Are the Polls Really This Close? Really?

If any Republican can overcome the wretched stain of eight years of George Bush and win the White House we deserve whatever bad things will happen to us.

Jack Cafferty

I realize that this is a best of the worst of McCain, but I can't imagine anyone putting together similar clips of Obama, that offered as frightening a glimpse of the man as future president. What makes this frightening is that most of these clips are from the last few months. He has made so many gaffes that he can have a 5 minute blooper reel based on three months of appearances. Actually saying gaffes seems generous, he places Iraq on the Pakistani border, thinks Czechoslovakia is still one country, Putin is the current president of Russia and Germany, and doesn't know which extremists Iran is supposed to be sending into Iraq. He either regularly misstates the facts or doesn't know what they are, and he constantly contradicts himself. What is most frightening is that McCain's distance from reality is no more discussed in the mainstream media than the fact that the Maverick is dead. Instead they talk about the effectiveness of his negative ads. Considering the problems the country is facing, the more relevant question to be asking is why would McCain's campaign sink millions into an ad featuring Paris Hilton, instead of promoting his positions and policies. At this point in the campaign I don't believe that McCain is even an improvement over Bush. I'm not sure if he holds any conviction that he wouldn't trade for votes. He has changed his position on every issue which once set him apart from his party, immigration, campaign finance, torture; going so far as to abandon his own bills. I can't imagine the damage he would do to the nation as President. Although I know it seems easy to say living in Spain, I agree with Jack.

h/t crooksandliars.com

Update: I'm not the only one who thinks would be no improvement over Bush.

Comments

Making the White Supremacist Argument in Blackface

What are the stakes that people imagine to be bound up with demonstrating that capitalism in this country emerged from slavery and racism, which are treated as two different labels for the same pathology? Ultimately, it's a race reductionist argument. What the Afro-pessimist types or black nationalist types get out of it is an insistence that we can't ever talk about anything except race. And that's partly because talking about race is the things they have to sell. Adolph Reed Jr.
If it's not clear already, it's worth thinking about the ways in which the history revision of the 1619 Project is less about understanding history than it is using history to justify a specific approach to defining and dealing with racism in the present. It serves the same purpose as all of the moral idealism pretending to represent justice-- identity politics, intersectionality, reparations-- that exist in the discourse to deter economic redistribution generally, and specifically, in th…

Anti-racism - Class = Status Quo: The Neoliberal Argument Against Coalition

I was approached a few months ago around the idea of collaborating to make the progressive case for reparations. I've said before that while the idea of reparations is morally appealing I don't believe in them as an immediate political project. It's not clear to me that it's possible to build a coalition around a reparative justice focused on just 13% of the population. Encouraged by a recent Twitter conversation that included economists Sandy Darrity and Darrick Hamilton where they suggested that saying reparations will never happen is cynical I've begun trying to think of them as an eventuality and lay out the steps to reaching them. Doing this has made clear that our understanding of reparations as a form of compensation to the descendants of the enslaved is not the reparative justice that we think it to be. If we were living with the kind of understanding of justice that made reparations possible we would not be a nation where war, healthcare, education, and cr…

The Intersectional Swiftboat Waltz

This past week the Working Families Parties endorsed Elizabeth Warren in the democratic primary. It's a somewhat obscure thing, in terms of national politics. WFP is a nominally left party started in New York state. In New York rather than run their own candidates they endorse Democrats. The choice of the centrist Warren over Sanders isn't without precedent. They endorsed Joe Crowley over Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and Andrew Cuomo over Zephyr Teachout. The entire affair is only relevant for what it suggests that we can expect from the rest of the primary.

When the endorsement was announced, members asked leadership to release the breakdown of votes, as they did in 2015 when the party endorsed Sanders. Leadership refused, saying something about preserving the integrity of the vote. What was obvious, where the 56 person leadership/advisory board had a vote equal to that of the 10,000+ membership, is that the leaders had heavily favored Warren while the members went to Sanders. I…

the bastards' last stand

Search This Blog