Much to the consternation and I'm sure shear disappointment of the McCain-loving mainstream media, what happened this past weekend with the Iraqi PM endorsing Obama's withdrawal plan is nothing short of a turning point in this campaign. While McCain and his media cohorts will continue to extol the false notion that the surge has worked--just because you say it over and over again doesn't make it true--the facts on the ground (yes, those facts) dictate that the Iraqis want us out and we want out, so why not make everyone happy and get out! Call it a time "horizon" or a timetable or whatever you want; we're done and over with Iraq.
And the McCain campaign knows it. One strategist told Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic, "We're fucked." That's a simple way of putting it, but basically it's right. Especially in light of McCain saying in 2004 that if we were asked to leave he would honor that commitment. Even after the Iraqi PM's spokesman claim that Maliki was misquoted, the Times has obtained the audio version, and a straight-forward interpretation shows that there is no confusion at all. In fact, Maliki, not the magazine, brought Obama and the words "timetable" and "withdrawal" into the conversation!
With Obama in Iraq today, after having a successful trip in Afghanistan over the weekend, the media will be swirling around him like vultures, prepared to pounce at any slight mistake or even the whiff of a mistake, so that they can then run a 24/7 Obama Campaign Death Watch on the cable shows (a la Jeremiah Wright). Except, it won't matter. The pictures of soldiers cheering Obama as he enters a mess hall, coupled with presidential-like meetings with top government officials, will out shadow anything the McCain media attempts to stir up.
This is all to drum up the big finale on Friday. The speech in Berlin. They're estimating that up to 1 million people could attend. Ask yourself: can you imagine McCain getting that many to attend a speech? No, not 1 million for McCain. Maybe a thousand or a hundred. Or maybe just no one at all. The Europeans know who the next president of the US will be. And now so do we.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
Veep Speculation
We're nearing the point at which both Senators McCain and Obama will be selecting their respective Vice-Presidential running mates. Both Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic and Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post have put in their thoughts. Overall, I'm not comfortable with the list presented for Senator Obama, and I certainly hope that McCain picks Romney or Carly Fiorina. Either of those two would be like manna from heaven!
As for Senator Obama's choices, here's a rundown with complimentary commentary (taken from Marc Ambinder's list):
Sen. Chris Dodd (the insurance capital of the world)--can't really seeing it happen. Although, if truth be told, it was Dodd who broke Hillary Clinton's back. Remember in November of 2007, during the now famous (or infamous) Philadelphia debate where Dodd jumped all over Hillary's bobbing and weaving over giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. It was Dodd's dirty work that did Hill in.
Gov. Tim Kaine (the DC Beltway)--won't get it, even though he was an early backer of Obama's. He's pro-life for one and two he's inexperienced--more so than Obama. And Obama is already competitive in Virginia without Kaine's presence on the ticket, although his selection may just seal the deal. But, he's experiencing some political troubles at home, which isn't a good sign, either.
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (where the Wizard of Oz took place)--another early supporter of Senator Obama's, she is the female counterpart of Obama. She's center-left and appeals to Republicans because of her sensibility and practicality. She won't help Obama carry Kansas, though. Right now, he's behind by about 20 points. No running mate can solve that conundrum.
Sen. Evan Bayh (a state no one knows about)--dull, boring, stale: all words to describe Senator Bayh. Although, his political resume is quite impressive. Governor and Senator of a red state and very popular. He endorsed Hillary, but never really said anything to disparage Obama's image. This would be a "safe" pick for Obama. I don't think he's looking to play it safe. At least, I certainly hope so.
Sen. Chuck Hagel (fly over country)--this is my personal choice, although I think his chances of receiving the spot are as narrow as Hillary's, if not more so. He appeals to the Midwest, independents, and disaffected Republicans. Plus, Vietnam hero, opponent of Iraq War, he has the military and foreign policy credos which Obama currently lacks. His trip with Obama to the Middle East next week may be mere window dressing or a preview of things to come.
Al Gore (the Earth)--just threw himself out of contention, telling ABC News that he has placed on himself a term limit for the vice presidency.
John Edwards (son of a mill worker)--he may very well end up in the spot. The Edwards of '08 is not the one from '04. He's tougher, stronger, and better at campaigning. I can't imagine Edwards appeasing to the other side during a VP debate this fall, as he did with Cheney four years prior. Edwards message during this campaign was similar to Obama's, except he was never able to raise enough money or appeal outside of Iowa (he was the Dick Gephardt of the '08 campaign). Also, the Edwardses are a strong pair. Standing with the Obamas, I can see it happening.
