James G. Gilmore

The difference is clear:

2008-09-03T23:17:00.003-04:00

If you watched the Democratic Convention last week, you saw a party that loves their country and the people in it, and wants to win an election by appealing to the people and calling for a new direction for the country. You saw a party that, while very clear about the differences between them and their opponents, has a positive vision for what America can become and a positive direction of leadership.

The Republicans, in contrast, have become a party of hate and contempt. They hate the Democratic Party and their standard-bearer, Barack Obama, and clearly think that the rest of the American people are too stupid to realize that the reason the country has been run into the ground is years of incompetent, morally-bankrupt, corrupt, and ideologically-unsound Republican "leadership." Their plan to win the election is to pour as much contempt on Barack Obama as possible and hope they can make enough people afraid of him that they'll stay home.

I sincerely hope that the American people will be smart enough to see through the Republicans' lies and amorality. I also sincerely hope that those who consider themselves Republicans will put country above party and call on their party to begin campaigning honestly on issues and ideas rather than on hate, contempt, and fearmongering. But mostly, I hope that those who have taken the Republican Party in this direction - including their presidential and vice-presidential candidates - go down to such ignominious defeat in November that their political philosophy is completely discredited and people of conscience retake the Republican Party.

You know your campaign is off message when...

2008-09-03T18:22:00.004-04:00

...you're threatening to sue the National Enquirer.

What next? A suit against Mad Magazine for running a less-than-flattering caricature of Palin in this month's issue? Or will it be a suit against the Weekly World News for suggesting that Sarah Palin is also the mother of Bat Boy?

"Macabre" doesn't even begin to describe the circus this choice has become...

The hits just keep on coming...

2008-09-01T20:33:00.005-04:00

First, let me get something out of the way:

Things that are not any of our business:
Sarah Palin's daughter's pregnancy

Thank you. Anyone who thinks otherwise can just bug off. No teenage girl deserves to have her problems broadcast on national TV, even if her mother is the Republican VP pick.

But there are some things that are our business regarding John McCain's irresponsible choice of Sarah Palin. For example, on the aforementioned story: Why did the McCain campaign claim that they knew about this pregnancy before they chose her, when Palin's own press secretary didn't know a thing about it two days ago? (If you think I'm undermining my first point, remember the words of the "Impeach Clinton" crowd: it wasn't the sex but the lying.) Another good question: Why did Sarah Palin belong to an Alaskan secessionist party back in the 1990s, and does she still sympathize with their "Alaska First" views (which would, of course, contrast with McCain's own "Country First" campaign)? Why did Palin have to lawyer up today in the Troopergate scandal in Alaska?

But those questions are all trivial and meaningless, really (except for perhaps the last one, which might indicate her willingness to abuse government power for personal vendettas... which isn't necessarily a dealbreaker in the Bush-McCain era). They're fodder for the bloggers and the talking heads for a few days, after which they fade into oblivion. The question we should be asking, the key to the whole thing, is this: why does all of this seem to be taking the McCain campaign by surprise?

If Sarah Palin were an applicant for just about any government job that's going to have access to the most classified information we have (as the VP has), she would have to go through an incredibly thorough, invasive, and stringent vetting process. She would have to list just about everyone she's ever known and anything that could even potentially be used against her. This isn't just to root out potential spies; this kind of background checking is done because people with access to that kind of classified information can be blackmailed or threatened if there are skeletons in their closets. It's for the protection of the country and the information, and I for one am glad that everyone with high clearance has been checked out by the appropriate government agency.

However, an applicant for the vice presidency cannot constitutionally be held to any standard other than that he/she be 35 years old and a natural-born citizen.

Thus, if the McCain campaign is putting "Country First" and not "Election First," as they claim, wouldn't they want to vet a person who would have access to the most classified information we have at least as much as an agency like the CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. would? Hell, even if they are putting "Election First," wouldn't they want to do that kind of vetting, as scandals like these could threaten to derail the candidacy?

What does it say about John McCain's decision-making ability that he would make this choice - which is, we should note, the first presidential choice a candidate makes, and perhaps the most important - without doing his homework? What does it say about his judgment that the decision appears to have been made before the candidate was vetted?

Most importantly - do we really want that kind of decision-making judgment out of the person with his finger on the flashing red button?

