1. Obama was for the holocaust before he was against it. Or some other such idiotic trash that is unbecoming a candidate such as John McCain .

2. Obama would gladly lose a war to win an election. Because he was against the surge. McCain was in favor of the surge. Of course, all of this ignores the simple fact that Obama was against the war from the get-go.

3. McCain says the surge helped bring about the Sunni Anbar Awakening, which has had as much to do - if not exponentially more - with calming the violence in Iraq as the surge itself. The problem is that the surge wasn’t even a glimmer in young Dubya’s eye when the Anbar Awakening began.

4. Obama is like Hitler. Of course, some locals have already said that.

5. Obama will say anything to gain the vote of members of the Israeli press. He mistakenly said the Senate Banking Committee was “his committee” when, in fact, it was that committee (of which he is not a member) that had passed a bill sponsored by Obama. IOW, it was his bill, not his committee.

Of course, because in the past 24 - 48 hours, McCain and his campaign have said several really stupid, offensive things, he did the only thing he could do.

He canceled his single press availability today so he wouldn’t have to answer any questions.

Via Vanity Fair, obviously.

Be part of the Obama campaign by participating in meetings in the area to help contribute to this year’s platform. All you have to do is show up and discuss the issues that matter to you, and this information is then passed along to the Obama campaign. It’s called “Listening to America“.

There is a Listening to America meeting tonight at Batavia’s City Centre tonight at 7:30 pm.

There is one in Buffalo tomorrow (the 24th) at 6pm at 927 Grant St. in Buffalo (the Polish Cadets Hall off the Scajaquada).

John McCain has an video he’s released online that mocks the adoring coverage Obama gets in the press.

Ha ha.

It’s funny because the media have covered Obama just like…

…well, just like how they covered John McCain in 2000.

Haley Barbour on PBS in 2000:

Is the media soft on McCain?

HALEY BARBOUR: Oh, I think it’s probably more than that, Terry. I said last week that the news … the national news media were slobbering all over John McCain and that well known conservative correspondent Mary McGrory of the Washington Post said that absolutely it was true, that I was quite right, that the press has swooned for McCain. I’ve never seen anything like it. And I think what’s interesting for most viewers or people who are interested is that the press that is most pro-McCain are the most liberal press. The ones who are the biggest Clinton supporters like the New York Times and the Boston Globe have come out and said McCain is the anti-Clinton. The Washington Post actually ran an editorial that proclaimed that McCain was the conservative candidate in the race. It’s been a long time since Republicans looked to the Washington Post to tell them who was a conservative.

McCain is just jealous that the Straight Talk Express magic of 8 years ago is gone, and that his friends in the media have moved on to fresher meat.

Here’s the new cover, courtesy of the Albany Project:

There is much back and forth over whether this image is funny, not funny, helpful, or harmful. The cartoonist basically threw every dimwitted right-wing smear against the Obamas into one image. My own opinion is that it’s pretty darn funny.

With that said, the debate over this cover is missing the real, important issue. That is, the New Yorker is still publishing magazines and has found a way to become talked-about among people who don’t drink at the Algonquin or summer in the Hamptons.

The Wendt Foundation paid $2 million to fund the legal fees for the casino half-sorta-victory last week. Two million dollars. That’s a lot of scratch, and frankly I had thought that the lawyers had donated their time towards this effort. I’m taken aback that there was an expenditure for this.

So, here’s the Wendt foundation’s general giving focus:

Purpose and activities: Emphasis on education, the arts, and social services; support also for churches and religious organizations, health associations, public interest organizations, and youth agencies. Fields of interest: Aging; Aging, centers/services; AIDS; AIDS research; Alcoholism; Arts; Biomedicine; Cancer; Cancer research; Children/youth, services; Community/economic development; Crime/law enforcement; Disabilities, people with; Economically disadvantaged; Education; Education, early childhood education; Environment, natural resources; Federated giving programs; Government/public administration; Health organizations; Higher education; Historic preservation/historical societies; History/archaeology; Hospitals (general); Human services; International human rights; Legal services; Libraries/library science; Medical research; Mental health/crisis services; Minorities; Minorities/immigrants, centers/services; Museums; Performing arts; Performing arts, theater; Political science; Public affairs; Religion; Residential/custodial care, hospices; Substance abuse, services; Visual arts.

