November 5th, 2008 12:47am
admin
This is a big day.
It marks a huge victory on so many levels, for so many different values — the most obvious of which may well be the least. Hope over fear, optimism over cynicism, cooler heads over reactionaries, Democrats over Republicans, change over the status quo, honor over dirty politics, honesty over bullshit, seeking the truth over swallowing the party line, diversity over racism…
…this is a big, big day.
You can be sure the world is watching, and some part of it is realizing it was wrong about us. We’re not led by fear. We don’t always give in to fear. And cooler heads do prevail.
This is a big day.
October 10th, 2008 11:46pm
admin
Today, John McCain learned the consequences of smearing Barack Obama as frequently and dishonestly as he and his supporters have done in the past week or so: You end up having to publicly defend your opponent at your own rally.
In a desperate response to their plummet in the polls over the past month, Senator McCain and his running mate, Sarah Palin, have peppered their stump speeches with accusations that Senator Obama associates with terrorists and isn’t being honest with America. At every stop — and in at least one attack ad in heavy rotation — they’ve asked the question “Who is Barack Obama?”
This tactic of continuous negativity and innuendo hasn’t served to inspire McCain’s base so much as to whip them into an angry, incoherent mob. At rallies for McCain and Palin, this week, crowd members have been heard to respond to the candidates’ attacks on Obama with cries of “Treason!” and “Terrorist!” and even — extremely disturbingly — “Kill him!”
All of this culminated today in something that undoubtedly has McCain and his campaign wishing they could go back in time and dial back their own mudslinging: A moment that, according to the Associated Press, forced McCain to publicly insist to his frenzied supporters that Obama is a decent man, and that they shouldn’t fear an Obama presidency.
I don’t trust Obama,” a woman said. “I have read about him. He’s an Arab.”
McCain shook his head in disagreement, and said:
“No, ma’am. He’s a decent, family man, citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with (him) on fundamental issues, and that’s what this campaign is all about.”
He had drawn boos with his comment: “I have to tell you, he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States.”
If the Obama campaign doesn’t turn the video from that rally into a campaign ad of their own, they’re nuts.
Note to Senator McCain: This is what happens when you let your desperation to win an election take you from promises of a respectful campaign to a strategy of continuous negativity and ugly attacks. You paint yourself into a corner that forces you to praise your opponent over a chorus of boos from your own supporters. It’s no more than you deserve.
It does raise one question, though: Has McCain backed off from his campaign’s smear tactics because he’s realized they aren’t slowing his plunge in the polls, or has he decided (perhaps too late) that if he doesn’t win the election, he’d at least like to lose with some shred of honor intact?
September 25th, 2008 02:29pm
admin
Yesterday morning, John McCain announced his desire to delay Friday night’s debate between him and Senator Barack Obama. He cited a need to concentrate on the current economic crisis and on getting the Treasury Department’s $700 billion bank bailout plan through Congress.
But there’s evidence to suggest that the bailout McCain was most interested in was one that would get Sarah Palin out of next week’s debate with her vice-presidential rival, Senator Joe Biden.
First off, McCain’s claim that he wants out of tomorrow night’s debate because he’s got to concentrate on helping Congress reach an agreement on a bailout plan rings a little hollow, coming as it does four days after the plan was sent to Congress and only two days before the debate.
Second, ABC News reported last night that a source in his campaign says McCain also wants to delay the vice presidential debate, scheduled for Thursday, Oct. 2. His full plan, apparently, is to reschedule Friday night’s debate with Obama to take place in that slot, and reschedule the debate between Biden and Palin for “a later, unspecified date.”
Now, it may well be that McCain and his advisers feel he needs an extra week to prepare for his first debate with Barack Obama. But I think it’s more likely this entire gambit has always been aimed at trying to get the vice presidential debate off the calendar.
He certainly has reason to want that. Palin’s performance in the very few interviews she’s granted has demonstrated a decided lack of ability to think on her feet and operate outside the narrow confines of the talking points her handlers have given her. Working without a net, she appears decidedly wobbly (check out her recent interview with Katie Couric — especially the last bit). Joe Biden, with his 36 years in the Senate and a deserved reputation as a passionate speaker, could make mincemeat out of Palin in a debate.
Palin’s difficulty in spontaneous situations hasn’t escaped the McCain campaign. That’s why they’ve limited her interviews and tried this week to restrict press coverage of her United Nations visit to photos and 30 seconds of small talk with Afghanistan’s President Hamid Karzai. And that’s plenty of motivation for McCain and Co. to do anything they can to keep Palin from sharing a stage with Joe Biden.
Fortunately, it doesn’t look like McCain’s fourth-down, long-yardage play is going to work. Barack Obama has said he believes the debate should take place as scheduled, tomorrow night — correctly pointing out that a president needs to be able to “deal with more than one thing at once.”
More importantly, the Commission on Presidential Debates says the event will go on as scheduled. And if McCain stubbornly refuses to show? Obama communications chief Robert Gibbs says “My sense is there’s going to be a stage, a moderator, an audience and at least one presidential candidate.” So that’s that.
On top of this comes today’s joint announcement by Democrats and Republicans in Congress that they’ve reached an agreement on a bailout plan both parties can live with. Which pretty effectively kills McCain’s claim that he can’t debate Obama until an agreement is hammered out. It was always clear to anyone paying attention that discussion of the bailout plan was well under way yesterday and that McCain’s dramatic rush to D.C. for a “leadership meeting” would not bring a deal any sooner. The fact that a deal has been announced — hours before McCain’s hastily arranged meeting with Obama and President Bush — serves as confirmation that McCain’s frantic, drop-everything move yesterday was unnecessary.
