krocklin

Except they say 50% of West Virginia voters - or at least the vast majority that voted for HIllary - thought Obama was a Muslim.
Doesn't say much about how "tuned in" they were. posted 05/18/2008 at 11:09:27

As long as there is belief in the military, in Washington and among the electorate that America can maintain credibility while maintaining a military presence all over the world and intermittently engaging in wars, there is going to be blowback. McCain represents this misguided view and will be disabused. posted 05/18/2008 at 11:05:45

Before we praise Mathews any more, let's remember what he said on his program just yesterday.

"The Republicans strength is still on national security. This is the only area in which they have an advantage."

After 7.5 years of a foreign policy that has just made us weaker and Al Queda and Iran stronger? What "advantage" do they have? Is their judgement wiser, their leaders braver and more effective?

And then when a politician is outspoken and tells the truth, Mathews is the first one to defend the orthodoxy and denounce the truth tellers - until it becomes more widely known what the truth is.

That's the difference between him and Olbermann. If he were consistent he would have denounced almost everything Olbermann has been saying for years, because it was not acceptable on the D.C. cocktail circuit. Now that it is, Mathews is also a "truth teller" all of a sudden.

Except that he will still readily denounce any courageous remark made by anyone about Republican policy.

Also, he smacked down Ed Schultz yesterday for saying "Bush is an idiot". At the same time denouncing Republicans for doubting the patriotism of their critics for years - those Republicans who still can't refrain from labelling their critics as unpatriotic, Hamas and terrorist supporters, don't want to win in Iraq etc.

Ed should have defended himself and said the Republicans have said much worse for years thanks to people in the media like Mathews who tolerated it until now. posted 05/17/2008 at 07:09:10

It is clear what the only strategy McCain will have. This is all he has:
1) There hasn't been a terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11.
2) Reverend Wright (through proxies).

And on the economic front, talking points just as vacuous as the above:

1) Inflation is under control (a lie)
2) Unemployment is still low
3) We have the best healthcare system in the world thanks to the "free market"

If this convinces the electorate, then they deserve him. posted 05/15/2008 at 10:32:47

Keith Olbermann is a national treasure. He is the ONLY one in the mass media who has not allowed his voice to be quieted.
If he is shrill it is to compensate for the lack of spine in the rest of the media.
At least we have now arrived at the point where we can hear "war crimes" on the air. Let's see how far this goes eventually. Maybe some day......
But until prosecution for same becomes a reality - perhaps at the Hague - and Rove is in jail for the Siegleman affair and other matters - more miscreants will arise to stain the fabric of the nation.
And until the stupidity of the public remains at it's current crisis level, it will embolden morally bankrupt politicians like McCain and Bush to make fearmongering statements like these. posted 05/15/2008 at 10:06:52

Yeah singing "bomb iran, bomb iran" to the tune of a Beach Boys song reveals a merry old guy. Yee haw!!!! And Bush joked about not finding weapons of mass destruction. posted 05/08/2008 at 10:54:39

Yeah singing "bomb iran, bomb iran" to the tune of a Beach Boys song reveals a merry old guy. Yee haw!!!! posted 05/08/2008 at 10:51:44

This is the kind of issue that is a losing one for Democrats.
Much of the public doesn't care if we abuse our "enemies".
In fact its a badge of toughness, like war itself, that appeals to a large swathe of the public.
Whenever there are humanitarian cries of injustice, or sensible obvious solutions proposed for clear problems, much of the public shuts them out as bleeding heart liberalism and it just consolidates support for Republicans.
Unfortunately that's the way it is. I can already hear the rightwing talk show hosts mocking any investigation that might go before congress. posted 05/06/2008 at 13:35:03

Finally there is a little light shining on the debacle that the mainstream media cynically pawns off on the public and tries to pass off as an examination of the candidates and their take on the issues.

The League of Women Voters used to host some of these debates, and in the format they would design no such tabloid questions would be permitted - and yet ABC gave us nothing but for almost the entire hour.

