Two Faced McCain and The GOP

For weeks now, John McCain and the GOP have been jumping on Barack Obama for his supposed lack of knowledge of what's happening in Iraq simply due to the fact that he hasn't traveled to Iraq (as of this writing) in the last 923 days, and even rigged a clock to their website in an attempt to make it an embarrassing issue.

John McCain had even suggested that he and Obama should make the trip together. My guess on that bright idea is so the Maverick could show Obama all the hot spots and perhaps go bar hopping. Maybe even take Obama to the local strip club where the burkas only go down to just above the ankle. Ultimately, McCain was trying to pull an Izzy Mandelbaum and show the young kid the ropes, a position that the Illinois Senator wouldn't be caught dead in.

Now that Senator Obama has left on a world tour to visit war zones as well as foreign dignitaries, the McCain campaign and surrogates dare to call the trip a stunt, while McThuselah is trying to get his story straight after initially saying that Obama's trip was good thing. The audacity of Obama to go on a foreign trip, visit war zones and introduce himself around the world! It's not as if he would visit a country and by the strangest of coincidences, US hostages would be released from said country. That wouldn't be considered a stunt, would it?

And now we have this ad from the man who pledged a "respectful campaign."



Shall we take these claims one at a time?


"Barack Obama never held a single Senate hearing on Afghanistan."

It turns out that presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain has attended even fewer Afghanistan-related Senate hearings over the past two years than Obama's one. Which is a nice way of saying, McCain, R-Ariz., the top Republican on the Senate Armed Service Committee, has attended zero of his committee's six hearings on Afghanistan over the last two years.

...A review of the Senate Armed Services Committee hearings as listed on the committee Web site for the past two years reveals that McCain's committee has held six hearings that included the word "Afghanistan" in the title or Central Command -- which overseas U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

McCain missed them all.

"[Obama] hasn't been to Iraq in years."

Not that it matters whether he's been there or not, but this trip will change that fact. It's also worthy to note that a person which such vast foreign policy experience as McCain should probably know not to leak the possible itinerary of a fellow Senator when travelling in hostile territory.


"[Obama] voted against funding our troops."

From Media Matters: "...on March 29, 2007, McCain himself voted against H.R. 1591, an emergency spending bill that would have funded the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and would have provided more than $1 billion in additional funds to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The Senate passed H.R. 1591 by a margin of 51-47. Once the bill's conference report was agreed to by the House, the Senate again passed the measure on April 26, 2007, by a vote of 51-46. McCain did not vote on that version of the bill. By contrast, Obama voted for it on both occasions. President Bush vetoed the bill, citing its provision for a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

Moreover, McCain has voted against other legislation funding care for veterans. On April 26, 2006, McCain voted against an amendment by Sen. Daniel Akaka(D-HI) that would have "provide[d] an additional $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans." In addition, on March 14, 2006, McCain voted against "increas[ing] Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes." On March 10, 2004, McCain also voted against "creat[ing] a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating tax loopholes." Obama voted for the first two measures; he had not yet entered the Senate when the third vote was cast."

This doesn't even include McCain's opposition to and non-vote of the Webb GI Bill, which passed in the Senate 75-22.


"John McCain has always supported our troops and the surge that's working."

Well, that's the rhetoric. But when it comes to putting your vote where your mouth is, McCain has been conspicuously absent. And as far as the "surge working," isn't it pretty obvious that when you negotiate with terrorists and pay insurgents to stop shooting at you, that violence is bound to go down?


"I'm John McCain and I approve this message."

I'm sure you do, Maverick.

Bush Surrenders!

Why does George W. Bush hate America? Why does George W. Bush hate the troops? Why is George W. Bush cutting and running? Why is George W. Bush negotiating with terrorists? Why is George W. Bush an appeaser?

According to the definition of the GOP chickenhawks lo these past six years, that is what President Bush is doing as a result of this:

Washington (AP) - The United States and Iraq have agreed to seek "a general time horizon" for deeper reductions in American combat troops in Iraq.

Iraqi officials, in a sign of growing confidence as violence decreases, have been pressuring the United States to agree to a specific timeline to withdraw U.S. forces. President Bush has adamantly opposed a timeline, and the White House said Friday that the timeframe being discussed would not be "an arbitrary date for withdrawal."

The administration can try to spin this any way they want, but the fact that the Iraqis will not agree to anything unless a timetable is in place for troop withdrawal (after all, it is their country) is the very thing that Bush is opposed to, but cannot avoid.

