Jingoism 101, by Michele Bachmann

On Friday, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) appeared on Chris Matthews' show Hardball to talk about the presidential election, specifically about how Sarah Palin's Website talks about all of the wonderful "pro-American places" in the US. When Matthews failed to get her to name some of those places, he took another approach, and the following dialogue ensued:

Matthews: How many Congresspeople, members of Congress are in that anti-American crowd you describe?

Bachmann: [Deer in the headlights]

Matthews: How many Congresspeople you serve with - I mean, there's 435 members of Congress...

Bachmann: ...Well, right now...

Matthews: ...how many are anti-American in that Congress right now that you serve with?

Bachmann: You'd have to ask them, Chris, I'm focusing on Barack Obama and the people he's been associated with...

Matthews: But do you suspect that a lot of the people you serve with...

Bachmann: ...and I'm very worried about their anti-American nature.

Matthews: Well, he's the United States Senator from Illinois, he's one of the people you suspect as being anti-American. How many people in the Congress of the United States do you think are anti-American? You've already suspected Barack Obama. Is he alone, or are there others?

Bachmann: [Deer in the headlights]

Matthews: How many do you suspect of your colleagues do you suspect of being anti-American?

Bachmann: I would say, what I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look - I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America? I think the people would love to see an exposé like that.

After Bachmann's ridiculous nationalistic rant, The Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel hit the nail right on the head:

Chris, I fear for my country. I think what we just heard is a congresswoman channeling [Sen.] Joe McCarthy, channeling a politics of fear and loathing and demonization and division and distraction. Not a single issue mentioned. This is a politics at a moment of extreme economic pain in this country that is incendiary, that is so debased, that I'm almost having a hard time breathing, because I think it's very scary. Because this is a country I love, and this woman had no sense of the history of this nation, which is one of struggle, of trying to fulfill the great ideals of this nation, of movements that have brought about the civilizing advances of this country, and she doesn't even know who Saul Alinsky is - a community organizer who channeled the views of the people from below.

I think Barack Obama is going to win, and he's going to have a lot of work because there is an extremism unleashed in this nation which you just heard on this program, which could lead to violence, and hatred, and toxicity. And against the backdrop of the Great Depression we're living through, it could lead - and I don't use this word lightly - to a kind of American fascism, which is against the great values of this nation, and which people like that are fomenting.

It doesn't get much better than that - vanden Heuvel couldn't possibly have been more spot on, and by the way, it's just one more reason (did you need another?) why all progressives and liberals should be subscribing to and reading The Nation Magazine (vanden Heuvel is a part owner).

However, there's more you can do. A Website has already been established to censure Bachmann in Congress, and you can also leave some kind words on her Facebook page. She's also in a very competitive race for reelection, so any contribution can make a difference. The only way we're going to stop this hateful, absurd language is to get these hatemongers out of Congress.

Update: I've read reports that ActBlue has raised over $100,000 for her opponent, Elwyn Tinklenberg following Bachmann's nauseating appearance on Hardball on Friday. Sweet - let's keep it going. Even if you give $5, your contribution can make a difference and send Bachmann back to Minnesota in disgrace, right where she belongs.

Update, Part II: I just visited her Facebook page, and it appears that you have to become a "fan" or supporter of hers on Facebook to leave a post on your Wall. I'll pass. I found something pretty interesting on her page, though - her contact e-mail is listed as "repmichelebachmann@gmail.com" - pretty interesting that a Representative in the U.S. Congress has a gmail e-mail address listed in her Facebook page. Just wondering if that has anything to do with subpoena power regarding government e-mail addresses. Anyway, you can certainly drop her a line at her e-mail address, at least. Please, keep it courteous and respectful, but let her know in no uncertain terms that her language, behavior and demeanor and completely reprehensible and unacceptable.

Major hat tip to Crooks & Liars for the video and transcripts. (Just another reason why I've been consistently saying for years now why C&L is the best liberal blog on the Web.)

Live Blogging the Presidential Debate

Stephen Crowley, NYT

There's about 10 minutes to go, and this promises to be interesting. Here's hoping that the actual debate is heaps more interesting than the talking head nonsense I've been listening to for the last two hours. As usual, Olbermann, Matthews, Gregory and the rest of the MSNBC crew have focused on the trivial - subjects that people probably care little about: Bill Ayers, McCain's demeanor during the last debate, and endless predictions about what the candidates will say. ZZZZZZZ The only one who had much interesting to say was Olbermann, who is doing a pretty effective job of exposing the hatred and vitriol that is increasingly becoming a staple of any Palin (and John McCain's, to a certain extent) campaign appearance.

Things are going to get started, as soon as Chris Matthews shuts up. Please check back and hit Refresh, as I will update periodically when my fingers need a break from typing.

Chris Matthews actually just brought up a good point on Countdown - how troubling it is that McCain/Palin supporters are yelling out threats and hateful remarks about Obama at campaign appearances. Of course, neither can control what people yell out, but they can and must tell people that that sort of language is completely out of bounds and unacceptable. I haven't thought about it much, but Matthews raises a good point - when these hateful remarks enter the mainstream and go unanswered, "the nuts from the right and left come out," and he mentioned Lee Harvey Oswald. Matthews is right - language by any supporters of any candidate must remain civil and decent, and I certainly hope that the Secret Service takes all of these threats seriously.

They are getting ready to throw it to Brokaw - I'm interested to hear if Brokaw referees the discussion tonight, especially if McCain pulls a Palin and ignores the moderator's questions. I don't think that either candidate can get away with that in this setting. Here we go. ...

