SocraticGadfly: McCain (John)
Showing posts with label McCain (John). Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCain (John). Show all posts

December 29, 2018

Top blog posting of 2018 —
A year heavy on refuting conspiracy theories

Below are a few of my top 10, by volume, blog posts of 2018, with a bit of summary and a final wrap at the end.

They're all at least somewhat related to conspiracy thinking, which bloomed in profusion this year, as much as rapid-response tweeting on various issues from President Trump.

Speaking of ...

This summer, I called out Marcy Wheeler, aka Emptywheel, along with other Kossack alumni Dead-End Kids, for her absolutist claims backed by less than absolutist evidence that Donald Trump conspired with Vladimir Putin to get Trump elected.

A month later, I called out the presumably non-existent Forensicator, along with Tim Leonard/Adam Carter and anybody else invested in his likely creation, such as Disobedient Media, as well as people involved with propagating his claims that Guccifer 2.0 was NOT a Russian intelligence asset — such call-outs including Bill Binney, Ray McGovern and other members of the majority faction of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity and Patrick Lawrence for his credulous reporting, all of this indulged in detail at Consortium News. I also called out much of this consortium, abetted by the likes of ShirtLost DumbShit Zach Haller, for being the likely originator of Seth Rich conspiracy theories. (That said, Consortium News is a mare's nest of conspiracy thinking.)

Speaking of Seth Rich conspiracy theories, back in February, I called out idiot lawyer Jared Beck and his DNC fraud lawsuit filing, which sounds like it was written with a crayon.

Starting in February, and compiling more evidence throughout the year, I called out Beto O'Rourke for being a Fauxgressive ConservaDem.

When Schmuck Talk Express John McCain died, I called out Beltway media stenographers, bipartisan foreign policy think tanks and the like for failing to tell the truth about a person who was an Islamophobe and a warmonger, among other things.

Fortified by that, later I called out the Beltway stenos and allies for similar hagiography when Iran-Contra and October Surprise co-conspirator Poppy Bush died.

All call-outs, right?

With that pattern, I invite you to read my 2015 post on practicing philosophical Neo-Cynicism, my update on Diogenes' original Cynicism, and rejecting the conventional wisdom — and not just in politics — of the chattering classes.

December 24, 2018

Ocasio-Cortez has another unforced error:
This time, she botches government shutdown info

Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez, red rose Congressional queen of the House of Lancaster, I mean, the Democratic Socialists of America, has had several unforced errors since beating Joe Crowley to essentially win election to her 14th Congressional District.

First and most notable for people like me who bat outside the duopoly on foreign as well as domestic policy, was her retreat from words of support for BDS.

Second and related was her gushing over the Schmuck Talk Express™,  John McCain, when he died.

Well, now, she's shown that she should tweet less, research more, including knowing some basic constitutional facts, on the government shutdown.

AOC has a set of tweets that The Hill "reported" into a story, and oh, there's so much wrong.

First, she says Congresscritters should have salary cut off, after decrying partisan nature of shutdown (yet being already bipartisan enough to not call out Freedom Fries Caucus head Jim Jordan by name).

Second, she ignores a problem (which The Hill itself gets wrong as to the "why"). You can't cut Congressional salaries.

That relates to her not even mentioning the president's salary during the shutdown. Which, yes, also falls under the same rubric as that of Congresscritters, which The Hill got wrong.

It's not just illegal, which The Hill claims; it is unconstitutional, which is an entirely different kettle of fish. Explicitly so with the president. And for good reason. Although the president wound up much stronger than most members of Team Philadelphia 1787 not named Hamilton intended, the founders didn't want Congress forcing a president to their will by hacking his pay. (Of course, they objected when George III tried to insulate colonial governors from colonial legislative control, so, and far from the only time in America's founding, hypocrisy was at play.)

As for Congress, per the same link, in the current Congress, it's illegal to cut their pay, explicitly, by the 27th Amendment, which The Hill also gets wrong. When the new Congress starts, AOC could push a bill on the first day of the session that they don't get paid until the shutdown ends. She could also ask for it to be part of the standing rules in House and Senate. If I am engaging in correct constitutional interpretation, that could pass muster. But, short of an amendment, she still can't do anything about the president's salary.

Finally, if we're going to criticize Beltway stenos for "reporting" on Trump's tweets, should we not hold the stenos to the same standard re Ocasio-Cortez? I say yes. That piece had no actual reporting and was inaccurate. I've already Tweeted to the particular Beltway steno who "reported" this, specifically on the error, and got no response.

Update, Feb. 20, 2018: She's had other unforced errors, like throwing Rep. Omar halfway under the bus on Israel-Palestine issues.

December 05, 2018

American exceptionalism and presidential mourning

That's what's behind this picture at the George H.W. Bush funeral.



And, the mainstream media, insisting it is part of this ruling class as the Fourth Estate, insists we mourn. Because without such mourning, especially when based on the mythos of American exceptionalism, both that mythos and the American empire associated with it are hard to maintain.

So, with both George H.W. Bush and John McCain, the Fifth Estate insists we mourn — for the mythos of these individuals to prop up the mythos of American exceptionalism and American imperium.

Of course, there are exceptions. The media exceptions are usually from the left, with the exception of a few paleoconservative and libertarian sites that will object to the foreign policy of the likes of Poppy Bush and the Schmuck Talk Express.

What needs to be mourned, instead, is the tenacity of this mythos, and the tenacity of the subservience to it of the 99 percent of American media.