This is the very thing that Senator Obama has been advocating from the beginning that the McCainstream Media and the GOP have been lambasting Obama for, but of course now that it's coming from the White House, they'll adapt to it and act as if this has been their position all along. And no one will call them on it.

This also comes on the heels of Monday's revelation that the US is sending a senior official to Iran for the purposes of participation in international talks. Hmmm... sounds like diplomacy to me.

...The administration sought to describe the talks as a continuation of the same strategy it has always pursued: halting Iran’s nuclear activities without having to resort to military force.

Duh. That's what diplomacy is, you nitwits. And what do you know! Diplomacy is what Barack Obama has been advocating as well. Is Obama secretly Bush's real Secretary of State? At this rate, maybe by the end of the day we'll have universal health care too!

So let's recap: diplomatic intentions with Iran on Monday, the Medicare veto override on Tuesday and the agreement with Iraq for a troop pullout timeline today. I'd say it was a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week for Georgie.

(Photo courtesy of The Onion)

George "The US Does Not Torture" Bush Will Veto Ban on Waterboarding

We can't get rid of this guy fast enough.

WASHINGTON — The White House says President Bush will veto legislation on Saturday that would have barred the CIA from using waterboarding- a technique that simulates drowning- and other harsh interrogation methods on terror suspects.

..."President Bush's veto will be one of the most shameful acts of his presidency," Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said in a statement Friday. "Unless Congress overrides the veto, it will go down in history as a flagrant insult to the rule of law and a serious stain on the good name of America in the eyes of the world."

Is Congress going to have the balls to do the right thing and override the Farce-in-Chief? Keep watching.

Bush to House: Approve Immunity Or We All Die

More fearmongering from our intrepid leader. What a pig.

NY Times: President Bush strongly urged the House of Representatives on Wednesday to quickly approve a surveillance bill passed by the Senate Tuesday evening, saying he would not agree to a further extension of the current eavesdropping law.
The president effectively gave the House a deadline to act, since the current authority to intercept telephone conversations or electronic communications expires at midnight on Saturday.
“There is no reason why Republicans and Democrats in the House cannot pass the bill immediately,” he said in comments made at the White House, adding that the failure to do so “will jeopardize the security of our citizens.”

Keith Olbermann and Jonathan Turley have more:

Wexler Wants Hearings

Congressman Robert Wexler, D-Fl , has started a petition calling for Congress to hold impeachment hearings against Vice President Dick Cheney. Initially, Wexler was shooting for 50,000 signatures. It is now over 100,000 in 5 days; now Wexler is shooting for a quarter of a million signatures.

Quoting Wexler:

The charges are too serious to ignore. There is credible evidence that the Vice President abused the power of his office, and not only brought us into an unneccesary war but violated the civil liberties and privacy of American citizens. It is the constitutional duty of Congress to hold impeachment hearings.

Now in speaking to friends, I heard one give me the Rodney King-can't-we-all-get-along excuse. "That's all we need," he said, "more polarization." My friend is a Republican, not a neo-con. (Yes I do have a few Republican friends... keep it under your hat.)

But I say to my friend and everyone else: I remember Republicans marching lockstep in the Capitol Building chanting "Rule of law! Rule of law!" when the prospect of impeaching Clinton was an appetizing thing for them.

Yes, Clinton committed perjury. He didn't lie about illegal wars. He didn't lie about gaming the Justice Department for political gain. He didn't lie about torture. He lied about an extramarital affair. And for this, there was a two year investigation and millions of dollars spent, looking for some dirt to impeach Bill Clinton. Are you telling me that Dick Cheney doesn't warrant at least half that scrutiny?

Unlike the show trial put on by Republicans against President Clinton, a proper impeachment hearing would involve a fair and objective presentation of the facts without hyperbole or political gamesmanship.

We all thought it would be different after the November 2006 elections. Things would start to happen. Good, solid bills would be passed. The Iraq occupation would at least start being drawn to a close.

...After the Democratic Party regained control of Congress, many – myself included – thought that it might be possible to meet President Bush half-way on the large issues facing our nation. Unfortunately, Bush has been nothing more than an ideological obstacle. He has vetoed stem cell research. He has vetoed efforts to bring our troops home from Iraq. He vetoed children's health care. So, the idea that we are somehow inhibiting Congress from passing our agenda by holding impeachment hearings – unfortunately – is a false argument.

...A Congress willing to stand up to the abuses of the Bush Administration through impeachment hearings will demonstrate a strength of will that will more likely convince Bush to accommodate on issues such as Iraq, health care, and energy and environmental issues...

