Submitted to a Candid World
Archive for
First as Farce, then as Tragedy
The Onion predicted the “Joe the Plumber” phenomenon back in 1999, mocking the nation’s nascent focus on “regular guys” and folksy wisdom over actual, intelligent discourse. The Onion‘s “regular guy” – Roy the Forklifter – even nailed Joe’s bizarre habit of rambling about Obama’s “anti-Americanism,” devotion to “socialism,” etc.
And the Award for Scariest Costume Goes to (drumroll) the McCain Tax Plan
Remember the good ol’ days when math was just fuzzy? Well, I just completed reading the Tax Policy Center’s (TPC) Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidate’s Tax Plans, and I am damn-near speechless looking at details surrounding McCain’s tax plan. Lucky for you, dear reader, I am not completely speechless, so I can fill you in on some of the more interesting tidbits.
First, there is the issue of whether John McCain knows what the hell he is talking about when he is on the campaign trail. Based on CBO projections (using current law), federal tax revenue will not keep up with spending, leaving a cumulative deficit of $2.3 trillion between 2009-2018. But even this deficit forecast is rosily optimistic, because the current-law baseline does not assume an Alternative Minimum Tax patch, and the estimates were completed before all of the economic craziness that hit in late September. Nonetheless, it is a place to start.
John McCain’s tax plan, as described in campaign literature by economic advisers, would result in a cumulative deficit of $7.3 trillion over the same period. When McCain is stumping, however, the effect of the promises he makes amounts to a deficit of $11 trillion! By comparison, the projected 2009-2018 deficit from Obama’s campaign literature is $5.8 trillion; the deficit projected from his stump speeches: $5.4 trillion.
Why are John McCain’s speeches so far off from his campaign materials? Four-trillion dollars doesn’t arise from rounding error. Continue reading
“Of Course She’s Not Ready!”
Says Lawrence Eagleburger (note: you can’t make a name like that up!) of Sarah Palin. Meanwhile, Palin concedes the economy, and asks voters to remember national security… and McCain concedes Bush’s groundbreaking 72-hour get-out-the-vote strategy, re-allocating money to advertisements.
PUMA Chow: McCain’s Deceitful Mailer to Hillary Women in Pennsylvania
In a new mailer being distributed in Pennsylvania, John McCain tries to cast himself as heir to the Hillary legacy. The mailer (images below the line) features Sarah Palin prominently (a bold move, considering her plummeting numbers), and offers her as proof that McCain “share[s] Hillary Clinton’s goal of promoting women to more important roles in government.”
What?
A word to Senator McCain: promoting talentless, vapid, anti-feminist women like Sarah Palin just because they’re women is still sexism. It’s just a different kind of sexism. By suggesting that a promise to put more women in government somehow discharges his responsibility to Hillary voters, McCain reduces the importance of Hillary Clinton’s historic candidacy to her gender, and urges Clinton Democratic women to look past her accomplishments, her solidly pro-women record, and her character, to settle on her anatomy as the characteristic that defines her.
This is wrong. As Hillary herself asked – “were you in this campaign just for me?” Clinton Democrats should be “in it” for Hillary’s ideas, her political legacy. It’s true: America does need more women in government. Qualified, strong women. It needs more Hillary Clintons. More Ruth Bader Ginsburgs, more Sandra Day O’Connors, and (to reach across the aisle) more Kay Bailey Hutchinsons. Not more Phyllis Schlaflys. Not more Ann Coulters. And certainly not more Sarah Palins.
By the way, does anyone recall what Senator McCain thought of Hillary Clinton, before he needed her votes?
McCain’s contempt for Hillary can’t have vanished overnight. And we know his contempt for women’s issues certainly hasn’t. On every relevant issue, McCain is hostile to women’s interests. And before you say it, this isn’t just about abortion (though, contrary to the right’s attempt at comforting words, Roe is in danger, McCain thinks the “health of the mother” exception is a bad joke, and he will pull the trigger). Uniformly, McCain has stood against women’s interests in equal pay (which he mocked as “a trial lawyer’s dream”), birth control, pre-natal health care, health care in general, and the list goes on.
Thank God the PUMAs are dead. They’d be eating this junk up. Is McCain fooling anyone else?
VOTE – And Get Others to Vote, Too
In Florida, some reports that the youth vote isn’t turning out as much as expected. This is – potentially – bad news. As anyone will tell you, even the Republicans themselves, the Republicans win when people don’t vote. Contribute to get out the vote or protect the vote.
Can You Catch Socialism from Kissing in Your Swimming Suit?
