Posts Tagged 'John McCain'

What Winning At All Cost Says About You

Do you remember when you were a child and your mother or father or other parental figure said, “It’s not whether you win or lose; it’s how you play the game”? I started thinking about that saying within the context of a presidential election, and it made me wonder whether there really was more to winning than just winning.

There was a time when thelogicalreport might have supported John McCain, but that was a very long time ago. Sadly, it’s not just us; there have been many others who have made the disappointing contrast between the John McCain of years past and the John McCain of the 2008 election. For me, the problem with Senator McCain winning the presidency isn’t so much his being the president, for he isn’t a malicious, evil individual. The problem with McCain winning the presidency is the way in which he might win it: through constant, unmitigated, purposeful lies. What’s just as disturbing is that most of the mainstream conservative media have gone happily along with the lies. Here are just a few.

Lie #1: Barack Obama associates with terrorists (and it’s even been intimated that because he associates with them, he is one of them).

Barack Obama does not “associate” with terrorists. If I sit in the cubicle next to someone who committed a crime 40 years ago, and I have lunch with him every day, and I didn’t know that he’d committed a crime 40 years ago, I have news for you: that doesn’t make me a criminal. Even if I did know that he committed a crime 40 years ago, it still doesn’t make me a criminal, and it doesn’t mean that I take my societal cues from criminals. Senator Obama’s actions of service, kindness, and compassion in working for those who are impoverished in the country speak for themselves.

Lie #2: Barack Obama is a Socialist/Marxist. The McCain campaign has been only too happy to take something that is more honorable and honest than anything that George W. Bush has said or done in his entire 8 years and turn it into the number one single on Joe McCarthy’s hit parade. I’m still trying to figure out why so many people are willing to illogically believe that “spreading the wealth around” means Marxism just because an opposing campaign and it’s panicking supporting players in the conservative media say so. It’s a wonderful example of taking something out of context and assigning a false meaning to it. I think that most Americans want the wealth to be spread around and are tired of the wealth being concentrated in the hands of tax-dodging corporations who take advantage of the rest of us daily. Spreading the wealth around, as Obama explains it, means closing corporate tax loopholes and restoring the progressive tax system that was so successful before W lowered the tax rate for the richest among us. That’s it. If that’s Marxism, then those of you who believe it are Fascists.

Lie #3: Barack Obama is a Muslim. I don’t pretend to know who started this one, but I did hear MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough encourage the lie by not correcting it. And I’m happy to say that I did hear John McCain FINALLY correct the lie—-once, after which time he seemed to have abandoned that particular lie.

Barack Obama is a Christian; we all know it. Obama has said so, and even McCain has said so. He goes to a Christian church–not that it should matter. Why are so many people willing to believe that Muslim means terrorist? Again, is it just because the conservative media says so?

Lie #4: Obama is going to raise your taxes.

McCain says that people earning over $42,000 will have their taxes raised. It’s a lie. Obama has said time and time and time and time again that if you earn under $200,000, you’ll get a tax DECREASE. If you earn over $250,000, your taxes will go back to what they were under Bill Clinton, when we were building up a surplus, that is, he’ll let the temporary tax cuts for the wealthiest among us expire. If you earn between those two amounts, things will stay the same. Tax cuts for 95% of us, and higher taxes for the richest among us? Oh no, he’s a tax and spend liberal!

So, is this how John McCain wants to win the White House? McCain has taken every opportunity to try to win the election by attacking Obama’s character, saying that we can’t trust him, and who IS Barack Obama, and he’s secretive, and he won’t reveal specifics on his policies. But if you lie about someone else’s character, not to mention his policies, in order to win, doesn’t that say everything we need to know about YOUR character? And shouldn’t it send up a red flag to warn us that YOUR policies are not in our best interest?

Is this how John McCain wants to win the presidency? Is he that desperate? Apparently, he knows that his policies favor, once again, the wealthiest among us and so has to deflect attention to lies about Obama’s character.

Attack Senator Obama’s policies; that’s fair game. But don’t lie about his policies and then attack his character for them. Senator McCain, doing so only tells us more about you than we want to know——-especially if you’re elected tomorrow.