And there is the crux of the problem. The Budget bill that just passed would have been vetoed by Bush, had Congress not eliminated $22 billion in spending that it wanted. Bush would have shut down the government if he didn't get his way. And yet, in the Energy bill that just passed, the oil companies get $13.5 BILLION in subsidies. THIS IS OUR MONEY. This is another bill that would have been vetoed had Congress eliminated oil subsidies. So Bush can't spend another nickel for children's health care, for the elderly, for education, for middle class Americans, but can give $13.5 billion of our tax money to the oil companies in the middle of record profits. That is appalling.

Democrats lose every time because Republicans in the Senate threaten to filibuster and DO filibuster every single bill brought to the floor. And Bush threatens to veto any bill that doesn't give him everything he wants. Sort of like the spoiled, tantrum throwing Trelaine in that old Star Trek episode. (I keep waiting for the part where Pappy and Babs Bush finally take him back to discipline him after seeing how he's ruined the world they gave him to play with, all the while Dubya crying, "I don't wanna!... I don't wanna... I don't wanna...")

If Democrats show they have a spine and begin impeachment hearings, maybe the White House would start singing a different tune. So take a minute or two and sign the petition. It can't hurt.

Dodd Delays Telcom Amnesty FISA Bill

Finally, a politician with the balls to do what's right and follow through on what he promised.

From ChrisDodd.com: Majority Leader Harry Reid has just pulled the FISA bill from consideration in this session. It will be brought up at some point next month.
Without Senator Dodd's leadership today, it is safe to assume that retroactive immunity would have passed.
This is a great victory for the American people. His outspoken opposition to retroactive immunity and the Intelligence Committee's FISA bill made it impossible to move forward now. From a process standpoint, that took the persistent shadow of a Dodd filibuster on this legislative process, a "hold" against any legislation that included retroactive immunity, and today, a refusal to grant unanimous consent to rules of debate that would have made it harder to strip retroactive immunity from the Intel Committee's bill through the Dodd-Feingold Amendment. He brought along some of the Senate's most passionate voices -- Senator's Feingold, Kennedy, Boxer, Wyden, Brown and Bill Nelson joined him to stand up to the President today.

Clinton, Obama and Biden, all of whom said they supported Chris Dodd and his filibuster, did not take the time to return to DC from the campaign trail in Iowa to help Dodd in his fight against giving retroactive immunity to telecom companies that aided and abetted in the illegal wiretapping of American citizens by the Bush administration.

Here's Dodd's FISA speech on the Senate floor today.

Senator Kennedy: "Voting for amnesty would be a vote for silence, secrecy, and illegality... The President has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA, but he has also said that he will VETO any FISA bill that does not grant retroactive immunity. No immunity? No FISA bill.

So if we take the President at his word he is willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies!"

Bush Vetoes SCHIP Again

Mr. Compassionate Conservative once again vetoed a bill that would make possible the inclusion of 5 million children to obtain health insurance.

Bush issued his veto on Wednesday, saying "our nation's goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage - not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage."

This statement of course has no basis in fact. The State Children's Health Insurance Plan is available to those who make too high an annual income to receive Medicaid but not enough income to afford to pay for a private insurance policy. SCHIP is not free. It is a discounted plan, with participants paying low cost premiums. But President Bush would have you believe that it is a substitute for private insurance and that the Congress is trying to expand a program to those who already have private coverage as a step toward that evil concept we call socialism. Of course, Bush and the rest of the elected members of government already receive government funded health care. If it's so bad for the rest of us, why doesn't he switch to private insurance? He can certainly afford it.

Mr. No Child Left Behind would also try to make you think that the $35 billion that Congress allocated over five years is fiscally irresponsible and that his economic conservatism was a main reason for rejecting the bill. This is a strange reason when you consider that $7 billion pays for approximately 2-3 weeks for the occupation in Iraq.

The fact is that at the current funding levels, some participants currently covered by SCHIP would have to be dropped.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the House will take up the extension question Thursday in a bill that also will make adjustments to Medicare.

"We'll obviously need to put additional money" into the children's health insurance program, Hoyer said, because several states say they will have to remove recipients from their rolls if the current funding level continues into next year.

As far as raising taxes is concerned, "What a sad day that the president would say that rather than insuring [millions of] children, 'I don't want to raise the cigarette tax,' " said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

In 2006, an estimated 20.8% (45.3 million) of U.S. adults were current cigarette smokers; of these, 80.1% (36.3 million) smoked every day according to the Center for Disease Control. I, for one, would not be affected by this tobacco tax increase, and neither would 80% of the US population. If a 61 cent per pack tax deters people from smoking and become healthier in the process, so be it.

