Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic hits it right on the head. John McCain has gone back on his word not to play up his POW experiences during the presidential campaign, so this is absolutely fair game. He’s not just exploiting his time as a POW, he’s lifting other people’s stories to gain sympathy. Couple that with his vote in the Senate to allow Americans to use the same torture “enhanced interrogation techniques” that were used on him and he leaves himself wide open for this one. It was just a matter of time… (h/t Jamie)
In all the discussion of John McCain’s recently recovered memory of a religious epiphany in Vietnam, one thing has been missing. The torture that was deployed against McCain emerges in all the various accounts. It involved sleep deprivation, the withholding of medical treatment, stress positions, long-time standing, and beating. Sound familiar?
According to the Bush administration’s definition of torture, McCain was therefore not tortured.
Cheney denies that McCain was tortured; as does Bush. So do John Yoo and David Addington and George Tenet. In the one indisputably authentic version of the story of a Vietnamese guard showing compassion, McCain talks of the agony of long-time standing. A quarter century later, Don Rumsfeld was putting his signature to memos lengthening the agony of “long-time standing” that victims of Bush’s torture regime would have to endure. These torture techniques are, according to the president of the United States, merely “enhanced interrogation.” Read on…
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said in an interview Wednesday that he was uncertain how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own.
“I think — I’ll have my staff get to you,” McCain told Politico in Las Cruces, N.M. “It’s condominiums where — I’ll have them get to you.”
Is McCain’s memory so shot that he genuinely can’t remember? Hell, a parking lot he owns is worth four times more than the average American home. Does he have so many that it’s unimportant for him to even keep track? Whatever the reason, millions of Americans are at risk of losing their one and only home, and a new Obama ad is quick to point this out.
Eight years ago, then Governor George W. Bush revealingly joked about his backers at the 2000 Al Smith Dinner. “This is an impressive crowd - the haves and the have-mores,” Bush said, adding, “Some people call you the elites; I call you my base.” With his own quip Saturday night that “$5 million” is his definition of rich,” John McCain made no mistake that he is Bush’s natural heir.
Now, there is nothing wrong with being happily rich and utterly detached. Nothing, that is, unless you make criticizing your political opponent as “elitist” and “out of touch” a centerpiece of your campaign. Which is why McCain beat a hasty retreat in an interview today with the Politico. (In that same interview, McCain with no sense of irony called lobbyists “birds of prey.”) Without naming a number, McCain said:
“I define rich in other ways besides income. Some people are wealthy and rich in their lives and their children and their ability to educate them. Others are poor if they’re billionaires.”
Of course, by any accounting, the $100 million McCains are fabulously well-off (see the gold-plated details below the fold). But John McCain’s staggering detachment from the real lives of the American people can truly be measured in dollars – and sense.
For starters, McCain in April declared that there had been “great progress economically” during the Bush years. On more than one occasion, he diagnosed Americans’ concerns over the dismal U.S. economy as “psychological.” (Phil Gramm, McCain’s close friend and adviser supposedly excommunicated over his “whiners” remarks, was back with the campaign last week.) McCain, a man who owns eight homes nationwide, in March lectured Americans facing foreclosure that they ought to be “doing what is necessary — working a second job, skipping a vacation, and managing their budgets — to make their payments on time.” And when all else fails, McCain told the people of the economically devastated regions in Martin County, Kentucky and Youngstown, Ohio, there’s always eBay.
In his defense, McCain’s shocking tone-deafness may just be a matter of perspective. When you’re as well off as he is, anything below a $5 million income (a figure exceeding that earned on average by the top 0.1% of Americans) seems middle class by comparison. (Read the rest of this story…)
The Jed Report is at it again with another damning video, this time “focusing on McCain’s relationship with Washington DC lobbyists, using clips from the past 18 years, from the Keating scandal to present.”
As Logan noted last week, Abramoff crony Ralph Reed was supposed to host a fundraiser for his pal John McCain Monday night. Well, apparently the McCain camp realized how bad that would have looked for their candidate, and although they won’t admit they explicitly told him to stay away, Reed never showed up and no mention was made of him.
Ralph Reed was a no-show at a fund-raiser for John McCain Monday evening, following nearly a week of considerable drama surrounding his involvement in the senator’s campaign.
The Republican candidate had come under fire for associating with Reed, the former head of the Christian Coalition who fell from grace after his involvement with lobbyist Jack Abramoff. McCain was one of the leaders of the investigation of Abramoff’s lobbying activities that led to his imprisonment. Reed was never charged.
Kudos to the Obama campaign for jumping on this right quick:
That didn’t stop the Obama campaign from issuing a “response” to the absence. “Faced with the embarrassing prospect of holding a fundraiser with one of Jack Abramoff’s closest associates, the McCain campaign scrambled today scratch Ralph Reed from tonight’s program,” Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said in a statement. “The real question isn’t why Reed isn’t showing up, but why a so-called reformer would invite him at all.”