Here’s a sampling of recipients in 2006:

$500,000 to Shaw Festival Foundation, Buffalo, NY, For renovation and expansion. $360,000 to Hilbert College, Hamburg, NY, Toward constructing communications lab and performance facility. $250,000 to Community Foundation for Greater Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, For Joint Foundation Transition Funding for Arts. $250,000 to Daemen College, Center for Information, Research and Community Programs, Amherst, NY, Toward construction. $250,000 to Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, To acquire land in Zoar Valley. $225,000 to University at Buffalo Foundation, Buffalo, NY, Toward Olmsted challenge grant supporting Ira G. Ross Eye Institute. $200,000 to Chautauqua Watershed Conservancy, Jamestown, NY, Toward purchase of conservation easement at Lake Chautauqua Lutheran Center. $50,000 to Good Schools for All, San Diego, CA, For unrestricted support of Raising Student Achievement. $25,000 to Hauptman-Woodward Medical Research Institute, Buffalo, NY, For Systemic Autoimmune Disease Research Center of Western New York. $20,000 to Niagara Aerospace Museum, Niagara Falls, NY, For rent, utility, and insurance.

And $2 million for legal fees in 2007 - 08.

Imagine if $2 million had gone towards an actual charitable cause that actually helps the underprivileged. Although I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that a sovereign exclave should not be carved out of Buffalo’s downtown to facilitate gambling that can’t be subject to state or local taxes, I don’t care about the morality of this, and I don’t care whether it’s a “good” or “bad” deal for the city any more than I care whether the heavily subsidized, money-losing Hyatt is a “good” or “bad” deal.

But this interview between Bruce Jackson and Joel Rose pretty much underscores the fact that the whole “sovereignty” issue is a technicality that stands in the place of “we know so much better than you”. And they got $2 mill from a local charity to pay legal fees rather than an actual charitable effort.

Oh, well.

I think that a fitting image next to the phrase “cheap political stunt” in the proverbial dictionary would be Jack Davis’ gimmicky vote-buying effort at a Greece, NY gas station yesterday.

The gas was subsidized by Democratic Congressional candidate and multimillionaire Jack Davis, and the campaign expected to pay for all of the 10,000 gallons that were stored in underground tanks at the Sunoco station at Long Pond Road and Ridgeway Avenue.

“We are here because I believe gasoline should help America run; gas prices should not be running America,” Davis said. “This (day) exceeded my expectations.”

About 700 customers, who waited about two hours in line, were charged $1.50 a gallon, and Davis picked up the difference between that price and Thursday’s regular price of $4.29 per gallon, or about $27,900, from noon to 4 p.m.

The 26th District has 654,360 residents. Why doesn’t Jack Davis just send us all a check in exchange for our votes? We know the guy refuses to go out and meet with or speak with average people, and instead campaigns via direct mail, so it’s only fitting that he’d basically buy people off with this idiotic gas stunt. Here, he made the voters come to him. How convenient.

Davis said gas prices are high because of special interests and lobbyists for oil companies. Davis is self-financing his campaign and is committed to spending $3 million on the race.

Davis’ opponents on both sides of the aisle attacked Thursday’s event.

“Like all western New Yorkers, Chris believes record-high gas prices are a serious issue that demands real bipartisan solutions, not slogans or political gimmicks,” said Nick Langworthy, campaign manager for Lee.

Kryzan said a national energy policy is needed. “It’s going to take more than a publicity stunt to solve the real problems that every day people are facing in western New York as a result of high gas prices,” she said in a statement.

Powers’ campaign manager, John Gerken, said Davis was “trying to buy votes.”

“He claims he has no intention of buying this election, but today proved he is a hypocrite,” Gerken said.

Rochester’s WHAM reveals why Davis doesn’t like being asked questions:

Just two days ago, Jack Davis (D) said, “Some will say I’m trying to buy a congressional seat. Not so, not so, not so.”

From noon to 4 p.m., Davis paid about $2.70 per gallon out of his pocket, while drivers paid only $1.50.

When asked if buying someone’s gas is the same as buying their vote, Davis replied, “No, I’m a patriot.”

