More Morning Joke™ Zaniness - UPDATED

Someone should tell Joe Scarborough that the election is over.

Speaking of Sarah Palin this morning, and how she didn't know her geography, Scarborough squeezed this nugget of wisdom out of his ass: "This plays in her favor."

Not knowing what countries are involved in NAFTA and not knowing Africa is a continent is apparently an advantage to being one step away from the Presidency of the United States, according to Scarborough.

Now we all know what he meant. He meant that politically, it shows she's "just like us" and by "us" I mean all the uneducated wingnuts that make up her base; that she's got that... how do the French say it... "I don't know what"; that she's the type of person you'd like to have a beer with or maybe a lap dance from, but Joe, Joe, Joe, can you for once in your life think about the greater good instead of instinctively going to that deep, dark place that asks how this can be politically advantageous?

I mean, for fuck's sake, she could have gotten to the position of sitting Vice President without knowing that Africa is made up of 53 countries! I think that's a bit of a problem, Joe. I don't care that she galvanizes the extreme right wing base and you think that that's a plus. How did that work this time around? I want my elected officials to be smarter than I am, or at least smarter than a grade school student, or at least smarter than my dog!

And on another note to be fair, if these leaks from anonymous McCain campaign sources are false, then what does it say about the leakers or the Republican party in general that they are eating each other from the inside just two days after the election? They obviously were close enough to realize what type of person she is and don't want her anywhere near the leadership for a future run.

Either way, whether she's a dingbat or whether it's character assassination, and I believe it's the former judging by the few interviews she gave and the VP debate, it's not good for the remnants of the Republican party.

(H/T Bob Cesca)

UPDATE (11/08/08 12:55pm):

More right wing wingnuttery - this time it's Pat Buchanan and the forlorn Mika Brzezinski in defense of Sarah Palin yet again. How can they think it's a good thing for the Republican Party to have Palin as its leader? And they're all upset about the constant Palin attacks after the race is over, as if it's some entity other than the GOP and the McCain camp who's trashing Palin. They're self destructing and refuse to see it.

Lawrence O'Donnell is spot on in this clip.



(H/T FDL)

Obama On Trade: We Can't Afford More Of The Same

Barack Obama spoke to the Alliance for Ameican Manufacturing in Pittsburgh, and spoke to them like adults, not children. He spoke the truth.

Not every job that has left is coming back. And not every job lost is due to trade –automation has made plants more efficient so they can make the same amount of steel with few workers. These are the realities.

I also don't oppose all trade deals. I voted for two of them because they have the worker and environmental agreements I believe in. Some of you disagreed with me on this but I did what I thought was right.

That's the truth. But let me tell you what else I believe in:

For America to win, American workers have to win, too. If CEO pay keeps rising, while the standard of living for their workers continues to decline, that's not a win for America.

That's why I opposed NAFTA, it's why I opposed CAFTA, and it's why I said any trade agreement I would support had to contain real, enforceable standards for workers.

That's why I believe the Permanent Normalized Trade agreement with China didn't do enough to ensure fairness and compliance.

Now, you can have a debate about whether my position is right or wrong. But here's what you can't do. You can't spend the better part of two decades campaigning for NAFTA and PNTR for China, and then come here to Pennsylvania, and tell the steelworkers you've been with them all along. You can't say you are opposed to the Columbia Trade deal, while your key strategist is working for the Columbian government to get the deal passed.

That's not respect. That's just more of the same old Washington politics. And we can't afford more of the same.

Read more here.

Bush: NAFTA Good. Me Want Banana

Chimpy tried to act all smart and presidential-like today by trashing Clinton and Obama on their NAFTA stances.

Although he did not name Clinton or Obama, he left little doubt who he was talking about, at one point even mocking Clinton's promise to take a "timeout" from free trade agreements if she becomes president. "You know, some have called for a 'timeout' from trade," he told the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce shortly after Clinton addressed the group. "I guess that's probably popular with the focus group. You know, they toss out the word 'timeout' from trade -- it's got this kind of catchy little title to it. In the 21st century, a timeout from trade would be a timeout from growth, a timeout from jobs and a timeout from good results."

Growth, jobs and good results for what country, Raisinbrain?

Anatomy of A Kitchen Sink

I have lost faith.

For the longest time, as far as I can remember in my "political" life, I have defended the Clintons. When the vast right wing conspiracy went after Bill (and Hillary), using the repugnant Ken Starr, spending millions and millions of taxpayer dollars, looking for any kind of mud to stick, I supported my president to the end. Even when Bill had painted himself into a corner and lied under oath (and who wouldn't) about an affair - a stupid, cheap little affair - I stood by him because I could not believe or understand at the time, that although he violated the "rule of law", these repulsive troglodytes led by Newt Gingrich and the now deceased Henry Hyde would dare to impeach based on lying about something that insignificant. Finding out later that Gingrich himself was having an affair at the same time that he was crucifying the president for the same offense (or lying about it) only poured salt on the wounds, but it was a classic case of IOKIYAR.

