...and in Hershey, PA, he said the reason is that his opponents "have faith in government." HUH? Is he kidding? Should we elect a president who thinks government is bad? Look, McCain, taxes and government are here to stay. There's work to be done, there are obviously things to fix, but if you don't trust government what motivates your candidacy?
The fact is, taxes and government are here to stay. Much of our political process urgently needs reform, but Senator McCain evidently can’t articulate any positive value government can provide to the voters and citizens of the USA.
Senator, you’ve got it bass-ackwards.
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
I’m voting for Obama for a variety of reasons. But, even if I didn’t see important differences between the two on deregulation, foreign policy, taxes, foresight with regard to the economy, health care reform, etc., I’d still be picking the guy who has faith that the organization he wants to lead can effectively matter to those it governs.
Senator John McCain has been known for making racist and sexist comments. So many, one wonders why they've not been reported by the mainstrea media. Well, here's a video report on just some of what McCain has said, as well as his agreement with Bill O'Reilly that he's part of a "White Male Power Structure."
The foundation for my video was the work on Doug Thompson, who's the main author of the blog "Capital Hill Blue" I happened to find his work on the matter of McCain's racism while conducting this search "john mccain racism" on Goggle, and scrolling down. Doug's work is perhaps the most comprehensive collection of comments and actions that McCain has made and taken that have been identified as racist and sexist.
Doug says that he was a Capital Hill Chief of Staff in his blog, but I checked via search and did find a more detailed information set on his other website about himself, and which read:
Thompson took a sabbatical from newspapers in 1981 and moved to Washington to work on Capitol Hill. He served as press secretary for two Congressman and then Chief of Staff for another before joining the House Committee on Science & Technology. From 1987-1992, Thompson served as Vice President for Political Programs for The National Association of Realtors and then joined The Eddie Mahe Company as a senior associate for Communications. During that stint he became involved in campaign finance issue and was a founding member of the Project for Comprehensive Campaign Reform. He also lecturer at the American Campaign Academy and was a sought-after spokesman on campaign finance issues.
He also claims that he was a staffer to the House Committee on Science and Technology and during that time worked on the "transfer of DARPANet from the Department of Defense to the National Science Foundation" in the early 1990s -- "the beginnings of the Internet" as he wrote.
That's valueable information because some have called Doug's credibility into question, but what he seems to provide is a good first-person view of how elected officials like McCain behaved when they weren't in position to become President of The United States.
Since I don't believe in reinventing the wheel, I'll copy and paste what Doug wrote below but I will alter their apperance because Thompson didn't seem to appropriately catagorize each example.
Examples of racism:
Question: Why does Mexican beer have two "X's" on the label?
Answer: Because wetbacks always need a co-signer.
John McCain, a member of the House of Representatives in the mid-1980s, often held court at a table near the bar at Bullfeathers, a popular Capitol Hill watering hole, telling jokes and matching hangers-on drink by drink.
As a Capitol Hill chief of staff, I often drank at Bullfeathers and was invited to join the throng at McCain's table one evening. A few minutes listening to the racism, bigotry and homophobia of the Arizona Congressman told me all I needed to know.
McCain loved to tell jokes about lesbians, blacks, Hispanics and the Vietnamese community that occupied a large section of Arlington County, Virginia, just south of the District of Columbia.
I checked to see if Bullfeathers was still open, and lo and behold, it was. It's located at 410 1st St SE # 1, Washington, DC 20003, and the number is (202) 488-7160. The website reads:
Serving the House of Representatives and all their friends since 1980. Come enjoy the party atmosphere at our forty-foot bar. Happy hour every night from 5:00 to 8:00 pm. The food is great, with a wide variety to choose from - and we still serve the best burgers on the Hill. Come out and enjoy our outdoor cafe. If you're having a private party or fundraiser from 50 to 250 people, let us cater your event!
At the time of the events Doug points to, Senator McCain was Congressman McCain, thus a perfect candidate to patronize Bullfeathers. While his is the only comment on McCain at Bullfeathers I can find, I also didn't see anything refuting his charge, either.
Examples of Sexism:
Exampe:
Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because Janet Reno is her father.
Another example:
Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’
Even his wife is not immune. Writes Cliff Schecter in his book, The Real John McCain:
Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain's intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain's hair and said, "You're getting a little thin up there." McCain's face reddened, and he responded, "At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt." McCain's excuse was that it had been a long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long days.
And as if that were not enough Katie Hong of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer went on a one-person crusade to point out McCain's anti-Asian -- more spefically Anti-North Vietnamese given his background as a Prisoner of War -- comments. This was posted on March 2, 2000, but it's still easy to find online because it's been linked to so much:
On his campaign bus recently, Sen. John McCain told reporters, "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." Although McCain said he was referring only to his prison guards, there are many reasons why his use of the word "gook" is offensive and alarming.
It is offensive because by using a racial epithet that has historically been used to demean all Asians to describe his captors, McCain failed to make a distinction between his torturers and an entire racial group.