I sure as hell don't.

Looks like Sarah Palin...

2008-09-01T10:14:00.003-04:00

...really is a woman after John McCain's own heart:

"I told Congress, thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere," Palin told the cheering McCain crowd, referring to Ketchikan's Gravina Island bridge.

But Palin was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it.

The Alaska governor campaigned in 2006 on a build-the-bridge platform, telling Ketchikan residents she felt their pain when politicians called them "nowhere." [...]

In September, 2006, Palin showed up in Ketchikan on her gubernatorial campaign and said the bridge was essential for the town's prosperity.

Wow... she really is a maverick. To make the soundbite line of her speech a bald-faced lie, instead of the half-truths and bumbling "my friends" of John McCain, is truly mavericky and bold.

Is anyone over at Camp McCain doing their job? Come to think of it, is anyone in the national media - you know, the people who should be pointing out that Palin openly lied in her speech - doing their job?

Well, at least they aren't ignoring it this time.

2008-08-31T14:31:00.003-04:00

Remember Katrina? Remember Bush's pathetic response to Katrina? What you might not remember was who Bush was hanging out with while he was ignoring the plight of the people of New Orleans...

That's right: John McCain. Happy birthday, Johnny. Way to keep the president focused on what really matters.

This time, though, it would appear that instead of their usual policy of ignoring things that affect people making less than $5 million (all of whom are, to McCain, middle-class), the Republicans are actually going to pay attention if a hurricane hits New Orleans... because it's going to disrupt their convention.

First, McCain and his entourage visited a relief center in Mississippi today. This, of course, might do more harm than good, as a visiting presidential candidate requires not only Secret Service protection but also coordination with local public safety resources - resources that could probably be better put to use actually engaging in the relief effort instead of providing a presidential candidate a photo-op pretending to engage in the relief effort.

Second, they're changing their convention plans from a celebration - though I honestly have no idea what they have to celebrate - to a "service convention." Bush has apparently cancelled his appearance at the convention - probably even more welcome news for McCain as he tries to distance himself from a failed president - and the rest of the convention is probably going to be muted as well. I honestly can't knock that at all. As someone on another blog said, sometimes the right thing and the politically-expedient thing are the same.

But third - and this is the part that really chaps my hide - is this tidbit from the Politico, which has sources within the GOP:

McCain was scheduled to deliver his acceptance speech Thursday, but now may do so from the devastation zone if the storm hits the U.S. coast with the ferocity feared by forecasters.

Seriously? John McCain would divert massive resources from the relief effort - which will need to be huge even if the hurricane does minimal damage, but even more so "if the storm hits the U.S. coast with the ferocity feared by forecasters" - to make a political speech? A lot of cops, firefighters, security services, infrastructure, etc. would be necessary to provide for McCain to make his acceptance speech from the "devastation zone;" I know this from having been locked out of my workspace for about five hours by the Secret Service at Invesco on Thursday night. These things don't just happen. Is John McCain really so focused on November 5, and not on January 20 (or, for that matter, on the people of New Orleans), that he would really divert precious resources from actual disaster relief to a photo-op when they're needed most?

Sen. McCain, please do the right thing and stay the hell away from the Gulf Coast for the next week like Obama is doing. The people down there need to devote all their resources to getting people out of the area, bracing for the hurricane, and rebuilding and helping people afterward, not to backing up the Secret Service so you can get a photo-op and look presidential.

This doesn't exactly inspire confidence, does it?

2008-08-30T17:45:00.005-04:00

Charlie Black with the Bush-McCain campaign:

[Palin]’s going to learn national security at the foot of the master for the next four years, and most doctors think that he’ll be around at least that long.

I know it was a joke, but seriously... most doctors think he'll be around at least that long? What happens if he isn't? A 72-year-old man with a history of cancer and other ailments could (God forbid) pass away at any time - even on January 21, 2009. Will she be ready then? Or will she still need a few years to "learn national security at the foot of the master"? If so, what new "master" will be pulling the strings of the new Commander-in-Chief?

The more I look at this choice, the more it becomes clear to me that with this decision John McCain was thinking only of November 5, 2008 - and not of January 20, 2009. It's an irresponsible choice - and an even more irresponsible way of making that choice - from the man who wants Americans to make him the next leader of the free world.

