Over at military.com, Dr. Phillip Butler (USNA '61) has a very interesting article up. Who is Dr. Butler? He was a hall mate of John McCain's at the Naval Academy. He was a Vietnam War light-attack carrier pilot. He was a POW for 8 years in North Vietnam during the time that McCain was in captivity. He has two Silver Stars, two Legion of Merits, two Bronze Stars and two Purple Heart medals.
Senator John Sidney McCain, III is a remarkable man who has made enormous personal achievements. And he is a man that I am proud to call a fellow POW who "Returned With Honor." That's our POW motto. But since many of you keep asking what I think of him, I've decided to write it out. In short, I think John Sidney McCain, III is a good man, but not someone I will vote for in the upcoming election to be our President of the United States.
The good doctor runs through the reasons why being a POW isn't a qualification for being president (which obviously applies to himself) ...
Moveon.org sent around an email today claiming that McCain, despite his "get to work!" huffing and puffing, missed some key energy votes. You know, not having gone to work in the first place.
Which votes? I decided to go digging. Thanks to CAP, I didn't have to dig much.
Speaking of celebrities, guess who's starred in one of the highest grossing comedies of all time?
He's a movie star now.
Yes, Arizona senator and aspiring presidential candidate John McCain recently made his cinematic debut in this summer's bawdy romantic comedy "Wedding Crashers."
(My kingdom for a YouTube clip!)
Also, he popped up in a scene in 24, playing a part of a staffer. Quite the actor! He fancies himself as so famous, that he's popping in and out of Hollywood scripts! Such a powerful celebrity!
Now that Brittney Spears has entered as one of the latest issues of the presidential race (yes, seriously, Brittney freakin' Spears), it's a good moment to pause and reflect on her most famous political moment. It's sort of reminds me of a certain Senator from Arizona....
Maybe Brittney's PR person is working for McCain too? Seems like they think and talk about politics the same to me. (H/T TPM)
John McCain runs right back into the arms of lobbyists:
A while back the McCain put a new rule in place that no one involved in their campaign could be a federal lobbyist or foreign agent. But CBS has an interview out with McCain campaign manager Rick Davis that appears to say that rule is no longer in effect.
Folks, McCain just made a major boo-boo. What did he do? He has unleashed an ad that's so false and despicable, that it's going to backlash on him. Big time. Sheesh, even Chuck Hagel has condemned the ad.
How do I know there's going to be a backlash? Because we're going to make it happen. And because I speak with the benefit of knowing some recent history in Virginia.
In Virginia, we recently saw two straight state-wide elections where the Republican candidate hurled scurrilous charges at the Democrat that were so slimy that it hurt the hurler. And, in large part, the backlash was rightly fueled by the Virginia blogosphere.
Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that the U.S. Embassy in Berlin "instructed Foreign Service personnel stationed there not to attend Sen. Barack Obama’s [D-IL] public rally" in Tiergarten Park because the event is "‘partisan political activity‘ prohibited under its regulations for those serving overseas."...
Team McCain is really setting a gold standard on how not to help their candidate. On the economic side, we're a nation of whiners stuck in a fantasy recession. On the foreign policy side, we're in Iraq for-ev-ah!
After simply waving away the recent pronouncements of the Iraqi government in favor of Obama's time frame as a mere mistranslation (my kingdom for an update!), Max Boot runs through what he thinks are more realistic time lines while proudly announcing that "Senator McCain (whose campaign [he's] advising) has been pushing all along" for the views expressed in that clarification issued by the Iraqi government (*cough* U.S. Central Command).
File this in the Party Imploding Upon Itself folder:
Evangelical Christians in Iowa, dominant in the state's Republican Party, have denied Sen. Charles E. Grassley his request for a place on the state's delegation to this summer's Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn.
With a majority of nine out of 17 members on the Iowa Republican central committee, religious conservatives made Iowa Christian Alliance President Steve Scheffler chairman of Iowa's 40-member delegation in a vote immediately after their state party convention July 12.
"The Republican Party of Iowa is moving significantly to the right on social issues," the just-ousted Iowa Republican National Committee member Steve Roberts told The Washington Times. "It hurts John McCain's chances to win this state."
Ah, the understatement of the day. It also hurts the GOP's chances to remain a viable political party.