9:03: Here come the candidates, and it's no surprise that McCain made some eye contact and greeted Obama much more cordially. (Okay, I guess I'm focusing on the inane now, too - sorry.)

9:04: The first question is on the economy - no surprise there. It goes to Obama first. He characterizes the mess we're in as the "worst economic crisis since the Great Depression." Absolutely. I like the fact that Obama is directly attacking the failed economic policies of Bush. I feel he came off the track already though with his mentioning the economic rescue package from last week. Booooo. But, kudos for mentioning that AIG went on a $400k junket, and he rightfully calls for that money to be returned to taxpayers and for the AIG greedy pigs to be fired. It won't happen, but I'm happy Obama said it.

9:06: McCain starts with energy independence, and I don't know that that's going to resonate. I notice that he mentions keeping taxes low, and I just don't think it's going to wash. The worst kept secret in this campaign is that the next president will have to raise taxes, period. Very FDR-esque to mention buying up mortgages - and we should - Obama should be putting forth these ideas. McCain's joke falls flat to Brokaw about his being Treasury Secretary. And he sounds a bipartisan note by looking at Obama and mentioning an Obama supporter - Warren Buffet. Edge to McCain on that question. :o/

9:08: Obama just mentioned that Warren Buffet would be a good choice for Treasury Secretary. I'll be back after I get done biting down on a cyanide capsule.

9:10: First b.s. talking point of the night - McCain just contradicts himself by saying it's a "rescue" not a "bailout," and then he proceeds to talk about greed on Wall St. I must have missed something. I knew it wouldn't take McSame long to sound like a partisan hack. Now he's attacking Obama, and he's repeating himself about stabilizing home values. What about people who don't own homes? Obama had better not let it pass that McCain's campaign manager's company was taking money from Freddie Mac up until about six weeks ago. Hit him, Barack.

9:12: I like how Obama came out with his response - "let me talk about what's in it for you..." instead of going off on a partisan attack. After that, he proceeds to attack McCain on deregulation - good. Dereg is poison in the financial markets, and I don't care what the economists say.

Brokaw is trying to trap Obama with a question during the ensuing discussion: "Are you trying to say that people need to prepare for the worst regarding the economy?" Of course, Obama says "No," and he blows it there - it IS going to get worse, but as a candidate, he can't say that.

McCain for the third time is mentioning "buying up bad mortgages" - a good idea, but how many more times will he repeat it tonight? The over/under is 8. I'll take the over. (By the way, conservatives will hate this idea, which I love - McCain really isn't conservative enough for many on the far right, and that just tickles me.) Oh yea, and who's going to pay for it? And where was McCain with this f*&$#@ idea last week - publicly pushing for this? Nowhere to be found, except trying to score political points and trying to suspend the very debates that we have watched and are watching so he could save our economy (in so many words). Talk about bold ideas... after the fact, and after McCain (and Obama, to be fair) voted Yea on a POS, pork-infested bill to bail out of Wall St.

9:18: A boring question about why should Washington be trusted with taxpayers' money. Obama's response was pretty predictable, and now McCain is pimping his resume as a "reformer" and his well-worn campaign faux witticism that "Senator Obama has never taken on a member of his own party," as if that's a prerequisite for running for president. What, no mention of Maverick?

To me, McCain is not even answering the question now - he's just attacking Obama. I don't know how this is going to play with the voters. And seriously, I'm so tired of hearing "My friends," it's making me crazy. He's just repeating a laundry list of his talking points - energy reform and eliminating our dependency on foreign oil - too bad he has consistently voted against green and alternative energy sources.

9:25: Obama mentions his proposal for $15 billion for alternative energy, and that "we can do it." Bravo. Health care is priority #2 in Obama's mind - good. Education is third, and that's good, too. I haven't heard McCain mention education yet. Obama is now going after McCain for more tax cuts for corporations. Interesting that McCain won't prioritize what's important, like Brokaw asked. Let me get this straight - you're running for president, and you can't come up with the most important thing to address in your new administration? Maybe his aides forgot to tell him what to say. Seriously, that's a pretty telling and significant gaffe.

9:27: An excellent question from a woman who lived through the Great Depression, which asks what sacrifices both candidates will ask Americans to make. McCain is now talking about a fucking overhead projector, for the second time. McDrilly, we get it. (We get how insignificant it is.) I'm waiting for McCain to get on all fours and paw the carpet, while snarling "Grrrr! Earmarks!" Again, Obama has an opportunity here regarding earmarks - will he take it? (Palin - the Princess of Pork - there are some great lines Obama could use here: "You will tell us the names of people who are looking for pork? Look on your own ticket, John." That would be a good start.)

9:29: Obama has the line of the night so far - reminding Americans what Bush wanted people to do not long after 9-11: "to go out and shop." Nice way to ask Americans to sacrifice, Dubya. I love it that Obama just mentioned Big Oil has 68 million acres of land in contracts that the aren't drilling on - the whole offshore drilling is just an opportunistic bullshit campaign borne out of greed to get more oil, OUR OIL, from underneath OUR lands. Oh yea, and Hurricane Ike did plenty of damage in the Gulf of Mexico, including plenty of oil spills, too; there goes the GOP line of b.s. about "drilling environmentally responsibly."

9:31: Obama is now on the attack about McCain's rhetoric about earmarks, which accounts for $18 billion of the federal budget. We're gonna need just a few more fat trimming of the federal budget than that, McSame.

