Start me up…

Here, Joe Lieberman incites fear by insinuating that America will be attacked in 2009 because terrorists like to test new presidents. Huh? His distasteful suggestion that Americans need to elect someone who is battle ready because terrorists will “test” the new president was obviously a fear tactic designed to scare voters into voting for McCain. Still, I go back to a simple point that goes unanswered, why do these tough guy freedom fighter Republicans think they have an advantage by playing the terrorism card? The people who attacked us are in Afghanistan/Pakistan growing their movement, yet Republicans advocate staying in Iraq forever. It’s an interesting strategy, isn’t it?

So here we have John McCain and Lieberman saying, “the U.S. is safer from terrorism today than before 9/11,” yet now they are telling us we’ll be attacked again and soon, so because we’re tougher on terrorism you need to stick with us to be safe. Huh? Okay, so we are safer from terrorism today because Republicans are tougher on terror, but we’ll be attacked again soon, so you need to vote Republican because we need to stay in Iraq where the terrorist group who attacked us does not exist. Got it? Okay, good.

Can’t wait to see how this goes over with the Rush Limbaugh wing of the Republican Party.

McCain told the Latino officials the proposal failed because Americans were not confident Congress would protect U.S. borders before dealing with the question of illegal immigration.

“GOD’S CHILDREN”

“I want to assure you we will address this issue in a humane and compassionate fashion,” he said, calling illegal immigrants “God’s children.”

If I were Obama I would make stem cell research, illegal immigration and the marriage amendment the platform of my campaign. McCain shares the same position as his liberal counterpart on all of these hot button issues. That’s certainly not going to inspire the base of the Republican Party in November.

That’s pathetic. I’m waiting for another crying episode after Obama declares himself the winner on Tuesday night. Will Clinton have the respect to bow out before he declares victory or will she drag this out for 2012 and tear apart the Democratic Party?

John McCain in 2000:

The NRA is entitled to their advocacy. I don’t think they help the Republican Party at all, but I don’t think they should in any way play a major role in the Republican Party’s policy making.

It would be interesting to compare John McCain in 2000 to John McCain of 2008.

whereIstand Tags

• NRA
• JohnMcCain

Kevin Drum picks up a nice quote:

“Bush is hardly a moron. He wanted the rich — in particular the oil guys — to do well and they have (phenomenally well). He promised to appoint more Justices like Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia and he did. He didn’t want to work terribly hard and he hasn’t. He wanted to show that government can’t do things very well, and he has. Morons are not usually so successful in getting what they want.”

Here’s a quick and dirty update on “who will win” the Democratic nomination:

The latest count: Obama, 1,736.5; Clinton, 1,605.5. It will take 2,025 delegates to claim the Democratic nomination at the party’s national convention this summer.

Right now there are 9 contests left bringing us to June 3rd. There are 505 pledged delegates and 295 superdelegates left to be dished out. Right now it looks pretty safe to say Obama will edge Hillary out in pledged delegates through the remaining contests. He’s heavily favored in Oregon, Montana, South Dakota and looks okay to hold on in North Carolina. Hillary will probably take Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia and Puerto Rico. But let’s be safe and say they split the remaining pledged delegates. So that’s 252.5 more delegates for Obama, which would put him at a total of 1,989 pledged delegates. That means he would only need 36 out of the remaining 295 superdels to hit the magic number of 2,025 delegates. Lately, both candidates have been splitting superdelegates, so let’s say Obama only picks up 1/3 of the remaining 295 superdels. At the end of this race that would leave him with roughly 2,089 total delegates to Hillary’s 2,053.

Now, I doubt it will be that close, but I just wanted to make sure Clinton supporters realized the race was already over. Please start preparing to fight John McCain.

whereIstand Tags

• BarackObama
• HillaryClinton

Health care costs booming, energy costs booming, cost of education booming, food costs booming, inflation booming, American wages stagnant for years, yet have no fear, John McCain and the “gas tax holiday” are here! Honestly, why is it that when Americans, well, when 95% of Americans are being squeezed to death and oil prices are through the roof that Republicans want to sell and manipulate them into consuming more oil?

In the last week we’ve seen McCain propose the laughable and panderific gas tax holiday, which will do nothing other than increase oil company profits and take money out of the roads and highway state budgets. Now today, President Bush gets into the action and has the audacity to bring up drilling in ANWR. Yes, President Bush your fearless forward thinking agenda has struck again to save Americans from absolving themselves and their environment from oil and discovered another maneuver to ensure more lavish profits for big oil.

Reuters, analysis:

Gerald Kepes, head of the upstream oil and gas practice at the PFC Energy consulting group, said if the Interior Department had begun leasing tracts in ANWR in 2003 the first oil would had probably been flowing in 2012.