Update: Even Karl Rove thinks this is an irresponsible choice - or at least he did back on August 10:

"With all due respect again to Governor Kaine, he's been a governor for three years, he's been able but undistinguished," Rove said. "I don't think people could really name a big, important thing that he's done. He was mayor of the 105th largest city in America."

It's important to note here that Tim Kaine has twice as much experience as governor as Sarah Palin, and of a much more populous and diverse state with an economy that isn't propped up by the oil and gas industries and federal pork.

Oh, and for the record, I can't even find where Wasilla, Alaska, with its population of a whopping 6,715, ranks on the list of US cities. But if the state of Alaska were a city, its population of 680,000 would make it the 17th largest city in the nation - meaning that anyone who has been the mayor of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose, Detroit, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, San Francisco, Columbus, or Austin has, in fact, had more constituents than Gov. Palin.

Her?

2008-08-30T02:25:00.004-04:00

Okay, first things first: Last night, I was a part of history. The convention was nothing short of incredible - and though I didn't have as much of a chance as I'd have liked to mingle with big- and medium-wigs, the fact that I got to be there at all is a memory I'm going to take with me for the rest of my life.

But the big story today - as John McCain intended - is Sarah Palin, McCain's choice for running mate. To be honest, I find her utterly underwhelming... but more important than the political implications of having her on the ticket, I think, is how the candidates' differing processes of selecting running mates reflects on their judgment and decision-making capabilities.

Barack Obama, as is now well-known, subjected his potential VP nominees to extensive scrutiny - including long conversations with his vetting team and with himself and a deep exploration of his candidates' personal, political, and financial records. Every angle, everything in the candidates' pasts, everything they'd said and done, was considered when coming to this decision, which was mulled over for quite a while.

And it's clear from Obama's process that the primary qualifications for the role were (a) that the person be prepared to take over the presidency on day one should the unthinkable happen, (b) that the person have independent judgment and be willing to express contrary opinions to Obama's, and (c) that the person have a good working relationship with Obama. Obama got all three - and much, much more - in Joe Biden, who convinced me even more this week that he is the right man for the job. (Not to mention that his mother is perhaps the sweetest little old lady on the face of the planet.)

On the other hand, John McCain - as is becoming well-known - went from his gut, deciding just the other night that Palin was his pick. He'd met Palin a grand total of once - yes, one time - before deciding that the not-even-half-term governor of a state of 680,000 people with no economic or foreign policy experience of any kind was completely ready to be the leader of the free world on January 21, 2009. The vetting process for her was apparently somewhat minimal.

And I'm not entirely sure what exactly McCain saw (or sees) as the primary qualifications for the role of vice president... she's not ready to take over the job, there's absolutely no evidence on her of any kind on the issues that matter, and McCain had met her only once before choosing her, thus negating any argument about his trusting her character or about their working relationship. The cynical part of me says that the reasons for her choice as running mate are rather obvious (made all the more so by her reference to Hillary Clinton in her introduction speech today - an insult to all real supporters of Hillary Clinton, who even though she was not my choice to be president was certainly qualified for the job), but the part of me that thinks that John McCain made this decision for the good of the country is wondering just what the hell he was thinking, putting someone he barely knows and who has no record and no relevant experience potentially one heartbeat away from having her finger on the button.

Now which kind of decision-maker do we want leading the free world? Do we want someone who considers all the angles, consults intelligent people from various ideological standpoints, thinks deeply about the issue, and comes to a conclusion based on the best possible criteria for a successful choice? Or do we want four more years of the last eight years, a president who shoots from the hip and makes decisions based on his gut feelings with criteria for success that aren't at all clear?

In other words - do we want intelligent leadership in Obama, or do we want four more years of Bush-McCain?

The choice to me is very clear - and made even more so by what, in my opinion, is a rather irresponsible choice on John McCain's part.

Best convention line thus far...

2008-08-26T21:35:00.003-04:00

...from Ohio governor Ted Strickland:

You know, it was once said of the first George Bush that he was born on third base and thought he'd hit a triple. Well, with the 22 million new jobs and the budget surplus Bill Clinton left behind, George W. Bush came into office on third base--and then he stole second.