Indeed, it's as if Sean Hannity or Fox News were feeding in the questions. posted 04/17/2008 at 12:40:39

McCain claims to be a "Teddy Roosevelt" Republican.
Nowhere is his hypocrisy brought into greater relief than in this statement.
TR was to the left of any of the Democrats today on social issues, unions and fairness in the labor market - i.e. he opposed all the "elite" in the economy - those in the stock market and corporate world and favored legislation that limit the formation of extreme wealth in any economic sector.
He crusaded for unions, child and other labor laws and against the exploitation by the wealthy.
And he feared that inequity in the distribution of income could injure the democracy and bring down the whole system - which it shortly was to do.
McCain is a product and ally of bankers, lobbyists, large corporations and the wealthy classes, exactly as Bush is. posted 04/16/2008 at 10:24:03

They COULD be in the Democrat's direction?
If not the electorate will prove once again its totally masochistic.
McCain will lose in a landslide, no matter how much they spin it, the media obfuscates the issues and no matter how much the public is misinformed and ignorant and has voted against it's own interests in the past. posted 04/14/2008 at 14:49:33

Zinni doesnt have an ounce of progressiveness in his make-up. Just being skeptical about Iraq isnt enough to complement Obama. posted 04/14/2008 at 14:36:02

To say that Kerry and Gore are elitist and out of touch with and that they lack respect for the ordinary americans is to ignore the fact that the Repuplicans - and the Bush family, whose fortunes have always been closely allied with those of the Saudi Royal Family - hardly are respectful of this same broad constituency (i.e. the middle class).
This turned me away from Hillary finally for the first time. To say that Kerry and Gore, her fellow Democrats, are these things when the other side represent s only the wealthy classes, is appalling in any Democrat.
It's obvious pandering to the "Reagan Democrats", and in synch with her recent attempts to appeal to their stereotypically perceived love of hunting and going to church. posted 04/15/2008 at 06:03:56

I hate to be cynical and would like to stick only to principle when considering a candidate - and i think Wes Clark has as much integrity as ANYONE on the political scene.
But integrity can be made into a liability by the Rebublicans.
Therefore, I think Jim Webb would be more appealing and he has just as much integrity to boot. Without the broad smile, he conveys more hard edged common sense and the same seriousness of purpose but more so somehow from a media point of view.
And Webb has a son in the military, like McCain.
Telling the truth hasn't won in the past for the Democrats; so theyre lucky that they have Webb, a former official in Republican administrations - who's seriousness and obvious military expertise and deep concern sent the Republican's top pick for the nomination to defeat in the Senatorial election. This proves his voter appeal is probably greater for whatever reasons than Clark's. posted 04/13/2008 at 15:43:13

All of you seem to be ignorant of what "reporting your income" entails when you are under public scrutiny as a public figure who doesn't want anyone knowing what his real wealth is..
Your accountants simply move it into accounts and investments not detectable on a pubicly disclosed statement.
For example, lets say George W. has 100 million dollars - and keep in mind that the Bush family is wealthier than the Kerrys and Kennedy's combined but very wary of disclosing this - then he would be earning in simple interest $5million dollars. This is probably fairly close to the truth. But instead of interest bearing accounts, which would look really bad to the public, its invested instead in various shelters and put into as many trusts and so on as possible - instruments in other words that don't yield taxable income. Even Municipal bonds. posted 04/11/2008 at 20:47:19

It should be interesting to see if spin can continue to win the day. To see if McCain can continue to make specious pronouncements that are contrary to fact and get away with it. To see if Bush, Cheney and Rove et. al. can ultimately escape prosecution. If not, some other Republican will rear up and carry their toxic mediocrity to the next level. posted 04/10/2008 at 11:24:48

You are way too idealistic. And unrealistic. A large swath of the electorate will never see it your way, as humane as it is. They are much more likely to take the Republican brand of toxic mediocrity to the next level. posted 04/10/2008 at 11:28:32

Yeah sure. The left, the right. They're all the same.
Except one of them advocates continued destruction and mayhem in the name of "security" and "peace", and the other opposes it.
A bit of a difference there. posted 04/08/2008 at 16:02:38

We can say that this country has turned the corner back towards democracy, cooperation, sanity, good judjement, decency and the constitution ONLY WHEN the debate becomes framed altogether differently.
That is, when the media starts asking the questions not about the intentions of the various factions in the Middle East, but whether the intentions of the Whitehouse AND the Pentagon (i.e. Petraus) are truly criminal.
If a suspicion that the American People and the American Economy have been had creeps into the debate, then well see some progress and consensus.
The Nuremburg Trials put to an end similar excuses for all the lies, murder and destruction of Nazi agression.
A similar phase - and unfortunately we're still far from it - will be required to discredit the Petrauses, McCains and Crockers et. al. posted 04/08/2008 at 16:15:22

