Not even Nixon or George W. Bush ever went this far. Jesus.

It’s simple. McCain is a goddamn fucking coward. He says stuff when he can get away with it or you can’t respond. Otherwise, he clams up.

For five years, he wasn’t a gutless coward. He’s 72. That’s not a good percentage.

Holy Jesus, I wish there were some way I could unwatch that mob video.

Not to defend this idiot, but I am sure you could go to a progressive rally and hear someone say “BusHitler.”

anonNY—

I bet you would never hear that at an official Gore or Kerry rally. An ANSWER rally? Sure. But not one set up by the party’s nominee!

Also, Bob Dole and Bush Sr. were much more honorable than this when they were losing in October.

At an Obama rally, anoNY?  Neither the Obama campaign nor the Kerry campaign has ever insinuated that Bush is a terrorist or a nazi.  And their supporters certainly wouldn’t make claims like that based on Bush’s (or McCain’s) last name.

HOLY CRAP! Those fuck-wits in Ohio are unbelievable! They have clearly and unrepentantly mastered the art of cognitive dissonance. “No facts for me! They just confuse me! Give me a sound-bite I can memorize! I promise I won’t scrutinize it, I’ll just repeate it at the top of my lungs!”

They are getting somewhat cautious, though. “Don’t answer the question unless you get it in writing.”

What are they afraid of? If they are worried about being cast in an unflattering light, they shouldn’t say stupid things!

Yeesh…

It’s quite obvious that at this point, McShame is desperate. They’re grabbing at straws. What’s worse is that McShame did not have the nerve to confront Obama about Ayers during the debate.

He is going to drive away even about half his base with this stuff. Even though I deplore everything conservatives stand for, I think even at least 90% of their base doesn’t believe in carrying out violence against an American politician.

That one lady was so disgusted by ACORN’s work helping low-income people.  “When did you first hear about them?”  “...today.”

Question: Why is he whipping up the base? They are all gonna vote for him, anyway. What do his handlers have in mind to do with this angry mob of cretins?

Not to defend this idiot, but I am sure you could go to a progressive rally and hear someone say “BusHitler.”

“The Dems do it too!  Not that they actually *have*, but I can imagine them doing it, which is just as bad!”

Question: Why is he whipping up the base? They are all gonna vote for him, anyway.

Because if he doesn’t, they might get distracted by a shiny thing and forget to vote.

They might also vote for Bob Barr or stay home or sneak one in for Obama.

There will be a lot of the latter. White guys that won’t say they’re voting for the black guy. It does exist.

Question: Why is he whipping up the base? They are all gonna vote for him, anyway.

I suspect that their internal polling is showing that they may not all vote for him.  They may not vote for Obama, but they may be indifferent enough to stay home rather than turning out for McCain.

You shouldn’t have to be shoring up your base three weeks before the election.  McCain should have started courting independents and conservative Democrats weeks ago.  The fact that they’re so afraid the base might let them down that they have to continue to throw them this kind of red meat the whole way through is a bad, bad sign for McCain.

McCain is continuing Nixon’s gamble that if he can split up the pie, he’ll get the larger half.  After the failures of the past 8 years, that’s a pretty long shot.

He is going to drive away even about half his base with this stuff. Even though I deplore everything conservatives stand for, I think even at least 90% of their base doesn’t believe in carrying out violence against an American politician.

I’m getting to the point where I suspect that the GOP want everyone to FEAR the 10% of the base that does.

“Look at the crazies, and watch us stir them up. THINK about what they’ll do if we don’t get our way.”

They need to realize that by doing that, they may end up bringing out the crazies on the left (and from other places) at the same time.

Why is he whipping up the base? They are all gonna vote for him, anyway.

Because for the first time in a long time, the Republican candidate can’t entirely count on the base.  At this point things are looking bad for McCain even in states usually considered staunchly Republican, like Indiana and Nebraska.  He won over the religious nuts and conspiracy theorist/militia fascists with his choice of Palin, but then it turned out she was so unqualified and embarrassing that the smarter and not quite so nutty ones started to think twice.  They also lost the support of a lot of their most fervent media cheerleaders. 

Palin is the RNC’s Ahmedinejad.  Very little actual power, but great potential for whipping up the “bitters” (as Wonkette has taken to calling them) into a racist frenzy and thus getting out the vote in states that suddenly look like battlegrounds (Indiana and Nebraska, I’m lookin’ at you…).  Which insures that he’ll at least get more electoral votes than Mondale did…  he hopes…

Or, you know, what Mnemosyne said.  But I did want to throw my Palin = Ahmedinejad idea in there…

Ben - but there are probably a good number who are “traditionally” Democrats who are polling for Obama right now because they don’t want to say that they won’t vote for a black guy, but who will vote McCain in the secrecy of the voting booth. It evens out.