I took solace in the fact that I was a Democrat, and we didn't stoop to such disgusting levels. That one day*, the pendulum would swingin the other direction, and that again we would find our way. And now the unthinkable has happened. In a desperate attempt for a long shot bid at the presidency, Hillary Clinton has used the same tactics that were used against her for all these years. Hillary broke out the Karl Rove playbook called "The Kitchen Sink."

We all knew it was coming. Hell, Hillary's campaign told us that was exactly what they were going to do in a last act of desperation. They even called it the "kitchen sink." So I thought I'd take a look to see what came out of the kitchen sink and list them in no particular order.

1 - Clinton compared Obama's foreign policy experience to George W. Bush: “We’ve seen the tragic result of having a president who had neither the experience nor the wisdom to manage our foreign policy and safeguard our national security. We can’t let that happen again.”
Considering that Bush never even visited another country before becoming president, I think that comparison is a little suspect.

2 - Clinton's "tested and ready" mantra was repeated over and over while portraying Obama as naive when it came to meeting foreign leaders if he believed “that mediation and meetings without preconditions will solve some of the world’s most intractable problems." Obama has never said that carefully preparing for meetings wasn't in his plans.

However, this is what he did say: "...I do think it is important precisely because the Bush administration has done so much damage to American foreign relations that the president take a more active role in diplomacy than might have been true 20 or 30 years ago.

Because the problem is, if we think that meeting with the president is a privilege that has to be earned, I think that reinforces the sense that we stand above the rest of the world at this point in time. And I think that it's important for us in undoing the damage that has been done over the last seven years, for the president to be willing to take that extra step."

Makes sense to me. Do we really think we're better than anyone else? If that's the case, then we're in more trouble than I thought.

Put on your hip waders, this is we're it turns ugly.

3 - Matt Drudge posts a photo of Obama in traditional Somali garb attributing it to the Clinton campaign. Whether or not Drudge is to be trusted as to the source, instead of denouncing it was a fear mongering tactic, the Clinton camp shrugs its shoulders.

4 - The Clinton camp accuses Barack Obama of plagiarism when using phrases borrowed from his own Committee chairman and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, that Patrick told Obama to use. In an interesting twist, Hillary Clinton's now famous "whatever happens, we're going to be fine" quote can be attributed to John Edwards during the December 13th debate, and the "hits I've taken every day..." line can be found almost verbatim in a Bill Clinton speech during his run for the presidency.

5 - Continuing with their fear tactics, the Clinton campaign puts out their "3am" or red phone ad. Vote for Hillary and your children will sleep safe at night. Ironically, the stock footage of the sleeping child was taken 8 years ago and that actress is an Obama supporter.

6 - NAFTA-Gate: Clinton accuses Obama of calling the Canadian Embassy to reassure the ambassador that all the NAFTA talk in their recent debates is just rhetoric. In fact Obama senior economic adviser Austan Goolsbee had been invited by someone at the consulate to visit and discuss trade. "The Canadian Embassy confirmed that he said everything I said on the campaign trail," Obama asserted. Then the kicker: it turns out that it was actualy someone on the Clinton staff had put out feelers to the Canadians and asking them to take the rhetoric with "a grain of salt."

Ah, the ol' political projection and transference.

7 - Clinton's 60 Minutes interview and her non-denial that Obama is a Muslim. "As far as I know" doesn't cut it when you are denying something. At first I took it lightly, but reporters close to the Clinton campaign categorize it as "not an accident."

8 - Clinton national co-chairman Bill Shaheen suggests that Obama was a drug dealer in his youth. From the Telegraph UK:

Obama has been open about youthful drug use (big deal) but no one has suggested he was a dealer. A Hillary spokesperson immediately disowned Shaheen by saying that “these comments were not authorised or condoned by the campaign in any way”. Too late. It came after a second Clinton campaign volunteer was forced to resigned for forwarding an Obama Muslim smear email and means another day of negative press coverage for Hillary.

9 - The"Obama is a Muslim" smear e-mail that has been circulating for over a year has been at least partly attributed to Clinton's former Iowa chairman, Ryan Callanan. Even if it did not originate with him, one little click of the "delete" button instead of the "forward" button and campaign disclosure of the receipt of the e-mail was all it could have taken to distance the Clinton campaign from any doubt.