“This all assumes that there would be no environmental challenges,” said Kepes, as lawsuits to block drilling could take years to resolve. “Really, 2015 is more then likely.”

Opening ANWR could have made current prices worse because Saudi Arabia may have delayed increasing its oil production capacity, making world supplies tighter and prices higher.

“Since there is a worldwide market for oil, increases in production in one place (like ANWR) could be offset by decreases in production someplace else to keep the prices high,” CAP’s Weiss said.

whereIstand Tags

• Should the U.S. allow oil drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)?
• Should Congress suspend the gas and diesel tax from Memorial Day through Labor Day 2008?

John McCain has had the Republican nomination wrapped up, for what, almost 3 months now? I find it interesting that 220,000 Pennsylvania Republicans this past week took time out of their day to vote against McCain when the race has been over for 12 weeks.

And while it was superfluous in determining that party’s nominee, 220,000 Pennsylvania Republicans (out of their total turnout of 807,000) were moved to cast ballots for Mike Huckabee or, more numerously, Ron Paul. That’s more voters than the margin (215,000) that separated Hillary Clinton and Mr. Obama.

Those antiwar Paul voters are all potential defectors to the Democrats in November. Mr. Huckabee’s religious conservatives, who rejected Mr. McCain throughout the primary season, might also bolt or stay home. Given that the Democratic ticket beat Bush-Cheney in Pennsylvania by 205,000 votes in 2000 and 144,000 votes in 2004, these are 220,000 voters the G.O.P. can ill-afford to lose.

And does anyone really believe that when the country can finally focus on one Democrat vs. McCain’s (or Bush’s) record that independents are going to vote for the old bastard who wants to stay in Iraq and who’s economic policy leans on a gas-tax holiday? Sure John, lets consume more oil and cut funds for our deteriorating national infrastructure. Brilliant.

Joe Klein makes the obvious point, why would he not vote for John McCain, who insists on carrying out a pointless strategy in Iraq distracting all of America’s resources from the real war against Osama and Al Qaeda?

John McCain is probably the favorite candidate of Osama bin Laden, just as George W. Bush was Osama’s presidential preference.

Why? Because both Bush and McCain have bought Osama’s disinformation about Iraq being the central front in the war on terrorism. Of course, bin Laden wants the gullible neocons to take the Iraq bait because Afghanistan really is the central front of the war on terrorism–more precisely the Afghan-Pakistani border areas where the real Al Qaeda lives. The war in Iraq has been a grand strategic gift to Osama, keeping the U.S. military tied down elsewhere and off his tail.

Ron Suskind had a relevant scene in his excellent book The One Percent Doctrine: It’s the Friday before election day in 2004 and Osama bin Laden has issued a videotape in which he lambastes President Bush. The top dawgs at the CIA are gathered to analyze the tape. Dep. Director John McLaughlin says, “I wonder who Osama is voting for?” Everyone cracks up because the answer is so obvious.

Obama is the only candidate saying he wants to refocus our attention and attack the terror groups responsible for 9/11 located in the Afghistan/Pakistan border. I certainly would never trust John McCain on the economy, and since he’s bin Laden’s obvious preference to run American’s foreign policy, I think I’ll have to choose Barack Obama in ‘08.

whereIstand Tags

• BarackObama
• JohnMcCain
• Should Iraq be the central front in the war on terror?
• Which should have the higher priority in the War on Terrorism?

After the ABC debate tragedy I think voters should know a little bit more about the critical policy differences between the candidates. For instance, the health care debate…everyone knows the system is broken and it’s unacceptable to have 40+ million people uninsured. McCain’s “conservative vision” to solve the health care abomination in this country is to create more ‘freedom’ and competition in the market, a.k.a., business as usual, or shall I say more of the same we’ve been shat on with over the last 8 years. How long until people realize a “conservative” approach to this problem is not going to work? Keep in mind that close to 50 million people in the U.S. are currently uninsured…

“The problem is not that most Americans lack adequate health insurance — the vast majority of Americans have private insurance, and our government spends billions each year to provide even more,” McCain has said.

Now, who’s out of touch, McCain, or Obama who says voters are angry because Washington won’t solve their problems?

On the other side, you have Clinton’s “universal coverage” plan, which mandates by law that everyone buy into the plan, and Obama’s “universal access” plan, which requires children to be covered and subsidizes those currently uninsured. That’s a big difference! Can we really go from the broken system we have now, to legally mandating everyone buy into the federal government’s plan? Is it reasonable to think such a drastic step could get passed by Congress? And which candidate is more likely to work with the other side of the aisle to get the necessary votes to pass meaningful legislation?

whereIstand Tags

• BarackObama
• JohnMcCain
• HillaryClinton
• Should adults be required by law to purchase health insurance?