Rachel Maddow calls a spade a spade... or in this case, a liar a liar on Friday's Countdown.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Rachel Maddow calls a spade a spade... or in this case, a liar a liar on Friday's Countdown.
Newsweek: Team McCain and the Trooper - Nominee's ally moves to curb probe of Palin
Political Punch: Palin Accuses 'Obama/Biden Democrats' of Attacking Her Family, But Campaign Can't Name One
I watched the Obama/O'Reilly interview Part 1 on The You Tubes and I have to say that I'm really appalled at the amount of disrespect BillO showed. This is a United States Senator and the Democratic nominee for the presidency and O'Reilly finds it necessary to be fucking smug and arrogant.
That dirty motherfucker sits there, smirking and interrupting Obama at every turn. I defy anyone to find video of O'Reilly daring to be that disrespectful or even challenging ANY Republican. Not just Bush or Cheney, although BillO probably creamed in his pants if he has had them on (I don't know, I can't stand to watch this fuckwad) but even McCain (questions were about nothing other than softballs to bash Obama), Giuliani, Rummy, Rove ("Newsweek has become a far left publication..." says BillO), Boehner... ANYONE with an "R" after their name. Goddamnit, he pisses me off! Yet another asshole that I hope to have the opportunity to bump into on the street so I can punch him in the throat.
Obama, for his part, handled himself as well as he always does, but sometimes I'd wish he wouldn't be so accomodating to these douchebags and call BillO out for his interruptions and contempt.
The rest of O'Reilly's interview with Obama is scheduled for this week in three additional parts, because knowing O'Reilly, he's probably taking the time to try and find a way to edit the interview in order to portray Obama in the worst possible light.
* NOTE - the above post was partly written before searching for other O'Reilly interviews, which I have linked above.
You can't really make this shit up.
(H/T Elvis Dingeldein)
- Interview with Katie Couric of CBS News, September 6, 2006
Friday, September 5, 2008
(H/T Crooks & Liars)
(H/T Bob Cesca)
I knew that the GOP was classless, but this was far and away the shittiest thing I've ever witnessed. Rudy Giuliani and his "Ithlamith exthremith" fear mongering wasn't enough on Day 3 of the convention. They followed it up with video.
Someone should remind the morons that were shouting "USA! USA! USA!" at the top of their lungs after the video was over that we were attacked under a Republican watch. Bush cleared brush while being warned of the "evildoers" and was playing "read-me-a-story" while New York and the Pentagon fell.
This video was billed as a "tribute" to the victims of 9/11, but it was nothing more than cheap theatrics, complete with images of extremists that we should fear because they are "different" than us, Osama Bin Laden (who we still haven't caught under Republican rule, by the way) and the burning towers of the World Trade Center, which I personally viewed collapsing out of my rear view mirror as we were forced to evacuate Manhattan.
It may have been a tribute for the chickenhawk, mouth-breathing, knuckle-draggers at the convention, but I wonder how the families of the fallen felt? I know how I felt, and it wasn't full of pride.
... is like a virtual Republican overload support group. And cheaper than actual therapy. The best part is the connection you feel and bonds you create with fellow commenters.
We've been liveblogging during the Democratic and Republican Conventions and have developed an online friendship discussing our mutual feelings regarding the political scene. We get angry, snarky and silly. There are a few that rise above like 'jane', 'The Space Cowboy', 'ceu', 'JG' and 'kansasdem', but by far, one of my favorite bloggers that I recently discovered is Mr. The Elvis Dingeldein ("its pronounced Dang-le-deen, bitches!") and his blog, "Clusterdouche." He just cracks my shit up. And I mean laugh-out-loud, can't-stop-giggling HI-larity!
Over the last two weeks, it's been my pleasure to try and match the man's sharp wit, insane sense of humor and amazing writing skillz. I haven't even come close, but I have made him laugh once or twice, so imagine my surprise when he complimented me. Yes, I enjoy and admire Mr. Elvis' writing so much that I'm flattered by his comments, so I'm including them here along with some of our comments during the RNC.