Why do cigarette smokers feel discrimiated against for a tobacco tax? Do drinkers feel discrimination on an alcohol tax? Or drivers on a gas tax? If you don't drink or don't drive, there is an automatic savings. Should I feel angry that the non-drinker doesn't pay tax on my glass of wine or bottle of beer? Is Bush is worried about the smoker that is against a tobacco tax , or is it the tobacco lobby?

One more question: if Bush was so proud of this veto, why did he sign it in private?

...such votes are uncomfortable for GOP lawmakers. It is a popular program with the public, making some Republicans wary of sticking with Bush on such an issue with the 2008 elections looming. Of the 43 million people nationwide who lack health insurance, more than 6 million are under 18 years old. That's more than 9 percent of all children.

Bush said the bill "moves our country's health care system in the wrong direction." If we aren't currently moving in the wrong direction, what the hell does Mensa Man have in store for us?

GOP = Grand Obstructionist Party

Ever wonder why Congress is supposedly getting nothing done?

With the president warning repeatedly that he will veto any budget package he dislikes and the Democrats short of the 60 votes they need in the Senate, the Republican minority is in an unusually strong bargaining position — and not just in the budget negotiations that are the top priority in Congress these days.

Mr. McConnell and his fellow Republicans are playing such tight defense, blocking nearly every bill proposed by the slim Democratic majority that they are increasingly able to dictate what they want, much to the dismay of the majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, and frustrated Democrats in the House.

In fact, the Senate Republicans are so accustomed to blocking measures that when the Democrats finally agreed last week to their demands on a bill to repair the alternative minimum tax, the Republicans still objected, briefly blocking the version of the bill that they wanted before scrambling to approve it later.

By the way, this 110th Democratic led Congress has done more work in its first year than the Republican led 109th Congress did in its previous two years.

Mr. McConnell, of course, said it was up to the Democrats to work things out, whether on spending or any other measure, in a way that Republicans would accept. “They are in the majority,” he said. “But in the Senate, to do most things, it requires 60..."

Fuck you, McConnell. It didn't take 60 votes to approve anything while the Rethuglicans were in control, and now the abuse of the filibuster is at an all time high. I can't wait for this putz to be thrown into the street on his ear come next election.

Suck On This Veto, Chimp Boy

NY TIMES: Congressional Democrats escalated a confrontation with President Bush over federal spending on Tuesday as the House overrode Mr. Bush’s veto of a popular water projects measure and approved a $215 billion bill to pay for health, education, labor and veterans programs despite a veto threat.

The vote on the water measure was 361 to 54, far more than needed to reject the veto. If the Senate follows suit, it will be the first time Mr. Bush has had a veto overturned.

...Democrats said it was Mr. Bush and his Republican allies who were acting irresponsibly by resisting slight increases to pay for improvements in health care and education while simultaneously seeking nearly $200 billion in new deficit spending this year to pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Screw The Kids

Mr. Compassionate Conservative has vetoed the S-CHIP bill.

The bill was approved by Congress with unusual bipartisan support, as many Republicans who side with the president on almost everything else voted to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, or Schip, from its current enrollment of about 6.6 million children to more than 10 million...

Gov. Jon Corzine of New Jersey said: “Once again, President Bush has missed an opportunity to display compassionate leadership. Instead, he has resorted to political and ideological gamesmanship rather than seek a bipartisan solution that would protect this nation’s most vulnerable children.”

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said: “We have no choice but to try to override his veto. The Senate already has the votes to do it, so it is now up to the holdouts in the House to decide whether to vote their conscience or join the president in putting ideology above kids.”

The Senate voted with a veto-proof majority, 67-29. The House is a couple of dozen votes short of the two-thirds needed to override Raisinbrain's veto. Now we'll see what the Republicans are made of. Are they going to do what's best for their constituents or are they following the Pied Piper of Pissants down the road to unelectability?

And can we please stop saying that this bill is a step towards the "evil" of socialized medicine? If socialized medicine is so evil, then I defy any Republican elected official to stop using it. Let Bush go somewhere else to get his pre-cancerous polyps removed from is ass. Let Darth Cheney go to the local hospital to recharge his pacemaker batteries instead of going to Bethesda Naval Hospital. If this bill can help an extra 3.5 million children to receive health care, what's the problem? Do we seriously believe that a family of four pulling in about $50,000 a year before taxes can actually afford health insurance at a cost of $500-700 a month? If you do, do the math and stop kidding yourself.