Do we really want this guy's finger on the button?

2008-08-26T16:38:00.003-04:00

You can tell how a person works by asking his or her coworkers... and John McCain's coworkers, Democratic and Republican alike, all agree that John McCain's temper is out of control.

“He has a huge anger problem,” [Sen. Barbara] Boxer said. “And he never hid that….I have seen it happen on the Senate floor many, many times... He has exploded at me a couple times.”

Oh, and let's not pretend McCain has the kind of control over his temper that he can keep from being violent:

Boxer pointed out that many of McCain’s GOP colleagues have also spoken out about his volatility, highlighting an incident told to the Biloxi Sun Herald by Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.).

Cochran told the newspaper that he watched McCain get involved in a physical confrontation with a Nicaraguan government official during a 1987 trip there. According to Cochran, McCain grabbed the official by the shirt collar and “snatched him up like he was throwing him up out of the chair.”

So... in the many stressful and frustrating situations the next president is likely to find himself in, do you really want a man who is this unable to control himself? Do we really want the leader of the free world to be a (supposedly) grown man who gets violently angry and throws a temper tantrum whenever he doesn't get his way?

John McCain does not have the temperament to be President. Add that to the numerous reasons he is unfit for the office.

A noun, a verb, and POW.

2008-08-26T00:13:00.003-04:00

On Jay Leno's show tonight, John McCain personally engaged in the same crass exploitation of his own life story that his campaign has been engaging in for weeks - another rather pathetic attempt to use the fact that he was a POW to suggest that this makes him completely beyond any criticism for anything he's ever done.

"For a million dollars," Jay Leno asked Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., today, "how many houses do you have?"

"Could I just mention to you, Jay, that, at a moment of seriousness. I spent five-and-a-half years in a prison cell," McCain said. "I didn't have a house. I didn't have a kitchen table. I didn't have a table. I didn't have a chair. And I didn't spend those five-and-a-half years because, not because I wanted to get a house when I got out."

Seriously... what the hell does your having been a POW have to do with the fact that you're such a massive economic elitist? Are a few years of heroism supposed to paper over a lifetime of moral cowardice, lack of character, and failure of integrity?

John McCain is running a serious risk that his personal story will become a running joke - and when it happens, he will have only himself to blame.

Something I Don't Understand

2008-08-21T11:25:00.006-04:00

Why is it that Barack Obama is painted as an elitist when John McCain, the son and grandson of admirals who grew up in privilege, has a great deal more money, wants to basically sell what remains of this country's middle class to the rich, and doesn't even know how many houses he owns at a time when many of his "fellow" Americans can barely afford to stay in theirs, is somehow seen as a "regular guy"?

Anyway, Obama's come out with a new, strong ad on this very topic.

Update: "John Sixpack" calls the Waaaaaaaambulance and issues a response.

Does a guy who made more than $4 million last year, just got back from vacation on a private beach in Hawaii and bought his own million-dollar mansion with the help of a convicted felon really want to get into a debate about houses? Does a guy who worries about the price of arugula and thinks regular people ‘cling’ to guns and religion in the face of economic hardship really want to have a debate about who’s in touch with regular Americans?

Um... "Senator"? Barack Obama earned his money by writing books people wanted to read, and only got out of student loan debt a few years ago. You left your first wife, the mother of your children, because your mistress had a lot of money and was willing to fund your political career... not to mention that you can't even be bothered to show up for the job the American people are paying you to do. I don't think you want to have the debate about who's making a better living here, "Senator" Whiny.

Update 2: Someone else pointed out that according to John McCain, Barack Obama's $4 million income is still well within the middle-class.

Update 3: Another predictable response from Widdle Crybaby Johnny's campaign: "b-b-b-but he was a POW!"

"Senator" McCain: Were you or were you not tortured?

2008-08-20T14:33:00.004-04:00

That should be a key question in this debate.

Andrew Sullivan makes the point that according to McCain, he was subjected to the following as a POW in Vietnam:

The torture that was deployed against McCain emerges in all the various accounts. It involved sleep deprivation, the withholding of medical treatment, stress positions, long-time standing, and beating.

