Of all the newly revealed McCain camp lies, I think I love best the fact, as reported by Bloomberg, that they are evidently fibbing about crowd sizes at McCain-Palin rallies. I love it both because its so desperate—like inflating a movies box office—but also because the irony of the strategy here is so palpable: 1) Slam the Obama campaign for being a cult of celebrity. 2) Try to create your own celebrity. 3) Fail. 4) Lie.
Unlike the growing heaps of fabrications about Gov. Palins record—the bridge to nowhere; the earmarks; the trip to Iraq that never was; the trip to Ireland (plain or unleaded?)—we can actually attack the fake crowd stats without attacking Palin herself. The McCain camp has been chuffing ahead with all the lies, confident that they can make up whatever they want about Palins experience, and then attack anyone who questions that pretend experience as a raving sexist. Classic smoke bomb. But you can ask about fake crowds without being accused of assailing the Porcelain Pit Bull, right? Stay tuned.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/xxfactor/archive/2008/09/14/those-mythical-m...
The Lies And Deceit Of John McCain
A great column by Ruth Marcus, rebutting the insane notion that there is any serious equivalence between the venial campaign sins of Barack Obama and the massive moral sins of John McCain:
McCain's transgressions, though, are of a different magnitude. His whoppers are bigger; there are more of them. He -- the easy out would be to say "his campaign" -- has been misleading, and at times has outright lied, about his opponent. He has misrepresented -- that's the charitable verb -- his vice presidential nominee's record. Called on these fouls, he has denied and repeated them...
Are there any corners left for McCain? Is there any reason to trust that a man running this campaign would go on to be an honest president?
No, he wouldn't. He's a fantastic and shameless liar. We all make mistakes and in a heated campaign, some fibs and lies will emerge. But the mark of a morally serious person is not their occasional failures, but their response to them. Does he correct and apologize? Does he ultimately care about the truth, about reality? Or does he refuse to acknowledge his lies and keep repeating them, even after they have been proven beyond the slightest doubt?
McCain has failed the most basic of ethical tests. He is morally and ethically unfit to be the president of the United States.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/the-lies-and-de....
hhvhvyfbybvnrcximjgvne5c8
TheUndertakerrocks1 1 year ago
Oink, oink, says Karl Rove.
Allardyce 1 year ago
HA!!, anyone who knows Richardson, knows he is not known for his eloquence!!!!
popecuttyeye 2 years ago
haha, I've noticed that as you get older, you become more conservative, so not much chance on switching me to the "Dark Side" in the future. That being said, occasionally I do get information from other sites. Sometimes I use their words (thankfully plagiarism doesn't count for much on youtube) instead of my own because they say it better than I do. Trust me, I do "digest" the information before writing back. Everything I have said has been my opinion or a direct representation of it.
jjmatt04 3 years ago
(cont) Politico on one post and then another from Right Wing Nation on another, etc. etc. You need to digest this information that you gleam from your research and try and form your on views. You're young, you have time. Who knows...maybe I can bring you to the Dark Side of the Force, Young Skywalker...
tgear77 3 years ago
Not to be insulting, jjmatt, since I've kind of enjoyed these give-and-takes we've been having, but the other poster does make a point (but he could have been more polite about it). I notice in your postings almost word for word quoting of blogs and posts and news articles. You are correct that it makes you informed (though not always correct if you just follow one school of thought), but it doesn't offer that much in original thought. Sometimes it seems as if I am arguing with a blogger from..
tgear77 3 years ago
As for the launching of Obama's political career, let me clarify. Obama may not have launched his national career out of Ayer's home, but he did introduce himself as a politician to many of the Democratic heavy-hitters through Ayer's brunch. That is still a political coming-out party. He may not have officially stated he was running, but it was pretty much a sure thing if he was attending the get-together.
jjmatt04 3 years ago
I'm looking at this from the perspective that a terrorist is a terrorist. Ayers was the mastermind behind an organization that blew up buildings. Ayers can claim all that he wants that he wasn't responsible for the deaths that his group committed, yet still claimed he wanted to "kill all the rich people." And went on to tell kids to "kill your parents." The man was just as much a terrorist as Osama.
jjmatt04 3 years ago
(cont) right wing talking points. Obama did not launch his campaign at Ayers' house. Ayers held a brunch and the retiring State Senator brought Obama to introduce him to people as her approved successor. Two months later, at an event at a Chicago hotel, Obama launched his campaign. Since then, Ayers has held some fund-raising dinners and teas at his house for Obama, but not in concert with the campaign, and also not attended by Obama. So no, he wouldn't launch a campaign w/Ayers OR McVeigh.
tgear77 3 years ago
(cont) the players in the NFL. For the actions attributed to Ayers, the only harm that came to anyone was the death of the 3 members who blew themselves up in the NYC Townhouse. The bombings that Ayers worked on were meant to do damage, not harm anyone. Again, not condoning his actions, but not branding him a murderer either. So I see a huge difference between someone who blows up statues and Pentagon bathrooms and someone who wants to kill all Americans. Secondly, once again you use the ...
tgear77 3 years ago