Joe Biden (Long-Winded)--I had always thought that he would be Secretary of State, and I still think he'll be at Foggy Bottom come January 2009. His experience in foreign policy is unmatched; he would be able to go after McCain with credibility and authenticity. His most famous contribution to the '08 campaign was this line: "There's only three things [Rudy Giuliani] mentions in a sentence -- a noun, a verb, and 9/11." Although, his mouth often gets him into trouble. Lest we forget that Obama is "articulate and bright and clean."
And last but not least, Sen. Hillary Clinton (Hell)--if this happens, cue the theme from Jaws.
As for Senator Obama's choices, here's a rundown with complimentary commentary (taken from Marc Ambinder's list):
Sen. Chris Dodd (the insurance capital of the world)--can't really seeing it happen. Although, if truth be told, it was Dodd who broke Hillary Clinton's back. Remember in November of 2007, during the now famous (or infamous) Philadelphia debate where Dodd jumped all over Hillary's bobbing and weaving over giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. It was Dodd's dirty work that did Hill in.
Gov. Tim Kaine (the DC Beltway)--won't get it, even though he was an early backer of Obama's. He's pro-life for one and two he's inexperienced--more so than Obama. And Obama is already competitive in Virginia without Kaine's presence on the ticket, although his selection may just seal the deal. But, he's experiencing some political troubles at home, which isn't a good sign, either.
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (where the Wizard of Oz took place)--another early supporter of Senator Obama's, she is the female counterpart of Obama. She's center-left and appeals to Republicans because of her sensibility and practicality. She won't help Obama carry Kansas, though. Right now, he's behind by about 20 points. No running mate can solve that conundrum.
Sen. Evan Bayh (a state no one knows about)--dull, boring, stale: all words to describe Senator Bayh. Although, his political resume is quite impressive. Governor and Senator of a red state and very popular. He endorsed Hillary, but never really said anything to disparage Obama's image. This would be a "safe" pick for Obama. I don't think he's looking to play it safe. At least, I certainly hope so.
Sen. Chuck Hagel (fly over country)--this is my personal choice, although I think his chances of receiving the spot are as narrow as Hillary's, if not more so. He appeals to the Midwest, independents, and disaffected Republicans. Plus, Vietnam hero, opponent of Iraq War, he has the military and foreign policy credos which Obama currently lacks. His trip with Obama to the Middle East next week may be mere window dressing or a preview of things to come.
Al Gore (the Earth)--just threw himself out of contention, telling ABC News that he has placed on himself a term limit for the vice presidency.
John Edwards (son of a mill worker)--he may very well end up in the spot. The Edwards of '08 is not the one from '04. He's tougher, stronger, and better at campaigning. I can't imagine Edwards appeasing to the other side during a VP debate this fall, as he did with Cheney four years prior. Edwards message during this campaign was similar to Obama's, except he was never able to raise enough money or appeal outside of Iowa (he was the Dick Gephardt of the '08 campaign). Also, the Edwardses are a strong pair. Standing with the Obamas, I can see it happening.
Joe Biden (Long-Winded)--I had always thought that he would be Secretary of State, and I still think he'll be at Foggy Bottom come January 2009. His experience in foreign policy is unmatched; he would be able to go after McCain with credibility and authenticity. His most famous contribution to the '08 campaign was this line: "There's only three things [Rudy Giuliani] mentions in a sentence -- a noun, a verb, and 9/11." Although, his mouth often gets him into trouble. Lest we forget that Obama is "articulate and bright and clean."
And last but not least, Sen. Hillary Clinton (Hell)--if this happens, cue the theme from Jaws.
Questions to McCain
My Uncle Mark, God Bless him, sent a copy of George Will's May 5th column in Newsweek magazine, which, for some reason, I cannot find online, so you'll just have to trust me that it exists. His column, titled "Questions to Obama," is classic Will--all fluff and no facts. So, I decided to respond to my uncle's email with my own questions for John McCain. The follow is what I sent him--and I'm still waiting for his reply . . .
