Oops. That would make McCain a McHypocrite for blasting Obama for proposing the EXACT same thing McCain proposed only two years ago. But in all fairness to McCain, nearing the age of 72, maybe he simply can't remember his positions anymore. More in Jamie Ruben's op ed in Friday's Washington Post.
In all fairness, McCain clearly no longer remembers what he says day to day. He can't remember sworn depositions, meeting key supporters who then launch racist attacks, etc. So why expect him to remember his positions on the war, on immigration, on the religious right, or any other issue that might affect his election chances.
It was just last week that McCain lied to the media about never having met a lobbyist involved in last week's scandal (he had met with the lobbyist, and admitted it under oath in 2002). Now he's lying about this controversy as well. Or he's telling the truth, he actually thinks he didn't meet all these different people because the 71 year old McCain no longer has all his faculties.
Bush has been big on talk when it comes to democracy, but despite what he says in America, he's been terrified to speak as boldly with American "allies" in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are both holding bloggers in prison so we ought to be hearing something from the man who loves talking about democracy, shouldn't we? Even in Bahrain, the US could not even accept a letter from a human rights activist without extended debate. Even then, Bush went on to praise the local government despite the lack of democratic reforms.
Bush can talk all he wants about democracy but it's obvious to the world that he's a hypocrite who has little interest in democracy. It's the same old Bush that we already know, which is all talk and no action. What leverage does he even have with discussing democracy? He's running a trashed economy that is burdened with debt and addicted to oil. Even Wall Street is in the Middle East begging for cash. It's not as though he can use the US as a shining example of freedom and democracy, now that he's crossed all of the lines and spies on American citizens. Our own human rights record - including in neighboring Iraq - is not much of an example either. Are we ever going to see him walk the walk?
His liberal record went right up until his final days in office as governor. Despite what he has said since leaving office, he was always there, ready to help out to keep abortions safe and legal. His new claim is that he would have blocked it if he had the chance. Of course, Mitt. Of course you would have done that. If only the track record didn't get in the way of facts. Why do facts always have to get in the way of a good story?
More hypocrisy from Mitt, after the jump.
Former governor Mitt Romney's economic development agency granted initial approval to a tax-exempt bond last year for a Planned Parenthood clinic in Worcester that will provide abortions, just two months before he left office and began highlighting his antiabortion position as a presidential candidate. more stories like this
Asked about the $5 million financial deal yesterday, the Romney campaign said the former governor was not aware it was under consideration when Planned Parenthood won preliminary approval in November 2006.
Romney repeatedly used the power of his office while governor to advance socially conservative positions, including restricting stem cell research, pushing abstinence-only sex education in schools, and vetoing a bill to increase access to emergency contraception in hospitals.
In the case of the abortion clinic funding deal, the Republican candidate's spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said Romney would have attempted to block it - if he had known about it.
"Mitt Romney is prolife," Fehrnstrom said. "He did not know about this loan. It was made by an agency that does not report to the governor. If it did, he would have told them not to do it."
In additon to providing abortion services, the 10,000-square-foot Planned Parenthood clinic planned for Worcester will offer Plan B emergency contraception, also known as the "morning after pill," which also is opposed by antiabortion advocates.
Jeffrey M. Berry, a political science professor at Tufts University, said he was surprised that Romney and his aides did not catch such a politically sensitive financial deal making its way through his economic development agency. Now, Berry said, the campaign will be put in the position of defending Romney at a time when he is heading into the most critical days of his candidacy.
"It is unusual that his people at the agency did not find a reason not to fund Planned Parenthood," Berry said. "His administration was clearly focused on his run for the presidency and making sure there was no embarrassment like this. It was an administration that was pretty efficient getting everyone operating on the same page and avoiding scandal."
This is classic "Romney the hypocrite" in action. Religion for Mitt only matters when it's someone else's religion. He doesn't think it's important to include a Muslim in his administration because they just don't amount to any significant population in the US. While their population is admittedly small, how can any serious presidential candidate not find such inclusion a positive idea considering where we are today? Is it really that horrible that we - gasp! - include a representative who can broaden our horizons and provide feedback on reaching out to this community both at home and abroad?
