Hello! Jack and Jill Politics is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.
Community Page
- www.jackandjillpolitics.com/ Jump to website »
-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- is anyone else watching CSPAN? This is a really interesting discussion.
- Ummm, yeah, I'll STILL pass. But thanks for trying.
- It doesn't say they were chasing non-Black tail to the exclusion of Black tail.
- Men/Women who are married and cheat, why not just get a divorce? then you can have all of the "girlfriends/boyfriends" and extramarital sex you want, and no one can really complain. If...
- So pretty! They look like ballerinas! :-)
1 year ago
I'm an Obama supporter, but I don't think McCain was joking about spousal abuse. Where that remark comes from, rather, is an old saw about how to respond to a question that can only make you look bad.
For example, when the Michelle Obama/"Whitey" bs came up weeks ago, I believe it was the website for the Libertarian magazine "Reason" that said:
"Asking Barack Obama if he has ever heard his wife say 'Whitey' is like asking him when he stopped beating her." (i.e. even if Michelle didn't say it and Senator Obama didn't hear it, both of which I believe are true, the question is still out there, creating suspicion.)
So yeah, McCain may have stepped right up to the line on this, but I don't think he stepped over it.
1 year ago
1 year ago
I'm a McCain supporter, and I know that's what he was trying to do.
Unfortunately, there's some things in the world you just can't joke about.
That was beyond "not smart."
1 year ago
Well, I don't wonder really.
I'd like to see an interviewer take him to task on all this focus-shifting he does.
Wanna see McCain's head explode? (I do.) Then someone needs to have the guts to say:
"We're not talking about Senator Obama right now, Senator. We're talking about you. Now answer the question."
And when the bile starts to rise, an interviewer needs to ask him about his fraudulent and illegal abuse of the public financing system in his primary campaign. And push him till he provides a real answer without changing the subject to, well, you know, the "extreme" Black guy.
McCain is stupid. And angry. And stupid. And dangerous. And unstable. And stupid. And dangerous.
And he's the Republican nominee for president.
For now.
1 year ago
McCain respecting his wife? That's ridiculous.
1 year ago
Way to reach out for those women voters, McWifeBeater! You're doing a heckuva job!
How in the hell is the Mainstream Media gonna spin this exchange?
"Oh, he's a old war hero" bullshit.
He crashed 5 planes and blew up an aircraft carrier BEFORE become a POW.
I can't wait for him to bust out with N-bombs.
1 year ago
I can't wait for him to bust out with N-bombs.
Don't say that. Please.
Craig,
Wanna see McCain's head explode? (I do.) Then someone needs to have the guts to say:
"We're not talking about Senator Obama right now, Senator. We're talking about you. Now answer the question."
The same could be said to Obama as well.
1 year ago
1 year ago
Good work Mr. McCain. Next up Cindy McCain critizing the liberal media for promoting false stories about her abuse
1 year ago
Right Wing Meets Right Wing
One Sell Out Takes on The OTher
Where do we get ticktets?
1 year ago
1 year ago
On the flip side, who actually expects decent reporting these days? Today's press can barely mentally formulate a good question, not to mention stating one correctly.
1 year ago
Since we know that McCain has called his wife in front of reliable witnesses expletives and curse words that merely hint at darker impulses and actions at home behind closed doors, McCain went way over the line. He was not being funny. He knows what he has done in the past and wants to tell people that he's not that kind of guy.
Bet you he is.
And he's still not answering questions from the gate, focusing on Obama as being extreme and radical. Answer the freaking question! Explain who YOU are, you lying so-and-so.
Yall buy that shyt about Obama being extreme? They wish, and I don't, and I don't anyone else does either, unless it is someone just as extreme and radical and racial on the Reichwing side wanting to hear confirming 'points' made.
I look forward to seeing McBush discombobulate on national television as well. I'm wanting to see the reporter with steel ones (despite gender) say, "Sir, please answer the question," to McCain. Watch him come apart, or better, watch him go off even while on his meds. Then we'll see who really is capable of manning the tiller on the ship of state.
1 year ago
By Eric Alterman & George Zornick
This article appeared in the July 7, 2008 edition of The Nation.