Two weeks ago, it seemed Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter had just about had it with John McCain. The columnist said he’s “misread McCain,” who, it turns out, is “a surprisingly immature politician” who may not be “ready to lead.” Alter’s piece concluded that McCain had “mortgaged his precious personal honor.”
But underlying Alter’s argument is that McCain is still a good guy who’s been led astray by irresponsible advisors who’ve led him astray. McCain’s ugly campaign is “out of sync with the real guy,” Alter said.
In his new column, Alter takes McCain to task for “making stuff up about Barack Obama,” and this time, Alter doesn’t make excuses for the Republican nominee.
As usual, news organizations are deeply afraid to say that one side is more negative than the other. Doing so sounds “unfair.” It’s much easier, and less controversial, to say that “both candidates” are being negative. That would be “balanced”, but also untrue. […]
[O]verall, and to his credit, Obama has not engaged in anywhere near the number of falsehoods as McCain.
For about a month, McCain’s campaign has been resorting to charges that are patently false. When Obama traveled abroad in July, to positive reviews, McCain decided he had to make attack ads that went far beyond the norm. In the past, plainly deceptive ads were the province of the Republican National Committee or the Democratic National Committee or independent committees free to fling mud that didn’t bear the fingerprints of candidates. But not this time. These smears come directly from the candidate.
The litany is no doubt familiar to those watching the campaign closely. McCain lied about Obama being responsible for gas prices. Then about Obama’s treatment of wounded U.S. troops in Germany. And then again about Obama’s tax policies.
[W]hen he resorts to these kinds of falsehoods, and casts such aspersions on his opponent’s patriotism, John McCain is no longer putting his country first. If he were, he would recognize that the interests of the nation require a relatively truthful campaign. To fulfill his image of himself, McCain should stop lying about his opponent. For a man with his claims to honor and integrity, that’s not too much to ask.
Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Democratic Party’s vice presidential candidate in 2000 and now an independent who is one of John McCain’s strongest supporters, will speak at the Republican National Convention, an official said.
Lieberman will deliver a speech when Republicans gather in St. Paul, Minn., to nominate McCain for president, a party official told The Associated Press on Wednesday. The official requested anonymity because a formal announcement had yet to be made.
Lieberman’s office declined to comment.
Four years ago, former Sen. Zell Miller, a Georgia Democrat, praised President Bush and mocked the Democratic ticket as weak on defense in a speech at the GOP’s national convention. Read on…
So my question for Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid is: how soon can we kick the pr*ck out of the party?
On Saturday night, at the forum at Saddleback Church, the Rev. Rick Warren asked John McCain to name “the three wisest people that you know that you would rely on heavily in an administration.” McCain listed three people: Gen. David Petraeus, Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), and eBay CEO Meg Whitman.
It was nice, I suppose, for McCain to mention Lewis in this context. Indeed, I don’t doubt for a moment that Lewis is quite wise and would have a lot to offer McCain in the way of advice.
But it was more than a little odd to see McCain tout his support for Lewis’ wisdom given that McCain has largely ignored Lewis during their decades of concurrent congressional service. Jonathan Stein has the story:
At the time of McCain’s Selma speech, a Lewis associate told my colleague David Corn that McCain has never been close to Lewis. Lewis was not told about McCain’s speech in Selma in advance, nor was he invited to attend.
In response to McCain’s latest invocation of his name, Rep. Lewis said in a statement requested by Mother Jones, “I cannot stop one human being, even a presidential candidate, from admiring the courage and sacrifice of peaceful protesters on the Edmund Pettus Bridge or making comments about it.” But, he added, “Sen. McCain and I are colleagues in the US Congress, not confidantes. He does not consult me. And I do not consult him.”
Well, no, of course not. McCain is a conservative Republican with an underwhelming record on civil rights. Lewis is a progressive Democrat who has championed civil rights throughout his life.
McCain is going to “rely … heavily” on Lewis if elected? We should be so lucky.
My, my. FactCheck.org does what their name implies and finds that one of McCain’s recently resurrected talking points, first featured in an aptly titled ad called “Outrageous,” is filled with some rather dubious claims.
John McCain’s ad, “Outrageous,” which began running November 12, touts the Arizona senator’s long-standing fight against pork-barrel spending. The ad includes three examples of projects that McCain deems unnecessary and claims that “one man” has “the guts to stand up to wasteful government spending.”
But the three examples of spending highlighted in the ad – a “bridge to nowhere,” a study of bear DNA and a museum dedicated to Woodstock – seem chosen more for their impact than for any direct involvement McCain had in attacking them. In fact, he voted in favor of the bill that included the bear study funding; he was absent for key votes on the Woodstock museum (including one on an amendment he co-sponsored); and he never specifically tried to eliminate the bridge earmark and missed some crucial votes on that one, as well.