September 01, 2018

John McCain, de-hagiographied on Twitter

Now that the embalmed carcass of John McCain, the Schmuck Talk Express, is most of the way through a posthumous Roman triumph that would have made Marius, Julius Caesar and Pompey blush, with #TheResistance participating fiercely in what one non-member Twitterer called nothing more than a subtweet to Trump, let us indeed turn to Twitter to remember our Wrecker of Airplanes, Monger of Wars, Bomber of Civilians, Hater of Gays in Wedlock (despite his own lack of marital sanctity), Racist toward Middle Easterners and various other things.

First, though, let me remind that #TheResistance team of one thing — that John McCain earned indeed every one of those titles. And yet, in my friends of friends circles and observations, has been Twitter-deified more than anybody since ActualFlatticus.

And with that, off to Twitter! In no particular order, but mainly focused on the DC divinizing demagoguery, here we go, while noting I have a related poll, in case it doesn't embed:

Second, and having Tweeted along these lines more than once, the inside-the-Beltway stenos are responsible for much of this:
Speaking of, this is probably being eyed as a gravy train by said stenos, #TheResistance, or both:
And, let's throw a particular member of said group under the bus. I've seen her retweeted a lot. Especially after actually looking through her feed, gad she's overrated:
It's disgusting enough #TheResistance is turd-polishing John Sidney McCain III. Even worse is the butt-kissing of George Shrub Bush. The necromancing of the Prince of the Living Undead, though, by #TheResistance is simply beyond the pale:
Of course, some members of that team have been long-time professional Democrats:
That said, shouldn't John Sidney prove, at least to his heiress widow Cindy, that he is in fact now divine, ruling with the other Caesars?
Don't forget that the DC hagiography had a warm-up act back in Phoenix.

I didn't forget on Twitter, after all, using the chance to throw others under the bus. Like JoePa Biden:
And Westboro Baptist Church:
And, yes, that is throwing them under the bus, for apparently being too chicken to extend their level of tasteless out here. After all, Sidney did eventually mellow enough on his anti-gay marriage stance that he should have been a target.

Even before the funeral, of course, the Schmuck Talk Express was lauded as a human rights advocate. Setting aside all the ways I listed up top that he was not a human rights advocate within the US of A, let's look elsewhere.

Like India:
Famous literati needed to be reminded of this, of course:
And lover of the human rights of Ukrainian neo-Nazis he was pictured with:
And remembering further his valiant support for domestic human rights:
In which Dear Leader, #TheResistance popular vote president emeritus, ultimately joined:
And with that, let's just tack back to throwing #TheResistance further underneath the wheels of the Schmuck Talk Express:
And here, via retweet, as I had nothing to add:
And back to the Beltway stenos for good measure:
Had enough? Well, you should be sick of #TheResistance and #TheBeltwayStenos, not me. Besides, I didn't even mention Meghan McCain or Sarah Palin, among others.

If you haven't had enough, follow my blog, follow me on Twitter, or both.

August 25, 2018

RIP John McCain


John McCain first freely exercised his great American democracy freedom at birth, when he freely chose to be born the son and grandson of US Navy admirals.

John McCain later chose his freedom to prove he was not a copycat clone of his father and grandfather as a military man by freelywrecking multiple US Navy aircraft. Part of exercising that freedom was not learning how to fly better as the son and grandson of admirals, knowing that he didn’t have to fly better, and take "fly better," "fly straight," and "fly right" however you want.

As for his serving his country, the flyboy playboy freely chose to stay in the military, as he didn't have the courage to leave before he got shot down, even though he didn't want to stay in. Resign your commission.

John McCain later exercised his democratic freedom by freely choosing to leave Hanoi, North Vietnam ahead of his Navy comrades, despite being the son and grandson of admirals.

John McCain then exercised his great American freedom to choose his personal life as a heterosexual straight male by freely divorcing his wife.

John McCain continued to exercise this freedom throughout an illustrious democratic Congressional career.

He freely chose to accept money from Charles Keating under the notion it would increase his freedom.

He used his freedom to freely support lies in the name of Greater Democracy as it sought to destroy people resisting its bounteous good, even at the point of war.

He used his freedom to freely support leaving the heartbroken country of Georgia at the altar of NATO bridehood after promising he would respect its democratic valor against the Great Satan of Russia.

He then, in 2008, used his freedom to engage in tokenist faux-feminism by naming Sarah Palin his vice-presidential candidate.

After that, he unselfishly loved Ukrainian neo-Nazis.

He finally accepted the Normalization Freedom Prize from Fred Hiatt for services above and beyond the call of duty.

Fortunately, I had accumulated notes on a Word document for a few months for most the material above.

But, many members of #TheResistance will say, but he was such a decent man. 

Bullshit.

Beyond all the above, he supported government shutdowns, supported not voting on an Obama Supreme Court nominee and other things. The Straight Talk Express of the 2000 campaign was a schtick; already then, he was the Schmuck Talk Express™ and looked "straight" only because he was running against Shrub Bush.

Don't forget that in 2008, he didn't want to deal with the financial crisis. And, he said we should never talk diplomatically with countries that are alleged terrorist supporters. He never would have negotiated Obama's Iran deal. Nor would he, despite his famous visit to Vietnam, have been likely to loosen things up with Cuba.

And, no, he was NOT the "maverick of the Senate." I don't think the Senate has had a real maverick since Wayne Morse. Hell, the Arizona Republic, in its news obit, said, re his Senate time, that he "never was an outsider."