Like the vast majority of our 300 million or so fellow citizens--but unlike most of the elite political reporters covering the presidential campaign--your authors have never had the pleasure of meeting Arizona Senator and Republican presidential nominee John McCain. We've never sat with him in a semicircle on the red velvet couches of the Straight Talk Express downing Dunkin' Donuts and participating in endless bull sessions that long outlast our store of questions. We've never talked strategy openly with McCain and his advisers over drinks and dinner, or been fed information to use against his opponents. Perhaps even more regrettably, we have not enjoyed the pleasure of joining our media colleagues for a sunny afternoon, chez McCain, "swinging lazily back and forth on a tire swing strung up under a massive sycamore tree in a quiet Arizona canyon, the sound of a gushing stream nearby," as the candidate, according to Newsweek, "carefully monitor[ed] giant slabs of pork ribs on a smoking grill."
But even though we might be taken with McCain personally, we would like to think that we would resist the urge to offer the sort of spontaneous testimonials to his character that have gushed from the pens of so many MSM journalists. These would include calling McCain "a cool dude" (Jake Tapper, Salon); "an original, imaginative, and at times inspiring candidate" (Jacob Weisberg, Slate); "a man of unshakable character, willing to stand up for his convictions" (the late R.W. Apple Jr., New York Times); "a man of intelligence, honor and enormous personal and political courage" (Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek); "blunt, unyielding, deploying his principles.... What he does do is what he's always done, play it as straight as possible.... The maverick candidate still" (Terry Moran, ABC News's Nightline); "worldly-wise and witty, determined to follow the facts to the exclusion of ideology...willing to defy his own party and forge compromise...pragmatic in the service of the national interest...rises to passion when he believes that America's best values are at stake" (Michael Hirsch, Newsweek); "kind of like a Martin Luther" (Chris Matthews, MSNBC's Hardball); "the perfect candidate to deal with what challenges we face as a country" (Mika Brzezinski, MSNBC's Morning Joe); "rises above the pack...eloquent, as only a prisoner of war can be" (David Nyhan, Boston Globe); "the bravest candidate in the presidential race" (Dana Milbank, Washington Post); "an affable man of zealous, unbending beliefs" and "the hero [who] still does things his own way" (Richard Cohen, Washington Post); and who, in "an age of deep cynicism about politicians of both parties...is the rare exception who is not assumed to be willing to sacrifice personal credibility to prevail in any contest" (David Broder, Washington Post).
Believe us, we could go on (and on and on...). Suffice it to say that no candidate since John F. Kennedy, and perhaps none since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, has enjoyed such cozy relations with the press. In his book Politicians, Partisans, and Parasites: My Adventures in Cable News, Tucker Carlson explains the source of many journalists' attraction to the Arizona senator: "McCain ran an entire presidential campaign aimed primarily at journalists.... To a greater degree than any candidate in thirty years, McCain offered reporters the three things they want most: total access all the time, an endless stream of amusing quotes, and vast quantities of free booze." Ryan Lizza, reporting for The New Yorker from the current Straight Talk, notes the dichotomy of McCain's press-friendly campaign style and that of his opponents: "The Democratic candidates rarely speak to the traveling press. McCain not only packs his bus with reporters (whom he often greets with an affectionate 'Hello, jerks!') but talks until the room is filled with the awkward silence of journalists with no more questions." Lizza also notes that the "chumminess" between the campaign and the reporters has almost no boundaries. Questions of strategy--even media manipulation--are discussed openly with reporters present, and "McCain's senior advisers dine almost nightly with the people covering the candidate."
The degree to which members of the press find all this irresistible is evident by the confessions that reporters have occasionally offered in public; confessions that have few, if any, precedents in recent political history. For instance, Charles Lane, writing in the October 18, 1999, issue of The New Republic, admitted, "I know it shouldn't be happening, but it is. I'm falling for John McCain." His declaration followed that of Michael Lewis, who, in the same magazine, compared his feelings to "the war that must occur inside a 14-year-old boy who discovers he is more sexually attracted to boys than to girls." ..............
And then this excerpt in the same article
“Examine McCain's position on any given question and compare it with the press coverage of that position. Again and again, you will see that many of the most admired and respected reporters in the business are not merely "in the tank" for McCain; they are practically unpaid members of his campaign staff.”
1 year ago
1 year ago
1 year ago
1 year ago
But McCain always does.
As his friends from back in the day will tell you, he's a fool and complete fraud.
And he's dangerous.
I dare someone to write his unauthorized biography.
1 year ago
honest, he did
1 year ago
Meanwhile, as the MSM is busy, daily reframing Obama's politically expedient flip-flops as a pragmatic tack to the center...