9:35: McCain is very full of it when he's talking about how he's not in favor of tax increases for anyone. It's a total lie, and McCain knows it. He wants to keep the current tax rates, but those current tax rates FAVOR THE WEALTHY - the Bush tax cuts that McCain wants to keep in place. (Which, by the way, he was against five years ago, but now that he's running for president, he's for. Which is it?)

9:37: Brokaw is now asking a question about entitlements, and he's being disingenuous at best. Social Security will be fine for decades, and I'd love to hear Obama say that we need to raise the cap on SS from it's current rate of just over $100k per year - raise the taxable income for SS to $250k, and SS will be fine.

9:38: Obama is now coming back to McCain's mischaracterizations about tax cuts, and I'm happy that he is. McCain is trying to paint Obama as someone who will hurt small businesses, and that's bunk, too - the overwhelming majority of small businesses make less than $500,000 per year, and Obama's tax plan leaves those people alone.

9:40: McCain has just repeated himself by boasting about "taking on his own party" for the second or third time - is he going to repeat himself all night? Can we get a no-repeat debate, McSame? And stop it with the anti-lobbyist rhetoric, when you have so many lobbyists on your staff, including your campaign manager. Hit him, Barack - his gloves are down. I don't know why he doesn't exploit this opening - McCain is repeatedly giving it to him on a silver platter.

9:42: McCain is now talking about his global warming "record," if you can call it that. I'd love to hear one achievement, and so far I'm not hearing it. Now he's really on the B.S. Express talking about nuclear power - it's"safe and it's clean," eh? I beg to differ. I know that nuclear power must be part of the bridge to new energy technologies, but what will we do with the spent fuel? It's a proposal without a solution to a big problem, McSame.

I'm delighted to hear that Obama is refuting some of McCain's rhetoric about energy, specifically Obama's line when he says, "he complains that nothing has been done in Washington, but he's been there for 26 of them." Nice.

Brokaw is getting cranky about both candidates running over on time. Okay, that's fine - the more questions, the better, so keep 'em straight, Tommy Boy.

McCain is now blubbering about offshore drilling, but I don't buy for a city second that it will reduce the price of oil, and it doesn't take an economist to figure out why. I've written this many times before, and I will undoubtedly do it again - what's to stop Venezuela, Russia and Iran from scaling back production to keep the price of oil high to offset our production in would-be oil fields? In the meantime, our lands get raped, polluted and pillaged by multinational Big Oil companies, with no consequences.

9:49: A question about healthcare - this is Obama's strength - I can't wait to hear McCain's response, because his $5k tax credit is a joke, that will end up in the hands of insurance companies, according to this Website. And he must be nuts if he thinks that insurance companies won't raise the rates to sop up some of that $5k credit that Americans will get under his plan.

Here comes McCain - what line will he repeat here? Wait, wait - he wants to put health records online? He must be out of his mind. I don't want my medical records online, under any circumstances. Now McCain is on an anti-government rant- I'm so shocked, coming from a Republican. It will never cease to amaze me that America elects people to be in charge of our government, who hate government.

Is healthcare a privilege, right or a responsibility? McCain - a responsibility. Obama - it's a right. Advantage: Obama. I'm happy that Obama is refuting the myth that he is for "mandates."

One of the best lines of the night - Obama mentions that McCain voted against S-CHIP, a program that Repubes and Bush were against renewing, which gave millions of more children healthcare. I know this is true, and I remember it - I don't even need to go back and look.

9:59: McCain need a drink of water - his mouth sounds as dry as his manner and his answers. Maybe if he stops saying "My friends," his mouth wouldn't be as dry. Now McCain is calling Americans "peacemakers"; Not under this administration. I don't know how Americans feel about it, but there surely are millions around the world who are giving that line an eye roll, at best.

Wow, McCain is leaving himself more open than the town whore when it comes to his foreign policy answers. Of course, McCain mentions the Surge, all but boasting that it was a success, and of course he mentions Georgia and Russia, a sickeningly easy shot that Obama should take. I'll never forget when Georgia provoked Russia (look it up, if you don't believe me, and by looking it up, I don't mean Fox News), and McCain looked into news cameras, saying with a straight face, "We are all Georgians now." I was waiting for a drum tap, like he was joking. Oh, and we sent $1 billion to Georgia in foreign aid during the week of the Republican National Convention, a fact which received virtually no media coverage. I guess if it isn't mentioned on Faux News, then it never happened.

10:03: The Obama Doctrine - he could have and should have been much stronger in his answer. Now we get to hear the McCain Doctrine - from a guy who doesn't know a Shiite from a Sunni. To listen to McCain say it, he's never been wrong about any foreign policy decision that American's made, going all the way back to when he was in his mother's womb. Please.

10:07: A question on terrorism and Pakistan - Obama first. Obama is mentioning that the central War on Terrorism is in Pakistan (or, as he says it, Pokiston) - it is. That country, in addition to Afghanistan, is where al Qaeda is located, not in Iraq. Here comes a "rebuke" from McCain about where the front of the war on terror is - I know he'll say it.

Of course, a WHOPPER of a lie about Pakistan - Obama never, ever said that he wanted to "invade" Pakistan, and McCain knows it. Yet, he keeps on repeating this lie. It IS a lie, and McCain knows it. I can see Obama laughing in the background - I hope he has a chance to respond.

Obama is insisting on a follow-up, and McCain gets testy. So be it.

