Posts Tagged 'McCain'

Ramblings on Palin’s Real America and Us Versus Them

 In 2001, President George Bush, in regard to the so-called war on terror, said, “You’re either with us or you’re against us…,” laying the groundwork for a cultural divisiveness that has become larger than any sense of country that we all share as Americans. And what’s most frightening is that the “you’re either with us or against us” mind set has become the norm rather than the anomolous, embarrassing, temporary blot on our collective soul that it should be. Now, the McCain campaign is carrying the torch, perhaps all the way to the next White House.

 Bush’s words encouraged us to judge one another’s motives and allegiances, for, after all, if we didn’t agree with the commander in chief, then we were being unpatriotic. If we didn’t support the invasion of Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with September 11 or any other terrorism threat at the time, then we were unpatriotic. If we didn’t rush to thrust the youngest and bravest of us into the line of firearms and bombs and beheadings in that sovereign nation, then we were not supporting those youngest and bravest of us——those troops—-and we were being unpatriotic. If we didn’t support tax cuts for the wealthiest among us in a time of war so that the rest of us could, once again, have the financial proof that trickle-down economics does not work, then we were unpatriotic.

And so it has continued for the past 7 years, from illegal wiretapping and spying on you and me in our telephone conversations and e-mails to firing government officials who refused to randomly investigate only Democrats for voter fraud that wasn’t voter fraud to snubbing anyone whose first language was not English. Our government has continued to foster an “us versus them” perspective.

The McCain/Palin campaign is now continuing to encourage that divisive, incendiary, destructive train of thought. In one of her latest campaign speeches, Palin spoke of small-town America as the “real” America, once again trying to divide our country into those who are patriotic, that is, those who agree with the McCain/Palin vision for this country, and those who are not patriotic, that is, those whose vision for this country does not include privatizing Social Security, taxing us on our employer-offered health benefits, and providing Socialist welfare to corporate America.

When George Bush did it, I dismissed it as “well, it’s George Bush.” I, as well as so many other Americans, came to view whatever Mr. Bush said as the opposite of what was really going on in his mind and behind our backs——–and he never disappointed me. When he said that he was a uniter, it turned out that he was a divider. When he said that wiretapping was always done with a warrant, it turned out that he was spying on Joe six-pack without warrants. And when he pressed on with his “us versus them” idea, it was just another day at the office. Maybe he was using the old divide and conquer routine.

Is that what Senator McCain and Governor Palin are trying to do now, divide and conquer? That sort of tactic can be successful if executed properly, with a surgeon’s precision and an Olympian’s skill. George Bush, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney have that skill and that precision. The proof is in the state our poltical discourse. They laid a solid foundation for the Republican candidate. But is that the kind of country we want?  Do we really want it to be you’re either with us or you’re against us? Isn’t anyone else tired of the “I’m right, and you’re wrong—and un-American” line? Do we want our leaders to encourage a distrust, a sort of neighbor-versus-neighbor kind of America? 

It sort of reminds me of the Civil War.

McCain Pals Around with Terrorists

He really does.

Although I wrote about McCain’s infidelity and his ties to the Council for World Freedom (what many on both sides would call a terrorist group), I’ll admit that I wasn’t aware of his close friendship with domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy. Anyone remember him?

I’m not going to list Liddy’s criminal acts or talk about his extremist beliefs here; you can read about them for yourselves either in this Huffington Post article or in this wonderful testimony to Liddy’s character, mostly told in his own words.

I will, however, make a point of saying that Liddy helped to plan the total incapacitation of an American citizen in the Watergate case in order to keep illegal acts by the government from becoming public. It appears that he was also interested in firebombing the Brookings Institution. I believe this all makes him a domestic terrorist. Here’s an interesting transcript of an interview with Daniel Ellsberg, the gentleman who leaked the Pentagon Papers. Pay special attention to the part where he talks about the, ummm, attempt to sort of do him bodily harm; Liddy was convicted of conspiracy in that one.

Does this second association to terrorists (or is it third?) make Senator McCain a terrorist? Does it make us afraid of what might happen if he’s president? Does it make us wonder why he has been dishonest about his associations? I, myself, am pondering the answers to these very complicated questions.

McCain and “My Fellow Prisoners”

During a campaign speech in Pennsylvania, Senator John McCain, in mid-sentence, addressed his audience as “my fellow prisoners.” He did it without missing a beat. There was no explanation afterward, and the crowd didn’t seem to know what to make of it. Neither do I.

McCain seemed to be speaking in a sincere tone, trying to talk about his position, so why would he use the word prisoners? And did anyone see the look on Sarah Palin’s face when he said it? Of what is he a prisoner? The present administration? The press corps that was taping his speech? Or was he referring to his audience members as prisoners of his rhetoric?

While the McCain campaign might be busy today trying to concoct an explanation for yesterday’s mistake, my fear is that the real reason behind the misstep was that he is suffering from some sort of psychological problem induced by either senility or post-traumatic stress disorder.

What do you think about his “my fellow prisoners” moment?

McCain Attacks Obama for Not Funding the Troops

I’m not just talking about John McCain, who, while looking down his nose, likes to tell his audiences that Barack Obama voted against funding the troops. Cindy McCain is now out there on the campaign trail, telling people that it sent a cold chill through her body when she found out that Obama had voted against troop funding. Cold chill? First, is there any other kind of chill than a cold one? Second, how many cold chills did she get when she found out that her own husband was against funding the troops? Their own son was in Iraq at the time, so she must have been uncontrollably outraged—and chilled to the bone—to find out that the young man’s own father would have voted against helping him, right? No, not really. She left out that little detail in the video that I saw. Perhaps she mentioned it later.

In May 2007, Senator Obama did, indeed, vote against authorizing billions for the war—because he not only wanted to help our troops with money, but he wanted to get them out of Iraq, and without a timetable, that wasn’t likely to happen. He said, “We must fund our troops. But we owe them something more.” He called for “a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else’s civil war.” By the way, I’ve never seen Obama shy away from talking about his vote on that issue or responding to McCain’s attacks about it. What the McCains don’t tell you is that every other time, Obama voted ‘yes’ to fund the troops. This time, he thought that it was time to do more than just extend their stay in hell.

Something else that the McCains don’t tell you is that there had been a bill earlier that both funded the troops AND provided a non-binding plan for withdrawal, which the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted. This is the bill that Senator Obama supported and voted ‘yes’ on. But more important, this is the bill that John McCain urged the President to veto. McCain, himself, was conveniently absent for the vote, but he urged the President to veto the bill, which Bush did. So, McCain was against troop funding. Not only was he against troop funding in this instance, but he voted against the troops many other times (but that’s for another day—-very soon).

It’s all in your perspective, isn’t it? If you support the troops and want them to come home, then you boast about Obama’s vote. If you want the troops to stay in Iraq indefinitely, then you boast about McCain’s urging the President to veto the bill.

Senator McCain likes to remind his audiences that we need truthfulness from our next President. Then why isn’t he, McCain, being truthful? And if he does become the next President, will he continue an administration of lies? Haven’t we already had 8 years of that?