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

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

'Anti-racism', All Trap, No Honey: A Discourse About Discourse

One of the things that prevents me from writing more often is the sense that I'm just writing the same thing repeatedly from a slightly different angle. In a nutshell, all I'm saying is that moral idealism substituted for material goals will not lead to justice, but is an argument against materialism. I'm a dumb person's low rent Adolph Reed Jr. translator. I'm a "class reductionist" who understands that when the discourse is reduced to just class there's nothing as important as food, water and shelter that's left out. I often find myself contending with people who insist that there is, unable to name anything. They don't understand that they're making an argument against economic redistribution, or they don't care. There are no concrete manifestations of systemic racism or any oppression that are not dealt with through economic redistribution. When people say that economic redistribution won't end racism, what they mean is that

Is Cynicism More Disqualifying Than Ignorance?

I was somewhat reluctant at the time to ascribe any specific intent to Elizabeth Warren's DNA stunt, just focusing on what it said about her political instincts. In retrospect, because of subsequent choices, I see it as craven cynicism. I get that, "I have a plan for that!" is supposed to be her new brand, but obviously, a working plan isn't a central part of that. Her brand should actually be "Pandering Cynic". I now find myself wondering if even she thinks the policy she offers will do what she says it's intended to do. I've been saying in my head that I feel irrational anger towards her, but it's actually quite rational and specific. My posting schedule has been off because I've been playing with the idea of submitting pieces for publication. I've been thinking a lot about how we talk about disparities and how the conversation is used as a cudgel against universal policy. The closest to a good faith version of this argument is

the bastards' last stand

Search This Blog