Ooo - now McCain is getting even more testy, and, dare I say it, unpresidential. Obama hits back brilliantly about Pakistan.

10:13: McCain looks really amateurish tonight during his response to Obama's response - I don't know how else to say it. He seems to be losing his composure here, talking about "getting Osama bin Laden; I know how to get him and I'll get him, no matter what." What the phuck (Philly reference) are you waiting for, McCain? Bin Laden attacked us over seven years ago - think you could drop by the Pentagon and enthrall the commanders and generals with your acumen? Empty, election-year rhetoric, period.

10:16: Now Obama is talking about Afghanistan, and I think he's right on here. "We have to have a government that is responsive to the Afghan people, and right now, it is not."

McCain is now talking about how Obama is "correct" about doubling the size of our forces in Afghanistan. Um, where are those troops coming from, McLame? I guess the folks over at Blackwater are going to start taking resumes again, and lots of them.

10:19: Now McCain is talking about Russia's behavior, regarding another Cold War. I have to tell you, he's way off base here. First, he talks about how "wealthy" Russia is. I must have missed something there. Second, people around the world must be laughing their asses off right now, hearing McCain characterizing Russia as "an aggressor." Hmm - Iraq War, anyone?

Georgia provoked the conflict with Russia, and McCain knows it. How does he know it? A former lobbyist for Georgia has a very high position in the McCain campaign; I can't remember his name, but I'll come back to this in the coming days - it gets virtually no coverage in the media.

10:26: A question about Iran and Israel, and McCain again tries to paint Obama as some sort of pussy for wanting to talk to the Iranians without preconditions. As Obama said during the last debate, "no preconditions does not mean no preparation," and I agree with him. Whatever happened to diplomacy? For all of the necrophilia that McCain fantasizes about with Ronald Reagan, one would think some of the metaphorical pillow talk could center around the value of diplomacy.

I like Obama's response - a diplomatic one, too - he cites specific examples about what happened when Bush walked away from diplomatic talks with Iran and North Korea.

10:28: The last question of the night: "What don't you know, and how will you learn it?" Of all the questions that Brokaw could pick from through Internet submissions, that's the one he picked?

I like Obama's response - that the American dream is fading, or coming into question, and it is. We do need fundamental change, and that's his answer in so many words.

