(h/t Heather for video)
The Bizarro-World of the punditocracy has the world so shifted askew that in their view, John McCain, who has voted with President Bush 95% of the time in 2007 and 100% of the time in 2008 is a bipartisan who reaches across the aisle and Barack Obama, who has only the 40th most liberal voting record, is a flaming liberal with no record of working on a bipartisan basis, despite co-sponsoring legislation with ultra-right wingers Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar. Catch that logic?
Stephen Hayes and Tony Blankley are foisting this incredible bit of specious syllogism, based on The Weekly Standard’s article naming Obama the most liberal Senator. Because we all know The Weekly Standard (founded by neo-con William Kristol) never makes things up, right? Rachel Maddow, once again casting pearls of wisdom before porcine truthiness, tries to set them straight:
MADDOW: …Barack Obama has only been in the Senate for one term. In that time, the bills that he‘s sponsored have been with people like Tom Coburn on more than one occasion. He was the guy that extended the Nunn-Lugar bill so that it wasn‘t just about weapons of mass destruction. It was also about dangerous conventional weapons like shoulder fired missiles. He did it with Dick Lugar. He has.
When you‘ve only been in the Senate one term and you‘re a freshman, you don‘t have a huge legislative record. But what he‘s got is actually extraordinarily bipartisan.
HAYES: David, I think Rachel may have exhausted the list. I think that may be it. He clearly doesn‘t have a bipartisan record. The “National Journal” survey found he was the most liberal senator.
MADDOW: Come on. Come on.
(CROSS TALK)
MADDOW: And Bernie Sanders is obviously taking it to the refs on this one and Russ Feingold too. If Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar don‘t count as reaching across the aisle because we‘re rounding that down-
(CROSS TALK)
HAYES: I‘m perfectly happy to count them. There‘s just two. What other examples are there. The fact remains that “National Journal” poll-you can scoff at it, if you want. Other people don‘t seem to scoff at it. I guarantee that the McCain campaign is going to be using it liberally.
MADDOW: Let me ask you though, in 2004, that “National Journal” poll, who did they say was the most liberal senator in 2004?
HAYES: I don‘t know.
MADDOW: It would be John Kerry.
Transcripts below the fold:
GREGORY: I want to move on to number two here, but I do think there are two realities in this campaign. One is the bush years have given Democrats a bigger voice, a stronger voice to take on the tactics and the methods of the war on terror. There‘s also a Republican record where we have not been attacked in this country since 2001. That also is going to mean a lot to people. It will be difficult to take that away from the Bush administration, even if you attack them on the war on Iraq or on methods and techniques of dealing with prisoners. It‘s going to be a complicated and intense debate.
Let‘s move on to number two. One of Obama‘s calling cards here is that he can play across the aisle, that he has bipartisan appeal. What is that appeal? Does Obama have an actual track record, Tony Blankley, of bipartisanship?
BLANKLEY: I don‘t want to claim a comprehensive knowledge of Obama‘s record, but my impression is that he does not have a track record of challenging the interests of his own side. He challenges the interests of the Republican side. This is the argument McCain‘s making. If it‘s makeable, it‘s a powerful argument for McCain, because it goes to the very nature of how Obama describes his campaign and the reason for it, that he‘s beyond politics.
If you can show that he has the weaker record, decisively from McCain, who clearly has a bipartisan record-that‘s why he doesn‘t have base supporters, because he‘s been on the wrong side for a lot of us for many years. I think it‘s a powerful issue, if he can make it. Part of that will be advertising money, where Obama will be out-spending him two or three to one.
HARWOOD: That‘s one of the reasons he gave that speech to the African American on Sunday, though, was to provide some examples, contemporaneous examples, of him talking to people on his own side and saying you have to shape up too.
GREGORY: But has he done it in Washington? Rachel, this is the flip side of the argument that being in the Senate is a vulnerability for McCain, because he does have area‘s where he can say, whether it‘s gang of 14, campaign finance reform, other issues. Look, I‘ve done it. I have worked on the other side of the aisle.
MADDOW: In fact, he does. Barack Obama has only been in the Senate for one term. In that time, the bills that he‘s sponsored have been with people like Tom Coburn on more than one occasion. He was the guy that extended the Nunn-Lugar bill so that it wasn‘t just about weapons of mass destruction. It was also about dangerous conventional weapons like shoulder fired missiles. He did it with Dick Lugar. He has.