Chasing the Chimp

I was away this past week, but here is what I've seen happening with Curious George just these last few days alone:

Bush, Mr. Compassionate Conservative, threatened to veto the S-CHIP Program, (State Children's Health Insurance Program). The legislation renews an effort to provide health insurance to children of America's working poor. But President Bush is threatening to veto the plan.

In the midst of the Minneapolis bridge collapse, Bush decided to blame Congress for not spending the discretionary highway monies in the budget properly while at the same time, is considering a fresh plan to cut tax rates for U.S. corporations.

Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty had earlier rejected a 5 cent per gallon tax to help in funding road and bridge repairs.

When asked about the Pat Tillman case, in which seven separate Pentagon investigations have all been a dead end, Bush decides to look the other way and then invokes executive privilege dealing with the death of the soldier whose sacrifice this administration used in the drumbeat for war.

The House of Representatives passed a bill (HR 3159) which would guarantee troops as much time at home as they spend deployed. The vote count was 229-194 (191 Republicans and 3 so called Democrats whose days are numbered by this vote, no doubt).

The White House's response? The bill would “infringe on the president’s constitutional authority as commander-in-chief to manage the readiness and availability of the armed forces” and would “substitute the mandates of Congress for the considered judgment of our military commanders. If this legislation were presented to the president, he would veto the bill.”

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

So let's recap: We can't afford to continue providing children in need with health care (approximately $7 billion a year over the next 5 years). We can't afford to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, meaning dams, bridges, power grids, water supplies, etc., that are in desperate need of repair and are at critical conditions at the cost of $160 billion over the next 10 years. But we can afford $12 billion spent in Iraq monthly (close to $600 billion and counting that we know of), and we can afford more corporate tax cuts. They claim to support the troops, but won't give them much needed time at home, and earlier this year, the White House opposed a 3.5% increase in pay for the military. Now they are fighting a Democratic effort to restore full educational benefits for returning veterans, according to an official's comments last week.

Republicans at their finest, protecting billionaires in need. God, I hate these people.

Stem Cell Hypocrisy

Bush has vetoed lifting restrictions on embryonic stem cell research for a second time this past Wednesday under the guise of "sanctity of life".

“Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical,” Mr. Bush said in a brief ceremony in the East Room of the White House. He called the United States “a nation founded on the principle that all human life is sacred.”

All life is sacred except for Iraqis, isn't that what you mean, George? All life is sacred except the surge of troops you're sending to die in Iraq, right George?

George W. Bush is a hypocrite (no news there).

But let's get to the crux of the matter: The "sanctity of life" argument is a smokescreen while this administration slowly shifts federally funded research to the private sector. The pharmaceutical companies are not restricted to experiment with embryonic stem cells and once they start finding cures you can only imagine what the exorbitant cost for the cure to a disease like diabetes or multiple sclerosis will be after the private sector patents its findings as opposed to having it in the public domain.

How do you suppose the average American will be able to afford something like this if it stays in the hands of the corporations? The corporations and the extremely wealthy win again.

Chimpy's vetoes are just pre-emptive privatization.

Bob Geiger: He's Kidding, Right?

New York Times Editorial: Mr. Bush’s Stem Cell Diversion

Chimpy's Veto

On the fourth anniversary on his now infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech and his spectacular photo op aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, Chimp in Charge has vetoed legislation that not only would have given him the funding he requested for his illegal war in Iraq, but also vital funds for crumbling Walter Reed Hospital and other worthwhile expenditures. Curious George vetoed the bill because of the timetable to pull out troops that Democrats would like to bring home, rather than have them die for a misguided, failed policy with no real strategy in place, contrary to GOP claims.

Bush said Democrats had made a political statement by passing anti-war legislation. "They've sent their message, and now it's time to put politics behind us and support our troops with the funds," the president said.
..."Our troops and their families deserve better, and their elected leaders can do better," Bush said.

They certainly can you bastard. Rot in hell, you filthy son-of-a-bitch.

UPDATE: Keith Olbermann with Frank Rich on Countdown, May 1, 2007

The Latest Polls

From Bob Geiger's Blog:

For people who spend so much time lately talking about how unpatriotic Harry Reid and Senate Democrats are for their drive to end the Iraq war, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and their Republican rubber-stampers in Congress seem blind to the fact that, for a long time, the vast majority of the American people have sided with Democrats and the troops on this and against them.

Latest CBS Presidential Poll on Iraq Showdown

...This poll, like all the others, shows that when Bush vetoes the Congressional mandate to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, the script is already being written for how to run against every Republican in the House and Senate who votes to uphold that veto.

You know the old saying, you lie with dogs, you're gonna get
fleas.