McCain's answer is completely incoherent - "What I don't know is what the unexpected will be." Groundbreaking. He's all but giving his answer from the Hanoi Hilton right now with many allusions to his POW experiences, with another repeat line - "We need a steady hand at the tiller."

~~~
That's it - no knockout punches, so I have to give the advantage to Obama tonight, because McCain really needed to knock off the surging Obama with some sharp, crisp answers, and he didn't do it. Obama, again left plenty of points on the table, for the second consecutive debate. There's a fine line between being and looking presidential and hitting back when your opponent is leaving himself wide open with inaccurate assertions and blatant falsehoods.

I'll be back later tonight or tomorrow with more thoughts on the debate.

Thoughts on McCain's acceptance speech

I'm trying really hard to find some good in McCain's acceptance speech, but I was so nauseated by the introduction, I'm having a hard time controlling my venom and outrage.

Between Tom Brokaw's mentioning "POW" every three seconds and an introductory film that was all but shot in the Hanoi Hilton, I haven't seen anything this militaristic since... John Kerry's 2004 acceptance speech. And we all know how THAT happened. I'd really like to know where all of these people were who now insist that John McCain's military record is unassailable and that he's a hero - where were these people when another war hero was sickenly dragged through the sewer by the likes of T. Boone Pickens (who bankrolled the Swiftboaters). And by the way, it was McCain who failed to adequately and vehemently defend his "friend," Senator Kerry.

(For instance, I wonder where the despicable beast pictured at left was during this convention - she had no problem wearing purple Band-Aids to outrageously question Kerry's combat wounds in 2004. After an uproar (but not nearly strenuous enough) from the Kerry campaign, the GOP leadership at the '04 convention asked her and others to take the purple heart Band-Aids off. The very same people who didn't much care how Kerry, a war hero, was dragged through the mud are now bristling at the slightest criticism of McCain's military service, or at the people who have the temerity to question why most of McCain's campaign appearances turn into alphabet soup, he brings up "POW" so much.)

It's not McCain's service that I have a problem with. I honor it, without equivocation. But, the outright, blatant hypocrisy on the part of conservatives four years after doing whatever it took to smear Kerry, a war hero, makes me sick.

I don't even know where to start with all of the inaccuracies and outright lies I'm nearing by McCain. *I'm going to fast forward a bit, but I'll backtrack, too...*

I just heard McCain say that "Obama passed a corporate welfare bill." Really?!? That has crock of shit written all over it. I distinctly remember Congressional Democrats trying to end the subsidies to Big Oil earlier this year, but the Republicans successfully blocked that attempt with a filibuster. So, I'd like to know just what "corporate welfare bill" Barack Obama "passed." I'd think McDrilly, a U.S. Senator for well over 20 years, would certainly know by now that Senators don't pass bills, they vote for them. And presidents sign them into law.

Here's a whopper - "We are going to help workers who have lost jobs that won't come back by finding them another one that won't go away." Way to dip into the platitudes, Senator. Hmmm, too bad his almost fetish-like love for free trade won't bring back many of those jobs. Free trade is wrecking our economy, bar none. Obama has stated that he wants to re-examine NAFTA and free trade, and right away the right attacked him. NAFTA and free trade helps one group of people most of all - trans-national corporations and their millionaire CEOs.

Education is the civil rights issue for this century. Okay, another promise by another candidate - if he wins the election, I hope he holds to it. Every presidential candidate promises in one form or another to be the Education President, but virtually no president, Democrat or Republican, delivers, and Bush is just the latest. He's left plenty of children behind.

Wow - another biggie - "We're gonna stop sending $700 billion to countries that don't like us very much... [drowned out by applause]" No word if Iraq is included in that group or not - we are sending $10 billion over to that hot piece of sand every month. Wait, I forgot, we are winning going to win in Iraq. I don't know whether to laugh, or cry.

Now he's really throwing read meat out to the dogs - "Senator Obama doesn't want to build new nuclear power plants or allow off-shore drilling, but he knows we can't achieve energy independence without more drilling." *Ding Ding Ding* That's the lie of the night so far - here it is, loudly for the cheap seats - WE CANNOT ACHIEVE ENERGY INDEPENDENCE WITH MORE DRILLING. It's a total, bold-faced lie, and McCain knows it. But, he also knows that he's appealing to the ignorance of the American electorate, and also its frustration at high energy prices.

###

For someone who hates war, McDrilly has spent a whole lot of time trying to provoke it - his comments on Georgia - a small country that most Americans couldn't even find on a map if you gave them the latitude and longitude coordinates, are as foreboding and ignorant as they are scary. [I'll revisit Georgia in a separate post, very soon - probably tomorrow, and also Iran for that matter.]

Back to energy for a second - I have to give McCain credit for one thing - he may have a point about nuclear power - unfortunately, we do have to include it in the foreseeable future until we make renewable energy sources viable.

However, McCain mentioned Clean Coal (as did Obama in his acceptance speech), and there is no bigger bullshit lie in American politics today. Clean Coal is like saying Nice Pedophile - those two words just don't go together, and I think deep down, both candidates know it. (Or their energy wonks know it.)

His smile is so creepy - he just can't quite pull off saying something he thinks is clever without that sinister smile. When he just mentioned "I have the scars to prove it, and Senator Obama doesn't," when talking about Washington D.C., he just did it again, along with a George W. Bush-like wink, even, almost as if to say, "Nailed it!"

Now McCain is giving us the POW story - and one we've hard umpteen times this week. I'd have preferred to have heard it just from him, because he has every right to say it, and he should be saluted for it.

I have to say one thing though - plastic Fred Thompson let go a whale of a lie the other night, whether unintentional or not, when he said that McCain cannot salute the American flag he fought for. Too bad we saw him doing just that in his intro video. Nit picky, for sure, but does anyone fact check this stuff.

I'm profoundly moved by hearing McCain talk about his experiences as a POW - it's moving and admirable. But leave it to McCentury to even approach overdoing such a moving story: "I wasn't my own man anymore, I was my country's." [...] And finally, the cherry on top of the sundae: "I'm not running for president because I think I'm blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me, my country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her so long as I draw breath, so help me God."

He's been saying this all the while an American flag has been flapping in the wind in the background on a video screen. I'll resist any Nazi rally references; what is understood, needn't be discussed.

