Yesterday, standing in front of a cheese display in a supermarket in Bethlehem, Pa., John McCain had a lot to say about the surge. As the Wall Street Journal reports it:
McCain began his answer with his definition of "surge" and then shared his own experience while visiting Iraq. "A surge is really a counter-insurgency strategy. And it’s made up of a number of components," McCain said. He continued by explaining that Colonel Sean McFarland, who McCain visited in 2006 and was in charge of operations at Anbar province, had begun a counter-insurgency on his own.
A lot of people have gove into the timeline, and shown McCain to be... well, not consistent with the history as it's recorded. But everyone seems to have given him, and the Conservative Media, a free pass on something more insidious. Trying to actually define what "the surge" means. As a term in the English language. For as George Orwell suggested in Nineteen-Eighty-Four; if something can't be said, then it can't be thought.
Who invented the term, what it meant, and how (and why) the Conservatives are trying to change the meaning of the phrase, below the fold...
Responding to criticism for their unprofessional and unethical editing of a Katie Couric interview with John McCain, CBS News Senior Vice President Paul Friedman said:
The report was edited under extreme time constraints and one piece of tape was put in the wrong order. Fortunately, this did not in any way distort what Senator McCain was saying.
Clearly, Mr. Friedman is either stupid or a liar. Roll the tape:
Perhaps Mr. Friedman can explain how replacing McCain's incorrect claim about when the "Anbar Awakening" began and his mocking of Obama for not knowing this "matter of history," with a contemptible attack on Obama's patriotism didn't distort what McCain said.
An old man goes to the park to hear the speech, armed with a bushel of rotten tomatoes. When the speech begins, the old man lets fly -- over the head of the orator. His next few missles sail to the right of their mark. Soon, though, the man's age takes its toll, and his lobs fall progressively short. Seeing this, a friend leans over and suggests that it's time to stop. "Stop?" cries the old man. "I've still got tomatoes, and I only have to hit him once."
Over the past couple of weeks there have been a few diaries pointing out something obvious: we need to take the fight to John McCain. In one, Clammyc urged us to stop defending Obama and to go on the offensive.
In another, I listed ten free ways that people could get involved in pushing the Democrats' message.
Barack Obama has arrived in Berlin and is greated with the most astonishing amount of excitement since the fall of the Berlin wall. My guess is that the demonstration today will be in the range of the 200.000 people who came together on September 14, 2001 to show their solidarity after the attacks of 9/11.
I myself will jump on the train in a few hours to go to Berlin. I am really excited about watching the speech and as a German, I am interested to hear what he has to say and I am going to write an update later.
In any case, German media is going nuts: all news channels are having a constant coverage.
For some impressions of Barack Obama in Berlin, check the FAZPlease note the modern art in the chancellery. I think it is nice
And the frontpages of German Newspapers: here My favorite one is the taz (image nr.3).
John McCain was right about the surge after all. He can't help it if you don't notice his emphasis on the SURGE and Counter-InSURGEncy, can he? Follow me after the jump so I can lay it out for you....
In speaking to David Kirkpatrick for a piece in the New York Times’ ongoing (and going, and going. . .) series “The Long Run,” Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) contributes to the ever-growing list of leading Republicans’ attempts to dismiss the illegal abuse of detainees at Guatanamo Bay as little more than a mild discomfort or a puckish hazing ritual.
[McCain] likes trading jokes about colleagues with a small group of friends that includes Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. . . . Entertaining guests at his property in Sedona, Ariz., [McCain] invariably drags them for long walks to indulge his passion for bird watching. “If you took all the people at Gitmo, put them in the cabin for the weekend and made them listen to John talk about the birds, they would all spill their guts.” Mr. Graham said.
I will agree with Lindsey Graham on one point: listening to John McCain speak is unfailingly tedious—however. . .
Across Europe and the Middle East, and even within Israel itself, the view that Israel is truly an apartheid state is widespread and credible. South African archbishop Desmond Tutu, who should know what he's talking about on that score, has said that the situation of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories is in some way worse than that of blacks in South Africa under the old regime.
With the renewal last month of an odious Israeli law restricting marriage and family reunions between residents of Israel proper and the West Bank and Gaza no less a prominent member of the Israeli elite than Amos Schocken, the publisher of Ha'aretz, Israel's daily paper of record ran an editorial declaring that his country was now officially an apartheid regime. Still, the visit of Barack Obama earlier this week occasioned no question from adoring US mainstream reporters on how the candidate, the son of a mixed marriage himself, can offer his uncritical support to the "Jewish identity" of a nation that bans mixed marriages.
I appreciate your attempt to help Obama on the campaign trail. But I don't think you're going to do good for the campaign. You're actually going to do worse.
Regardless of how you view media coverage of the presidential election, there is one thing we can all agree on: Barack Obama receives far, far more media coverage than John McCain.
The McCain campaign portrays this as a fawning press corps engaged in media bias. However, increased media coverage also equals increased media scrutiny.
I am hoping to get some input from people that understand the cultural issues better than I.
When I first saw the photo of Obama laying the wreath at the Holocaust memorial and saw him wearing a skullcap (Yarmulke, etc.). I was not sure of how that would be interpreted by practising Jew's and muslims. And what it really meant to people that understand the true meaning of this symbolic garb. Nevermind what it might be portrayed as by Fox etc. in the U.S. So I ask for some enlightenment from people more knowledgeable than I on this particular subject.
Just how low can John McCain go? Apparently he wants to skid the entire United States with his shitty campaign tactics.
Yesterday, we saw the despicable comments the McCain campaign made during Senator Obama's visit to the Yad Vashem Memorial. Earlier in the week, he even suggested that Senator Obama was a socialist. So what's next? Per Ben Smith at Politico , McCain has web ads up that try to link Senator Obama to Fidel Castro. This comes after his infamous ad that features Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran right next to Senator Obama.
For those of you who never got the chance to be a teacher and instead took the route of the more boring yet higher paying job, or for those of you who always wanted to tell a teacher what and/or how to teach, here's your chance.
This is just a simple observation, but I've seen two diaries posted in the past few days that attack John Edwards for infidelity, based on some right-wing smear. The first diary I saw stated that Edwards was wearing a "blue dress" as he tried to enter the hotel secretly. The second diary, entitled "I am STUNNED" referred to John Edwards as "Jon Edward" in one sentence. Both were based on a recent article in "The National Enquirer," which as everyone knows is factually based and a trusted source of political information. Both reported having previously been fans of John Edwards, but because of the article they had lost faith in Edwards, and simply wanted to point out to us all what a douchebag Edwards truly is.
I have been rough on the Netroots. I just think you have to win this election before you worry about impeaching Bush. You know and I know it will never happen.
I want them all in jail. But I am also worried about my Country. There are some major issues that we have to deal with. And if you care about this Country, and your children then it is time to quit obssessing with putting Bush in jail.