Republican rhetoric is at defcon-1/terror-level-red hysteria, throwing around “socialism” as if the word were the finger in the dike of a cracking, disintegrating campaign … Oh, wait, it IS that finger! Well, no need to panic, brave Republicans, socialism is alive and well in the U.S. It has been since, um, … the beginning, with the acknowledgment in the Constitution, no less, that Congress has “the Power to lay and collect Taxes” for the “general Welfare of the United States”. Socialism is central to core American values that weave through both Palin’s “real America” and the icky, unreal chunks.
Join me, comrade, below the jump …
Which One of You Jokers Signed Me Up for John McCain Spam?
Har har har. But you know… hypothetically… some unscrupulous person who accidentally got signed up for a JohnMcCain.com “account” could, in theory, register to “phone bank” from home, get the numbers & voter info, not call, fill the form out with inaccurate information (“voter indicated voting for Obama/Biden”), and click submit. Not saying I would. It would reflect badly on the campaign. Tempting, though.
Economist for Obama
The Economist, fiscally conservative newspaper of record for the world’s business elite, endorses Barack Obama. The editorial board had harsh words for McCain – “if only the real John McCain had been running,” they muse – and praise for Obama’s mettle, as proven by the past year. Their conclusion bears repeating: “So Mr Obama in that respect is a gamble. But the same goes for Mr McCain on at least as many counts, not least the possibility of President Palin. And this cannot be another election where the choice is based merely on fear.”
Value Voters: Redefining “Priorities Fail”
I have a hard time not grimacing every time I hear the phrase “values voter.” Like the evangelical appropriation of the term “pro-family” to mean “pro-straight family, but rabidly and violently opposed to gay families,” the far right’s usage of the term “values voter” takes a valence issue and twists it into a narrowly partisan term, with the insulting implication that anyone who doesn’t share their values doesn’t have any values.
In fact, it strikes me that the opposite is true. As the old saying goes, “hate is not a family value.” Neither is blackmail. Nor do I think it particularly pro-family to force a woman to carry an unwanted baby to term – since she can always put it up for adoption! – and then stop a gay couple from adopting the child. On the other hand, I think tolerance, compassion, and separation of church and state are fairly important, fundamentally American values.
But the hypocritical redefinition of “values” is neither here nor there. It’s an old grudge, and one that I’m sure many of you share, but it’s not particularly interesting. What is interesting is watching the degree to which, in this election, “values voters” (largely lower- and middle-income) seem torn between their pocket book, served by the Democrats, and their patriarchal notions of “faith,” served by Republicans like Sarah Palin. It’s a genuine conflict of interest, and as I’ve said,
The [Republican] Party’s greatest trick – the Reagan Realignment (although it’s fair to say it was begun by Nixon) – came about when the Republican Party adopted its current vaguely theocratic/culture-war platform to convince lower- and middle-class voters to vote against their pocketbook.
In tough economic times, that coalition starts to look vulnerable. Perhaps, in past elections, it’s been easy for values voters to overlook their financial interest and vote their heart over their mind. But, as Fivethirtyeight has noted, with the economy in dire straits, and the blame (rightly or wrongly) on the Republicans, even racism seems like a luxury (“ma’am, we’re voting for the n****er.”).
Indeed. It’s not a good climate for Republicans, they say. It’s arguably not a good climate for narrow “values voter” issues, either. After all, with the economy in the tank, who can justify spending $500,000/year on abstinence education that nobody wants? With the temporal City of Man crumbling around them, traditional values voters could be expected to find it harder to pull the lever for the City of God, to the detriment of their country’s financial interests. But for campaigns like this:
Campaigns that are, apparently, working: per Gallup, as voters increasingly distrust McCain on real issues, like foreign affairs and the economy, they increasingly rationalize their support for him based on his personal beliefs. Forget about waning American hegemony, dismal economic prospects, and the deaths of our soldiers abroad. Faith (fundamentalist Christianity ONLY). Family (straight ONLY). Life (embryonic ONLY). That’s what really matters.
How sad. In a world where real-life issues matter “now more than ever,” millions of Americans are set to throw their vote away, just to prevent the tenuous psychic harm of watching two men hold hands. These people aren’t just willing to die for their faith; they’re willing to watch their country die for old prejudices that they call their faith.
America doesn’t need another President beholden to fundamentalist interests and blinded to reality. Real patriots think of their “country first” – even if that means putting the culture war second.
Fox News: In the Tank for the Far, Lunatic Right
We’ve written here, and abroad, extensively about the fake controversy surrounding Barack Obama’s birth certificate. Aside from the small matter that litigation on Obama’s “ineligibility” is a nonjusticiable issue for the FEC, not private voters, Obama has produced his birth certificate. CAN WE GO HOME NOW? Apparently, no: running out of positive stories about conservative triumphs, Fox News will follow 9/11 Truther cum shady lawyer Philip J. Berg to the steps of the Supreme Court as he begs for certiorari. I say, let SCOTUS take review, dismiss the suit in one day, disbar the Berg the next, and be done with it. This is shameful.