Mother, moosehunter, maverick....oh, puke.
How many times have they said "maverick"?? Obviously, they don't know what that word means.
Posted by: ceu at September 4, 2008 09:06 PM
[Obviously, they don't know what that word means.] I don't know what they think it means, but I always substitute the word "cocksucker" for "maverick."
Posted by: Broadway Carl at September 4, 2008 09:09 PM
BEST FREUDIAN SLIP EVER!!! TOM BROKAW INTERVIEWS TOM "RED, YELLOW, ORANGE, GO!" RIDGE, WHO SAYS:
"Because uh John Bush (D'OH!) ... John McCain is very much his own man."
Ohhhh, how I fill the Obama Underoos with love!
Posted by: Elvis Dingeldein at September 4, 2008 11:21 PM
Dear Michael Gerson : Please insert a rabid, feral, and deeply aggravated wolverine cub in your rectum and hang upside down by your ankles until it works its way to your filthy, filthy mouth.
Posted by: Elvis Dingeldein at September 4, 2008 11:26 PM
I love Rachel Maddow enough that I would get a sex-change operation and become a flaming uberdyke to get next to her. She's glorious. GLOR-ee-USSSS!
Posted by: Elvis Dingeldein at September 4, 2008 11:48 PM
The Jane™ said, chicks DIG humor its hotttt
Listen, sister, if years and years (and years) of reading the Interview page of a Playboy centerfold while fighting the urge to doze off in post-self-coital bliss has taught me anything, it's that The Hot Girls love them the sense of humor. And also Corvettes. And money. Yeah, mostly it's the money. But a sense of humor is always a distant third.
Posted by: Elvis Dingeldein at September 4, 2008 11:55 PM
So what does it say about a Republican National Convention with no overt "Republican" signs in the arena, no douchebag Republican monkey-president and no shoot-you-in-the-face vice president? The top two members of the Republican party were nowhere to be seen.
Matthews is talking about it now... condemning your own party leaders so you can be elected.
OOOH! John & Cindy McCain confetti! Also, a Sarah Palin impersonator and a couple of guys with John McCain hand puppets. Not the first time he's had a hand up his ass.
Posted by: Broadway Carl at September 5, 2008 12:02 AM
You and I are truly soul brothers, Mr. The Broadway Carl. I say we merge our efforts and become The Broadway Clusterdouche, what say you, sir?
Posted by: Elvis Dingeldein at September 5, 2008 12:04 AM
Mr. The Elvis Dingeldein: I'm honored that you would consider my occasional quip worthy of such an esteemed compliment. A Broadway Clusterdouche merger is a wonderful thought. That and all the Obama Underoos talk makes me hot.
Posted by: Broadway Carl at September 5, 2008 12:11 AM
"The Broadway Clusterdouche" Sounds like a fantastic musical. Perhaps Andrew Lloyd Webber could write the score? And I think Pat Buchanan would come to see it - he just mentioned something about McCain and "mano a mano," so I think he likes that sort of thing.
Posted by: KatinWilm at September 5, 2008 12:13 AM
Andrew Llyod Webber has so already written The Broadway Clusterdouche, Katin, haven't you ever seen an ALW show? Jesus The Christ™ (Superstar!) they're insufferable!
Posted by: Elvis Dingeldein at September 5, 2008 12:15 AM
I'm going to copy and paste your compliment and post it on my blog, Mr. The Elvis Dingeldein, for surely no one would believe me if I said, "You know, back in aught 8, one Mr. The Elvis Dingeldein asked me to join forces for a Broadway Clusterdouche extravaganza. Then the Republicans won back the House in 2010 and I threw my laptop out the window. I never heard from my Bob Cesca friends again."
Posted by: Broadway Carl at September 5, 2008 12:17 AM
So does that mean that Jane is singing "Don't Know How to Love Him?" Perhaps McCain's first wife could fill in if Jane is otherwise occupied.
Posted by: KatinWilm at September 5, 2008 12:18 AM
Or she could be singing, "What's The Buzz" not realizing it's her vibrator.