Some people might point to the McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation as an example of something good that he did. Yeah, but ... did McCain ever utter a word against Citizens United after it gutted what the Supreme Court hadn't previously directly gutted?

Bottom line is that, above all else, McCain was a warmonger. Never forget.

As for his cancer, he didn't vote to save Obamacare; he just voted to delay its execution to try to do it in a more orderly fashion. He never uttered a peep as Trump undercut parts of it (and showed why we need a single-payer system).

Also, let's not forget that he was not enlightened on racial issues. Contra one centrist type on Twitter, if he DID evolve, he evolved from a LOW starting point. And, any evolution was very late, given he was making racist comments just five years ago. (Add in his part in the ACORN scandal, and finding out that Obama could be pushed around on this.) Putting him in the same breath on this as Abraham Lincoln is Grade-A horseshit.

Otherwise, look at his stances on other issues, per Wiki. Patriot Act supporter. Snooping on America supporter. Gun nut. Opposed most gay rights. War on Drugs cold warrior. He did support immigration rights, but, as part of a lever of not making many jobs that immigrants take both safer and better-paying for American citizens.

As for McCain's media fellators, the inside-the-Beltway stenos who have now made themselves even less trustworthy than before? If you didn't write your dreck, people like me might not write this.

And, I tackled the whole McCain funeral deification with a stream of tweets, put into a blog post here.

Update: The Schmuck Talk also had a hand in spreading elements of the Steele dossier. New releases from a lawsuit against Buzzfeed over the dossier, which make clear this was a bipartisan Never Trumper effect, are here.

==

Per DeSmog Blog, as for "service to his country," his attempt to pass a climate bill nearly 20 years ago was of more service than bombing Vietnam or mongering other wars.

December 02, 2017

A few quick notes on the #TrumpTaxScam
and the #resistance

First, it's really, of course, a GOP Tax Scam. That said, I doubt they'd try it with Shrub Bush in office. I know they wouldn't with Poppy Bush and probably not with Reagan.

Of course, while Reagan was already trying to whittle away at America's safety net, it was around the edges, and he probably wouldn't have asked for that much with this Congress.

But, when the executive branch is led by an infant, with his on-the-ground Veep pandering to the worst of the Religious Right, the children are going to play in Congress, too.

And, the children got elected after Obama got elected.

I blame, for that:
1. Shrub, Poppy, and consiglieres of both for not calling out Tea Party Congressional candidates, or the entire movement, quickly.
2. Dear Leader for continuing to try to sing "Kumbaya" with them after more and more of them got elected to Congress specifically in backlash to him, and often in race-driven backlash.
2A. Preznit Kumbaya a second time for gutting the Democratic National Committee and doing nothing to help Democratic congressional candidates in 2010.
3. The few alleged GOP adults already in Congress.

Speaking of, vag-hat-wearing #Resistance folks, how do you feel now about your "normalizing" of both Schmuck Talk Express John McCain and Jeff Flake in the past few weeks?

Your "movement" is as thin as baby oatmeal with both of them, with Shrub Bush aforementioned, and others.

It's also as thin as oatmeal for those of you who rightly reject much of what Hillary Clinton stood for but still uncritically accept Obama. He rightfully earned the Dear Leader moniker for reasons like this.

I'll confess that I had some hope McCain would vote no, based on his Obamacare repeal stance. That said, this just proves again that he can be almost as much a weathervane as Trump himself at times.

March 02, 2015

Meet the gravediggers of Russian democracy

With the death of Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov, it's pretty clear that Russia is a non-democratic state, de facto.

So, who killed Russian democracy?

Vladimir Putin is, if anything, only a final cause.

The real gravediggers are six.

And, they are two Russians, and four Americans.

The Russian I propose is Boris Yeltsin, and the three Americans are George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Sachs, a single name to represent the neoliberals who got Yeltsin to "burn down" Russia.

Poppy Bush first refused to see Yeltsin as an alternative to Gorbachev, perhaps setting him up for future sensitivity to would-be slights. He then, despite earlier pledges not to do so, became somewhat triumphalist over the end of the Cold War. Even worse, although German Chancellor Helmut Kohl put a big crowbar in the Federal Republic's wallet to ease the financial shock of East Germany being reincorporated into the West, Bush refused to offer significant aid to Gorbachev.

As a result, he lost credibility at home, and thus the coup. When it failed, Yeltsin, still not well-appraised by the West in general, became "the option."

That's even though it was clear that another Russian — vodka — was clearly in charge of Boris Yeltsin.

That alcoholism is why Yeltsin rapidly cycled through would-be political heirs, especially after Sachs et al convinced him to burn down Russia. Nemtsov was the second-last of those heirs, before Putin.

Bush was wrong in encouraging Sachs et al to do a neoliberal sell-off of Russia, and Clinton was wrong in encouraging it to continue.

Then, there's Yeltsin vs. "what are the options," namely leading up to the 1996 elections.

The "leader principle" probably seemed to Clinton to be the best that Russia could do. Was he right?

First, he was wrong to not "nudge" Yeltsin to settle on one good choice.

Second, he was wrong to not have other people, whether instead of, or in addition to, the Sachses of the world, working on improving Russian democratic and electoral structures.

Third, he was wrong to not consult more with Yeltsin on the Balkans War. Even if we eventually ignored Yeltsin's ideas, not talking to him more, especially as we expanded NATO eastward, which made Russia feel more isolated, and  fueled strong nationalistic sentiments inside Russia.

The fourth American?