When you‘ve only been in the Senate one term and you‘re a freshman, you don‘t have a huge legislative record. But what he‘s got is actually extraordinarily bipartisan.
HAYES: David, I think Rachel may have exhausted the list. I think that may be it. He clearly doesn‘t have a bipartisan record. The “National Journal” survey found he was the most liberal senator.
MADDOW: Come on. Come on.
(CROSS TALK)
MADDOW: And Bernie Sanders is obviously taking it to the refs on this one and Russ Feingold too. If Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar don‘t count as reaching across the aisle because we‘re rounding that down-
(CROSS TALK)
HAYES: I‘m perfectly happy to count them. There‘s just two. What other examples are there. The fact remains that “National Journal” poll-you can scoff at it, if you want. Other people don‘t seem to scoff at it. I guarantee that the McCain campaign is going to be using it liberally.
MADDOW: Let me ask you though, in 2004, that “National Journal” poll, who did they say was the most liberal senator in 2004?
HAYES: I don‘t know.
MADDOW: It would be John Kerry. In both cases, I think Bernie Sanders was really-
GREGORY: Quick comment here because I want to get-
BLANKLEY: The Nunn bill was not a big partisan fight. McCain, on the other hand, is was paired up with Kennedy, with Feingold. He picked on the Democratic side on great fight, great partisan fights.
(CROSS TALK)
BLANKLEY: No, but it‘s not a big bill.
GREGORY: Let me wedge in here. The third question, John Harwood, your take on it in 20 seconds, desperate to drill, where are the votes in the oil debate, John, quickly?
HARWOOD: There are blue collar votes to be had in this debate, for a candidate to say we have to do something different, because you‘re paying more than four dollars at the pump. That‘s who McCain is talking to today.
GREGORY: OK, we‘ll take break here. Three questions, always lively here. Your play date in our remaining moments with our panel. Don‘t go away.
No Trackbacks To “Race To The White House: Obama’s Bipartisan Appeal“
Gregory always manages to stay in the “middle” even if that brings him to the edge of the precipice.
i <3 Rachel.
I sit on a man’s back, choking him, and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by any means possible, except getting off his back.
Well, hell, I wish Obama was a progressive. In most ways, he isn’t, though: he’s a moderate by any standards save those of the neo-con radicals and the pundits they inspire. Still, if they can portray Obama as a liberal because those neo-cons tell them he is, why, gives the pundits good copy, and they don’t even have to think to say or write it. Hey! A twofer!
maybe i’ll have better luck here… i heard stephen hayes say something the other day and i’m still trying to clear it up… seems a good place to make sure he’s the liar i figured…
here it is… i’ve been outside working in the beautiful high 70s, low humidity weather these past days… [tuesday] i heard this exchange - or thought i heard it and wasn’t sure until i could check the transcript [wednesday]… taking a break, i found it -
from Race to the White House with david gregory, simulcast on RACHEL MADDOW’s show on AirAmericaRadio:
well, i don’t recall that they ever got back to it…
but, is that true??? they are NOT incarcerated???
REALLY???
[katy, it’s off topic on this thread. I’ll let it stay at this one for a few minutes so that you can copy and paste it on an Open Thread. Thanks. Site Monitor ps- There were quite a few people arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned for that first attack, though it’s hard to say if every individual involved was captured.]
Do you mean McCain actually voted for something in 2008?! I don’t believe these lies!
Saying Obama is the *most* liberal senator is like saying Tony Blankley is an intelligent, free-thinking, caring person.
Makeable?
Yes, McCain is bipartisan. He supports both fascists and genocidalists.
ebone @ 2:
Me too. She is always prepared for the right’s talking points and has a wonderful way of confronting and defusing their distortions. It’s no mystery why she was chosen as a Rhodes Scholar.
Stephen Hayes earns 4 and a half Robert Novak heads out of 5 for his repertoire of douchebaggery.
I love this blog but I hate it when people get the spelling of the Weakly Substandard wrong. :(
And I also need to ask what is “wrong” with being “most liberal?”
Wasn’t jeebus a liberal?
I’d have Rachael’s babies and I am a man.