Posted by: Broadway Carl at September 5, 2008 12:20 AM
And so if you value your sanity in this insane political time, you should do yourself a favor a stop by one of Bob Cesca's liveblogging threads and vent. It cures what ails ya. Stop by Clusterdouche as well - it's fucking hysterical.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
And there you have it ladies and gentlemen. It sure didn't take long.
Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland:
"Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity," Westmoreland said.
Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”
The Obama campaign was careful in its response, probably treading lightly for fear of accusations of playing the race card.
The Obama campaign, asked about the quote, did not note any racial context. “Sounds like Rep. Westmoreland should be careful throwing stones from his candidate's eight glass houses,” said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor.
And just think, we have a whole nine more weeks of this. Good times, good times...
Barack Obama responds to Sarah Palin's acceptance attack at the Republican National Convention. He hits back nicely, but stays above the fray refraining from attacking Palin.
He's not taking the bait. Suck it, Republicans!
HuffPo: Bill Melendez, the animator who gave life to Snoopy, Charlie Brown and other "Peanuts" characters in scores of movies and TV specials, has died. He was 91.
Melendez died of natural causes Tuesday at St. John's Health Center, according to publicist Amy Goldsmith.
Melendez's nearly seven decades as a professional animator began in 1938 when he was hired by Walt Disney Studios and worked on Mickey Mouse cartoons and classic animated features such as "Pinocchio" and "Fantasia."
I was holding off in judgment of someone I'd never heard speak publicly, except for the video bits here and there about Hillary Clinton whining or asking what a vice president does. Here's my analysis: Same shit, different mouth.
Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska pulled no punches, was sarcastic, snarky and spewed the usual lies and smears regarding Barack Obama. But if you think about it, that was her job, to deliver a speech written by the McCain flunkies and solidify the base. Job well done.
I was hoping to hear some substance, some policy ideas or initiatives that this campaign plans to instill (if they happen to win the White House) on Day One, but got nothing. And maybe that's the job of John McCain tomorrow night, although I think I've heard his ideas of "drill here - drill now" and "I'm going to win this war by winning it," so I'm not expecting too much tomorrow night.
The "blame the media" card was pathetic as well. It seems that it's sexist for the media to try and find out what Sarah Palin's qualifications are for the vice presidency and actually vet the candidate in a proper fashion, something the McCain campaign didn't do. At least, the McCain campaign is calling it sexist... I guess I missed McCain coming to Hillary Clinton's defense when the media was scrutinizing her.
Hopefully, the media will remain the media and not revert to the McCainstream Media that we've seen this long campaign season. I'm optimistic because it looks like they're not too happy about McCain crying about the media. Joe Klein isn't having any of it:
There is a tendency in the media to kick ourselves, cringe and withdraw, when we are criticized. But I hope my colleagues stand strong in this case: it is important for the public to know that Palin raised taxes as governor, supported the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it, pursued pork-barrel projects as mayor, tried to ban books at the local library and thinks the war in Iraq is "a task from God." The attempts by the McCain campaign to bully us into not reporting such things are not only stupidly aggressive, but unprofessional in the extreme.
We'll see what transpires over the next couple of weeks. Biden had better unload and pull no punches because Sarah Palin won't.
Will Bunch - Attytood: Palin's Speech To Nowhere
HuffPo - AP: Attacks, Praise Stretch Truth At GOP Convention
Crooks & Liars - Attn: Media: Earmark-loving Sarah Palin is not a reformer
Top GOP Pundits Peggy Noonan, Mike Murphy Caught On Tape Disparaging Palin Choice: "Political Bullshit," "Gimmicky"
UPDATE II (2:25pm):
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Washington Post - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live.
Still not an issue?
(H/T Bob Cesca)
With closed-captioning, so you can try to understand what the hell Joe Cocker is singing... or maybe so Joe Cocker himself can understand what he's singing.
Another Brave New Film by Robert Greenwald.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
This is unfuckingbelievable.