John McCain. He was right to see "KGB" inside Putin's eyeballs. He, and others, were even more wrong than the first round of NATO expansion, when they wanted to expand at least affiliate membership to countries like Georgia and Ukraine. The result is that Georgia's already gotten its war at Russia's hands, and Ukraine is getting it now.

In both cases, affiliate membership offered little, yet was almost as stupid as full membership. Plus, NATO now looks like its words won't ever be backed with actions. And, Putin and other ultranationalists had their triumphalist lust fed in Georgia, and want it fed again now.

And the second Russian? Symbol of nationalist intellgentsia even as he was dying, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn gave Putin the intellectual blessing to pursue a neo-Tsarist past to a new, strong, nationalistic Russia. His sentiments about Ukraine, his totally wrong claims that it was never a separate country (Kievan Rus, the first "Russian" state, that introduced Christianity to Russia

Putin as the final cause? Yeltsin's alcoholic erraticness may have led him to settle on somebody worse, if he'd lived another year. That said, once tabbed, Putin wormed himself totally into Yeltsin's life, both personal and political.

But, otherwise, the others are the real gravediggers, and the real pallbearers.

Of these people, Yeltsin died dead and drunk. Solzhenitsyn died dead and unapologetic. Sachs was later partially apologetic; none of the three American politicians ever have been.

To put it another way, other than a bit of euthanizing help, Putin didn't kill Russian democracy. He's just the greedy heir rewriting the will to make sure he's the only real beneficiary of its demise.

August 21, 2014

Obama and war hawks on #ISIS vs reality-based Democrats

In light of the brutal murder of James Foley by the Islamic State in Iraq (portions of) and Syria (the semi-failed state of), US President Barack Obama is now hinting at upping involvement in Iraq.

A bit more detail here; the administration is saying troops are a possibility. "Under 300" sounds not too bad, right? But, in reality, it sounds like the "drip, drip, drip" of how we sent more and more to Vietnam.

And pressure to keep escalating that drip, drip, drip is certainly possible. It's very possible when you've got warhawk nuts like Sen. John McCain (R-Airplane Crashes) egging you on, along with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-I Might Be Gay).

Fortunately, at least one House Democrat, and one with a bit of say-so in matters, is saying "hold on":
“We shouldn’t allow this horrible act to provoke us into doing things that are counterproductive,” said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, on CNN’s "New Day." “There’s nothing ISIS would like more than having us reintroduce ground troops into Iraq, for example.”
 He said the U.S. “had to know that when we get involved with airstrikes, that ISIS is going to strike back at us in any way they can.”

Couldn't have said it better myself.

As for the ISIS brutality level? We're just upset because they might cut off oil, and because we've officially labeled them terrorists. That's in contradistinction to our ally in the War on Terra against Afghanstan, Islam Karimov, president of Uzbekhistan, who has boiled alive political opponents.

On the other hand, if you take Rick Perry seriously (and why?) ISIS has already crossed the border. As in the US border. Last I heard, Perry was sending the National Guard to the Travis County DA's office.

March 04, 2014

A few brief thoughts on Ukraine

First, the usual association of wingnuts is urging military action, including Fred Hiatt and the Washington Post editorial board, the same John McCain who wanted to egg us into the Georgia-vs-Russia war of a few years ago after egging Georgia on by stupidly hinting at NATO membership, and Dr. Death Warmed Over, Charles Krauthammer, who claims that Obama thinks global warming is a more serious issue. (Actually, in terms of actions, rather than talk, Dear Leader doesn't think it's that serious.)

So, will the last wingnut commentator to be faux-shocked, or rather Faux-shocked, over Obama not nuking Sebastopol please turn out what's left of the lights inside his or her head?

The reality is that the ruble and Russian stocks got pummeled Monday. Along with that, Russia's trade treaty partner, Kazakhstan, started sounding the alarm bells. If the financial pummeling continues, Putin will draw in his horns after the Crimean escapade and will butt out of Ukrainian regime change. Up to this point, his adventuresomeness has generally been rational.

Indeed, per a great Guardian piece, which tells Obama not to listen to the blather, this is ultimately Putin's Waterloo, if anybody's.

US financial incentives to Ukraine are so far not enough to provoke him further, but at the same time to indicate the US won't be totally idle.

Most of this will work out in the wash if Putin doesn't double down on dumb. If he does, there's little we can directly do, expect possibly covertly encourage protests inside Russia as its economy continues to tank.

Actually, there is one financial move we can take: Boot Russia from the G-8. However, European members, dependent on Russian gas, will be quite leery of that.

However, encouraged by American technology, and warned by American regulatory blind eyes, European nations could, and should, start fracking for natural gas in their own countries.

That said, this is another case where, like Syria, Dear Leader was dumb enough to draw a bright line. Apparently, he doesn't get that his mellifluous dulcet tones aren't recognized as such in large swathes of the world abroad as well as domestically.

Update: Peter Beinart reinforces the idea that there's been no US "retreat." He also, along with other smart-minded people, says we can't support an anti-Russia Ukrainian government. That would, indeed, be a bridge too far.

November 21, 2013

Harry Reid trumps a 5-year Kumbaya chorus

I'm not a total fan of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. He can still be in the pocket of hardrock miners in Nevada too much, and I'm still not sure just how liberal he is on socioeconomic issues.

But, I know he's less of a neoliberal, or seems to be, than Preznit Kumbaya, aka Dear Leader, aka President Barack Obama. And, he's certainly not in any special love with any mythical mellifluousness of his voice. 