No one asked him if he was a patriot or not. The question was whether it was buying a vote. The answer is - of course it is. It’s one thing to spend $30k on a mailing, it’s another to hand a potential voter a direct monetary benefit such as Davis did yesterday. Why not just hand them each a check for $50? I mean, sure it’d be effective, but is it legal?

It was revealed yesterday that US trade with Iran had grown under the Bush administration despite all the angry talk and axis of evil stuff. This trade includes appliances, cigarettes, and other consumer goods.

When asked about it, John McCain said:

Why would we want to kill average Iranian civilians? Even if we went to war with Iran, wouldn’t the objective be regime change? What’s so funny about that joke?

How can you argue with logic like this?

Yes, we can vote for George W. Bush in 2008. We have the right to write in the name of our chosen candidate, regardless of whether or not he is officially on the ballot.

We know that George Bush was God’s Candidate in 2000. We know that George Bush was God’s candidate again in 2004. And George Bush has been God’s president for the last 8 years.

Trust in God and vote your faith. Keep America safe. Write-in George W. Bush for President in 2008.

When Republicans cry with indignation at mistreatment of John McCain, let us not forget 2004. Back then, the GOP brought new meaning to “honoring service” of a veteran and political civility. Kerry received three Purple Hearts serving in combat in Vietnam. That’s three more than Bush, Rove, and Cheney combined. This is how, in 2004, Bush’s supporters honored his service:

So, the civility bar has been set remarkably low, and so far the only thing that’s been questioned is whether getting shot down over Hanoi is a qualification for the Presidency. When Wes Clark made that observation, Bob Dole awoke from Bob Dole’s slumber. Bob Dole said this:

“The attack by General Wesley Clark on Senator John McCain’s war record and qualifications for the presidency is beyond comprehension. Clark’s absurd remarks signal further erosion in our nation’s political discourse. He should have stayed in bed Sunday morning.

It’s unfortunate that a former General who ran for the presidency on his own war record thinks it appropriate to attack a distinguished veteran and former prisoner-of-war in this way. Senator McCain’s entire life has been devoted to public service. His achievement and experience constitute unparalleled qualification for America’s highest office.”

This is what Bob Dole said in 2004 about John Kerry’s service:

And last week, former Sen. Bob Dole, the party’s 1996 presidential nominee, brought more attention to the allegations when he told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, “With three Purple Hearts, he never bled that I know of. And they’re all superficial wounds.”

In other words, Senator Dole, the erosion of our political discourse was helped along by the likes of you.

I happen to think that there is no set of qualifications for the Presidency. If there were, we could just us a headhunter and solicit resumes. So the question itself is a dumb one.

But gasps of righteous indignation from the crowd that wore purple-heart laden Band-Aids ring very hollow indeed.

HT The Humanist.

Bush Tours America To Survey Damage Caused By His Disastrous Presidency

Friedman in the Times yesterday:

My fellow Americans: We are a country in debt and in decline — not terminal, not irreversible, but in decline. Our political system seems incapable of producing long-range answers to big problems or big opportunities. We are the ones who need a better-functioning democracy — more than the Iraqis and Afghans. We are the ones in need of nation-building. It is our political system that is not working.

I continue to be appalled at the gap between what is clearly going to be the next great global industry — renewable energy and clean power — and the inability of Congress and the administration to put in place the bold policies we need to ensure that America leads that industry.

“America and its political leaders, after two decades of failing to come together to solve big problems, seem to have lost faith in their ability to do so,” Wall Street Journal columnist Gerald Seib noted last week. “A political system that expects failure doesn’t try very hard to produce anything else.”

We used to try harder and do better. After Sputnik, we came together as a nation and responded with a technology, infrastructure and education surge, notes Robert Hormats, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International. After the 1973 oil crisis, we came together and made dramatic improvements in energy efficiency. After Social Security became imperiled in the early 1980s, we came together and fixed it for that moment. “But today,” added Hormats, “the political system seems incapable of producing a critical mass to support any kind of serious long-term reform.”

If the old saying — that “as General Motors goes, so goes America” — is true, then folks, we’re in a lot of trouble. General Motors’s stock-market value now stands at just $6.47 billion, compared with Toyota’s $162.6 billion. On top of it, G.M. shares sank to a 34-year low last week.