John McCain exaggerating his record, hoping people won’t notice because the establishment media won’t report it? You don’t say…
At Saturday night’s event at Saddleback Church, John McCain told the largely evangelical audience a version of history that the religious right likes to believe: “Our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values and principles.”
That is, to put it mildly, historically dubious — the nation was founded on the secular principles, as part of the separation of church and state — but it’s nevertheless a phrase McCain seems to be especially fond of lately.
On a frozen winter evening at a Town Hall meeting in a school in the Manchester, N.H., suburbs, John McCain expressed surprise and irritation with an intelligence report downplaying the threat of Iran’s nuclear program.
At the end of a long list of reasons to be suspicious of the Iranians, McCain declared: “And they sure don’t share our Judeo-Christian values.”
It seemed at the time to be an odd thing to say about a Muslim country. After all, even if there were no nuclear program, no oil, and no rabble-rousing president, Iran still wouldn’t have Judeo-Christian values. And it’s troubling to wonder if that alone would be a reason for suspicion.
Quite right. For McCain to characterize our hostility for a rival nation in such starkly religious terms reminds us that when it comes to foreign policy, McCain frequently doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
But it’s that phrase that continues to stand out. The Boston Globe dug around a bit and noticed that McCain references “Judeo-Christian values” all the time, when talking about policies as varied as the economy, immigration, and foreign policy. (Read the rest of this story…)
Sometimes political attacks materialize all by themselves. John McCain is set to board a helicopter today and travel 150 miles off the Louisiana cost to host a campaign event on the Genesis Project oil rig.
The overarching point is to stress the Senator’s newfound commitment to offshore drilling. But the stop also plays into a meme critics have been pushing for weeks. The oil rig on which McCain will be speaking is partially owned by Exxon Mobil. According to the website RIGZONE.com, the energy giant has a 38.38 percent share in the Genesis Project, topped only by Chevron’s 56.67 percent.
the DNC sends out an email hitting McCain for his oil rig visit, adding, among other things that “on that rig, it took 10 years from the date oil was discovered until the rig he will be standing on today produced a single drop of oil.
Just as McCain did Monday, Barack Obama addressed the Veterans of Foreign Wars today, and didn’t pull any punches in his response to McCain’s attacks, especially when it came to the cheap shot that he would rather win the Presidency than win the war. It’s welcoming to see a Democrat eager to go before traditionally Republican-friendly audiences and knock it out of the park.
In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, I warned that war would fan the flames of extremism in the Middle East, create new centers of terrorism, and tie us down in a costly and open-ended occupation. Senator McCain predicted that we’d be greeted as liberators, and that the Iraqis would bear the cost of rebuilding through their bountiful oil revenues. For the good of our country, I wish he had been right, and I had been wrong. But that’s not what history shows. […]
These are the judgments I’ve made and the policies that we have to debate, because we do have differences in this election. But one of the things that we have to change in this country is the idea that people can’t disagree without challenging each other’s character and patriotism. I have never suggested that Senator McCain picks his positions on national security based on politics or personal ambition. I have not suggested it because I believe that he genuinely wants to serve America’s national interest. Now, it’s time for him to acknowledge that I want to do the same.
Keith Olbermann takes on John McCain and his campaign managers with another powerful Special Comment on Monday’s Countdown. McCain has consistently voted against our troops, but he and his campaign continue to spread lies and distortions about Barack Obama, painting him as unpatriotic and anti-military, while glossing over his own betrayal of our military on the floor of the Senate.
Now as promised a Special Comment on the remarks of the Senior Senator from Arizona about Senator Obama at the VFW Convention, and about NBC News and MSNBC.
Four times in just two days, Senator McCain’s campaign managers have, simply, hung him out to dry.
First, trying to scapegoat the media, in the exact way that has spelled doom for other presidential candidates already watching from the sidelines.
Second, doing so with a petulant statement so full of holes that it virtually **confirms** that which was reported, and which set off this pointless temper tantrum in the first place.
Third, sending the candidate out to speak before the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention, even as the millstones of a series of disastrous, anti-veteran votes, still figuratively dangled from around his neck.
And fourth, encouraging Senator McCain, while there, to address his opponent in the language of unseemly contempt, undignified calumny, and holier-than-thou persiflage unsupported by reality… near-nonsensical bluster that — at best — makes the speaker look like a dyspeptic grouchy neighbor shouting “Hey you kids, get out of my yard.”
The Obama people must feel that he didn’t do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context, because that–what they’re putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.
“The level of objectivity at NBC News has fallen so low that reporters are now giving voice to unsubstantiated, partisan claims in order to undercut John McCain,” Davis fumed. “Mitchell did what has become a pattern for her of simply repeating Obama campaign talking points.”
During the televised forum broadcast from Saddleback Church in Orange County, Calif., Warren told viewers that McCain would be in a “cone of silence” during the questioning of Obama. Davis confirmed that “McCain was in a motorcade to the event and then held in a green room with no broadcast feed.”
As Logan 
Just as 