First, the end of the filibustering of district and circuit court nominees was needed, period. Republicans, who talk about the poor as thieving criminals, were stealing not just one and a half loaves, but 3 or 4 loaves compared to the agreement to take the possible "nuclear option" off the table in Shrub Bush's presidency.

Second, anything that makes John McCain whine, exposes his hypocrisy, and catches his tail in a vice halfway between hardcore conservative and true nutbar is fine by me.

Let's read the Schmuck Talk Express™:
"They're governed by the newer members... who have never been in a minority, who are primarily driving this issue," McCain told reporters after the vote. "They succeeded and they will pay a very, very heavy price for it."
Really? Harry Reid's been around as long as you have, John.

See, what this is, is what psychologists call "projection." Here's what McCain was actually saying:
"(House Republicans are) governed by the newer members... who have never been in a minority, who are primarily driving this issue," McCain told reporters after the vote. "They succeeded (in the government shutdown) and they will pay a very, very heavy price for it."
Glad I could translate, Schmuck Talk.

Third, the Senate GOP had become the party of obstruction and obstruction, with young turks there finding a willing ally in Yertle the Turtle, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Reid pointed that out shortly before the denouement:
On the Senate floor Thursday morning, Reid pointed out that half of the 168 filibusters of executive and judicial nominees in American history have come during the Obama Administration. "These nominees deserve at least an up-or-down vote," Reid said. "But Republican filibusters deny them a fair vote and deny the president his team.
Half. Period. End of story.

The Atlantic notes that Reid and McConnell don't really like each other, but both have been in the Senate long enough to try patchwork fixes. But, McConnell either couldn't or wouldn't do more.

And, that's important related to this. McConnell has long crowed about his knowledge of Senate parliamentary procedure arcana, and Reid just trumped him. My take is Yertle wouldn't do more, rather

Fourth, we know Reid squeezed Vice President Joe Biden out of the picture on government shutdown talks earlier this fall. Per my Photoshopped caption, he just put Dear Leader on notice, I think, that he will play the same hardball tactics, or worse, come next year. Reid finally decided, in the Chicago language and mannerisms that Obama is allegedly supposed to understand and practice, that it was time to bring a gun to a gunfight. McCain, in negotiations, brought an inadequate counteroffer, or a water pistol, if you will.

As for long-term ramifications? Well, the GOP needs to do more work on getting its Ted Cruzes and other knucklewalkers in line. Because, if the inside-the-Beltway take is correct on how this will make the GOP madder, I think Reid is ready to fire back.

Maybe Harry can even dissuade Dear Leader from chained CPI for entitlements and other nuttery of his Catfood Commission.

Or, I hope, get the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to find people to "primary" Carl Levin, Joe Manchin, and Mark Pryor.

July 16, 2013

Jon Chait, filibuster, #Obamiacs and the reality-based community?

Remember when Democrats, riffing on Karl Rove and his minions, said they were the "reality-based community"?

Well, top Obamiac fellator Jon Chait once again proves that's not true.

His latest malfeasance? Crowing over the deal in the Senate where Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell agreed that the Senate GOP would stop filibustering a pack of Obama nominees in exchange for the Senate not doing a "nuclear option" and entirely killing the filibuster.

Here's his first teh wrong:
Democrats had proposed to change the Senate’s rules to prevent filibusters on executive branch nominations (but not to ban filibusters of legislation or judicial nominees). They’ve won.
Nope. No win. Obama still has multiple DC Circuit Court nominees in limbo. And Reid couldn't even get an agreement to force an actual Wendy Davis-style filibuster.

Then there's this:
Republicans got one face-saving concession: Democrats have to pick new names for the NLRB. This became an issue because Obama tried to execute an end-run around Congress by appointing them to their positions when Congress was functionally, though not technically, in recess, and was struck down by the Republican-controlled D.C. circuit court. 
As at least one labor group makes clear, this isn't a "face-saving concession." Instead, the Turtle had ramped up the whole idea of the "not in recess" recess precisely for this reason. Instead, this is a clear cave for Dear Leader.

Of course, even that's not the stupidist Jon Chait-ism. This is:
The deal was brokered by John McCain, who undercut McConnell and is fully emerging, yet again, as his old centrist self.
Wow, McCain a "centrist." Only in Jon Chait's Obama Happy Meal world.

John McCain a fucking centrist. Now I've heard it all.

Once again, IOKIYAO to spout this bullshit.

It's this same Beltway-based (yes, he's in NYC, I know) mentality of politics as chess game, and Dear Leader allegedly being the master of 11-dimensional chess (NOT) that I loathe. It's the same thinking that led Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas to put personalities, followed by personal victories, over policy victories.

November 17, 2009

McCain aide: Palin book 'fiction'

And, Nicolle Wallace said this as part of a TV interview, even though Schmuck Talk Express himself has asked his campaign staff not to do that. The long knives are out for Palin.

October 04, 2009

Gen. Jones tells McCain to stop lying

What, the Schmuck Talk Express™ is lying? Retired Marine Gen. James Jones says, absolutely, he is, in claiming Jones’ advice to President Barack Obama is driven by politics.

June 16, 2009

Twittering dotage of John McCain

I guess one advantage of Twitter is that stupidity, stereotypes, and half-baked foreign policy can only be uttered 140 words at a time, as Jake Tapper’s Twitter-view of John McCain attests.

Of course, the flip side is Jake Tapper’s suck-up-itis is confined to 140-word bursts, too.

