Heh heh. Those Republicons, always living in a different reality from the rest of us:
Karl Rove recently made a related observation, saying McCain “is one of the most private individuals to run for president in history,” and it’s “troubling” the extent to which McCain is reluctant to talk about his
I haven’t the foggiest idea which presidential race these guys are watching. McCain “rarely discusses” his military background? Since when?
As Brendan Nyhan put it, “John McCain is a genuine war hero, but how many times can he and his political campaigns exploit that experience before the press stops claiming that he doesn’t exploit it?”
I got sick of McCain's POW Tourette's months ago. Nearly every ad I've seen highlights his military service (omitting the crashing jets part). Political opponents bring up a policy point, such as healthcare or national security, and he trots out cutesy little lines that scream, "Hey! Look at me! I was a POW!" The true meaning of Christmas? He learned it in Vietnam. Leadership? Vietnam. If someone brought up a hangnail, I wouldn't be suprised to hear him spout out something about hanging by his nails in the Hanoi Hilton.
And yet, our nation's press and the Republicons like to pretend he's shy about it. Doesn't exploit his service at all.
Riiight. Go on, pull the other one - it's got air raid sirens on.
They're not only reality-challenged, they're experts at moving goal posts. Right now, they're desperate to paint Obama as a flaming liberal who never reaches across the aisle. This conflicts with reality, which shows that Obama frequently has reached across the aisle on issues important to both parties. Their solution? Claim that those issues are "liberal" issues:
Now, both sides sometimes want to call an issue their own, but face resistance. It’s rare when a leading Republican, for example, simply gives up two of the biggest issues on the international landscape, and
labels them, prima facie, “liberal” issues.
But that’s precisely what Mitt Romney did on national television yesterday, announcing that counter-proliferation and fuel efficiency are necessarily “liberal” issues.
It's like magic! Anything Obama touches becomes a liberal issue! Even trying to keep the planet from being blown up is a dirty liberal issue!
Now here's our fun thought for the day: what's going to happen if liberals embrace a pro-life stance? Heh. This could get really entertaining.
Oh, and speaking of liberal issues, apparently AIDS legislation is becoming one of them, which means Bush is flirting with liberal ideas there:
WASHINGTON — President Bush's efforts to broaden a widely respected, bipartisan program to fight the spread of AIDS in Africa have
faced roadblocks by seven Republican senators.
Bush had hoped that Congress would pass legislation to spend $50 billion to fight AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis primarily in Africa in time for the Group of Eight summit in Japan next month. However, the seven
socially conservative senators, led by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., refuse to support the legislation unless spending focuses more heavily on treatment than on prevention.
Let's just savor the fuckery of that last bit, shall we? "...refuse to support the legislation unless spending focuses more heavily on treatment than prevention."
Translation: they'd rather you get AIDS.
Wanna know why?
"The bills' support would allow morally questionable activities, including advocating with host governments to change gender norms and policies and promoting activities that could include needle distribution to drug users," the senators wrote.
That's right. If you have sex they don't approve of, or if you use drugs, you deserve to die horribly. This is considered the right thing to do in neocon circles. "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" goes right out the window when it comes to their desire to impose their medieval morality on the rest of the world.
In their honor, let's have some Jethro Tull, shall we? It's not a fully appropriate song, but the title's just right:
"Living in the Past."