It is alarming because a major candidate for president publicly used a racial epithet, refused to apologize for doing so and remains a legitimate contender.
Contrary to McCain's attempt to narrowly define "gook" to mean only his "sadistic" captors, this term has historically been used to describe all Asians. McCain said that "gook" was the most "polite" term he could find to describe his captors, but because it is simply a pejorative term for Asians, he insulted his captors simply by calling them "Asians" -- a clearly disturbing message. To the Asian American community, the term is akin to the racist word "nigger." A friend of mine, a white male Vietnam veteran, pointed out that veterans, especially Vietnam veterans, know how spiteful the term "gook" is. It has everything to do with labeling someone as "other," the enemy and yellow. McCain sent the message that all Asians are foreigners and remain forever the "other" and the enemy.
The perception of Asians as "foreigners" or "the other" isn't new. This sentiment is what led to passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the Japanese American internment during World War II. The internment of Japanese Americans is now recognized as one of the worst civil rights violations in our country's history and a powerful lesson in what can happen when race alone is used as a test for loyalty or who is defined as an American.
We've made tremendous progress as a nation in overcoming racism. That is why it is so disturbing that a major candidate for the U.S. president can perpetuate the stereotype of Asians as permanent foreigners, hurtling us backward to a time and a place where such racial epithets were an acceptable part of mainstream discourse.
The question is, did McCain appologize? The question's important because he' had eight years to do so. The answer is yes he did and three days after he made the remark in 2000 as he was running for President. This is what I found:
Less than 24 hours after stories ran about Sen. John McCain’s statement to reporters that he would continue to refer to his Vietnamese wartime captors as “gooks,” his campaign announced Feb. 18 that he would no longer use that term. Three days later McCain issued an official apology.
Several stories that ran last Friday quoted McCain as saying “I hate the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live… I was referring to my prison guards and I will continue to refer to them in language that might offend.”
But after APIs blasted his unabashed use of the highly derogatory term that has historically been used against Asians and Asian Americans, the campaign made an apology after annoucing that McCain would no longer use the racial slur.
“I will continue to condemn those who unfairly mistreated us,” McCain said in a statement released Feb. 21. “But out of respect to a great number of people for whom I hold in very high regard, I will no longer use the term that has caused such discomfort… I apologize and renounce all language that is bigoted and offensive, which is contrary to all that I represent and believe.”
This year, Fred Soto revisited the matter of that slur in an excellent post that's a must read for anyone. Sote writes:
Much has been made of the reference that humbled the American war hero. Some apologists will fight until they are blue in the face to try and excuse John McCain’s words. Others will ask why this issue is worth revisiting, if for no other reason than to hurt the GOP front-runner? I’d respond simply that when a presidential candidate uses words that are racist in nature, Americans should jump to conclusions about his or her character. It is our duty to determine whether John McCain has the ability to lead and unite our nation. The information presented below shows that John McCain’s age and “experience” may play a big role in the presidential elections, after all.
If you’re still waiting for me to explain how and why this is relevant to American politics, I’ll do my best to explain my position. If John McCain had used the word “nigger,” do you believe for a second that John McCain would be standing above the GOP’s perch? The correct answer is “No,” it’s highly unlikely that he’d be the leading candidate for the GOP nomination. What John McCain did was make a reference that is equally derogatory, but the media seems to want to stay out of the fray on this one.
Americans forget that racism exists on a multitude of levels but the only time we recognize the problem is when it is done to minorities of the darker persuasions.
Unfortunately, Soto does not give us the idea that McCain actually evolved from this 2000 problem with Asians. He concludes with a sadness over the way the mainstream media has ignored the issue. I agree.
Irwin Tang explains why John McCain's racial slur is still relevant today:
There's also evidence that McCain commonly used the term before 2000. A 1973 article in U.S. News and World Report contains several examples of McCain's use of the word, here's one:
After I had been there about 10 days, a "gook"—which is what we called the North Vietnamese—came in one morning. This man spoke English very well. He asked me how I was, and said, "We have a Frenchman who is here in Hanoi visiting, and would like to take a message back to your family." Being a little naive at the time—you get smarter as you go along with these people—I figured this wasn't a bad deal at all, if this guy would come to see me and go back and tell my family that I was alive.
Supposedly, there's a video around where McCain uses the term, but I've not seen it. What's clear to me is that there's enough evidence of McCain's intolerance for those who's skin is darker is of such historic depth, it's disturbing.
What's more upsetting is that CNN and other media outlets don't focus on this problem with John McCain.
Let’s not dither: we’re all in favor of lowering taxes and cutting federal spending, we’d all like to have more to spend on what we enjoy. McCain and his team have avoided releasing many specifics, but they rely on the old school attack that Obama will surely raise them on the middle class.
Fact check reveals: Obama will champion tax policies that will impact those who earn a quarter million dollars or more in any single year, while lowering taxes on those below $250,000 substantially. McCain will lower taxes on the top earners, and raise them for the middle-class.
Both candidates need money to fix the economy, and pay for the war Bush conducted without paying for yet, so even on the surface McCain's claim to lower taxes is, at best, the path to economic chaos in the USA.