Since the Supreme Court ruling in favor of individual rights in the 2nd amendment, Obama has been trying to present himself as a moderate of gun control, when in fact, his record reveals just the opposite:
In 2004, the Illinois Senate considered S.B. 2165 (IL 2004), sponsored by Senator Ed Petka (R-Plainfield). The bill came about because of an arrest in Wilmette, IL in late December of 2003. A 54-year-old businessman shot and wounded a man who had broken into his home for the second time in 24 hours. Cook County prosecutors found the shooting justified, but the businessman, Mr. DeMar, faced a fine and possible destruction of two guns under a 1989 village ordinance prohibiting handgun possession.
S.B. 2165 would allow residents to use self-defense as a basis for seeking dismissal of criminal charges stemming from local gun ordinances if they used the banned weapon in an act of self-defense in their home, business or property.
Obama voted no on third reading March 25, 2004, and voted no on concurrence to a House amendment on May 25, 2004. In fact, Obama voted no four times: in the Judiciary Committee, on Third Reading, in the Judiciary Committee's vote on concurrence with the House, and on the final concurrence.
Luckily for the people of Illinois, the legislation passed despite Obama's opposition. Had he had his way, people in Illinois could still be prosecuted for defending themselves against crimes.
But that's not the only time Obama has voted against the people's right to keep and bear arms.
In 1999, Obama voted in favor of S.B. 177 (IL 1999). The legislation required guns to be secured by trigger locks, placed in a lock box, or placed in a location that a reasonable person would believe to be secure from a minor. Likewise, in 2003, Obama voted for H.B. 2579 (IL 2003) for a law that restricted the rights of Illinois's citizens so that they could only buy one gun a month. The law created the offense of "unlawful acquisition of handguns."
In 2001, Obama voted against S.B. 604 (IL 2001), which would have allowed individuals who have valid orders of protection against other individuals to carry concealed weapons for their protection. The bill would have created an affirmative defense against a charge of violating Illinois's concealed carry law if the person had a lawfully issued protection order against someone seeking to do harm to the person.
In 2002, Obama voted against S.B. 397 (IL 2002), which amended the Firearms Owners Indentification Card Act. The legislation was specifically crafted for sporting events and allowed a non-resident participating in a sanctioned competitive shooting event in Illinois to purchase a shotgun or shotgun ammunition in Illinois, but only at the site where the event is being held, for the purpose of participating in the event.
1 year ago
1 year ago
My sense is he's gotten by his whole life by fudging it. Is there something inherently wrong with that? Mo. But, for a President, people need to know. The fact he doesn't use the internet...how can you have access but not even the curiosity to go online?
Obama - by contrast - makes himself excessively available. He doesn't shy away from discomfort...and those reporters do put a hurting on him for it. It makes supporters like me into nervous wrecks.
Obama is a man who steps up to the plate and takes responsibility, even for things he hasn't done. Everyone projects their faults onto him. He becomes the racist. He is the race-baiter. He becomes the sexist. We all know it's not true; yet, he doesn't defend himself.
1 year ago
You see what you want to see.
When the NYT tried to accuse McCain of having an affair, he took every question, until the reporters has nothinh left to ask.
Obama scurried away from the podium after three questions about Rezko.
McCain allows the media access virtually unmatched by any other politician, while Obama closely controls media access and availability.
Many older Americans are not as technically saavy as the younger generation, and McCain is being honest. McCain also is a very humble man who has called himself an 'imperfect public servant' on more than one occassion.
Obama, by contrast seeks to excuse or deflect scrutiny and criticism. He preemptive playing of the race card, was particularly distasteful. NPR reporter Scott Simon even called him on it. The media increasingly sees him as arrogant, debuting his own presidential seal was seen as egotistical and presumptuous.
Let's face it. This election is all about Obama. Who is this man who has described himself as a 'blank slate?' What does he TRULY believe, what does HIS RECORD show, and HOW DOES HE BEHAVE? Does what voters learn about him cause them to pause...or to donate to his cause?
McCain is a known quantity. An 'honorable' and experienced statesman. He is an acceptible alternative to voters who feel that Obama is a tempting, but 'risky' choice.
___________________________________
dna,
The truth sometimes hurts.
1 year ago
Opposing viewpoints aren't spam.
1 year ago
Obama made himself available to reporters to answer questions about Rezko, remember? He answered everything and there was nothing left for him to say but to admit to things he wasn't guilty of. Obama realized it wasn't a good faith questioning, but an interrogation where they were trying to frame him.