Hmmmm.... those practices sound curiously similar to the practices the Bush-McCain administration deemed not to be torture - a definition John McCain condoned and approved when he voted for the Intelligence Authorization Bill back in February (one of the few votes "Senator" McCain has showed up for during this campaign).

So, "Senator" McCain: Was what you underwent torture, or wasn't it? If it was, then how the hell can you condone it as a practice of the United States government?

This is, quite simply, an open-and-shut moral case. Torture is wrong, period. Under all circumstances, in all situations, those who engage in torture and those who condone or approve its use are engaging in a grave moral evil. And anyone who supports those who condone or approve torture without speaking out forcefully and at every opportunity is equally guilty.

In February 2008, "Senator" John McCain, who once defied his generally-slimy character and stood honorably and morally to oppose torture, decided when it came to choosing between keeping his honor and winning the Republican primary, winning was more important than the deepest and most personal moral principles.

Anyone who calls him- or herself a person of conscience cannot support "Senator" John McCain, who is standing on the side of evil on one of the most clear-cut moral issues of our age.

If you read only one thing today...

2008-08-19T18:45:00.003-04:00

...make sure it's this... a man who spent more time than John McCain in the POW camps in Vietnam writing about why he won't vote for John McCain. Some highlights:

I furthermore believe that having been a POW is no special qualification for being President of the United States. The two jobs are not the same, and POW experience is not, in my opinion, something I would look for in a presidential candidate.

I can verify that John has an infamous reputation for being a hot head. He has a quick and explosive temper that many have experienced first hand. Folks, quite honestly that is not the finger I want next to that red button.

I'm disappointed to see John represent himself politically in ways that are not accurate. He is not a moderate Republican. On some issues he is a maverick. But his voting record is far to the right. I fear for his nominations to our Supreme Court, and the consequent continuing loss of individual freedoms, especially regarding moral and religious issues. John is not a religious person, but he has taken every opportunity to ally himself with some really obnoxious and crazy fundamentalist ministers lately.

Read the whole thing... if for no other reason than that Widdle Johnny's "...b-b-b-but I was a POW!" excuse for wrangling out of any and all criticism won't work quite so well here.

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

2008-08-18T22:51:00.005-04:00

Awww... poor widdle Johnny thinks NBC is being too mean to him. Widdle Johnny's feelings are hurt because NBC pointed out inconsistencies in his story and caught him cheating at the church forum.

Cheating at the church forum. That's just a step above grabbing a few bucks from the offering plate while it goes past. And then he lies about it and cries like a baby when he gets called on it... not to mention his spokesperson's invoking (again) the fact that he was a POW, which apparently means that he's immune from all questions about anything he ever did.

Pathetic.

Rick Warren's Moral Failure

2008-08-17T12:29:00.003-04:00

The Saddleback Civic Forum last night disappointed me greatly. I was hoping we would see Rick Warren force the candidates to wrestle with deep moral issues, engage complex situations with wisdom, and discuss their personal philosophies in detail. I was hoping that Rick Warren actually meant it when he said that there were more moral issues than abortion and gay marriage.

Instead, it turned into a two-headed coin: Barack Obama, being honest, thoughtful, nuanced, and intelligent; and John McCain, spouting talking points and obviously prepared anecdotes. And Rick Warren proved that for all his talk about being different, he's just another Christian Right hack.

Why did Rick Warren, who claims to understand Christianity, spend 20 minutes with each candidate on abortion, gay marriage, and stem cells (none of which are mentioned in the Bible) and not ask either candidate how their religious views impacted their understanding of the people across this planet and in this very country living under the crippling oppression of poverty? Where was the question about one of the primary moral questions of our age - that of the United States's proven and admitted use of torture in treatment of detainees (which John McCain flip-flopped and approved in a moral failure that should disqualify him from receiving the vote of anyone who calls him- or herself a person of conscience)?

In short: Why were all of Rick Warren's "moral questions" on the Republicans' turf? Why did he not address the very real and very meaningful moral issues of poverty (mentioned throughout the Bible) and treatment of the oppressed and the prisoner (also mentioned throughout the Bible)? Why did he not ask John McCain and Barack Obama if they thought the Federal Budget was a moral document?