I’ve heard quite a bit about Obama being the most liberal senator (more liberal than Feingold? Kennedy?), but I NEVER hear these windbags ask about the most conservative senator. Why is that?
North Texans having to chose between food and gas.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/vid.....r.gas.wfaa
[Sorry about the wait on this one, burn. It’s the over-zealous spam filter acting up yet again. The upside is that you don’t have to deal with all of the Cyrillic porn spam that we get. The downside is that a lot of innocuous-to-important links activate the filter. Site Monitor]
In North Texas it’s either food or gas.
http://www.cnn dot com/video/#/video/living/2008/06/19/stoler.food.or.gas.wfaa
theWalrus @ 7:
I’m not going to defend Tony Blankley’s politics because I disagree with them - but your comment about his character is out of line.
I’d suggest you listen to “Left, Right & Centre” (KCRW) a few times. It’s a great political discussion radio show with Blankley, Arianna Huffington and Bob Scheer. Blankley is the best I’ve heard at presenting the Right side of political discussion without relying on disrespect or common put-downs. - something you could do well to learn something about yourself.
The thing about Rachel Maddow is that when you watch her deliver her arguments and counter arguments on the screen she’s even stronger and more persuasive than when you just read the transcript.
She has a natural television presence and really understands how the medium works.
David Gregory has no business hosting a show. He’s so intent on when the show’s going to a break, he never follows up on interesting comments. He’s done it to Eugene Robinson more times than I can count. And this current discussion could’ve gotten a lot more interesting and informative if Gregory had more balls and let people say what they wanted to so. He always says, “We’ll get back to that right after the break.” And he never does. He’s reading from his script and if it says, “this talking point now,” break, “then we have to have a new talking point.” The guy’s such a scrotum.
And the National Journal rankings on who’s the most liberal/conservative has been debunked sooo many times. Leave it up to Tony Blankley to bring it up. No one else with any brains even pays attention to it anymore.
Gregory doesn’t like to give Rachel a chance to expose these two losers and their phoney source of “most liberal senator” crap. America had better get it’s head out of it’s ass and start exposing this right wing neocon crap pile for what it is….just propaganda and lies.
I’m glad the Democratic Party has a huge cash roll this time around. We need it. We need to expose these lying sons-of-bitches and their tricks and deception to the American people once and for all!!
Go Rachel. You make these two overstuffed sacks of shit look like JUST THAT!
John McCaint is a Nazi, until he proves me wrong
To the National Journal every Democrat is a liberal and every Democrat running for office is the most liberal.
stephen hayes is literally nothing but a fucking propagandist and liar. he still pimps the lie of a connection between 9/11 and saddam; and he is the author of a widely panned hagiography of dick cheney.
i find it interesting that he’s now a regular guest on dancin’ david gregory’s ego-hour. and is finding his way on other general electric media outlets as well. i’ve seen him a couple of times opining on democratic primary results.
you’d think someone so clearly discredited would not be given a prominent platform to continue to spread his lies.
BLANKLEY: I don‘t want to claim a comprehensive knowledge of Obama‘s record
Do us all a favor, Pudge, get real and stop claiming knowledge IN GENERAL.
I heart Rachel’s laugh, too. Especially when she laughs in their faces when they spew their lies. Priceless.
Rachel Maddow is approximatley 10 times more brighter, more informed , more quicker thinking and more articulate than those other cowboys .
HAYES: I‘m perfectly happy to count them. There‘s just two. What other examples are there. The fact remains that “National Journal” poll-you can scoff at it, if you want. Other people don‘t seem to scoff at it. I guarantee that the McCain campaign is going to be using it liberally.
You are lying sack of detritus and bite the heads of live chickens in graveyards every Saturday night. The fact remains that I wrote it, right here. Does that necessarily make what I wrote fact, MORON?
(wait…it might well be true, but my point still stands)
HAYES: I don‘t know.
Make that your answer to everything, Snarky McBeardface. At least it would be the truth.
Why even dispute whether he is the most liberal senator or not?
Just say, ‘I don’t know if that’s true, but all America can thank God that he’s not a conservative!’
Dada has it right!! ONCE. Just Once I’d like to hear them put all of this talk of “liberal”, “conservative”, into perspective.