Then again, it was never really about saving the economy. It was all about saving Sarah Palin from Joe Biden.
September 20th, 2008 02:43pm
admin
The media was abuzz late this week with news that a hacker had broken into one of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s E-mail accounts, an account sometimes used for official government business. Most of the reportage took the understandable angle that this was a disturbing crime, a real violation of Palin’s privacy. Some of the more ridiculous right-wing pundits (Rush Limbaugh, for example) immediately seized on the incident as an opportunity for some partisan hackery, accusing Barack Obama of being behind it.
But a few key questions have been all but overlooked by the mainstream press: Why would Palin use a free E-mail account from Yahoo for official state business? And how irresponsible was Palin to conduct official business via a Yahoo account? Just how secure is such an account?
The answer to that last question lies in the way the account was “hacked” — and I put the word in quotation marks because it’s used very loosely here. The method used by the still-unidentified E-mail thief barely qualifies as actual hacking. All the thief had to do was click on the “Forget your ID or password?” link on the Yahoo sign-in page, enter Palin’s Yahoo ID (i.e., the E-mail address in question), and answer a few questions intended to confirm that the thief was authorized to access the account. Anyone who has ever forgotten a password for any kind of web-based account is familiar with this process.
Apparently, the questions upon which the security of Palin’s E-mail account hinged were “What is your date of birth?”, “What is the zip code where you live?”, and “Where did you meet your husband?”
Naturally, the hacker had no trouble finding Palin’s birth date and zip code, and it was a fairly simple matter to guess that Palin met her husband at Wasilla High School, which they both attended. With those dubious safeguards satisfied, Yahoo allowed the hacker to change the account’s password and access Palin’s E-mail.
Palin’s unfortunate experience serves as a cautionary tale to anyone with a web-based E-mail account from Yahoo (or Hotmail, or AOL, or Mail.com, etc.): If someone wants to hack your account, it’s only as secure as the questions asked by its lost-password process — questions you generally have the option of choosing yourself.
But the greater significance of this story is that Palin used such a poorly secured E-mail account for official government business. Why would she do that, when she has an official “gov.state.ak.us” E-mail account that is undoubtedly much, much more secure?
One possible answer is that, just like the highly secretive Bush administration, Palin conducted some official business via a personal E-mail account rather than her state government account because she wanted to hide that business from public scrutiny.
Some of the E-mails in the hacked account reportedly make reference to the Alaska Department of Public Safety (DPS), which oversees the Alaska State Troopers. This raises the possibility that Palin does indeed have something to hide in the matter of “Troopergate,” in which she is accused of using her influence as governor to try and get her former brother-in-law, Alaska Trooper Mike Wooten, fired — ultimately firing Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan for failing to dismiss Wooten.
If DPS-related communications were conducted via a private Yahoo account because they contained information related to Wooten that Palin didn’t want to be a matter of public record, then it’s an indication of how willing she is to compromise the security of official government communications in order to hide the truth from her employers, the people of Alaska.
That level of shady influence peddling and secrecy would certainly qualify her to step into the vice president’s shoes…but we could do without another Dick Cheney.
Update: I can’t help thinking something positive might yet come of this. Alaska State Senator Hollis French, a Democrat chosen to look into “Troopergate” by the largely Republican Alaska Legislative Council, has vowed that the investigation will continue and be completed before the election — despite Palin’s and her husband’s refusals to cooperate or turn over E-mails that may relate to the case. In another ominous echo of the Bush administration, Palin cites “executive privilege” as her reason for stonewalling. But if there’s a chance that Mike Wooten and “Troopergate” were discussed via a private Yahoo account — something we might never have known if not for this anonymous hacker — isn’t it possible that the special investigator might subpeona these Yahoo E-mails? And wouldn’t Palin and her lawyers have a harder time citing executive privilege in connection with a personal E-mail account?
After all, how can she claim these E-mails contain government information so highly sensitive as to be protected under executive privilege when she sent and received them on a free Yahoo account with nothing more to shield them from prying eyes than “Where did I meet my husband?”
September 15th, 2008 02:41pm
admin
Today, Lehman Brothers — a 160-year-old investment bank — filed for Chapter 11 protection in the biggest bankruptcy in history. Also today, Bank of America announced it is buying Merrill Lynch, a 94-year-old investment bank.
Sen. John McCain’s response today to the collapse of these two financial institutions: “I think, still, the fundamentals of our economy are strong.”
I don’t feel a need to do any more than post those facts without comment.
UPDATE: Okay, maybe a little comment. Today’s events have created a target-rich environment in the skies above McCainland.
A friend pointed out this article about an essay published just yesterday morning in the Washington Post. The essay calls us a “Nation of Exaggerators” and says “Things today just aren’t that bad,” economically speaking, referring to concerns about Lehman Brothers — the huge investment bank that declared bankruptcy the day after this essay was published — as mere “jitters.”
The essay’s author? Donald Luskin, who identifies himself as an adviser to John McCain’s campaign.
With advisers like Luskin, is it any wonder McCain think there’s nothing wrong with our economy?
Something that blows my mind about this essay on another level entirely: That “Nation of Exaggerators” headline is an unmistakable echo of Phil Gramm’s “nation of whiners” comment from July — a comment that offended so many people in this country that Gramm ended up resigning as the co-chair of McCain’s campaign. For another McCain adviser to remind us of that comment in any context — let alone in an article that once again claims the economy is fine, and we’re all imagining things — is so epically stupid that I just couldn’t imagine it could happen accidentally. And indeed it was intentional.
We can’t let McCain win in November. He and his advisers clearly have nothing but contempt for the American public. And eight years of that should be enough for any of us.
Previous Posts