Gripedujour

Joe Klein at Time Magazine takes a crack at the differences between the “new” John McCain and the “old” John McCain:

One of the big differences between the old John McCain and the current edition is that the old one (1) would admit error and (2) would admit there were things he didn’t know. That was a good part of his charm. The current edition–a parody of the worst sort of political flim-flam artist–not only lies about his own positions, but attempts to camouflage those lies by mischaracterizing his opponent’s positions. It is appropriate, then, that the American Association Academy of Actuaries–a group devoted to the precise calculation of death rates–has exposed McCain’s extravagant fraudulence of the past week for what it was.

This is seriously like shooting fish in a barrel.

The prom queen has repeatedly said that she “took a pay cut” as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.

Here’s Palin’s pay over her tenure as mayor of the meth capital of Alaska:

For me, and I’m just a stupid liberal elitist who can do third grade math, but “cut” signifies a reduction (i.e. “We’re cutting prices”, “he ‘cut’ his hair”, and yes, “I took a pay ‘cut’”.) But when you make more than you did before, it’s kinda hard to argue you took ‘cut’. Unless you’re Sarah Palin— then you just lie.

ABC News had discovered an internal document that shows that Sarah Palin is lying about her latest reason for firing her public safety chief in the “Troopergate” scandal.

Seems the prom queen has been saying her reason for firing the life long public servant is not because he refused to fire her brother in law, but because he had a “rogue mentality” and made “an unauthorized trip to Washing D.C.”

Here’s the good part: The document shows that Palin approved the trip to D.C.! So much for that reason… better think of new lie— fast!

Full story here.

Maureen Dowd had Aaron Sorkin to write her column this weekend. That’s probaly why it’s good:

BARACK OBAMA knocks on the front door of a 300-year-old New Hampshire farmhouse while his Secret Service detail waits in the driveway. The door opens and OBAMA is standing face to face with former President JED BARTLET.

BARTLET Senator.

OBAMA Mr. President.

BARTLET You seem startled.

OBAMA I didn’t expect you to answer the door yourself.

BARTLET I didn’t expect you to be getting beat by John McCain and a Lancôme rep who thinks “The Flintstones” was based on a true story, so let’s call it even.

Read the rest of this entry »

Another excerpt from Frank rich today:

The twin-pronged strategy of truculence and propaganda that sold Bush and his war could yet work for McCain. Even now his campaign has kept the “filter” from learning the very basics about his fitness to serve as president — his finances and his health. The McCain multihousehold’s multimillion-dollar mother lode is buried in Cindy McCain’s still-unreleased complete tax returns. John McCain’s full medical records, our sole index to the odds of an imminent Palin presidency, also remain locked away. The McCain campaign instead invited 20 chosen reporters to speed-read through 1,173 pages of medical history for a mere three hours on the Friday before Memorial Day weekend. No photocopying was permitted.

I’m like, “Oh yeah he still hasn’t released his medical records or financial records.” Could you imagine if the Obama’s hadn’t either. Rush Limbaugh, in a drug induced haze, would be claiming that they are hiding money from their sales of crack cocaine to kindergartners.

McCain sucks.

As always, read this. Lemme just go ahead and put in the link one more time, so you don’t miss it: HERE’S THE LINK TO FRANK RICH’S COLUMN.

Excerpt:

That’s why the main thrust of the McCain campaign has been to cover up his history of economic malpractice.

McCain has largely pulled it off so far, under the guidance of Steve Schmidt, a Karl Rove protégé. A Rovian political strategy by definition means all slime, all the time. But the more crucial Rove game plan is to envelop the entire presidential race in a thick fog of truthiness. All campaigns, Obama’s included, engage in false attacks. But McCain, Sarah Palin and their surrogates keep repeating the same lies over and over not just to smear their opponents and not just to mask their own record. Their larger aim is to construct a bogus alternative reality so relentless it can overwhelm any haphazard journalistic stabs at puncturing it.

When a McCain spokesman told Politico a week ago that “we’re not too concerned about what the media filter tries to say” about the campaign’s incessant fictions, he was channeling a famous Bush dictum of 2003: “Somehow you just got to go over the heads of the filter.” In Bush’s case, the lies lobbed over the heads of the press were to sell the war in Iraq. That propaganda blitz, devised by a secret White House Iraq Group that included Rove, was a triumph. In mere months, Americans came to believe thatSaddam Hussein had aided the 9/11 attacks and even that Iraqis were among the hijackers. A largely cowed press failed to set the record straight.

Just as the Bushies once flogged uranium from Africa, so Palin ceaselessly repeats her discredited claim that she said “no thanks” to the Bridge to Nowhere. Nothing is too small or sacred for the McCain campaign to lie about. It was even caught (by The Christian Science Monitor) peddling an imaginary encounter between Cindy McCain and Mother Teresa when McCain was adopting her daughter in Bangladesh.

If you doubt that the big lies are sticking, look at the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll. Half of voters now believe in the daily McCain refrain that Obama will raise their taxes. In fact, Obama proposes raising taxes only on the 1.9 percent of households that make more than $250,000 a year and cutting them for nearly everyone else.

Read the rest of this entry »

Take a look at the front page of today’s New York Times:

Do you see? They’re not even “reporting” on bad news, now they’re speculating on the “possibility” of bad news. What isn’t there enough actual bad news in the world today, that they have to start guessing about the possibility of future bad news?

Could those ass-munching jerkoffs on the right-wing be right? Is the finest newspaper in all of America, perhaps the world, anti-American? In these perilous times how the fuck could they possibly dare place such an irresponsible headline on the front page of their Sunday edition?

WE, the American tax payers, each and every one of us, are putting up nearly a trillion dollars to rescue capitalism and the American way, and the New York Times is already saying “What if it doesn’t work?” before it even goes into effect!

If only these spineless ass-wiipes had feautred this kind of story PRIOR to the Iraq war, maybe we coulda all saved a trillion dollars, not mention over 4,000 American lives. But no. As I said maybe they really do hate America.

“But Will It Work?” Are they fucking kidding me? Want an example of how irresponsible that is? Try this:

• George Bush, Collie Molesting Drunkard?
• The USA, freedom hating assholes?
• Russia, commie loving fucktards?

See, you can put a question mark over anything God damn thing you want and call it “a story” or “journalism”— It don’t fucking make it so (‘cept the one about George Bush. I’m pretty sure he does molest collies). The front fucking page of the fucking New York Times is for FACTS, not idle spectulation— especially when the fate of our nation hangs in the balance.