What's really sad is perusing through the comments section and reading the wingnut comments that think this is a good thing. It's amazing how many people out there are pro-Nazi.
Monday, September 1, 2008
1 - The McCainstream Media nor anyone other than the Palin family and the McCain campaign brought this up. Remember that when you hear the right wing attempt to make this about Bristol's right to privacy and accuse the Democrats of exploiting the issue. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Monday the pregnancy of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s daughter was not relevant to the campaign and reporters should back off of it... “People’s families are off-limits and people’s children are especially off-limits,” Obama told reporters following a campaign event in Monroe, Michigan. “This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as a governor or potential performance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories,” he added.
Here is the statement:
"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. We're proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents," Sarah and Todd Palin said in the brief statement. "Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family," they added.
Barack Obama's statement:
... A senior McCain campaign aide was quoted in the Reuters story as suggesting that Obama’s campaign was linked to the bloggers who were spreading the rumors.
“I am offended by that statement,” Obama said when asked about it by a reporter. “There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us. Our people were not involved in any way in this and they will not be,” he added. “And if I ever thought there was somebody in my campaign that was involved in something like that, they’d be fired.”
2 - According to the Palin family statement, Bristol Palin made the "decision"? What decision? I thought Pro-Lifers didn't have a decision to make.
3 - Roe v. Wade protects PRIVACY, which is why this matter should be dropped and not politicized in terms of speaking about Bristol, but isn't it fair game to question Sarah Palin about her Pro-Life stance and ask, "Why is it okay for you or your daughter to CHOOSE to have a baby, but it's not okay to CHOOSE to have an abortion?"
It's called "Pro-Choice" not "Pro-Abortion." Abortion is not the issue. The right to have a CHOICE and the right to PRIVACY in making that choice are the issues.
UPDATE (9/2/08 9am):
A commenter named "Reality Based" on Jake Tapper's blog makes a very articulate point... a lot more articulate than I did late last night after a day of barbeque and beer:
You know, ordinarily I’d agree with the proposition that a candidate's children matters should be generally off limits. But in this case the McCain/Palin campaign has made it absolutely relevant by trumpeting Palin’s family life and “authenticity” as some sort of qualification to the vice-presidency, and thus the presidency. Palin rides shotgun on the fundie’s wet dreams of banning abortion and punishing premarital sex. Then her own teenage daughter has an unplanned pregnancy, and she “chooses” to keep the baby (a choice that Palin would deny MY daughter). It is not inappropriate to point out the arrogance and mean-spiritedness on display here.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Monday the pregnancy of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s daughter was not relevant to the campaign and reporters should back off of it...
“People’s families are off-limits and people’s children are especially off-limits,” Obama told reporters following a campaign event in Monroe, Michigan. “This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as a governor or potential performance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories,” he added.
Here we go again. Another Obama smear e-mail, this time comparing the supposed stances each presidential candidate. Once again, the list of unverifiable information in the e-mail is astounding. But I'll go through them by actually doing as little research, as the sender of this e-mail most likely has not.
2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE COMPARISON TALKING POINTS
ISSUE: Favors new drilling offshore US
JOHN McCAIN - Yes
BARACK OBAMA - No
False. Obama opposes offshore drilling as the sole solution, but said he would consider a compromise if it were part of an overall comprehensive policy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and point us toward a path of new, renewable sources of energy.
And let's think about this logically. The oil companies currently own approximately 63 million acres of offshore leases that they are available to drill on and currently do not drill on. Even if they started drilling today, which is what John McCain proposes, there wouldn't be a drop of oil produced from any of the sites until 2017, nine years from now, and not a drop of usable oil because of the lack of refineries until 2030. That's twenty-two years from now... is that going to help short-term gas prices? And ultimately, if the oil companies did drill and got the oil out of the earth, it is now their oil, which goes on the global market. It isn't going to be sold exclusively to the United States. So to say that offshore drilling is going to reduce our prices is a false argument.
