Some of you may have seen the hideous new campaign poster for Ole Grumpy... er, John McCain over at TPM. Just when you think his campaign couldn't get more desperate or clueless, they prove us wrong.
In case you haven't seen the latest triumph, here it is in all it's glory:
Nothing over the top about that, is there?
Well, I've improved it a little:
That's really much better. Should appeal to McCain's base.
I put together a handy reference guide to who just voted FOR and AGAINST the 3 proposed amendments to the terrible FISA retroactive immunity bill. Info comes from Senate.gov.
I intend to keep it for future reference. Anyone who voted AGAINST these amendments can be expected not to be a friend of the progressive movement. Sadly, there are many Democrats in that group.
I'm happy to say Obama voted for all three. He is on the right side of this issue.
Democrats voting AGAINST the Bingaman amendment (AKA "our last hope"):
Just the other day I was thinking: If Obama wins the election in a landslide (we can hope!) it wouldn't surprise me if the truly hardcore wingnuts start spreading the rumor that he's the Anti-Christ. It would be their last-ditch smear against a popular Democrat with widespread support, and a natural evolution of their he's-a-secret-Muslim-terrorist smear campaign.
Well, turns out they've already beat me to it.
Via Sadly No, I just came across a hardcore religious wingnut who is already claiming that yes, Obama is the Anti-Christ.
Without sarcasm or humor, but entirely seriously.
The only reason I bring this up on Daily Kos is because I feel that we as Democrats need to be prepared for absolutely ANYTHING being thrown at Obama by the wingnuts. Even something you think would be so ludicrous, so vile, and so insane as to be unthinkable. They WILL say it. The rumors and the smears WILL go out.
Do you know that a Republican named Thaddeus McCotter is representing you in the House? Do you know what he's doing there?
I just learned from Wonkette that Thaddeus McCotter (R-Michigan) represents your 11th District. Any 11th District voters here?
So this asswipe actually got up in the House and made a speech about what Democrats "really mean" when they talk. Yes, you guessed it, we are closet socialists who speak in code that only true tough-guy Republicans can translate.
Some of the highlights from this hilarious comedy act:
"We're going to learn how to speak Democrat today."
Mark Penn is again revealed as the worst political consultant in Washington in an interesting article in today's Boston Globe. Among the many, many examples of his incredibly bad judgement, this one is particularly memorable:
At a social event last spring at the home of Mark Penn, then Hillary Clinton's chief strategist and one of the most prominent and well-compensated Democratic consultants in the business, a fellow Democrat wondered aloud if freshman Senator Barack Obama might wrest the nomination from the well-connected New York senator.
Penn, the dinner guest said, waved his hand dismissively. "Flash in the pan," Penn said, adding that the Clinton campaign saw former North Carolina senator John Edwards as her biggest challenge.
There, in a nutshell, is the arrogance, entitlement and bad judgement of the chief strategist to the Clinton campaign.
Why exactly is this guy the "one of the most prominent and well-compensated Democratic consultants in the business"?
In his review of Rick Perlstein's new book "Nixonland," Wall Street Journal writer Thomas Frank talks about how the 60's shaped Nixon and his political movement. As an aside, he makes this interesting observation:
Well, now the main events of the '60s are 40 years behind us, and still we can't shake them. In the last national election, we redebated the Vietnam War. In the one coming up, we will be forced to debate Barack Obama's not-even-tenuous connection to the Weathermen. (We will probably not be asked to judge the poisonous legacy of the Young Americans for Freedom, although McCain adviser Charlie Black was actually a leader of that group.)
Really? Charlie Black again? Not being of that era, I had to look up "Young Americans for Freedom." What I found is very interesting. Turns out they are very connected to the Goldwater campaign and the neo-conservative movement that Kos wrote about today when he said "the new progressive movement is being specifically built on the Goldwater model."
She insists she can win, but the mathematical explanations for how that can happen grow more fanciful by the week.
And without any clear explanation of how she can win, mentioning the Robert Kennedy assassination to some ears sounds like the last, desperate scenario of someone unwilling to admit defeat.
Double ouch. When even the AP is making such fatalistic statements, Hillary's campaign has got to be getting worried.
As TPM pointed out yesterday, Women's Voices Women's Votes had another one of their little "accidents" in West Virginia. From the Charleston Daily Mail:
Betty Ireland (WV Secretary of State) said she's worried that a mass mailing aimed at getting young women in West Virginia to register to vote might cause confusion.
A group called "Women's Voices. Women Vote" sent out more than 16,000 mailers to unmarried women in the state after April 22, the last day to register in time to vote Tuesday.
(This issue is highlighted on the WV Secretary of State's website.)
Page Gardner, President of WVWV, is quoted in the article as saying:
"We hope that this unfortunate coincidence in timing does not lead to any confusion or aggravation for either your state's voters or registrars."
Really, Page, another unfortunate coincidence? Again? How many coincidences make a pattern?
And it turns out that WVWV shares an office with an organization whose president declared herself part of "Feminists for Clinton."
After I vented some snark yesterday (well deserved, of course!) our very own Trix made the following simple yet challenging suggestion:
"I've got an idea... tell us why Obama is so great."