March 13, 2009

February 19, 2009

Implied McCain paramour Iseman loses battle with NYT

Lobbyist Vicki Iseman, whom The New York Times may or may not have implied, a year ago, had an affair with John McCain (and the NYT can’t do anything about reader inferences as to what it did or did not imply, or intend to imply) has a pennies-on-the-dollar settlement with the newspaper (not literally, in terms of money), which primarily consists of the paper publishing an online column written by her attorneys, and an NYT “note to readers” in Friday’s print edition.

Given that the NYT didn’t have to give Iseman any money (other that, possibly, lawyers’ fees; that’s unclear), my parsing of the original article, above the first link, should sum up this issue.

I think it’s clear the newspaper won this baby. It just, in today’s newspaper fiscal world, didn’t want to spend any more money on attorneys.

As a newspaper editor myself, if I ever were in a similar situation, I KNOW I would feel like I had won.

Take, for example, the stipulated verbal announcement language of the settlement.

The NYT never outrightly said Iseman/McCain had an affair in the first place. So, it's definitely no skin to stipulate that. As for the "imply," well, the NYT can't do a thing about what readers inferred it implied. The settlement language not mentioning that shows how tissue-thin it is.. As for the “intent” issue, the question of Iseman being a “public person” or not is irrelevant. It’s tough to prove intent, period, in a civil case, without a big smoking gun. Especially, since the NYT “note to readers” says it did not “intend to conclude” (emphasis added) a relationship existed.

In short, the NYT did not withdraw a single word of the original story, and did not offer an apology on behalf of its readers’ inferences about any NYT intent.

In fact, it’s arguable Iseman lost, by having such a weak settlement rather than withdrawing the suit entirely. Now, she and her lawyers have brought new attention to herself and the story.

If Ben Smith thinks she won it shows how much of an idiot he is.

November 24, 2008

Show me the Trig Palin birth certificate

Beyond Trig Palin birth certificate, new troubles for Sarah Palin:

My overall summary is that Sarah is Trig's mom. But, that Todd Palin is not necessarily Trig's father. (And, per Joe McGinness, yes, Palin having an affair that resulted in pregnancy would surprise me not one bit.) That is why she couldn't risk giving birth in Texas, or even in Anchorage, if there's any way to "explain" her rushed flight back home where her water broke. And, yes, First Dude Todd was flying with her. And, he may have known he had been cuckolded. But he was First Dude, not some "fish packer from I'll Ask Ya," so what was he going to do at that point? File for divorce like now?

New update, Sept. 9, 2019: I posted this on Twitter after news of Sarah and Todd filing to get divorced, a potential divorce that was first rumored a decade ago. To be more clear on some things, I've done some strikethroughs on musings from the past, pre-2017 and well, pre-2011, that I had later rejected. Namely, that's most of what Andrew Sullivan, for whatever reasons, was claiming based on a non-source "source" who turned out to have low-level credibility.

Anyway, I still don't think Todd is Trig's dad. So, who is? Maybe Todd will tell, now that they're divorced? Could come out in child support issues, right? Speaking of, you can hit (or see after it's expired) this Twitter poll.

I do know that two years later, in the middle of ongoing controversy, Mat-Su Regional, Palin's hospital of birth, still had not made a birth certificate public, nor had Palin. I do know that SEVEN years later, in 2015, even as Palin doubled down on birtherism over Obama's birth certificate, she still refused to produce one for Trig.

Anyway, that's just another way in which Ms. Family Values, the Quitter with a Twitter, is a massive hypocrite. She earns every bit of kicking she gets.

Apologies for some links being dead. This was a decade ago; on this issue, I have personal reason to lament link rot.

One final note: Wingnut Robert Stacy McCain, the so-called "other McCain," said he knew who Audrey of Palin's Deception, really Anne Briggs was, and it played out. That was the final nail in the fake pregnancy coffin, though I was already moving away from it.

BUT ... the other Schmuck Talk Express refused to deal with the actual issues. And, I called him out by email yesterday, since he's been banned from Twitter not once but twice. That said, here's why he was banned from Twitter twice — a men's rights activist bigot attack dog and more.

Update and final wrap (before the special update), May 8, 2017: Please read all of my later writings about both Sarah Palin and Trig Palin, as well as the Palin's Deception blog. Stuff with strike-throughs is fake pregnancy stuff by "Audrey," aka Anne Briggs, that I've rejected.

Update, Aug 1, 2009: Is a rumored Sarah-Todd Palin separation or divorce connected to Trig Palin pregnancy and birth issues?

Update, July 3-6, 2009: Head here for my comments on Palin’s resignation announcement.

And, for further speculation on WHY she’s resigning, head here.

The REAL real reason for Palin’s resignation?

It’s all right here.

MSM political commentary doyenne Anne Applebaum goes a bit postal on Palin.

Douthat gets the resignation half right, especially on the political fallout, but not so much on the “poor, persecuted Palin” angle.

A big Washington Post “wrap” story has a few errors.

And, yet more strangeness from The Quitter with a Twitter.

Meanwhile, for the best refutation of the “Sarah is not Trigg’s mom” nuttery that I long-ago abandoned, held only by people who are cultists of the Palin’s Deception blog, visit Celtic Diva.

And, in "The Rogue," Joe McGinniss offers up a new "crazy like a wingnut" angle: Palin adopted Trig, knowing she was a Down's syndrome baby, so Sarah could be a poster child for the pro-life movement. She had to fly from Dallas back to Mat-Su Regional Hospital in such a hurry because the adoption finalized earlier than she expected. Hey, it's as believable as what Sarah claims.