And people accused Obama of sermonizing? Obama's speech was short on specifics, but McCain's speech is even short on ideas - this speech is like one long... desk calendar.

And the chants of "USA! USA! USA!" to shout down protesters during the early part of his speech were amusing, to say the least. At one point, it was very obvious that McCain was getting pretty angry with being interrupted. I'm surprised the cops didn't beat the protesters senseless like they've been doing outside the arena - a story that has not been reported at all by our corporate media. (More on that in a separate post tomorrow as well.)

No political rally in America has more shows of patriotism (bordering on jingoism) than the Republican National Convention. I was half expecting Sarah Palin, or heaven forbid, Cindy McCain, to come out in an American flag g-string and swing from a poll.

Well the speech is over, and the talking heads are annoying me already...

Chris Matthews, a truly neurotic political pundit if there ever was one, is now predicting that McCain's speech could "win him the presidency" and that he will "be in the lead in the polls by next week." We'll see about that.

###

In retrospect, only a party as inept as the Democrats could actually lose an election after the worst presidency in modern American history. I'll say this about the Republicans - they don't hesitate to attack the Democrats, but the Dems almost always hesitate to attack the Republicans. Not once during the Democratic National Convention did I hear any of the major speakers mention Guantánamo Bay, torture, Abu Ghraib, Walter Reed Hospital, Valerie Plame, etc. The American people need to be reminded of the many misdeeds by this administration, an administration that McCain has been so closely aligned with during the past eight years. I certainly hope Obama's advisors are up well into the night tonight.

One final note about tonight's coverage - right now MSNBC's Ann Curry is interviewing Michael Gerson, a former Bush speechwriter (The ass who gave us the pathetic, history-reaching Axis of Evil phrase years ago) is savaging McCain's speech, about 15 minutes after McCain finished delivering it. No doubt that McCain's people are livid - I'm wondering if this is a dig because McCain's people didn't want Bush to appear at the convention in person. Gerson sounds like an angry attack dog for Bush, and in a strange way, that makes me happy.

More throughout the day tomorrow.

Kevin James gets beaned by a Hardball

This is another piece of footage that slipped through the cracks last week, amidst all of the appeasement coverage, when President Bush disgraced himself, America and the presidency by likening Barack Obama to Neville Chamberlain during a speech in front of the Knesset, the Israeli legislature. Chamberlain is the British prime minister who carved up Czechoslovakia for Adolf Hitler before World War II in the hopes it would satiate Hitler's lust for territory and power. Likening Obama to Chamberlain because Obama believes it's a wise course of action to at least talk to our enemies is laughable enough, but some of the dopes who attempted to join the Bush chorus on television was probably the funniest thing about the whole incident.

Anyway, the video above is probably the best single piece of footage I've seen this year, maybe even since I started this blog over two years ago - it's Chris Matthews absolutely taking apart conservative radio talking head Kevin James, who wouldn't know appeasement if it bit him in the face. By about the mid-way point of Matthews' thundering away at James, I almost started to feel sorry for the guy. Almost.

A partial transcript, courtesy of C&L:

Matthews starts out by saying:

Chris: I want to do a little history check on you—what did Neville Chamberlain do wrong in 1939? What did he do wrong?

Kevin: It all goes back to appeasement. It’s the key term.

Chris: No, what did he do, tell me what he did?

Kevin: It's the key term.

Chris: You have to answer this question. What did he do?

Kevin: It's the same thing, it puts it all…

Chris: Well tell me what he did?

Kevin: It's appeasement.

Chris: What did Chamberlain do wrong...

Kevin: His actions, his actions enabled, energized, legitimized...

Chris: What did Chamberlain do?

Kevin: It's the exact same thing.

Chris: No stop, Kevin. I'm not going to continue with this interview unless you answer what that thing is. What did Chamberlain do in '39, tell me? '38?

Kevin: Chris, it's the exact same thing alright?

Chris: What did he do? [yelling] What did he do![/yelling]

Matthews just took him apart. I loved how Chris ends the interview, too: "Don't use the term appeasement if you don't know what it means."

Ouch!

I also thoroughly enjoyed Matthews' reference to the fact that Dana Perino, President Bush's press secretary, didn't know what the Cuban Missile Crisis was, and admitted as much, during an appearance on NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! program a few months ago. Wow - if I'm the press secretary in the White House (Heaven forbid) and I didn't know what the Cuban Missile Crisis was, I certainly wouldn't admit it.

Chalk up Kevin Jones (and Perino, for that matter) as two more conservatives who don't know what the hell they're talking about. And I have to confess, it's pretty fun pointing it out.

Some on the right accuse "libruls" of being "elitist" and "arrogant" when pointing these things out. Quite the contrary, but when you use these terms or claim to be some sort of expert, you really should know historical references before you start throwing them around to back up a president who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about, either.

For the record, I know who Neville Chamberlain is - he's the NBA player who once scored 100 points in a game, right? Just kidding.

Pat Buchanan: race baiter extraordinaire

I almost apologize for bringing this footage to you, but I felt it was important enough to comment on. [The relevant portion of this footage is from about the 5:00 mark to a little over 7 minutes if you don't wish to watch the whole thing.] Last week, following Obama's victory in West Virginia, and his getting John Edwards' endorsement a day later, the pundits were having a field day hyper-analyzing what all of it means. As usual, Pat Buchanan was worked into a foaming, growling froth over it all.

I deeply resent Buchanan's assertions in this commentary [at about the four minute mark in the footage above], specifically these lines:

What were the African-American community in Philadelphia that gave him 90% voting on if not the fact that Barack Obama was one of them. West Virginia, Hillary, was one of us. That's the same thing. But West Virginia gets trashed, and Philadelphia is wonderful.

I have to give Chris Matthews some credit for his response to Buchanan:

I want to respond to Pat's thought there [Buchanan laughs]. No, no, it's a thought that a lot of people share, and I don't deny that. But when you look at the history of this country - going all the way back over 400 years, in the beginnings of this country, before we had a Republic, white people get elected to all the major offices. We've had three African-American senators freely elected after Reconstruction, and a couple of governors, and that's about it. Doug Wilder and Deval Patrick [the two governors that Matthews mentions]. If you're African-American it seems to me rooting for someone for your community, and when they have a real chance to be president for the first time in history, I wouldn't read that as a negative sentiment. However, when you're white, and you've always called the shots, to say that you're voting against somebody who's had quite an impact in this campaign, I think it's a different way of looking at it. You can always say what's good for the goose is good for the gander, Pat, the way you argue it, it's hard to argue. But there's a difference between negative voting and positive voting.

