dumped his old lady to take up with the richer prospect.

He's a kept man.

So yea, he's a senator, a part-time job which apparently take very little of his time. He didn't even show up to vote down the bill he opposed for more veterans' benefits. He's like the little lady who takes a part-time job at the boutique to keep herself busy.

We wouldn't expect her to know her family finances. To expect John McCain to know his is reverse discrimination. Or at least, a clear bias for kept men over kept women.

What McCain really believes

I've been traveling a lot and haven't posted, but I have been watching the presidential race closely. Or at least, half of it.

See, whatever I turn on -- including Fox News and right-wing talk radio -- I hear a great deal of what Obama says and believes, and who and what he might be.

I hear very little praise of McCain, even in the most Republican of places.

And McCain's most recent ad focuses on how so many people show up for Obama, why that is, and whether Obama is qualified. But there's nothing about why McCain is.

Of course, given the number of times he's changed positions, it's probably hard for McCain to take a stand for anything.

But if he wants to be president, it seems to me he should tell us something about himself besides the fact he approves of this or that attack ad.

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.