Advertisement

McCain: Annenberg, Council for World Freedom, and Being Unfaithful

All  right, this “Obama lied about his association with Bill Ayres” thing has gone on ad nauseum. First, it’s a lie. Second, why can’t McCain just talk about social, economic, and foreign policy issues? He seems to not have any faith in his own political agenda.

Let’s take the Bill Ayres thing—–again. Senator Obama NEVER lied about having known Bill Ayres. He never gave an item by item list of every encounter, either happenstance or planned, that they’d had, but he never denied knowing him. So why do the conservatives keep saying that Obama lied about knowing him? And why does Sarah Palin keep saying that Obama “pals around” with terrorists? Ayres isn’t a terrorist. And Obama didn’t seek him out because he at one time was a radical. Get over it. And stop lying.

If you want to talk about Obama sitting on the same board as Ayres, you’re going to have to categorize McCain and his supporters as terrorists, too. The board was for the Annenberg Foundation, which was established by Walter Annenberg, who was a Republican and whose widow is a contributor to the McCain campaign. Oh no! Annenberg associated with terrorists, and his wife must also, and that means that McCain is a terrorist! Ridiculous.

I like the way McCain and his little helpers use the words “poor judgment” when describing Obama. It’s ironic, really, since that’s what the report on the Keating 5 said about John McCain and his involvement. Imagine that.

And if you want to continue to play the “guilt by association game” AND the “he’s been lying about it” game, check out McCain’s ties to a radical terrorist hate group, which called itself the U.S. Council for World Freedom. I haven’t heard McCain offer any detailed listing of gatherings that he had with this group; in fact, he’s been rather quiet about it. Here’s another version of the story. Stunning.

It also looks as if, as is so very often the case with conservatives who tout “marriage and family values,” McCain was unfaithful to his first wife, Carol. This story quotes the first Mrs. McCain, as well as the L.A. Times and McCain, himself. As we all know, being unfaithful to one’s wife makes one an unfit choice for President. Fascinating.

My point is that we all have skeletons, and John McCain has his share of guilt by association and personal poor judgment. I don’t necessarily think that those associations make him either a liar or the wrong choice for President. We need to stick to the issues that matter, and some past association that John McCain doesn’t want anyone to know about because it wasn’t his finest moment is not an issue that matters——at least not to me. But if the hate-mongers of the Republican Party want to dredge it all up, then I say, yes, by all means let’s get it ALL out in the open.

Barack Obama Knew Bill Ayres—Big Deal!

Barack Obama knew Bill Ayres. There, I said it—oh, and so already has Senator Obama; he hasn’t been trying to hide anything. While that’s all that the conservative right wants you to know so that you’ll conclude that Obama is a terrorist, I believe in adding the facts.

Ayres was, indeed, a left-wing radical who, as the New York Times says, launched ” a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and United States Capitol” about 40 years ago, when the senator was about 8. Since then, Ayres has turned his life around; he got both a master’s degree and a Ph.D. and is a professor at University of Illinois. He and Obama met over 20 years after his crimes, when they both were working on an anti-poverty project. Anti-poverty? Oh, that is radical (especially for the conservative right). And both men lived in the same neighborhood. I suppose Obama should have relocated. Ayres also contributed 200 dollars to Obama’s 2001 senate campaign. I bet that bought him a lot of radical favors. There are a few other details——-fairly boring—–about them being at a luncheon for school reform together and about Ayres hosting a coffee when Obama was running for office in the mid-90s. Wake me when it’s over. And this is why McCain and Palin are calling Obama a terrorist? Are you kidding me?

I thought that the conservative Christian right believed in salvation, believed that a person could change his life. Or is that just all talk that’s dragged out and paraded in front of the media only when it’s convenient for them?

If having been acquainted with Ayres at one time, who 40 years ago committed a crime and has now turned himself around and works against poverty and works in the educational system at one of the finest universities in the country, makes Obama a terrorist, then we should probably all look a little more closely at our childhood friends, co-workers, and even the people sitting right next to us in church.

If you want to not vote for Barack Obama because someone he met about 15 years ago when both men were doing the Lord’s work had committed crimes 40 years ago, then that’s your choice. But don’t try to make the argument that that makes Barack Obama a terrorist by association. Oh, please.