Moreover, if this was supposed to be a faith forum with all Christians on stage, where were the deep questions about the candidates' faith? I would have liked to see a question - or even a mention - of Jesus Christ from Rick Warren or John McCain; as it is, only Barack Obama seemed to acknowledge the existence of Jesus Christ on that stage.

This was a setup, plain and simple. This wasn't an opportunity for the candidates to prove themselves to the Christian Right; it was an opportunity for Rick Warren, about whom my opinion has changed 180 degrees as a result of this forum, to prove himself to the Christian Right by telling them that their two big issues really are the only ones that matter. It was a pitiful display on his part.

Rick Warren has demonstrated that he is just another right-wing hack.

New Ad from the Matthew 25 Network

2008-08-15T11:54:00.002-04:00

This ad is going to run during the Saddleback Civic Forum tomorrow night, at which Obama will talk about his faith.

I think American voters really need to consider the massive character gulf between the two candidates, as evidenced by the way they treat the people closest to them. On the one side, we have a family man who has been married to the same (incredible) woman for decades, has two beautiful daughters, and has never said a single negative thing about his wife in public.

On the other, we have a guy who demonstrated his lack of devotion to family by dumping his sick wife, the mother of his children, for a rich young beauty queen - who he has then insulted and disrespected on numerous occasions in public (calling her a "c**t and a trollop" on one occasion, and suggesting she degrade herself in a "beauty pageant" on another).

I think it's time that people of conscience start pushing back against the notion that the Republicans - the party that continues to embrace Larry Craig, David Vitter, and John McCain - are the party of "family values."

Irony, thy name is John McCain.

2008-08-14T17:40:00.005-04:00

In the twenty-first century, nations don't invade other nations.

--John McCain, vocal supporter of the 2003 invasion of Iraq

After watching George W. Bush look like a ten-year-old forced to sit through his sister's piano recital at the quite frankly breathtaking Olympic opening ceremonies last week, we have to ask ourselves: Do we really want our next president to be as much an embarrassing international joke as this one is?

Stay classy, Focus on the Family.

2008-08-12T13:57:00.003-04:00

Wow. Does it get any more childish, immature, or insulting than this?

First of all, the fact that these "Christians" are praying for it to rain on someone else's big day just says "petulant children." I mean, can you get any more immature? "We don't like that you support women and GLBT citizens, so we're going to pray for it to rain on you." That they claim Christ supports their childish behavior is deeply offensive.

But it's even more insulting than that. As I'm typing this, I'm sitting in an apartment in California - a state that, like many other places in this world as our climate changes, is suffering from droughts that threaten the state's crops and cause even more uncontrolled wildfires. And California's got it easy drought-wise compared to other places in the world, where entire populations are threatened by lack of rain.

If these so-called "Christians" are inclined to pray for rain, perhaps they should pray for rain where it's needed instead of praying for it to fall on the people they politically disagree with. But, of course, that would mean they put the needs of suffering human beings over their political stances against women and GLBT citizens, and we can't have that.

They are heretics.

John Edwards: Still Better than John McCain

2008-08-12T13:32:00.004-04:00

You'll undoubtedly notice that the McCain campaign isn't making much hay out of the Edwards affair - and the reason is that if they did, it would open them to massive charges of hypocrisy. As it is, I think we need to turn a bigger spotlight on what McCain's own affair reveals about his character.

First, like John Edwards's affair, John McCain's wife was sick at the time. It takes a special breed of scum to cheat on one's spouse when he or she needs more support, when he or she is hurting.

Second, unlike John Edwards's affair, McCain didn't break it off - in fact, he dumped his first wife (who was sick and crippled from a car accident) to run off with Cindy. Yep, Mr. Integrity himself dumped his sick wife for a hot, young, rich heiress. Edwards is working to make his marriage work; McCain decided that it was too hard to stay with his sick wife and ran off with the mistress. Stay classy, Mac.

Third, unlike John Edwards, John McCain's affair helped his career. It was Cindy's cash that bankrolled McCain's first run for office.

So, to review: John Edwards had an affair with a woman around his age, an affair that hurt his career perhaps irreparably, and broke off the affair to make things work with his wife (who is, I might add, an incredible woman who should get a Cabinet seat in the Obama administration).