From CNN.com 8/3/08 - Obama said Friday that he would be willing to compromise on his position against offshore oil drilling if it were part of a more overarching strategy to lower energy costs.
"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama told The Palm Beach Post early into a two-day swing through Florida.
..."I made a general point about the fact that we need to provide the American people some relief and that there has been constructive conversations between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate on this issue," he said during a press conference in Cape Canaveral. "What I will not do, and this has always been my position, is to support a plan that suggests this drilling is the answer to our energy problems," Obama added.
"If we've got a plan on the table that I think meets the goals that America has to set and there are some things in there that I don't like, then obviously that's something that I would consider because that's the nature of how we govern in a democracy."
Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it.
JOHN McCAIN -Yes
BARACK OBAMA - No
Okay gang, everyone say it with me. Judges do not make laws. Congress makes laws. Judges interpret the laws. Now if you want to get into a philosophical argument about Obama and McCain's stances on Roe v. Wade (I like to call it a patient's right to privacy not a woman's right to choose) then have at it. But for someone like McCain who vowed to appoint Supreme Court judges who will overturn Roe v. Wade, isn't that the same as saying that his judges would "interpret" the law to his liking?
OBAMA: When we get in a tussle, we appeal to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution's ratifiers to give direction. Some, like Justice Scalia, conclude that the original understanding must be followed and if we obey this rule, democracy is respected.
Others, like Justice Breyers, insist that sometimes the original understanding can take you only so far--that on the truly big arguments, we have to take context, history, and the practical outcomes of a decision into account.
I have to side with Justice Breyer's view of the Constitution--that it is not a static but rather a living document and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world.
I see democracy as a conversation to be had. According to this conception, the genius of Madison's design is not that it provides a fixed blueprint for action. It provides us with a framework and rules, but all its machinery are designed to force us into a conversation.
Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 89-92 Oct 1, 2006
Served in the US Armed Forces
JOHN McCAIN - Yes
BARACK OBAMA - No
True. Duh... what does that have to do with anything? Is this to infer that McCain would support the troops and Obama wouldn't? The same McCain that voted against funding the troops in the middle of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over a dozen times and didn't even have the guts to vote on the new GI Bill, deciding instead to skip the vote, that John McCain?
Amount of time served in the US Senate
JOHN McCAIN - 22 YEARS
BARACK OBAMA - 173 DAYS
False. I don't know when this e-mail was originated, but Barack Obama won his senate race in November of 2004 and was sworn in as a US Senator in January of 2005. I know that math is hard for some Republicans but just for the record, today is August 31, 2008. I think that's more than 173 days. He also spent 8 years as an Illinois State Senator from 1997-2004.
Will institute a socialized national health care plan
JOHN McCAIN - No
BARACK OBAMA - Yes
Sigh... Yes, those evil social programs like Medicare and Social Security and public schools, and police and fire departments and the post office... boy they've made our lives a living hell, haven't they? And oh, by the way, every member of Congress including John McCain gets affordable health insurance... the kind that Barack Obama wants everyone to have. You can see his detailed health care plan here.
Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy.
JOHN McCAIN - No
BARACK OBAMA - Yes
False. See Obama's stance on abortion here.
Would pull troops out of Iraq immediately
JOHN McCAIN - No
BARACK OBAMA - Yes
False. Since when does "being as careful getting out as we were careless getting in" constitute "immediate" pull out? This is just another scare tactic for those who believe Iraq is the central front on terrorism (Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until after we got there). but even if you debate that issue, here is what Barack Obama said:
Barack Obama offered his "Plan for Iraq" in an op-ed in today's New York Times, affirming that he would begin a "phased redeployment of combat troops" that would remove them in 16 months, by summer of 2010.
You can read the Times Op-Ed here. Also, since it seems that the Bush Administration and the government of Iraq are in negotiations for a timeline for US troop withdrawal, then I suppose Obama was right after all.
Supports gun ownership rights
JOHN McCAIN - Yes
BARACK OBAMA - No
Here are a quick couple of quotes regarding Obama and his stance on gun ownership rights:
"As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it."And seriously, does anyone really oppose registering and licensing guns for law abiding citizens, while at the same time, trying to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill? Haven't we had enough random bell tower, college campus shootings?