Let's keep the updates going in this new diary! This one is so big, it certainly deserves its own diary. The New York Times confirming the bombshell:
But the interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki’s office, not the magazine. And in an audio recording of Mr. Maliki’s interview that Der Spiegel provided to The New York Times, Mr. Maliki seemed to state a clear affinity for Mr. Obama’s position, bringing it up on his own in an answer to a general question on troop presence.
The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Mr. Maliki’s comments by The Times: "Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq."
He continued: "Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq."
UPDATE: This one is so big, I'm entering at the top of the diary. The NYT confirming the bombshell:
But the interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki’s office, not the magazine. And in an audio recording of Mr. Maliki’s interview that Der Spiegel provided to The New York Times, Mr. Maliki seemed to state a clear affinity for Mr. Obama’s position, bringing it up on his own in an answer to a general question on troop presence.
The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Mr. Maliki’s comments by The Times: "Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq."
He continued: "Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq."
Just as we thought. The best part: the interpreter that "misinterpreted" is Maliki's guy! I mean, the White House couldn't look like bigger liars if they tried!
It's becoming patently clear that the Associated Press has a chronic problem with employing reporters with a blatant anti-Democrat bias. Just a quick search at Media Matters' website shows the depth of the problem, but we know many of the best (worst) examples from Pickler and others.
Karl Rove exchanged e-mails about Pat Tillman with Associated Press reporter Ron Fournier, under the subject line "H-E-R-O." In response to Mr. Fournier's e-mail, Mr. Rove asked, "How does our country continue to produce men and women like this," to which Mr. Fournier replied, "The Lord creates men and women like this all over the world. But only the great and free countries allow them to flourish. Keep up the fight."
The McCain campaign, which has said it doesn't question Obama's patriotism, is now doing something awfully similar: Claiming that Barack Obama and the Democrats are dedicated to losing the war for their own political benefit.
The new accusation was unveiled on a McCain campaign conference call moments ago, with top McCain surrogates making this charge in tandem.
This is absolute shameful bullshit. If the MSM thought that their twisted version of Wes Clark's comments were bad, claiming that Obama and Democrats WANT the U.S. to lose in Iraq (or anywhere) is the height of slander. So does that mean that all Democratic war veterans want America to lose -- even those who fought in Iraq? Does the McCain campaign think that Obama and his supporters are rooting for casualties?
I'm fine with Obama's first salvo of national ads, but I'm also hoping for something different this year: I'd like to see an ad campaign that matches the 50-state strategy we've heard so much about. In other words, let's see some ads that focus on the unique concerns throughout the country.
For example, there could be an ad just for Nevada slamming McCain for his pro-Yucca Flats position. There could be an ad for Northern Virginia on Obama's plan for fixing the transportation crisis. There could be an ad on fair trade for Michigan and Ohio.
With all the recent distress over a couple of not-completely-progressive stances -- and the requisite not-more-more-dime comments, it's probably a good idea to step back for a moment for some perspective:
Barack Obama will be the most progressive president in the history of our great nations.
I'm not here to get into historical disputes about why, given the times, FDR or JFK or whoever may prove more progressive. My point is that, on issue after issue, Obama will be the most progressive than any President before him. By a long shot.
We know he's going to end the war in Iraq, restore habeas, reduce the influence of lobbyists, close Gitmo, engage in tough diplomacy with our enemies, appoint progressive judges, etc. But this just scratches the surface. Just a quick trip through some of Obama's issues pages reveals the breadth of progressive change that he wants to bring to American
Do you have a good idea for an ad? Or a point that the campaign should be making about John McCain? Or a certain group in a swing state that needs micro-targeting? A cool idea for a sticker or a shirt? Maybe there's a great blog idea or other Internet based innovation burning a whole in your brain?
I've seen a bunch of diaries with good ideas scroll away into off-the-screen oblivion, so maybe creating an open thread for us strategy junkies to brainstorm possible ideas for ads, messaging, technologies, etc. etc. could garner some interest? If enough of you participate (and perhaps if it gets rec'd up), we can create one place for our target audience (I'm looking at you, Mr. Intern at Obama HQ).
Anyway, let's see where this goes. I'll randomly pull some of the ideas up into the diary as we go along.
Right now, McCain has a huge advantage with the 65+ set and a slight advantage for with 50-64 set. How to tackle these numbers? Easy: At every single opportunity, Obama should bring up the fact that McCain supports privitizing Social Security.
The simple facts are these:
Older Americans have always been solidly opposed to the GOP's plans to gut Social Security.