10 through 13 - Hillary Clinton has questioned and compared not once, not twice but at least four times as of this writing, Obama's experience to lead as commander in chief to her experience and ...John McCain's experience! Does she really want to do the bidding of the Republican smear machine?

Hillary Clinton has crossed into the delusional threshold if she thinks that her eight years as first lady equals experience to be commander in chief. Her constant propping up of McCain to advance her dying campaign undoubtedly proves that she will burn the village down in order to save it... or save herself. If she loses the campaign, she's given McCain ammo against Obama. If for some reason she wins, McCain can attack her with the same twisted logic. He has much more experience than she does.

14 - Howard Wolfson compared Obama to Ken Starr when Obama suggested that Clinton disclose her tax records as he has done. Ken Starr? Really, Hillary? Is that where you want to take this thing? Double-edged swords can be mighty tricky. Do we want to delve into the nastiness that was Ken Starr and all that idiocy? Just release the tax records. What are you hiding? The fact that Bill Clinton's library was partially funded by the Saudis to the tune of $10 million? The fact that money was donated from the United Arab Emirates as well?

All these points combined with the ongoing positioning on superdelegates, claiming victory in Florida and Michigan when there was no contest and constantly moving the goalposts when primary defeat seemd imminent has soured me on Hillary for good. She has shown herself to truly be the establishment candidate despite her claims to the contrary.

I'm sure there's much more to come in the remaining six long weeks until the Pennsylvania primary on Aprill 22nd. Ultimately, if all pans out and there are no shenanigans, my theory is that Obama will win the nomination (do the delegate math) and Hillary's Rovian tactics will have damaged her so much in the process, she will lose the trust of the American people, her base and come 2012, her Senate seat will be up from grabs, hopefully by a better Democrat.

So no more defense of the Clintons for me. As my friend Armadillo Joe said to me the other day, their mistake is thinking that they are the Democratic party instead of realizing that they are just a small part of it.

__________________________
*I thought that day happened on November 7th, 2006. We'd had enough of W. and his administration's incompetence. Finally, they would get their comeupance. Alas it was not to be, as the Democrats that overtook the majority in Congress (a razor thin majority in the Senate) wound up being the wrong Democrats - they would capitulate and give the lame duck president everything he'd want and more for fear of being conceived as soft on defense, and in the process became soft, period.

Why, Hillary? Why?

So after taking a deep breath and stepping back to look at the overall campaign situation and the history of the last couple of weeks, here's my take on the Clinton campaign going all out negative on Barack Obama: desperation.

1 - Obama has won 11 straight contests, beating Clinton by wide margins.

2 - Clinton going negative (but not all the way) in Wisconsin was viewed by their campaign as a boost for them. They've been quoted as saying the didn't lose by as much (17 points) as they thought they would.

3 - Her closing statement in the Texas debate was viewed by many as conciliatory, which probably prompted the Clinton campaign heads to work overtime to negate that view, else be perceived as giving up.

4 - The Obama mailers on health care and NAFTA caused Hillary's campaign to see red and go off the deep end.

Now, it's one thing to challenge Obama and call him out on it: "Shame on you, Barack Obama. It is time you ran a campaign consistent with your messages in public — that's what I expect from you... Meet me in Ohio, and let's have a debate about your tactics."

It's another matter entirely to mock his message and compare him to the second coming of Jeebus. And here, in my opinion, is where the flaw with Clinton's reactionary attacks get the best of her.

Does she not remember the painting of Howard Dean in 2004 as unhinged because of his overenthusiastic "YAAARRR!" during a rally that sunk him? Seeing the anger in her eyes (scary) reminds me of the Dean incident, not in seeming like a nut, but in how it may be perceived.

The latest polls show Obama beating Clinton or in a statistical dead heat in Texas and Ohio after Clinton had 20 point leads in both states just two weeks ago. The Clinton campaign is not conceding and actually turning 180° in the attacks, looking for a fight to the bitter end.

One thing's for sure: it's going to be a very interesting debate on Tuesday in Cleveland.

Sirota: A Trade Transition

David Sirota's latest article about Hillary Clinton and her NAFTA position... or positions.

When it came to sex, Bill Clinton made us debate the definition of "is." Now, when it comes to economics, Hillary Clinton wants to debate the definition of "long," claiming this week in Ohio that "I've long been a critic of the shortcomings of NAFTA."

True, Clinton has recently criticized NAFTA — the 1993 trade policy whose lack of labor and environmental protections encourages companies to move American jobs overseas. But cheap campaign rhetoric over a few months does not make one a longtime critic — especially considering the record.

...in this, the age of stenographic journalism... Clinton simply figures that if she says she has "long been a critic" of NAFTA, then the assertion will be transcribed as truth.

That said, her U-turn is about more than dishonesty — it is about the public will.

Read the whole article here.