I wish the so-called liberal media had nerve to ask these questions to McCain:
1) Senator, just yesterday in your press conference, you referred to the country of Czechoslovakia, and about three months ago, while appearing on the racist Don Imus radio show you talked about working with said country. And you said it again last year in a debate. Actually, Senator, Czechoslovakia hasn’t been in existence for over 10 years. Do you know that Czechoslovakia is no longer a country? If not, how can you claim to be the foreign policy candidate when you don’t even know that a country hasn’t been in existence for more than a decade? (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_again_refers_to_czechos.php)
2) Senator, it seems you have a problem with mixing things up, or just plainly making things up. Coincidentally, or ironically, it almost always is in relation to foreign policy, your supposed forte. On several occasions, you have referenced Sunni and Shia but incorrectly. Even your pal, Senator Joe Lieberman, had to whisper into your ear the correct answer. (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/08/869803.aspx)
With all due respect Senator, we already have one president who didn’t even know about the sectarian tribes and rivalries in Iraq before invading, so why should we trust you as well? Oh, and one more thing: who actually jokes about killing another country’s people? (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/07/08/mccains_latest_iran_joke.html)
3) Senator, the other day, your senior advisor, ousted, fired, discredited, disrespected former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina, said that it was unfair that health insurance companies discriminate against women because they would cover Viagra for men but not birth control for women. At first, you said that you hadn’t thought that much about the issue before, yet you had actually voted in the past AGAINST a bill mandating that insurance companies cover birth control. So, Senator, have you not thought about it enough to actually vote against it before or did you just forget? Can we please have some of that "straight talk" you’re supposed to be spewing?
(http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-carly10-2008jul10,0,228806.story)
4) Senator, you said recently in an interview with The New York Times, "I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself." Um, how long should it take you to "learn" to get online? You point and click. With all due respect, even my grandmother, who is actually older than you, can use the computer and can log onto the Internet. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/us/politics/13mccain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin) And she knows what "Google" means. (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/09/mccain-its-a-google/) Don’t you think it would be important as president of the most powerful country that you should know how to at least use a computer?
5) And Senator, who really speaks for you? You say that only you speak for yourself. Yet, your top economic advisor says that Americans paying $4 for gasoline, higher insurance premiums, and more for college tuition, are just "whiners" and they should get over it. You have even said that Americans are "depressed." Bu you disagree with him, so you must be disagreeing with yourself, or are you mixing that up, too? And, by the way, why is he still with your campaign? And, why did you send him to speak to the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board the day that you rejected his comments? Maybe you should learn how to send him a text message.
(http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/who_speaks_for_john_mccain.php)
(http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/top_mccain_surrogate_describes.php)
(http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/mccain-i-would-imagine-we-are-in-a-recession/)
I wish the so-called liberal media had nerve to ask these questions to McCain:
1) Senator, just yesterday in your press conference, you referred to the country of Czechoslovakia, and about three months ago, while appearing on the racist Don Imus radio show you talked about working with said country. And you said it again last year in a debate. Actually, Senator, Czechoslovakia hasn’t been in existence for over 10 years. Do you know that Czechoslovakia is no longer a country? If not, how can you claim to be the foreign policy candidate when you don’t even know that a country hasn’t been in existence for more than a decade? (http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/mccain_again_refers_to_czechos.php)
2) Senator, it seems you have a problem with mixing things up, or just plainly making things up. Coincidentally, or ironically, it almost always is in relation to foreign policy, your supposed forte. On several occasions, you have referenced Sunni and Shia but incorrectly. Even your pal, Senator Joe Lieberman, had to whisper into your ear the correct answer. (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/08/869803.aspx)
With all due respect Senator, we already have one president who didn’t even know about the sectarian tribes and rivalries in Iraq before invading, so why should we trust you as well? Oh, and one more thing: who actually jokes about killing another country’s people? (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/07/08/mccains_latest_iran_joke.html)
3) Senator, the other day, your senior advisor, ousted, fired, discredited, disrespected former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina, said that it was unfair that health insurance companies discriminate against women because they would cover Viagra for men but not birth control for women. At first, you said that you hadn’t thought that much about the issue before, yet you had actually voted in the past AGAINST a bill mandating that insurance companies cover birth control. So, Senator, have you not thought about it enough to actually vote against it before or did you just forget? Can we please have some of that "straight talk" you’re supposed to be spewing?
(http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-carly10-2008jul10,0,228806.story)
4) Senator, you said recently in an interview with The New York Times, "I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself." Um, how long should it take you to "learn" to get online? You point and click. With all due respect, even my grandmother, who is actually older than you, can use the computer and can log onto the Internet. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/us/politics/13mccain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin) And she knows what "Google" means. (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/09/mccain-its-a-google/) Don’t you think it would be important as president of the most powerful country that you should know how to at least use a computer?
5) And Senator, who really speaks for you? You say that only you speak for yourself. Yet, your top economic advisor says that Americans paying $4 for gasoline, higher insurance premiums, and more for college tuition, are just "whiners" and they should get over it. You have even said that Americans are "depressed." Bu you disagree with him, so you must be disagreeing with yourself, or are you mixing that up, too? And, by the way, why is he still with your campaign? And, why did you send him to speak to the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board the day that you rejected his comments? Maybe you should learn how to send him a text message.
(http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/who_speaks_for_john_mccain.php)
(http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/top_mccain_surrogate_describes.php)
(http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/mccain-i-would-imagine-we-are-in-a-recession/)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
