After reading about the context behind Mitt's binders full of women, the question struck me, has there ever been a campaign more full of shit than Mitt Romney's? What's amazing aren't so much the anecdotal lies or misstated facts, like trying to say that Obama didn't call the plot 'an act of terror', I think I'm numb to those, though they do paint the picture of a man without a shred of integrity. What's amazing is that the very core of his campaign, the main supporting arguments he makes over and over are absolute bullshit. We all know that politicians spin, fudge the facts, take things out of context, flip flop, and make promises they don't intend to keep, but I don't know that we've ever seen a candidate for president whose central arguments were all either completely false or wildly misleading.
What's clear from post debate coverage is that Romney did not present an airtight indictment of the president's record but rather his arguments (read: lies) just weren't countered with the appropriate vigor and clarity, at least not every time. I tend to agree. Putting aside the purely stylistic complaints, Obama clearly left a lot of points on the board. He had some solid openings for rebuttals that he just didn't take. There has been speculation that he wanted to appear presidential or that he wanted to avoid appearing angry, but even given that, I feel there were some very effective responses that he could have given that would have turned the debate in his favor. Here's a few things I wish he would have said.
With Romney trailing in the polls, conservatives have already started the post-mortem, looking for ways to explain Romney's loss while absolving their ideology of any blame. George Will has the most unbelievable explanation I've read so far. Voter's are sticking with Obama because he's black.
I've been following the Trayvon Martin incident like most of the rest of the country and things just aren't adding up. The more I hear of Zimmerman's account, the more something it feels like something is missing. I'm going to go over what I know of Zimmerman's account and add my commentary on what just doesn't make sense to me. This is largely based on what I've read/heard of Zimmerman's account of the incident. It's pieced together mostly from the Orlando Sentinel report, or from what the Trayvon's father said the police told him and what Zimmerman's friend and father have said Zimmerman told them in the several interviews I've seen. There may be some accounts that I haven't read and not all the accounts are exactly the same, but I'm going to try and judge the plausibility of the events as I understand that Zimmerman said they happened. I'm largely going to use what I might have done were I in Trayvon's shoes as a measuring stick, and of course that might be completely different from what actually happened.
I apologize in advance for the dog bites man nature of this diary. I realize that the diary list could easily be filled with the disingenuousness of actual elected republicans, much less their talking heads on Fox News. But I saw a clip of Bush Labor Secretary Elaine Chao on Fox, and I was so incredulous at her audacity that I just had to share. Watch and be stunned with me:
The Bush/Cheney administration's last ditch effort at justifying their actions is to hide behind 9/11. Their argument has essentially become, "well you weren't there, you don't know what it was like." Condi used it while trying to justify the use of torture to Stanford students, and in Cheney's "national security" speech, he referenced 9/11 more often than Rudy Guiliani on the campaign trail. Well Richard Clarke was there and he is having none of it, in his Washington Post article, aptly titled The Trauma of 9/11 Is No Excuse, he smacks down that talking point, HARD. I highly recommend reading the entire article, there were several great paragraphs that I didn't quote due to not wanting to violate copyright rules.
In a classic case stating the obvious, Cheney admits to being involved in the decision to approve torture.
Cheney's comments also mark the first time that he has acknowledged playing a central role in clearing the CIA's use of an array of controversial interrogation tactics, including a simulated drowning method known as waterboarding.
"I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared," Cheney said in an interview with ABC News.
Asked whether he still believes it was appropriate to use the waterboarding method on terrorism suspects, Cheney said: "I do." L.A. Times
I just read a great comment on another website that I thought I'd share. It's a comment I found on the ChicagoTribune.com from an article about an interview with Sarah Palin. The article is largely about Palin defending her wardrobe and promising to fully fund education for kids with special needs. This area is apparently exempt from McCain's proposed spending freeze.
Anyways, in the comment section the typical back and forth breaks out between the liberals and the wingnuts over Palin, which then of course spreads to include McCain and Obama, and then naturally widens to include all points of contention between the left and the right. That's when some poor wingnut unwittingly throws out some Iraq "facts" in an attempt to make some point and he gets his ass handed to him. I think he's still trying to figure out what hit him.
Karateexplosions has an excellent diary on the rec list pointing the incomprehensibility of Palin's CNN interview answers. There's another diary on the rec list by Stiffa of Chris Matthews taking Nancy Pftonehauer to the wood shed for her lame attempt at defending Palin's answer from a different interview. Fortunately Palin is the gift that keeps on giving. In an interview with Steve Crupi of News 3, the Las Vegas NBC affiliate, Palin is asked the very logical question, given her belief that global warming is mostly due to natural cycles but also has a man made component, which activities are causing the man made portion? Palin of course, answers with utter nonsense.
h/t Think Progess
Another Conservative flees the sinking ship. And Ken Adelman is a super neo-conservative, as in he's personal friends with Rumsfeld and Cheney. He campaigned for Goldwater, served in the Ford and Reagan administrations, and worked under Rumsfeld at the Pentagon in 2001. And he's supporting on Obama, on the premise that John McCain doesn't cut it when it comes to national security. George Packer of the New Yorker shares his exchange with Adelman.
There is a reason Barack Obama may get close to 99% of the African American vote, and it's not because he's black. It's because the Republican Party has become almost openly insulting to black people. This tone deafness is likely the result of the lack of African Americans in the party's leadership. If my wiki research is correct, there hasn't been a single black republican elected to Congress since J. C. Watts in 2000. The treatment of Colin Powell makes me believe there won't be any black leaders in the Republican Party in the near future either. The reaction of some on the Right to Powell's endorsement of Obama reeks of racism. Colin Powell was Ronald Reagan's National Security Adviser, George H. W. Bush's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and George W. Bush's Secretary of State, he has a long history of serving the country. He is deliberate, he is cautious, and he is thoughtful (at least when he is not cheerleading for the Iraq war). So what was the conservative reaction to such a distinguished person's endorsement of Obama? "Well obviously he's going to side with the black guy. He can't help it." This is incredibly, INCREDIBLY insulting.
The conventional wisdom, at least in the traditional media, seems to be that Sarah Palin "won" because she didn't hurt McCain in her debate. Because she didn't implode by falling flat on her face and because she sounded slightly more intelligible than she did with Katie Couric, the debate was a net plus for the McCain camp. This logic ignores the fact that McCain is behind in the polls and lost another opportunity to make up ground, a "tie" is a victory for Obama who just needs to hold serve for the next 30 days. But it also completely ignores how Palin was damaging to McCain throughout the course of her debate, and how she completely undermined the meme that McCain was desperately trying to sell throughout the course of his.
Last night, I made an election night version of Downfall. I used this site to do the captions. It appears that it may be on the tip of going viral, as it was just posted at TPM by Josh Marshall (h/t ...
It seems to me that many on the right have a SERIOUS case of Romnesia these days. During the GOP Primaries and throughout Romney's 6-7 year run for President (snort) , Mitt Romney was DOGGED by many ...
In a quick short series, I want to share my observations about Presidential Candidate Romney (please stop calling him governor, he really didn't do much governing when he was here) as a resident of ...