I find myself agreeing with Matthews a great deal lately, and that's sort of weird, because I normally don't - a shocking number of stupid things come out of his mouth for someone who works on a major network, but I do agree with him here.

Of course, Buchanan goes on to rant about network pundits calling the many West Virginians "racists" who appeared on TV last Tuesday. Nonsense. I didn't hear one network pundit call them racist. But, what I did hear were many West Virginians saying overtly on TV that race played a factor in their votes for Hillary.

For Buchanan to whine and cry about these poor people in West Virginia is the height of hypocrisy. Yes, they do sign up and die in the military in record numbers, no question, but Buchanan rants that "they haven't been running the country," and that's wrong. Since we're talking about race, the race that makes up an overwhelming majority of the state HAS been running this country since its founding, and that's a verifiable fact. Buchanan is simply trying to muddy the waters, and it's a joke.

The fact of the matter is, Obama lost in West Virginia because he's black. PERIOD. And he'll probably lose the state in November, too, which strikes me as tragic, because Obama would do more as president economically as president in one term than McCain would do in five terms.

And I don't buy into the notion that Barack Obama won in Pennsylvania because of the black vote in Philadelphia. That's a vast oversimplification. Sure, the black vote helped Obama in Philly - the numbers don't lie, but that's not the only reason he won in Pa., and to say as much is wrong. For instance, I live in Philadelphia, I'm white, and I voted for Obama because I feel he's the best candidate for the office he seeks.

So, take that, Buchanan.

By the way, I don't think the Edwards endorsement will amount to much for Obama. Frankly, I think that endorsements are overblown. When Hillary drops out and endorses Obama, that will have an impact, but when party leaders endorse a certain candidate, I think it carries very little weight these days.

Stewart's Matthews-McAuliffe Douche Off

Jon Stewart made good sport of the exchanges between MSNBC's Chris Matthews and Terry McAuliffe, Hillary's campaign manager, during the evening of the West Virginia primary last week. If you haven't seen it, take a look - it really is pretty funny. Stewart dubs the exchange a douche off, and that about sums it up.

Chris Matthews was, well, being Chris Matthews, and I have little use for Terry McAuliffe, considering his track record against Republicans. This is the DNC Chairman who couldn't even beat George Bush in 2004, for Christ sakes. Why Hillary picked him to chair her campaign, I will never know - it certainly wasn't for his recent track record of success against Republicans.

Anyway, thank God for people like Stewart. What makes his show even better is that you just know there are execs over at Faux News who would kill to have a show half this funny. Maybe it's why the network's ill-fated answer to The Daily Show was dubbed The Half Hour News Hour. Too bad it lasted about as long as President Bush's oil company.

Russert & Matthews on McSame's free ride

This is a pretty telling piece of footage from a few days ago, and again (!) I find myself agreeing with Chris Matthews. (I know - that's twice in one week!) Anyway, I have to applaud Matthews for raising the question, which in so many words was, "Is McCain getting a free ride?" Even more shocking is that Russert agrees with him that indeed he is. Of course, that doesn't suggest that much will change, starting with Cindy McCain's startling defiance yesterday that she will "never" release her tax returns, even if she becomes first lady.

Hmm - so far, I'm seeing and hearing very little in the way of outrage or backlash over that. And before you think it's not that big of a deal, again I ask you to consider and remember what big news the tax returns of BOTH the Clintons and Obamas was, just weeks ago.

What's more, the McCains have both "filed separate tax returns for the last 28 years," according the Cindy McCain yesterday. According to several reports I have seen in the last few days, all of the couple's assets are in her name. No way should all of this come out in the wash. What's more, there's mounting evidence that McCain is using his wife's wealth to skirt campaign finance laws. More on that a bit later in a separate post.

As far as the press giving McCain the same amount of scrutiny that Obama and Clinton have received, don't hold your breath. There are many reasons I feel this way, but the biggest is this - our multi-media conglomerate companies are just about all run by corporate, greedy Republicans. Asking them to give McCain the same amount of scrutiny as the Democrats would be akin to these media corporations shooting themselves in the foot. It isn't going to happen, folks. And guess what? It's why the Internet, and Net Neutrality, is so vitally important to our democracy right now - it's about all we have left, until the corporations and the lobbyists take the 'Net over. If we let them. That's not paranoia - it's a fact - there are numerous movements afoot to let ISPs do just that. Read more about Net Neutrality Here.

And that's precisely why the two most important topics that MUST be addressed in the next administration, no matter WHO wins the White House (including, heaven help us, McCain) are these:

1. Election Reform - electronic ballots, paperless voting, computers that can be easily hacked - these all need to be reformed, and massively.

2. Media Ownership - these media mergers must stop, and NOW. The next president has to put a stop to this - pretty soon, there will be only a handful of radio station owners (oops - that's already here), television station owners and newspaper publishers. Fewer and fewer media outlets now have more and more power, and this problem seems to grow by the day.

These two issues are and will continue to be a recurring theme in 2008 (and beyond) on this Website, because I really do feel that they threaten our democracy's very existence as we know it. That last sentence is not hyperbolic in any way - think about it - without free and fair elections, or a free press, the rest of our democracy is simply a sham, a house of cards, and both of these are being threatened right now, as you read this.

Do I think that Hillary or Obama will dramatically reverse these two troubling trends as if by magic if either of them wins the White House? Absolutely not. That's why we have to fight for it and demand it. However, I give reform of these two issues (and a whole lot more) a much better shot with either of those two than if McSame wins in November.

Matthews frames Rush's Chaos perfectly

Just one more note on Limbaugh's supposed influence on the Democratic primaries earlier this week. Of all people, I found myself agreeing with MSNBC's Chris Matthews, who vented on Limbaugh late Tuesday night about Rush's urging Repubes to cross over and vote for Hillary.