"...I think it's important for us to recognize that we've got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people's traditions."
You can view Obama's more detailed stance on gun control here.
Supports homosexual marriage
JOHN McCAIN - No
BARACK OBAMA - Yes
False. From CNN.com:
Barack Obama opposes same-sex marriage, but also opposes a constitutional ban. Says he would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment. As stated on the Obama campaign Web site, he supports full civil unions that "give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples, including the right to assist their loved ones in times of emergency as well as equal health insurance, employment benefits, and property and adoption rights." Says the Employment Non-Discrimination Act should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Advocated legislation that sought to expand federal hate crimes law to include sexual orientation and gender identity. Says the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy needs to be repealed.
John McCain also opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment.
Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase
JOHN McCAIN -No
BARACK OBAMA - Yes
False, as you will see in the related issue below. You can also see Obama's detailed economy plan here.
Voted against making English the official language
JOHN McCAIN - No
BARACK OBAMA - Yes
True. Here's the reason.
"I believe the American people understand in order to succeed in our society, immigrants need to learn English. But the amendment would do a number of things that are problematical. The first is that it is contrary to the provisions of law that exist in many States. For example, in New Mexico, you have in their State Constitution, a provision that says that many of the documents within that State have to be provided in both English and Spanish. The same thing is true for the State of Hawaii. I believe this is a States rights issue, and those constitutions of those States ought to be respected. I do not believe it is a matter we ought to be imposing here from Washington DC. Also, this amendment would undo an executive order conceived by President Bill Clinton and implemented by President George Bush. Both recognized it is important that people who have limited English proficiency receive the kinds of services so they can understand what is going on in terms of the interface between the Government and themselves."Common sense, no?
Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals
JOHN McCAIN - No
BARACK OBAMA - Yes
False. This is simply a twist of the wording to confuse the reader into thinking that any illegal immigrant can apply for Social Security benefits. What the bill was actually about was to reduce fraud and prevent identity theft by undocumented workers. What it would have done was to deny benefits accrued to those who paid into the system after they became legal. Barack Obama voted yes to kill the bill on the basis of the following:
"Americans understand that for years there are undocumented workers who have tried to follow our laws and be good neighbors and good citizens, and have paid into the Social Security Trust Fund.
Once that person regularizes his or her status, and as they proceed down the path to earned citizenship, they should have the benefit after having followed the law and made those contributions. That is fairness.
We should not steal their funds or empty their Social Security accounts. That is not fair. It does not reward their hard work or their financial contributions.
The amendment proposes to change existing law to prohibit an individual from gaining the benefit of any contributions made while the individual was in an undocumented status. I oppose this amendment and believe it is wrong."
And by the way, it's also false because McCain voted WITH Obama to kill the bill as well.
The second part of this e-mail deals with the claim that Obama would kill us on the tax front. This has been debunked at FactCheck.org, a non-partisan group.
"Alert readers may already have noted that this chain e-mail does not provide links to any of Obama's actual proposals or cite any sources for the claims it makes. That is because they are made up. This widely distributed message is so full of misinformation that we find it impossible to believe that it is the result of simple ignorance or carelessness on the part of the writer. Almost nothing it says about Obama's tax proposals is true. We conclude that this deception is deliberate."I'll provide their answers here to the following claims as well but feel free to check the link above.
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
MCCAIN - 0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
OBAMA - 28% on profit from ALL home sales. (How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.)
False. The claim that Obama would impose a 28 percent tax on the profit from "all home sales" is false. Both Obama and McCain would continue to exempt the first $250,000 of gain from the sale of a primary residence ($500,000 for a married couple filing jointly) which results in zero tax on all but a very few home sales.