Why does a liberal have to defend their record when a conservative does not? What votes were cast that put them in the “liberal” category? If just once these talking heads would describe what liberal actually means, people in America would realize that liberal ain’t so bad. Something along the lines of…say…”well, Obama voted against the rights of X corporation to screw over working class people, and stood up for consumers and workers, so I guess if that makes him ‘liberal’, so be it, but I bet most Americans would agree with his vote, etc…” Why won’t they say that??!?!!? Why do even fellow liberals/progressives go along with the implicit frame?
More importantly, since when does Obama stand ONLY for “bi-partisanship”, when clearly, he is considered by many to be a good LIBERAL antidote to CONSERVATIVE misgovernance (sp?)???? This frame acts as if our problem in America has not been conservatism (it has), and that liberalism is better (it is), but that our problem is somehow, lack of bi-partisanship. BS. This is what concerns me about the Bush-bashing. If we do not link the disaster that has been “Bush” to the larger truism that Bush simply represented conservatism, we get nowhere, even if Obama wins. Because the wrong lesson is learned… that once again, it is not about an inferior vs. a superior ideology (which it is), but about personalities. We HAVE to get away from this and the first way to do this is to link CONSERVATISM with this disaster, not just Bush. Make conservatism as “bad” a word as “liberalism” was made into after the 60’s-70’s!!!
Grrrrrrr.
And yes… I know Obama aren’t no FDR, but still…..
And yes, I also know that’s bad grammar…
I hafta say- Maddow is so refreshing to have on TV. She is smarter and tougher then any of these propaganda pigs she faces.
Man, Rachel Maddow is smarter than all of those gasbags put together. She ripped apart their arguments and they could do nothing but repeat the same tired phrases.
ElleninBigD @ 18:
Canuknotusa @ 16:
tony does have something to offer i do listen him when i have a chance….i think he is more of a classical republican at times not sure he agrees with the NEOCON philosophy……i don’t believe he fully appreciates mcBlame
It must be hard for Rachel to be on these shows while being a member of the “reality-based Community”…. but at least she can still laugh at them…
I am no fan of Rachel Maddow, her ambitious to play at the MSNBC boy’s club led her to some spout some truely nasty garbage about Hillary Clinton. She’s also kissed the tokas of Chris Matthews, well, just see the Daily Howler.
Oh this issue, She’s right of course and does a decent job with these two. But by now the “most liberal” ploy is badly shopworn, and these Republican hacks won’t get much milage from it. I like the fact that Maddow suggests the Republican Party is now out on the fringe of Public Opinion, but why not just come out and say it?
Canuknotusa @ 16:
Well….ok. Knee-jerk dislike (I did it on this thread, too, that’s why I am am replying) of a republican isn’t the best way to go about things. But I pause to wonder….why in the world would I feel so strongly about him and his peeps? Why am I so reflexively repulsed and suspicious? I’m going to go with the last 7+ years of GOP hijinks plastered on top of another 30+ years of similar chicanery having scarred me so deeply…
BLANKLEY: I don‘t want to claim a comprehensive knowledge of Obama‘s record
then why the hell do you go on national teevee and make generalisations about him?
Bonkers @ 35:
Dude- don’t apologize for calling the kettle black… that sort of thinking, we’d hafta demand they change the name of this site!
And now we see the contrast between a woman with her doctorate in political science and a “journalist” carrying water for a quickly dying political ideology.
Maddow shouldn’t go on shows like that. They’re all jokes and she can only laugh at the stupidity rather than have a proper debate.
maddow got them good when she asked the rhetorical question who was the most liberal in 2004 — kerry.
yeah, we’ve got the playbook.
whoever the democratic candidate is automatically number one on “the most liberal” list.
i shake my head in wonder at the format — two minutes of four people speaking over each other. they have to do it that way. otherwise the viewers might hear an opposing viewpoint at enough length for it to be able to sink in and then where would they be!
What a bullshit ADHD format; it’s a (insert bigoted adjective) firing squad.
Rachael Maddow should get position of press secretary for Obama. Her intelligent fact gathering, honesty, and analysis is second to none!
She has it all, a doctorate, personality, and passionate concern for America and our democracy. She is really raising the bar on what journalism means as a job. Her self effacing humor is really genuine. GO RACHAEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rob @ 40:
She constantly makes those MSM dimwits look stupid. The contrast is vivid for all to see. I think it is good to have her there for that reason.
The host a