New links back up the evidence McCain campaign op Steve Schmidt can't deny

Update Dec. 5: Sully refutes Michelle Malkin calling this tin-foil hat territory, and says he talked to how likely/unlikely Sarah Palin's story was. You know the answer, but, they were polite about their "unlikely" comments.

He also notes, as noted here months ago, that Mat-Su Regional has no record of Trig Palin being born there on the date in question. Period.

Beyond providing a birth certificate, or offering some logical explanation for why Palin hasn't, the real tin-foil hatters, the one for whom Ms. Sarah is the female Messiah, need to explain why the hospital where Trig Palin was allegedly born has no record of the event.

Update Nov. 24: Palin Deception shows that pics from Bristol's prom may be from a previously unmentioned possible fourth prom date and so do NOT prove she is not Trig's mom.

Update Nov. 12: Sully tells us why Palin still matters:
Forty-six percent of Americans voted for the possibility of this blank slate as president because she somehow echoed their own sense of religious or cultural "identity". Until we figure out how this happened, we will not be able to prevent it from happening again. And we have to find a way to prevent this from recurring.

Because of that, because he notes Palin still has “no self-awareness,” and because he says the MSM abdicated responsibility on Palin, he promises to “stay on the case.”

Update, Nov. 11: Palin Deception scrutinizes Mercedes Johnston's MySpace pix and concludes they were shot at Palin's house and not a birthing room in Mat-Su. Audrey says that, beyond that, they aren't really evidence for or against either Bristol or Sarah as Trig's mom; readers speculate a third possibility, that Mercedes is the mom via Sarah's son and Bristol's brother, Track, or that the baby was adopted from Mercedes and Levi's mom.

And, both Audrey and Sully point out that allegedly-pregnant (again?) Bristol should be at the eight-month mark; will we see anything at Mat-Su's website in a month? Two months? At all?

Update, Nov. 4:Andrew Sullivan has a strong narrative questioning Palin's medical nonchalance.

Boosted from comments: The Palin Deception, an excellent website created by a reported lifelong (until now) Republican.

It’s an excellent roundup of photos that largely refute the pregnancy claims, along with a variety of verbal red flags from interviews she did in the last months before somebody gave birth and more.

A Yahoo Geocities website is also serving as a clearing house on this issue.

Per this photo from the National Governors’ Association, when Palin (front row, second from left) would theoretically have been about seven months pregnant, she sure doesn’t look pregnant.

(For a high-res version, go to the National Association of Governors’ photo page scroll down about three-quarters of the way, and click the link.

First, if top McCain campaign op Steve Schmidt is publicly bitching about Trig Palin paternity questions to the point of breaking alleged off-the-record media conversations (and further damaging his boss’s free ride with the media in the process, this story has legs. Long legs.

Here’s more Schmidt bitching, via Howie Kurtz, where he complains the campaign is “under siege.”

Here’s Howie’s nutgraf, buried in the middle of webpage 2:
News organizations routinely ask questions about allegations in an attempt to determine their veracity, and Schmidt did not contend that they were publishing or broadcasting false information about Palin and her family.
So, Schmidt isn’t denying at least the possibility of truth behind the rumors, just trying to quash the questioning.

Politically speaking, as I note in my roundup of Day 4 of the Palin follies, Palin herself is gun-shy about this issue. But, since B.O. is running Post-Partisan Politics™, someone outside the Democratic establishment will have to keep pushing the political leverage of this issue.

Second, the biggest piece of empirical evidence so far on Trig’s date and place of birth, and therefore on his parentage, is evidence of absence, or absence of evidence. Here’s the webpage of Mat-Su Regional Medical Center births, for April 18, 2008. See who’s NOT listed? Oh, and in case something was wrong on the date? No births at all are shown for either April 17 or April 19.

This is 2008. If the state of Alaska doesn’t itself have electronic copies of birth certificates available as PDFs, it would take a Palin staffer about 2 minutes to make one.

And, in either case, 30 seconds to upload to the Palin campaign website.

We would take a look, assess the genuineness of what was purported to be the Trig Palin birth certificate and go from there.

It’s as simple as that, Gov. Palin. And John McCain. And Steve Schmidt.

Finally,
the “motive” question.

As I mentioned in my first post on this subject, I believe that Sarah Palin was trying to protect her Good Mommyhood Seal of Approval™ from the Religious Right, as much as protect her daughter’s image, if she is passing Trig off as her son when he’s not.

Also, I disagree with Josh Marshall’s contention that Schmidt is spinning this as political smokescreen to divert attention away from Troopergate and other areas of Palin incompetence or ethical shortcomings.

He may have latched onto it for that purpose, but it still has a life beyond that.

Beyond that, it’s a shorthand for how Palin’s camp, and McCain’s honchos, can’t provide straightforward information to the most simple of issues.

AND, if Bristol Palin’s pregnancy now is, indeed, her second child, that Good Mommyhood Seal of Approval™ is tarnishing.

Well, given that between Troopergate, in the investigation of which she now refuses to testify (PDF), her untruths about the “bridge to nowhere” and other reforming efforts she allegedly has pushed, and more, her image is now in tatters, if the Mommy Trig line is just another untruth, albeit one that more than any of her others, goes directly to character, it wouldn’t surprise me.

(More Palin staff Troopergate stonewalling here by Frank Bailey, Palin’s director of boards and commissions.)