It's untrue that Obama is proposing a 28 percent capital gains tax rate. He said in an interview on CNBC that he favors raising the top rate on capital gains from its present 15 percent to 20 percent or more, but no higher than 28 percent. And as for a 28 percent rate, he added, "my guess would be it would be significantly lower than that." Furthermore, he has said only couples making $250,000 or more (or, his policy advisers tell us, singles making more than $200,000) would pay the higher capital gains rate. That means the large majority of persons who pay capital gains taxes would see no increase at all.
MCCAIN - 15% (no change)
OBAMA - 39.6% - (How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.')
False. Another false claim is that Obama proposes to raise the tax rate on dividends to 39.6 percent. Dividends currently are taxed at a top rate of 15 percent, and Obama would raise that to the same rate as he would tax capital gains, somewhere between 20 percent and 28 percent but likely "significantly" lower than 28 percent. This higher tax also would fall only on couples making $250,000 or more or singles making more than $200,000.
MCCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!
Patently false. The claim that "Under Obama your taxes will more than double!" is also false. The comparative rate tables this e-mail provides for McCain and Obama are entirely wrong, as we explained in an earlier article March 13 about another false e-mail from which these tables are copied. It is supposedly a comparison of tax rates before and after the Bush tax cuts, but it grossly overstates the effect of the Bush cuts. Furthermore, Obama proposes to retain the Bush cuts for every single income level shown in this bogus table.
The false numbers in the e-mail were copied from a similar smear accusing Bill Clinton of the same thing in 1999. It was just copied Obama's name was inserted. Shameless.
MCCAIN - 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA - Restore the inheritance tax Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.
FALSE! The claim that Obama proposes to "restore the inheritance tax" is also false, as are the claims that McCain would impose zero tax and that Bush "repealed" it. McCain and Obama both would retain a reduced version of the estate tax, as it is correctly called, though McCain would reduce it by more.
The tax now falls only on estates valued at more than $2 million (effectively $4 million for couples able to set up the required legal and financial arrangements). It reaches a maximum rate of 45 percent on amounts more than that. It was not repealed, but it is set to expire temporarily in 2010, then return in 2011, when it would apply to estates valued at more than $1 million ($2 million for couples), with the maximum rate rising to 55 percent.
Obama has proposed to apply the tax only to estates valued at more than $3.5 million ($7 million for couples), holding the maximum rate at 45 percent. McCain would apply it to estates worth more than $5 million ($10 million for couples), with a maximum rate of 15 percent.
NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA
New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet. New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already) New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity) New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!
FALSE! The e-mail continues with a string of made-up taxes that it falsely claims Obama has proposed. He has not proposed a tax on new homes with more than 2,400 square feet, or a new gasoline tax or a tax on retirement accounts. The most laughably false claim is that Obama would tax "water."
Two claims in this message, while not completely false, are still grossly misleading.
The claim that Obama would impose "new taxes on natural resources" may refer to his support for a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions, which indeed would impose large costs on industries burning coal, gas or oil and, indirectly, on their consumers. But McCain also supports cap-and-trade legislation, and even coauthored an early version of a bill that reached the Senate floor this year. Obama's plan would give the federal government more of the revenue from auctioning pollution permits than McCain's plan. Whether cap-and-trade amounts to a "tax" is a matter of interpretation. The fact is neither McCain nor Obama call it that.
There is also some truth to the claim that Obama would impose "new taxes" to finance his health care plan, depending on your interpretation of "new." He has said he would pay for much of his plan "by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for people making more than $250,000 per year, as they are scheduled to do." That would certainly be a tax increase for those high-income persons, compared with what they are paying now. But whether that's imposing a new tax, or just letting an old one come back, depends on your point of view. It may well be that Obama will eventually propose tax increases to finance some of his plan. We've noted before that the "cost savings" that he says will finance much of his plan are inflated and probably won't materialize, according to independent experts we consulted. But it's wrong to say that he's proposing such taxes now.
The short answer to our reader's question is, no, this message isn't real. It's a pack of lies.
Here's a chart from the Washington Post that breaks down Obama's and McCain's tax plans by income demographic. While both Senators are proposing tax plans that would result in cuts for most American families, Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.