Say, what's Pastor Rick Warren up to, charging $500 and up for a ticket to the Saddleback Forum and not telling people on the website according to this YouTuber. Look, the errors regarding this debate are starting to add up. I have no objection to the Forum and I enjoyed it.
But I do have serious problems with the way Warren guided Senator McCain to address a Darfur issue McCain would not have mentioned on his own, and I don't like that Pastor Warren essentially let McCain give the kind of stump speeches that Senator Obama was told not to give.
That's not right and Pastor Warren owes the country an explaination for it.
Now, we get to the most relevant question - if John Edwards' political career is done, why isn't John McCain's? John McCain had a well-documented affair on his first wife, with his current wife. He has admitted in the books he has written about his life that he ran around with several different women while still married to his first wife. And don't forget that he left her for a younger, richer woman - multi-millionaire Cindy Hensley who is now Cindy McCain - after she had been severely hurt in a car accident.
So, why are McCain's actions any more excusable than Edwards'? Because it was thirty years ago? Does that wash it away? Will we be fine with Edwards running for office again in a couple of years because then it will all be in the past? What is the statute of limitations on an affair?
The Commission on Presidential Debates, the organization intrusted with the task of setting the format, venue, and dates of the Presidential Debates, annouced that there would be three debates. This is what they reported:
November 19, 2007
Paul G. Kirk, Jr. and Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr., co-chairmen of the non-partisan, non-profit Commission on Presidential Debates ("CPD" or "the Commission") today announced dates, sites and formats of three presidential and one vice presidential debates for the 2008 general election. The dates and sites are:
First presidential debate: Friday, September 26 University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS
Vice presidential debate: Thursday, October 2 Washington University in St. Louis, MO
Second presidential debate: Tuesday, October 7 Belmont University, Nashville, TN
Third presidential debate: Wednesday, October 15 Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY
The two backup sites are Centre College in Danville, KY and Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, NC.
The Commission also announced formats for the debates.
All debates will be ninety minutes in length and start at 9:00 p.m. ET.
Each debate will be administered by a single moderator.
The first presidential debate will focus on domestic policy; the third presidential debate will focus on foreign policy.
The second presidential (town meeting format) debate will include any issues raised by members of that audience, and the vice presidential debate will include domestic and foreign policy.
In each debate except the town meeting format, the candidates will be seated at a table with the moderator.
Kirk and Fahrenkopf introduced two format features different from CPD formats of the past. The first change will be incorporated in the first and third presidential debates as well as the vice-presidential debate.
Each of those debates will be divided into 8 ten-minute issue segments; the moderator will introduce each segment with an issue on which each candidate will comment, after which the moderator will facilitate further discussion of the issue, including direct exchange between the candidates, for the balance of that segment. Time will be reserved for closing statements by each of the candidates in each debate.
Kirk and Fahrenkopf noted that this change is aimed at increasing the educational value of the general election debates. "Our mission is to promote voter education. The public deserves to hear and see the candidates offer and defend their positions on the critical issues facing our country in the most thoughtful and in-depth manner that television time constraints will allow. Loosening the constraints within the ninety minutes debate will allow for more serious examination of complicated questions. This change will also open the possibility of the moderator inviting candidates to question each other. We want voters to benefit from as full an explanation of a topic as possible, and we feel certain that the candidates will welcome this change for the same reason."
The second departure from past CPD formats will be the introduction of internet access to the presidential town meeting debate. Questions solicited by Internet will be included with those from citizens on the stage with the candidates.
Kirk and Fahrenkopf said: "The Commission believes that by including questions from Internet participants, we will enhance and expand the effectiveness of the town meeting debate. This technique has been employed in different ways during many of the primary debates. We will continue to learn from its use in the primary season, and we intend to consult with experts in information technology who can help us integrate it into a general election town meeting in a manner consistent with our non-partisan charter."
The Commission also released the 2008 Candidate Selection Criteria which will be used to determine who is invited to participate in the general election debates. In addition to being constitutionally eligible, candidates must appear on a sufficient number of state ballots to have a mathematical chance of winning a majority vote of the electoral college, and have 15% support in national polls before the debates.
The Gallup Organization will advise the CPD in the application of its criteria to polling data as it did in 2000 and 2004. View the 2008 Candidate Selection Criteria.
The co-chairmen noted that moderators for the four debates would be chosen in the summer of 2008.
The CPD was established in 1987 and sponsored all presidential and vice presidential debates in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004.
"Mindess McCain" - My New Name For John McCain And His Errors
We've seen day after day of Senator John McCain's errors, from talking about countries that don't exist to saying that Iraq's boarder is next to Afghanistan, and forgetting that we attacked Afghanistan before we attacked Iraq. What else is next?
Well, I'm calling him Mindless McCain, because at times he doesn't seem to think about what he says at all. He just talks.
In a revealing online article, The New Republic's Gabriel Sherman writes about the changing relationship between the press and the Obama camp, proving in the process, there's no media love for the Obama staff.
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