How come you didn't remember that O answered questions about Rezko?
1 year ago
1 year ago
That almost sounds like one of the presidential candidates....
1 year ago
Obama set down and had an extended interview with the conservative Chicago Tribune and gave indepth answers about Rezko.
The fact that you distorted what happened to make your point makes you just as ridiculous as the reporter who was badgering McCain. It's lame to make shit up or ignore conflicting facts.
Real lame.
1 year ago
I watched that press conference. Obama couldn't wait to get out of there fast enough.
But to your larger point, "My sense is he's gotten by his whole life by fudging it. Is there something inherently wrong with that? Mo. But, for a President, people need to know."
I honestly thought you were talking about Obama.
1 year ago
This isn't really about Rezko. Rezko is bad news and Obama should have known better. By his own admission he was 'boneheaded,' I'm satisfied to leave it at that.
truthseeker was trying to contrast McCain and Obama in a way that did not make much sense to me.
Again, I came to this blog looking to find out more about Obama. If he was indeed a moderate, like me. I have yet to discover anything concrete to which I can grab hold of...
His tacks to the center thus far, while they are indeed closer to my own poitions, seem calculated and insincere.
1 year ago
I watched that press conference. Obama couldn't wait to get out of there fast enough.
That's your subjective opinion about his demeanor...but even if you're right, it didn't prevent the reporters from asking all the questions they wanted. Also, you assess that he looked eager to leave, then assume that it's because he had something to hide. It's entirely possible he had a plane to catch...an event to get to...pressing things on his mind related to the campaign.
See, even you are doing the deflection dance just like your candidate. You instantly tell a lie about Obama to cover criticism of McCain.
How odd that you would come here specifically to find out about Obama. How odd that you'd forget that Obama answered questions about Rezko.
1 year ago
Your argument about Obama refusing to answer questions relied on Obama not answering about Rezko. But as we know he spent hours with the Tribune. So, where is that argument left?
Frankly I don't care. They both deflect questions they don't want to answer. I don't care. Obama doesn't woo the press, which in a way makes me more confident in those who cover him...but regardless.
If you want to know about Obama there are plenty of places to do it. I don't think J&J; is the best place. Why don't you try the many articles written by the Chicago tribune? They've been writing about him for years.
How about you check out his work in the Senate. I have, and what he did (taking on un-sexy problems and looking for good solutions) was impressive to me (though I'm a policy wonk).
Also, Jill has often been concerned about misogyny and this election cycle has provided a lot of food for thought. In a time when McCain and Obama are seeking female votes I think talking about how they treat and think about issue as well as how they talk about women is important. So I find your portrayal of this post as a McCain beat up post problematic.
I find it distasteful for you to claim Obama has "played" the "Race card" against the republicans. I recall him playing it cool when a Republican congressman called him boy before the nation. Please, the truth is that portions of the right seek to race bait, and guess what (southern strategy) they have a record.
I can't stand when people take a critique by an object of racism to label that object racist themselves or "race baiting." It is dishonest and frankly troubling.
Many of us know how it works. The hidden comment, the just beneath the surface call to racial stigmas. Even republican Huckabee has been vocal about traditional Republican strategies, cautioning elements on the right about running the type of negative campaigns we've seen with regards to race.
1 year ago
I have reviewed his record. He's my Senator.
Let's look at the Boston Globe article today RE: Obama's record on housing:
"As a state legislator, Obama had been in office for all of four years before he decided he was ready to replace Rep. Bobby Rush in Congress. The voters in his district didn’t see it that way. Relatively powerless when Democrats were in the minority, Obama’s accomplishments piled up in the final two years in the state legislature, as his political godfather, Emil Jones Jr., helped Obama take a lead role in just about every piece of high-profile legislation. By the end of 2003, Obama focused heavily on the upcoming U.S. Senate race.
This brings Obama to the U.S. Senate. His first general election ad touts a bill he didn’t vote for, his signature accomplishment in foreign policy (the nuclear nonprofileration bill) was so uncontroversial it passed by unanimous consent; and with his signature domestic policy accomplishment, ethics reform, nonpartisan observers conclude he has exaggerated his role in passage. Two years isn’t a lot of time to bring about “real change,” and most of his supporters would concede that Obama’s accomplishments as a freshman senator have been modest. He’s been rebuked by his colleagues for taking credit for legislation he had little role in crafting.