Matthews is 100 percent right. Morons who did it ought to be ashamed of themselves. I for one wouldn't switch my party registration for 15 minutes, let along long enough to vote for a Republican in a presidential primary. I'm not married to the Democratic Party, either, but I certainly am closer to it than the Republican Party. Actually, if Independents were allowed to vote in the primary in Pennsylvania, I would be registered that way, but that's not the case.

At any rate, I applaud Matthews for takin' Limbaugh behind the woodshed.

Bill Maher's take on race via Hardball

I'm glad that Bill Maher appeared on Chris Matthews' show Hardball the other night, because it's been almost two weeks since Maher's been on TV - he was off last week from his show, Real Time With Bill Maher. Forget the nakit adulation, though - Maher is spot on about McSame, considering his multiple gaffes this week in Iraq, about Iraq.

My favorite bit from this piece: when Matthews opines that McSame will be a problem for the Democrats "because he's a war hero," Maher fires right back:

We're one terrorist attack away from John McCain I'm sure rising in the polls 10 points because people say, 'Oh yea, he's tougher.' Of course, he's not tougher about the war, he's dumber about the war. [Emphasis Maher's] He's dumb about the war because he thinks that by keeping troops in the heart of the Muslim world, that's going to help the War on Terror. That's exactly what started the War on Terror, that's why Osama bin Laden was so angry with the US, because we had troops in Saudi Arabia. And we pulled them out after 9-11 by the way. Of course, we go right back in and plant them in the Muslim world and build Pizza Huts. That's why young Muslim men want to come here and blow themselves up and kill us. And until we solve that mental problem, we're never going to win the War on Terror. It's not about what happens in Iraq - we need to get out of Iraq, not build bases there.

Maher has the balls to say what no politician running for higher office will - the true, root causes of 9-11 and the War on Terror.

It's not the trite witticisms that that the likes of Bush and Rudy 9iu11iani like to use because they are the so-called "experts." (By the way, I'm probably the first to ever call Our National Embarrassment an expert on anything, other than running businesses [and now our government] straight into the ground, but I digress.)

I can almost hear Giuliani now, saying in his Sylvester J. Pussycat voice, "They hate us for our freedoms," which is total bullshit.

Of all the things that bin Laden and Al-Qaeda hate us for, our freedoms are probably pretty far down on the list. But hey, I'm not a Republican, so I don't know foreign affairs, I'm a peacenik pussy, and I must hate America.

I think Bill O'Lielly just channeled himself through me. Ugh.

h/t Crooks & Liars for the video

GOP operative: impeach Gonzo

This is a pretty interesting exchange on Chris Matthews from last night, and you have to know that things are starting to turn when Republican operatives are beginning to speculate that impeachment might be the only course of action, Gonzo might finally be Gone-zo. However, as long as President Bush is behind him our amnesia-stricken attorney general is going nowhere. Because God only knows the our Democratically "led" Congress appears to be perfectly content to do absolutely nothing, no matter what the Bush administration does.

Elizabeth Edwards jabs insipid Coulter

This is a pretty good piece of footage, and it illustrates the character of both Ann Coulter and Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic Presidential Candidate John Edwards.

Really, the footage speaks for itself, and I can't add anything more pithy than what Edwards herself says, other to to reinforce what she said. We really do need to elevate the political discourse in this country, and people like Coulter do nothing to debase and defile the entire process by never missing an opportunity to personally savage anyone with a "D" after his or her name.

Coulter really is pathetic and sad. There's really not much else that can be said in a classy way, so I'll just stop there. I ceased being angry about her diatribes a long time ago, but I'll never stop pointing them out, because the last thing we need in the face of her silly slander is apathy.

Two more quick thoughts - I have absolutely no problem with Edwards making money off of her remarks, no matter who she is slandering, and she's beyond hypocritical to lamely try and call out John Edwards for doing so. Isn't Coulter making millions off of her own blarney? So, why shouldn't Democrats?

Anyone who believes that Republicans don't send out fundraising letters to their base when a Democrat says something ill-advised should be awarded a doctorate in naïveté. It's part of the political fundraising game, Ann. But, of course, she thinks that most of us are naïve enough to believe that only Democrats do it.

Honestly, the moron in Chris Matthews' audience who shouted, "Why isn't John Edwards making this call?!?" made me as angry as Coulter did. Ridiculous, but something I'd expect from a Coulter sycophant. That's overtly stating that the wife of a presidential candidate doesn't have the right to express her views, or that hers are unimportant.

I'm happy that Elizabeth Edwards did what she did. It's probably best to ignore people like Ann, but sometimes, enough is enough, and they need to be called out.

Chris Matthews on FIRE

I haven't always agreed with Chris Matthews, but this is one of the better pieces I've seen from his show in a long time. Matthews just owns Terry Jeffrey from Human Events in this piece.

It's worth watching two or three times just to watch Matthews light into him, only to see Jeffrey do a very poor job of explaining himself. (By the way, if you're unfamiliar with Human Events, drop by the Website - it's hilarious!)

Jeffrey predictably plays the Hillary card, but it falls flat. I'm already tired of the Hillary demagoguery, but we might as well get used to it. There are a lot of people out there who hate women, so Hillary is going to have to meet with as many people in personalized settings as she can to knock down these walls.

My favorite line from this entire clip...

MATTHEWS: "If this was Clinton's war, you wouldn't have fought it."

Well done, Mr. Matthews.

DeLay's book promos not going well

I've got plenty to say about Tom DeLay, but I've been busy getting our desktop computer back to health after the hard drive died (literally). Anyway, I'm almost done with a piece about DeLay, including his appearance on Meet the Press this past Sunday.

Anyway, the clip above is a pretty good clip of DeLay appearing on Hardball with Chris Matthews. Here's a tip to the disgraced, indicted former House Majority Leader - before you go on a talk show to plug your stupid book, you might want to know what's in it. (Which raises the question, did he write it?) Anyway, Matthews makes him look like the perfect ass that he is. Good stuff.



The one above isn't quite as good as the Hardball footage, but it's still pretty good. NBC Today cohost Meredith Vieira doesn't let DeLay get off the hook too easily and actually has a halfway decent interview. Matt Lauer might want to study this tape for pointers on how to interview a controversial figure or celebrity. When you get verbally slapped around by the likes of Tom Cruise, you've got some work to do. Lauer is getting better, though.