That’s us. We’re at a 34-year low. And digging out of this hole is what the next election has to be about and is going to be about — even if it is interrupted by a terrorist attack or an outbreak of war or peace in Iraq. We need nation-building at home, and we cannot wait another year to get started. Vote for the candidate who you think will do that best. Nothing else matters.

There are so many reasons and causes for this inevitable chicken roost homecoming that I can’t even begin to hurl epithets at them. But I’m willing to overlook them for now just to have some people in congress take some bold steps that will help us in the future. Fewer international misadventures and more time and money being spent on transitioning our economy would be a swell idea.

Republicans really can’t figure out whether Obama is an elitist country clubber or a Jihadist-in-waiting who American, just barely. But this, I think, is the winningest strategy out of all of them and I urge Republicans to adopt this:

Norquist dropped by The Times’ Washington bureau today and, as part of his negative critique of Obama’s liberal stances on economic issues and other matters, he termed the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee “John Kerry with a tan.”

Harris Hill Men’s Club invites the entire community to a picnic for Jon Powers.

When: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 6:00 - 8:00 PM

Where: Clarence Town Park. Large Pavilion

It’s fun to watch the right try to figure out how best to define and pigeonhole Obama. They were so amped for Clinton, that they’ve been caught unawares.

They can’t decide whether Obama is the foreign outsider who rejects American values, or whether he’s the too-cool elitist at the country club.

They can’t decide if he’s too inner-city activist or too Park Avenue radical chic.

Thankfully, Karl Rove weighs in:

Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He’s the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.

Note, of course, that with that very statement Rove outs himself as being that guy at the country club holding a martini and cigarette making snide comments. “Beautiful date” is unconfirmed.

Country club?

As most everyone knows by now, Barack Obama has decided to opt out of the public financing system, eschewing federal matching funds so that his overall fundraising is not capped, and he can effectively battle against what is likely to be a brutal Republican onslaught from McCain, the RNC, and various swiftboat-flavored 527 groups.

Some people are upset about this because they demand doctrinal rigidity in a candidate, rather than pragmatism. I think Bush has shown us that doctrinal rigidity in the face of changing factual reality can be quite counterproductive. Others are upset because Obama had pledged to work out something with the McCain campaign whereby both would opt into the public financing system. McCain is, notably, upset, and going on the attack on the issue. It won’t be very persuasive, however.

Why? Josh Marshall explains:

McCain himself is at this moment breaking the law in continuing to spend over the spending limits he promised to abide by through the primary season in exchange for public financing. (By the FEC’s rules, we’re still in the primary phase of the election and will be until the conventions.)

I want to return to this subject though because this is not hyperbole or some throw away line. He’s really doing it. McCain opting into public financing, accepted the spending limits and then profited from that opt-in by securing a campaign saving loan. And then he used some clever, but not clever enough lawyering, to opt back out. And the person charged with saying what flies and what doesn’t — the Republican head of the FEC — said he’s not allowed to do that. He can’t opt out unilaterally unless the FEC says he can.

The most generous interpretation of what happened is that McCain’s lawyer came up with an ingenious legal two step that allowed him to double dip in the campaign finance system, eat his cake and spend it too. But even if you buy that line, successful gaming of the system doesn’t really count as strict adherence. And the point is irrelevant since the head of the FEC — a Republican — says McCain cannot do this on his own.

Why I detest cable news and Rush Limbaugh clones:

The McCain campaign today let loose former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani as its attack dog on the issue of terrorism and Obama’s alleged softness on it. Not only with Jimmy Carter’s name be bandied about, but expect the dead of 9/11 to be used as a hammer against Obama at every turn.

But aside from the accident of Giuliani being the mayor of the city hardest hit by 9/11, what foreign policy/counterterrorism credentials does Giuliani boast?

Senator Joe Biden says it beautifully:

“It’s no surprise that it takes a man with zero national security and foreign policy experience to defend the policies of John McCain and President Bush. The facts are that the policies President Bush has pursued and Senator McCain would continue have not made us safer. We’re bogged down in Iraq with no end in sight and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan — the people who actually attacked us on 9/11 — have regrouped and are plotting new attacks. In fact, terrorist attacks around the world have increased since 9-11.