John McCain had an affair with a rich beauty queen decades younger than him, an affair that helped his career by bankrolling his first campaign, and instead of doing what honorable people do he dumped his sick wife to run off with the heiress. And I have yet to see the slightest indication that he repents or regrets what he did in any way.

Someone tell me again how the Republicans - who nominated this scumbag - are the party of family values?

John McCain flip-flops...

2008-08-06T11:22:00.004-04:00

...again.

“Obama said a couple of days ago says we all should inflate our tires. I don’t disagree with that. The American Automobile Association strongly recommends it,” McCain said.

Turns out that real Americans don't drive their Hummers on the rims.

One would think that after his major reversals - apparently motivated by nothing but the most craven political expediency - on Roe v Wade, campaign finance reform, the Christian Right, and, oh yeah, torture , he would get the label of flip-flopper - after all, it was applied to Kerry simply because he saw the light on the immoral, irresponsible Iraq War. But of course, the "liberal" media has no inclination of being honest about John McCain, since the real John McCain would be so odious to most voters that Obama would win in a landslide, and no tight horse-race means lower ratings.

So, let's review: John McCain is a misogynist, has no character, integrity, or class, and apparently has no core principles he's not willing to sell out in order to win an election. (If he had any, you'd think opposition to torture - which he himself underwent at the Hanoi Hilton - would be at the top of the list... but apparently even that is for sale.)

Tell me again why anyone should support him?

Paris Hilton responds to John McCain

2008-08-05T19:32:00.002-04:00

You know you're having a bad week when you get pwned by Paris Hilton.

Yeah. The media just loves Obama.

2008-08-05T12:18:00.008-04:00

Picture this: Barack Obama goes to a popular event among the African-American community that features topless women, misogynistic musicians, and a raunchy nightly beauty contest. At the event, Sen. Obama jokes that he wanted his wife, Michelle, to compete in the topless (and frequently bottomless) beauty contest, which generally devolves into a drunken orgy, so that she could be Miss [event name here] and First Lady.

Does anyone think that wouldn't be the only thing on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox "News" 24 hours a day for the next week?

So why is it that John McCain can do it without even a peep on the news networks?

Indeed, McCain felt so comfortable at the event that he even volunteered his wife for the rally’s traditional beauty pageant, an infamously debauched event that’s been known to feature topless women.

“I encouraged Cindy to compete,” McCain said to cheers. “I told her with a little luck she could be the only woman ever to serve as first lady and Miss Buffalo Chip.”

That McCain can get away with this kind of thing is utterly ridiculous. So along with having no character or integrity, John McCain can also be accurately described as a misogynist... not that we didn't already know that from his generally anti-woman voting record and penchant for woman-hating "humor."

And anyone claiming to have a conscience can still support this man?

Update Thought: John McCain claims to be a Christian. What kind of Christian man would dishonor his wife by even joking in public about his wife participating in something like this?

Buffalo Chip has a reputation for that sort of thing. It holds a Miss Buffalo Chip contest every night, which is essentially a topless beauty pageant. And occasionally bottomless, too. During a drenching rain Wednesday night, the contest broke up into smaller groups and one woman wound up dancing naked on a bar top. Her boyfriend/husband saw her and angrily dragged her away as she struggled to put her pants back on and muttered something about how, "It's only this one week a year."

I laughed when I heard the guys at Buffalo Chip tell the story, but then I thought about the conversation I had with Pearl Gulbranson, who was working at the Crisis Intervention Center for domestic abuse, which is located in a house across the street from the Broken Spoke. Gather 500,000 people in one spot, feed them a lot of alcohol and there are bound to be some serious problems.

Obama calls 'em like he sees 'em...

2008-08-05T11:01:00.002-04:00

...and as the last eight years have proven, he's right about this:

They're very good at negative campaigning. They're not so good at governing.

For your enjoyment: A PSA and a political rant...

2008-08-04T22:53:00.005-04:00

...all in one.

A few days ago, Barack Obama noted that we could save more energy by properly inflating our car tires and getting regular engine service than will ever be output by the Republicans' offshore drilling plan - and, as opposed to the offshore oil reserves, which by all estimates probably won't pan out for 15-20 years if ever, we can inflate our tires and get our cars checked now.

Inflating your tires really does help your fuel economy, and I should know - my car tells me exactly how many miles I'm getting to the gallon, and I get 3-4 mpg better when my tires are at their maximum PSI.