Although I expect McCain to lose in a landslide, it is appalling that a major political party could select a candidate who prefers spin and delusion to reality.
Maybe if things could come come to this sorry a pass, I'm wrong and the electorate AND media is just too corrupt to perceive the facts. It happened during the Vietnam fiasco. All the anti-war candidates couldn't sway the election of NIxon. But even then, Nixon was a faux anti-war candidate whereas McCain gung ho all the way.
Could "Red State America" just be too short-sighted and misinformed in this age of Limbaugh? posted 04/07/2008 at 11:54:22

Unfortunately, since Reagan the dominant perspective in this country is just the opposite.
It is more accepted - and promoted by the party most in power for 30 years (the Republicans) - that the rich should help the poor WHEN THEY DEIGN TO. When they magnanimously decide to forgive them for being poor.

Rather as it was in the feudal and phaoranic societies of the past. Forget the Magna Carta and the U.S. Constitiution and the humanist thrust of Western Humanist philosophy and thought since the time of the Greeks.

Ronald Reagan is currently considered a great philosopher and political thinker and his ideas dominate. posted 04/05/2008 at 09:40:10

The more McCain's intractable and foolish notions about the Vietnam "War" are given any credibility and a sizeable portion of the media and electorate do not renounce and see that illegal and pointless war for what it was, the less faith i have that any mea culpas visa vis the Iraq Occupation are going to become the dominant view going into the election.
That McCain could have gotten this far with such misguided notions regarding that "war" and the current one is a tragedy. posted 04/02/2008 at 19:17:40

McCain's new tv ad begins with hims stating "We are Americans, and we will not surrender!"
Of course this is exactly the arrogance that got us into two illegal, immoral wars.
That we can even have a candidate who was a facillitator of both wars is appalling.
In a civilized nation, these views would be a liability. But somehow in our jingoistic nation, being a "war hero" is dropping napalm on civilians in a pointless, illegal and immoral war that wreaked destruction and human suffering for no purpose whatever.
The rationale and motives for the Vietnam War are even murkier than those for the Iraq War (which really is just an occupation, not a war), and yet McCain still defends them to this day and has "credibility" in the press. posted 03/29/2008 at 09:57:13

But still people like Chris Mathews are still blathering on about what a war hero McCain is. How courageous he was and what "service" he did for the country?
What exactly was accomplished by the Vietnam War? Nothing but destruction. Therefore there were no heroes. Heroes dont participate in such futility and waste.
As long as cable news hosts and others have to appeal to the misguided jingoistic urges of the American public we're in trouble.
Pat Buchanon just wrote a piece published in the Huffington Post decrying black people for not being grateful for their barbaric deportation to these shores.
To McCain we would have achieved "victory" were it not for the efforts of John Kerry and Jane Fonda - no matter that there was no justifiable motive for that war in the first place, as with the current one.
This is the intractability and morally vacuous thinking that the media itself uncritically and repeatedly falls into. posted 03/27/2008 at 08:11:41

Indeed. The real heros, as in the Vietnam war, are those who refused to go or renounced that pointless tragic and destructive fiasco. posted 03/27/2008 at 08:02:51

Logically you would think McCain has too much baggage and that his resume would start to reveal inconvenient facts about him - his close ties to lobbyists (who run his campaign), his status as one of the "Keating Five" earlier in his career, his flip-flops on tax cuts - not to mention his stalwart support of most of Bush's domestic and foreign policies.
That he was supposedly a "war hero" in a pointless, illegal and immoral war (which he still defends) is an aspect of American jingoism that the press will never shake unfortunately. Instead of a liability - as it would be in a more civilized nation - this will be his chief selling point.
Add to this the press's reluctance to hold him to as high a standard as the democratic candidates, the ignorance of the uninformed American public, and he may be a candidate who succeeds in escaping the scrutiny of objective analysis.
Very much like the current occupant of the office he aspires too. posted 03/28/2008 at 07:51:15

So the Clintons are "divisive"?
What is George W. Bush? Chopped liver? posted 03/26/2008 at 09:05:19

Until decent men OF INTELLIGENCE and CONSIENCE like Wesley Clark play a larger role in American politics, we're doomed to coexist with the McCains and Cheneys. posted 03/25/2008 at 07:35:24

Well said. On balance all this discussion should be good. An antidote to Fox News and Cheney himself. All the commercials notwithstanding. posted 03/25/2008 at 07:22:12