“When it comes to Guantanamo detainees, Senator McCain has been all over the map. A year ago, he recognized that Guantanamo was a stain on this country and joined me in advocating that it be closed down and recommending that the detainees be sent to Fort Leavenworth — where there has never been a question that they would have Habeas Corpus rights. Now, Sen. McCain insists that Americans must choose between our values and our security. That’s exactly wrong. Our values reinforce our security. Our failure to live up to them has been Al Qaeda’s biggest recruiting tool.”

Barack Obama has hailed the recent Supreme Court decision, which held that detainees in Guantanamo Bay’s detention camp are entitled to habeas corpus. The McCain campaign said,

Senator Obama is a perfect manifestation of a September 10th mind-set . . . He does not understand the nature of the enemies we face,” McCain’s national security director Randy Scheunemann told reporters on a conference call.

Former CIA director James Woolsey, who is advising the McCain campaign, concurred, saying Obama has “an extremely dangerous and extremely naive approach toward terrorism . . . and toward dealing with prisoners captured overseas who have been engaged in terrorist attacks against the United States.”

Remember the blind Sheikh, Omar-Abdel Rahman? Connected to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, we arrested him and his co-conspirators and convicted them under the rule of law. He rots in jail for life. Why can’t we do the same to Qaeda suspects? How do we reconcile our rule of law, our constitution, our moral and legal obligation not to torture, with what we’ve done since 9/11? How does 9/11 justify violation of principles that date to 1215?

Obama said the government can crack down on terrorists “within the constraints of our Constitution.” He mentioned the indefinite detention of Guantanamo Bay detainees, contrasting their treatment with the prosecution of the 1993 World Trade Center bombings.

“And, you know, let’s take the example of Guantanamo,” Obama said. “What we know is that, in previous terrorist attacks — for example, the first attack against the World Trade Center — we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in U. S. prisons, incapacitated.

“And the fact that the administration has not tried to do that has created a situation where not only have we never actually put many of these folks on trial, but we have destroyed our credibility when it comes to rule of law all around the world and given a huge boost to terrorist recruitment in countries that say, ‘Look, this is how the United States treats Muslims.’

Obama is merely arguing that the United States needs to follow its own laws and treaty obligations when it comes to people imprisoned by the United States on American soil, (which the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base most certainly is). If we don’t do that, then what, precisely, are we fundamentally fighting for?

The McCain camp can accuse Obama of having a 9/10 mentality all it wants. They?

They have a pre-1215 mentality. A September 16, 1787 mentality. A July 3, 1776 mentality.

Chris Lee has re-done his campaign website, and there remains no page for “views” or “platform”, so all the Republican snots who keep criticizing the democrats’ supposed lack of a platform might want to address that issue with their candidate.

If you go to the main page of Lee’s website, you’ll find that he will bring “real leadership, leading to real change”. The Republican candidate for NY-26 is the change agent? That’s novel. You’ll also find other platform planks, such as:

“Values, reform, and change that bring solutions”, juxtaposed with an image of an older woman with her daughter. This image.

“Putting the people of Western New York First”, juxtaposed with an image of a woman with construction workers. This image.

“Real solutions for our families and businesses”, juxtaposed with an image of a young family at play. This image.

“Making our future brighter for our children and grandchildren”, juxtaposed with an image of grandpa and granddaughter. This image.

Actually, although the “views” tab has been taken down, the page is still there. Going to it reveals that the tab’s gone because his “views” are still “coming soon.“. Not his platform. His “views”.

But he does have a “message”, which starts with this paragraph:

My name is Chris Lee, and I am here because Western New Yorkers are demanding real reform, real change, real leadership and real solutions. Right now Washington, D.C. and Albany are shortchanging us, and that needs to stop! For too long, we have heard about creating jobs, lowering taxes and eliminating needless regulation. Unfortunately, the results have not matched the rhetoric.

The incumbent has been there since 1999, and has endorsed Lee. If Washington has been shortchanging us, it’s no thanks to incumbent Republican congressman Thomas M. Reynolds - a man who was once very clout-laden in a body that until recently held a Republican majority during the pendency of a Republican presidential administration. I’d suggest that real change for the 26th would be to let a member of the other party have a go.