Notice the misleading final line of the chart stating McCain's "Average Cut" would be more than Obama's. Well sure it is when you're giving a 4.4% tax cut to those making almost $3 million per year and a 0.2% tax cut for those making under $20,000 per year. (Click on chart for full size.)
And one last thing regarding the final asinine line of the e-mail: "New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!"
Someone should tell the citizens of Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, Sweden, and a host of others that they're apparently living in a third world country because they receive universal health care!
Sunday, August 31, 2008
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind at this point that John McCain has gone absolutely stark raving mad.
McCain was scheduled to deliver his acceptance speech Thursday but now may do so from the devastation zone if the storm hits the U.S. coast with the ferocity feared by forecasters.So going into a disaster area and utilizing resources that would be put to better use for evacuation, rescue and safety is a better idea?! And now I'm reading some comments on left wing leaning blogs that this can work to McCain's advantage if recovery efforts go swiftly - as if he would have anything to do with those efforts except delaying them due to his presence. Has everyone gone insane thinking that McCain using a hurricane disaster as a backdrop for his acceptance speech is a good thing?
“It just wouldn’t be appropriate to have a festive occasion while a near-tragedy or a terrible challenge is presented in the form of a natural disaster,” McCain said in a taped interview for Fox News Sunday.
Actually, it's a great thing - FOR DEMOCRATS! Let the motherfucker go make that speech in the aftermath of a hurricane. How can it look like anything other than the mother of all political stunts?! With any luck, McPander will get washed away by the Hurricane Gods for daring to mock them.
Three years after Katrina, the Republicans will prove that they have learned absolutely nothing if they make the decision to speechify in a disaster area. In fact, they've already proven their lack of understanding by even considering such an option. The idea that a presidential candidate would go to a dangerous area for a political speech, taking countless resources away from those in need is mindboggling to me. And what would the McCainstream Media say if it were Obama who decided to make this demented decision?
The only logical reason to make a decision like this if I were working for the McCain camp is to avoid the disgrace of a sad sack convention punctuated by an awful acceptance speech in front of a sleepy, "we have no other choice" crowd. It also shows how McCain is being run by his campaign and not the other way around, for surely it was some nitwit on his staff who made this suggestion. If not, if it was actually McCain's idea, then it's only a matter of time before his head explodes with lunacy... I'm guessing sometime around the debates.
Has Minneapolis become a police state? This is incredible.
Minneapolis "police" raiding homes in advance of the GOP Convention looking for possible protesters, denying the right to see a warrant before the raid takes place, entering the premises with machine guns drawn. The last time I checked, protesting was still legal, right?
Glenn Greenwald: There is clearly an intent on the part of law enforcement authorities here to engage in extreme and highly intimidating raids against those who are planning to protest the Convention. The DNC in Denver was the site of several quite ugly incidents where law enforcement acted on behalf of Democratic Party officials and the corporate elite that funded the Convention to keep the media and protesters from doing anything remotely off-script. But the massive and plainly excessive preemptive police raids in Minnesota are of a different order altogether. Targeting people with machine-gun-carrying SWAT teams and mass raids in their homes, who are suspected of nothing more than planning dissident political protests at a political convention and who have engaged in no illegal activity whatsoever, is about as redolent of the worst tactics of a police state as can be imagined.
...We spoke with the people who were staying at the house about the raid in the video above, and they were really sweet and inspirational, interested in “food not bombs.” Coming off the Denver DNC where most young people were blackberry-wielding Young Democrats hustling tickets to bigger and better parties, they were extremely refreshing and a much needed part of our political landscape. The idea that they were a serious threat to security is rendered rather ludicrous by watching the video...
Yes, there were protesters arrested in Denver during the Democratic National Convention, but they were arrested while protesting. I don't remember hearing about a massive sweep of houses looking for possible organized protesters. And I'm sure no one else will hear about this from the McCainstream Media either. I haven't seen anything on the local news... have you?
Behold, the look of our country under a Republican administration.
(H/T Crooks & Liars)