Inflating our tires and getting tune-ups would actually help end our dependence on foreign oil in the present and it would do so without massive giveaways to the oil industry. It's a common-sense idea that would come at little cost to the American consumer and help the average Joe as well as our nation's economy.

So as expected, common sense having no place in the Republican Party, John McCain - who still has yet to tell anyone why they should vote for him instead of against Obama - has decided to make political hay out of his opponent making sense.

Seriously, Republicans... I thought he was supposed to be the different one. The one devoted to things like clean and honest campaigning, common-sense solutions, and bucking the party line. Why is it that when it comes down to choosing between winning the presidency and keeping his principles, John McCain is demonstrating that he'll pick the former ten times out of ten? And how can you in good conscience support a person of such empty character, of so little integrity, when your party has placed such a premium on those things in the past?

Update: I forgot to mention one of the likely reasons John McCain is opposed to energy solutions that don't line Big Oil's pockets... "Mr. Integrity" is taking their money. So much for principles. John McCain: No character, no class, no integrity.

Update 2: In a rare moment of responsibility amid their general policy of ignoring McCain's gaffes entirely and blowing Obama's out of proportion, it looks like the media is actually checking this one.

But who's really out of touch? The Bush Administration estimates that expanded offshore drilling could increase oil production by 200,000 bbl. per day by 2030. We use about 20 million bbl. per day, so that would meet about 1% of our demand two decades from now. Meanwhile, efficiency experts say that keeping tires inflated can improve gas mileage 3%, and regular maintenance can add another 4%. Many drivers already follow their advice, but if everyone did, we could immediately reduce demand several percentage points. In other words: Obama is right.

John McCain Forwards the Email

2008-08-04T09:25:00.003-04:00

You know those ridiculous and untrue emails your Aunt Edna forwards to everyone on her mailing list claiming that Barack Obama is a Muslim Manchurian Candidate or doesn't really love America or is the Antichrist? (When you receive them, of course, you should reply by putting away falsehood.)

John McCain - despite his earlier promises to run a positive campaign and not be a scumbag - has joined them with this ad. To the untrained eye, it may seem like a sarcastic and ridiculous attack ad attempting to tear down Barack Obama instead of tell us why to vote for John McCain... which it is, in part. (That John McCain doesn't seem to be able to articulate any reason for people to vote for him aside from "I'm not that black guy" is a matter for another post altogether.)

But to the trained eye, it's a lot more insidious than that. I study the Christian Right for a living, a movement that is dominated by premillennial dispensationalists - people who believe that the end of the world is nigh, and that its coming will be heralded by the Antichrist, a charismatic figure who will form a one-world government and yadda yadda yadda. John McCain has historically had trouble with this crowd - perhaps because he's demonstrated throughout his career that he'd rather spend Sunday Morning in a Washington TV studio than in a pew, or perhaps because his recent attempts to act like he has core principles and get religion are so transparently phony. (Or perhaps it's because, until he started running for president and trying to get these nutjobs' votes, he actually had sane positions on things like stem-cell research.)

But this ad is designed for the Christian Right, and designed to dovetail with those emails they've been sending calling Barack Obama the Antichrist. Look at the dogwhistles throughout the ad... it's basically a coded message to the Left Behind crowd that they should be very afraid of Barack Obama. Throughout the ad, there are subtle visual hints - the clouds, the overlaid words "They will call him the one" (echoing the passages about the Antichrist), the Obama quotes (every single one, I might add, taken out of context and misused in a complete dishonest way) - that those emails you've been getting about Barack Obama are all true, no matter what Snopes may tell you.

Unless and until John McCain repudiates this ad, fires anyone responsible for it, and personally apologizes to Barack Obama and the nation, he has demonstrated that his character is worth nothing, that he is willing to sell out any of the "principles" he supposedly holds near and dear in order to win an election. That John McCain - who undoubtedly knows better - is basically forwarding the emails saying Barack Obama is the Antichrist is utterly disgraceful.

McCain supporters who read this, the ball is in your court: Morality, if not any Christian principles those of you who are of the faith hold, dictate that it is imperative that you let the McCain campaign know that this is unacceptable. Time to get on the phone.