And, that all said, if she has been telling and living a lie with Trig, I think she’d have nothing but to gain now by coming out with the truth before any more damage is done.

Finally, given Bob Novak’s Palin suck-up column, it’s clear that we’re not going to get any inside scoop on McCain’s mental processes in the Palin choice, as I e-mailed him to request yesterday.

Consider this the roundup for day 5 of the Palin follies.

November 05, 2008

The crystal ball for top Republicans says …

Just as Hillary Clinton’s Democratic primary campaign failure can be reduced to one event – deciding to campaign in Iowa – so McCain’s failure in the general election can largely be reduced to one event.

In this case, Sarah Palin was McCain’s Achilles heel.

And, it’s not just me; 59 percent of Americans, which has to include at least a few Republicans, find her a drag on the ticket.

I don’t think he ever totally got over the petulance he had at being told by Karl Rove that he couldn’t pick Joe Lieberman as his Veep. (And, some “maverick,” eh? If he really were a maverick, he would have told Rove and Steve Schmidt where to get off.)

Another turning point? McCain’s “the fundamentals of the economy are strong” line. But, I think he could have done more to overcome that without the Palin baggage.

That said, what’s ahead for McCain?

He’s a 72-year-old senator whose one signature piece of legislation was passed in the face of massive opposition from senators in his own party. And, for the next two years, he’ll be in a Senate with shrunken GOP membership and, on many issues, an inability to filibuster. On other issues, Harry Reid, assuming he stays as majority leader, is likely to call Republican filibuster bluffs.

If you thought McCain was in danger of melting down during this year’s election, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

He’s up for re-election in 2010, and there’s already plenty of speculation popular Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, who has shown she can stand up to the GOP, will run for his seat.

I actually hope he doesn’t retire in 2010; I’d like to see him get another beatdown.

Meanwhile, here’s what happens to some other top Republicans.

Sarah Palin? Well, her future has taken yet another twist in the last week or so, with Ted Stevens’ conviction followed by his re-election. Assuming his appeals fail and he finally gets the boot from the Senate, she has to be eyeing his seat.

If not? I expect she’ll face both a primary challenge and a three-way general election race for governor in 2010. That’s unless she decides to run for Lisa Murkowski’s Senate seat, in which case she’ll have her head handed back to her in a hat. She may try to run for president in 2012, in which case she’d better have a hat ready for her head again. After that, the Peter principle kicks in and she goes to Fox News.

Meanwhile, Newsweek delivers more of the goods on the horribleness of Campaign Barbie, from the Secret Service seeing her incitements raise the threat level against Obama to just what a clothes horse she really is.

Somehow, I don’t think her and First Dumbass Todd being seen as “Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast” helps her image unless Alaskans are even more down with political corruption and cynicism than say, Louisiana voters.

Mitt Romney? He’d like to bid to be the “kinder, gentler” Religious Right-focused candidate. But, especially if GOP bloodletting after this convention pushes the part further right, there’s no chance of that. Beyond general reasons, his Mormonism will remain unacceptable to many. On the flip side, the way Mormon money pushed Prop. 8 over the top, he has to be looking at 2012.

Mike Huckabee? He could be the Religious Right front-runner, but I won’t say “should be”; he’ll have to keep himself in the public eye enough in the next four years.

Tim Pawlenty? If re-elected in 2010, he could be the “sensible conservative” alternative. Obama’s victory aside, governors still have many advantages over senators in running for the presidency. (Don’t forget that before Obama, the last Senator-cum-President, Jack Kennedy, had been in the Senate less than a decade.)

Mitch Daniels, re-elected in Indiana, is a possible up-and-comer. He raised taxes there despite protests from Grover Norquist and his ilk.

Rudy Giuliani? He’ll continue to get rich off 9/11 legends of his involvement. At the same time, he misses the game. I think he has to be tempted to run against Patterson for gov in 2010, but only if he has a pretty clear GOP field. With Mike Bloomberg apparently wanting another term as mayor of the Big Apple, one potential opponent is out of the way.

Mike Bloomberg? He’ll be the Hamlet of Gracie Mansion on another third-party bid.

Arnold Schwarzenegger? I’m really not sure. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t run for re-election. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did and lost. Or won. Or ran for the Senate in 2010 against Dianne Feinstein. She’s going to be 75-plus, and I don’t doubt age will be an issue. That all said, his “No on 8” stance has probably ended what remains of his love affair with the California GOP. I think he could win a primary for the Senate as easily as he could for his current spot, if not more so.

Charlie Crist? If the GOP bloodletting turns out not to make the party into a Constitution Religious Right party writ large, Crist has to be considered a front-runner for the nomination. His dignified, quiet distancing of himself from McCain’s more nutbar attacks on Obama, ACORN, etc., stand him in good stead.

The Republican Party? McCain’s loss will probably be interpreted through the lens of Prop. 8 success in California. That said, a pro-life issue in Colorado lost, so Religious Righters could push the GOP into further trouble if they insist their view is the correct one.

Meanwhile, let the infighting begin.

Outgoing National Republican Senatorial Conference Chairman John Ensign says the GOP needs a bigger social tent, while Grover Norquist and Tony Perkins are gathering a meeting of ’wingers tomorrow.


I think the choice to head the RNC in the future will be a “tell.”

LATER – some leading Democrats.

November 04, 2008

'Body' language at election parties

First, Obama is having a public party outdoors in Chicago, while McCain is having a private indoor party in balmy Arizona.

Plus, with McCain and Palin there together? Boy, wouldn't you like to be a fly on THAT wall!