Hmm. Really? Well, there are people out there who still need convincing. But when you're accused of being a "cultist" you have to explain yourself to people very carefully.
So although I am by no means a spokesman, I've thought it over, and I'm going to take a shot at it.
First, I don't want more of the same old partisan politics of the past. Battling over issues, fighting turf wars, and grinding down opponents can't be the only model for governing. Leading by example has to be as well. A candidate's style of leadership is incredibly important, and can't be underestimated.
Of course, no politician is perfect, and no one can work magic. But the tone set by the President's leadership is incredibly important. (See: Bush, George W.) What kind of model will that person be for everyone working in their administration? What personal example will they lead by? What do they bring that makes them unique and worth your vote?
After making a concerted effort to read the views of Hillary supporters at sites like MyDD, Taylor Marsh and LeftCoaster, this is my summation of their arguments:
The media is mean to Hillary
The Internet is mean to Hillary
Other Democrats are mean to Hillary
Howard Dean is mean to Hillary
Obama supporters are mean to Hillary
Everyone is mean to Hillary
You're a Hillary Hater(TM)!
Wow, people are so mean!
Hillary is just a brave wonderful gal who bravely and wonderfully stands up to all this MEANNESS. It's just mean and unfair. It even made her cry. If we all just realized how wonderful she is, we'd vote for her.
What kind of argument is this? What kind of rationale for voting is that?
As noted by DemFromCT on the front page, John McCain has once again revealed his profound ignorance of basic issues when questioned about HIV prevention and condoms.
What followed was a long series of awkward pauses, glances up to the ceiling and the image of one of Mr. McCain’s aides, standing off to the back, urgently motioning his press secretary to come to Mr. McCain’s side.
The upshot was that Mr. McCain said he did not know this subject well, did not know his position on it, and relied on the advice of Senator Tom Coburn, a physician and Republican from Oklahoma.
McCain revealed his masterful grasp of the facts:
“The guy I really respect on this is Dr. Coburn... I’m not informed enough on it. Let me find out... I have to find out what my position was... Get me Coburn’s thing, ask Weaver to get me Coburn’s paper that he just gave me in the last couple of days. I’ve never gotten into these issues before.”
Building off Kos' front page entry here, I'd like to see the Dkos poll results on who is preferred as potential VP running mate for Obama. (It's early, I know, but why not?)
Below is the list of suggested names I collated from Kos' entry and the comments. It's a partial list, for sure, but covers the most popular ones, I believe. Let me know if there are any I left off.
So, what are you waiting for? Vote!
Full disclosure: I'd love it to be Richardson. I think his foreign policy experience would be a perfect balance for Obama. And of course, the appeal to Latinos. What a double bill for the Democrats!
On the other hand, after reading the diaries here over the last few days, I'm beginning to wonder if a female running mate is the only way to assuage hard-core Clinton supporters. If having a female candidate is the most important thing to them, maybe it's the only way Obama could get their vote.
Or, does he need a white male to appeal to the mainstream? Clark obviously brings military credibility. Dodd seems like a great guy, but personally doesn't do much for me. (No flames, please! We're all friends here!)
Your state holds the next key vote in the presidential race. Obama is closing the gap against Clinton in the latest state polls, narrowing what had been a significant Clinton lead. Clinton's Bosnia embarrassment has hurt her one claim to electability - foreign policy experience - which has been revealed as based on a repeated pattern of exaggeration.
Now is a great opportunity for Obama to emphasize the difference he offers - a new, grassroots, progressive style of politics. And imagine... just imagine... if Obama won in your state! This dragged-out, divisive, brutal campaign would be OVER. The numbers on his side would be insurmountable and indisputable.
It won' t be easy, but it could happen - if YOU make it happen!
The usual "You're a Hillary Hater(tm) and I'm leaving" posts have sprung up again over the front page discussions of Clinton's debunked "I ran for my life from Bosnian snipers" story. Along with several other posters, I have asked politely in comments (on both the front page and in diaries): "Why are you OK with this?"
Strangely enough, there hasn't been a single response.
Everyone's excited about watching the Oscars tonight, right?
Wrong.
Instead, everyone should be watching the "60 Minutes" expose on Karl Rove and his corruption of the Justice Department into a prosecutorial wing of the White House. This is going to be good, and despite the unfortunate (or convenient, depending on your politics) scheduling opposite a Hollywood spectacle no one should miss it.
As Glenn Greenwald says it's a "very important piece" and "will undoubtedly be worth watching."
"It's very hard to write the future history of America before the current history hasn't been fully written." -- George Dubya Bush on Fox News
This has to be the most perfect Bushism I've seen in a long time. (Borrowed from today's Midday Open Thread)
Sometimes, the fact that this doofus is actually our President comes out and slaps you in the face to wake you up from the general absurdity of it all.
Another day, another humorous mental burp from those crazy kooks at The Corner. I checked over there to see how they would defend Bernie Kerik (Rudy’s best buddy) after his 14-point indictment. Not a peep about that (what a surprise!) but I did find something else quite amusing.
Some genius named David Freddoso posted a bit of pure wingnut brilliance entitled "A Small, Temporary Victory for the Freedom of Conscience," wherein he manages to perform some truly tortured (yet amusing) leaps of logic.