I asked Mr. Romney whether he would consider including qualified Americans of the Islamic faith in his cabinet as advisers on national security matters, given his position that "jihadism" is the principal foreign policy threat facing America today. He answered, "…based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Muslims could serve at lower levels of my administration."
Romney, whose Mormon faith has become the subject of heated debate in Republican caucuses, wants America to be blind to his religious beliefs and judge him on merit instead. Yet he seems to accept excluding Muslims because of their religion, claiming they're too much of a minority for a post in high-level policymaking. More ironic, that Islamic heritage is what qualifies them to best engage America's Arab and Muslim communities and to help deter Islamist threats.
Well, as long as they can carry Mitt's bags or perhaps sweep a floor or two. This is all quite interesting coming from a guy who belongs to a faith that barely represents 2% of the population, compared to the 1% in America who are Muslims. Are we really doing that well with our existing Muslim outreach programs that we can afford to exclude Muslims from senior positions in the next administration? Yes, he's the guy who cries "foul" when anyone discusses his Mormon faith (that he can't stop talking about) but he doesn't mind making a bigoted remark about Muslims. During our so-called war on terror, no less. How insulting, careless and downright offensive.
Bush can conveniently blast the Democrats for spending but nobody can deliver destruction to the economy the way Bush can do it. Some of his greatest hits include:
- Largest decline in housing prices since 1991. - Crumbling US dollar, weakest showing against leading five currencies since early 1970s. This includes 37 year low against Canadian dollar. Against the UK pound, it's over $2 to buy only one. - Skyrocketing and "out of control" oil prices, record highs at the pump. - Billions of US taxpayer dollars lost, missing, and who knows what from Iraq. Costs for war to drag out for decades. - Record high budget deficit, compounded by GOP spending boondoggles.
I think some people need to step back and look at the devastation triggered by complete GOP rule in our government and think about where we go from here. For decades Republicans (much like Bush yesterday) talked a big game, telling anyone who would listen that they were the financially responsible party but the results say something else. Their rule is setting new records, none of which are good for the country, yet some of them still have the audacity to blame the Democrats. Sorry folks, but check again.
Australia may be a different country, but the story always remains the same. More from Australia's religious right "Family First Party":
A family values campaigner accused of taking pornographic photographs of himself has been dumped as a candidate for Australia's November election by the Christian-values Family First Party....
"But that's not my penis," Quah told the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper, adding one of the images may have been digitally altered.
"I might have been drunk off my face, or my political enemies might have drugged me," Quah said. "It was a mistake that I would not have committed had I been of right mind. All I know, I have been humiliated."
....Quah said the photos were more than two years old and were taken and shared while he was drunk. He denied the genitalia in one picture was his, but said he did pose for two photos in an "inappropriate position."
Just an aberration in an otherwise family values team, no doubt.
Not like we need more evidence that "support the troops" is just a campaign slogan for Bush and the GOPers, but here's more evidence:
The Bush administration opposes a Democratic effort to restore full educational benefits for returning veterans, according to an official's comments last week.
Senate Democrats, led by Virginia's Jim Webb, want the government to pay every penny of veterans' educational costs, from tuition at a public university to books, housing and a monthly stipend.
Such a benefit was a major feature of the historic 1944 G.I. Bill, which put more than eight million U.S. soldiers through college and is now credited by historians as fueling the expansion of America's middle class in the post-war era.
But in recent years the benefit has dwindled; under the current law, passed in 1985, veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan can expect Uncle Sam to cover only 75 percent of their tuition costs. That's not enough, say Democrats and veterans' advocates.
Hey, if Bush won't give them armor in Iraq and doesn't care for the wounded at Walter Reed, why would we think he'd care about the futures of the men and women who risked their lives for his ill-planned war?
What's remains truly amazing is that anyone in the media still buys anything Bush says about Iraq or the military anymore. It's all spin and campaign stunts. Every time real facts appear, like Bush's opposition to fully funding educational opportunities for soldiers, the Bush spin is exposed and contradicted. Every time.