It’s easy to wonder whether the candidate who talks about “real change” and pledges a government that will “heal the sick” and “stop the oceans from rising” actually knows how to get big things done – or whether he had the patience. Obama would seem to have the skills and brains to be a legendary community organizer, or state legislator, or U.S. senator. But momentous accomplishments in each of those positions take time, and at each level, Obama hit a wall, and turned his attention to a position of greater power.
I note this as the Boston Globe takes a comprehensive look at Obama’s efforts at housing as a state legislator and as a U.S. senator, and comes to devastating conclusions. The policy changes Obama pushed have been catastrophic failures for the public, but lucrative for his donors.
As a state senator, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee coauthored an Illinois law creating a new pool of tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.
But a Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies - including several hundred in Obama's former district - deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.
Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama's close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama's constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.
Campaign finance records show that six prominent developers - including Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko - collectively contributed more than $175,000 to Obama's campaigns over the last decade and raised hundreds of thousands more from other donors. Rezko alone raised at least $200,000, by Obama's own accounting.
One of those contributors, Cecil Butler, controlled Lawndale Restoration, the largest subsidized complex in Chicago, which was seized by the government in 2006 after city inspectors found more than 1,800 code violations.
Obama has said that his preference for private companies acting as landlords of these developments rather than the Chicago Housing Authority was inspired by his experience with Altgeld Gardens. I can understand that instinct. But one of the problems of constantly moving on to the next promotion is that you never get to see the consequences and ramifications of past actions."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/
1 year ago
I, for one, ignore serpents.
1 year ago
s is either not intelligent enough to have a conversation without parroting the lengthy (and often ridiculous) opinions of others or he is not really interested in engaging in a conversation about the issues. Either way I "keep it moving" when it comes to s.
Junglecat
1 year ago
Yes one issue. Good thing that's not all there is right? Because we know there have been other things, such as getting cops to videotape interrogations.
Why not the US Senate where he's introduced and passed as much legislation as more senior senators?
How about:
-Energy Security Bill -
-Relief for Katrina and stopping FEMA no-bid contracts
-1st public database of federal spending and contracts
-attempting against the senate to raise CAFE standards in a meaningful way
-making voter intimidation illegal
On the wonkier side he has done things like move to regulate genetic testing (because there is little control over it), or being the first to talk about the Avian flu and other international health issues (with bills dedicated to these topics). Also there is the nonproliferation bill, and he even teamed up with Hillary a year ago to stop medical malpractice the way doctors have suggested, by doing it before the courts ever get involved.
Obama knew he was limited in power so approached unsexy problems with real solutions. We can make lists all day but the truth is he passed as many bills last year as someone like Hillary Clinton. He gets work done, and like most politicians not every solution works.
For all of these things just search the Senate records...but then that would take an open mind.
I'm no McCain basher, I just know who has policies most inline with my own and make no apologies. I don't try to tear down McCain just talk about where I disagree with him (Oil for example).
1 year ago
Craig @1:36 (and anon/Junglecat @1:48) -- you know I agree. I also know from other experiences with other people that too much criticism or arguing often animates and energizes the person's ego in situations like this, so ... take care.
1 year ago
1 year ago
We'll know for sure when McCain, in an attempt to be "hip" starts sporting "wife-beater" shirts under his suits.
Seriously, has anyone seen Cindy in clothing that bares parts of her body that would indicate McCain's using her as a punching bag? I have yet to see her in something like that purple dress Michelle Obama rocked, and I often wonder, cause the first indication of abuse is the clothing a person wears to cover up bruises and injuries.
McCain did call ole girl the "C" word on the "Straight-Talk Express" Bus earlier this year.
1 year ago
My ambivalence towards Obama lies in the fact that Obama is trying to move to the center, and toward positions are closer to my own, but his record and previous statements just don't jive.
Almost all here have confirmed that he's just playing politics. The media lauds his 'pragmatism' and covers for him. If he wants to be against FISA, he should be against it. He shouldn't worry about being accused of being 'soft on terror.' But don't support something just to get elected. Don't promise to accept public financing and then become the first post-Watergate president to refuse it under the guise of 'independence.'
I do not object to changes in policies or positions if reasonable circumstances warrant them, or if a thoughtful analysis alters one's point of view, but that isn't what has happened.
Playing politics with positions and policies that are important to me is disconcerting.