Senator Vitter's solicitation of at least one prostitute was not merely, as he has stated, 'a serious sin,' it was a violation of criminal law. The Senate Ethics Committee should commence an investigation into Senator Vitter's conduct and hold him accountable.
Last night, John offered bonus points for anyone who could find good "family values" quotes and votes from the DC Madam's client, Senator David Vitter (R-LA).
This morning, CNN covered the blogs coverage of Vitter's hypocrisy and noted that Think Progress found some quotes right on Vitter's Senate website.
Last year, when the Senate was considering the anti-gay marriage amendment, Vitter was typically sanctimonious:
"I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one," said Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican. "I think this debate is very healthy, and it's winning a lot of hearts and minds. I think we're going to show real progress."
In 2002, the GOP shoveled out billions of dollars of handouts in the Farm Bill with the bulk of the money going to large corporate farmers who are certainly much wealthier than the average American. Corporate welfare if a familiar theme for the GOP who never mind slashing money for the poor and asking them to step up and work, but the same brutal capitalism is noticeably missing when it comes to handouts for big corporates.
As taxpayers continue to foot the bill for Iraq, costs that will be weighing on the middle class for years to come, now the special interests from corporate farms want those same people to take on even more costs that will again profit already very rich people. I wonder if this new breed of American business will ever get out and do work on their own or if they intend to live off of taxpayer handouts forever. They're always the first to attack any welfare for individuals but would like taxpayers to think their business is somehow critical and needs to be funded.
Farming is obviously important but if these corporate farmers can't figure out how to survive in business, maybe they're in the wrong business and should change fields. They won't though, because they know there will always be plenty of handouts from those in Congress who are afraid of modernizing the system and introducing the idea of fairness.
Besides being unfair to the bulk of Americans who are forced to subsidize Big Farm, it's also unfair to farmers in other parts of the world who don't enjoy such luxuries and are unable to compete in the US market. It also highlights the hypocrisy of GOP claims of "free market" business because the only time they ever want a "free market" is when they have a tilted balance like this and don't have to worry about competition. Competition is always for someone else.
Decorated Iraq war veteran guilty of shooting a BB gun at age 13 was rejected for a pardon by Romney, though the recently convicted Libby, would be worth considering for a pardon. The primary difference here being that Libby is the right wing favorite at the moment and we all know how much Romney loves to play a crowd if it wins him a few points whereas the war vet is just a regular person who honorably served the country and even received a Bronze Star while in Iraq. Another day, another changing position by Mitt.
There are values and there are values. The only thinking at his think tank is when will the check clear.
Potential GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has promoted public policy positions that closely track the financial interests of companies that underwrite a think tank he founded.
During his days in Congress, Gingrich also played a major role in chopping food inspections down to their current pathetic state, while receiving significant campaign contributions from the big winners of those actions. What a visionary.
In April of 2004, Kaiser Networks Daily AIDS/HIV Report noted that Randall Tobias, serving as the Bush Administration AIDS Czar, was promoting abstinence and denigrating condoms:
Tobias, who was in Berlin for the Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS' 2004 Awards for Business Excellence, said that promoting abstinence and monogamy are "far more effective" than distributing condoms for preventing the spread of HIV, according to Agence France-Presse. "Statistics show that condoms really have not been very effective," Tobias said, adding, "It's been the principal prevention device for the last 20 years, and I think one needs only to look at what's happening with the infection rates in the world to recognize that has not been working." PEPFAR has been criticized by AIDS advocates for placing "false hopes" on abstinence and monogamy prevention programs, according to Agence France-Presse.
That outrageous view held by the Bush administration was widely criticized by thinking people.
Today, ABC News reported that the married Mr. Tobias resigned from his post as Deputy Secretary of State after admitting he was a customer of a DC escort service
Deputy Secretary of State Randall L. Tobias submitted his resignation Friday, one day after confirming to ABC News that he had been a customer of a Washington, D.C. escort service whose owner has been charged by federal prosecutors with running a prostitution operation. Tobias, 65, Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance and administrator of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), had previously served as the Ambassador for the President’s Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief.
In a Ted Haggard-like admission, Tobias said he only got "massages."
Abstinence is for the little people, not the loyal Bushies. They don't have to practice what they preach.