I agree it evens out. Bradley and Reverse Bradley=canceling out, which means the polls are about correct.

BTW, I’m nit-picking, but its Strongsville, not Strongville.

Look at the woman who first appears at 1:17 into the clip and then look at woman who identifies herself as “Christy Atkins” in the “PUMA” demonstration outside the Democratic Convention in this clip.  It sure looks and sounds like the same person to me (and if she was a Hillary supporter, than I’m a dead-ringer for Clive Owen).

It is interesting how the GOP has, unlike most years, refused to run to the center after the convention. If anything, they’ve run harder to the right since then. And it does make a lot of sense that it’s less about McCain thinking that the whole country is really that full of right-wing crazies and more about realizing that even the base could desert him…

To paraphrase Mordechai Richler:
When you see thousands of white people screaming “Country First!” it doesn’t take much to figure out that they’re not talking about people named Jamal or Diaz.

What I don’t understand about the Bradley effect is this:  If someone truly doesn’t intend to vote for Obama, why should they feel under any pressure not to say so to a pollster?  If they feel self-conscious about saying “because he’s black,” there are plenty of other reasons they could cite—if the pollster even asks for a reason.  Even a low-information voter should be able to pull up something like “inexperience” or “don’t know enough about him.”  I’m inclined to think this Bradley-effect thing is overblown.

Perhaps McCain is no longer incontrol of his campaign at all, as opposed to the nominal control he had a few months ago and the mostly in control state back when no one though he had a chance in hell of being the GOP candidate.

Forked—

Not only that. Polling is done by MACHINES now. Why would they feel weird about telling a machine (not even telling, pressing a button) that they won’t vote for the black guy?

Right, Helen, because we all know that John McCain is an honorable man who would never stoop to this sort of thing if he were really in control of his campaign.  His advisers made him do it.  Sure they did.  At least we’ve gotten to the point where the trolls are forced to concede that McCain is either a dishonorable jackass, or a weak puppet.  Neither one is particularly flattering.

For five years, he wasn’t a gutless coward. He’s 72. That’s not a good percentage.
Rick Massimo on 10/09 at 10:34 AM

Actually Rick, if you read the “maverick” story in Rolling Stone about McShameful it seems there’s even some question about those five years.

That is a really scary video.

HOW DARE YOU!

HOW DARE YOU ridicule the proud ignorant Americans trying to save our country with their shrill, ranting hysteria!

I have no doubt that Pam belongs to the Obama sleeper cell planning to launch an attack on the lying-ass crisis pregnancy centers of America as soon as Hussein is elected!:

Pregnancy Centers Could Face National Attack if Barack Obama Wins

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 9, 2008

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com)—Pregnancy centers across the country that provide women with abortion alternatives could be shut down or face severe regulations if Barack Obama wins next month. That’s because a bill targeting pregnancy centers could easily be approved in a pro-abortion Congress and land on Obama’s desk.

Obama has already promised pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL that he will be their lap dog in the White House and these are the groups leading the effort to pass the bill.

Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey reintroduced the bill in April in the Senate and issued a statement alleging that pregnancy centers mislead women by giving them information on abortion’s risks and alternatives.

The so-called “Stop Deceptive Advertising for Women’s Services Act” would place burdensome regulations on pregnancy centers.

It would also force the Federal Trade Commission to create and enforce rules to prohibit deceptive practices that pregnancy centers say they never use to reach women—such as advertising under the “abortion services” section of the phone book.

Melinda Delahoyde, the president of Care Net, a network of about 1,000 pregnancy centers from across the country, talked about the attacks in a recent interview with CBN News.

“This is not unexpected, when you’re coming against abortion in America, and the hurt and the pain and the lives lost, the lives destroyed through that - there always going to be oppositions,” Delahoyde said.

One leading pro-abortion group, the Feminists Majority Network, has reportedly hired a full-time staff member whose sole job is to launch attacks on pregnancy centers and dig up dirt on them for use in legislation.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney, a New York congresswoman, introduced the House version of the attack bill last summer.

In previous comments about her bill she claimed some pregnancy centers “take a more underhanded approach to lure in women seeking abortions by using tactics that should be illegal.”

Kristin Hansen, a Care Net representative, previously spoke with LifeNews.com about older versions of this bill, which have never moved past their introduction.

“What’s clear in these attacks is that the multi-million dollar abortion industry is growing increasingly frustrated with the success of pregnancy centers, which, unlike abortion providers, offer a wide range of free services to men and women facing unplanned pregnancy and sexual health-related concerns,” Hansen said.

While the bill has not ever been voted on in either the House or Senate, abortion advocates, who are expected to see their numbers increase after the elections, could find themselves emboldened by an Obama presidency and push for the bill harder than they have before.

Related web sites:
National Institute of Family and Life Advocates - http://www.nifla.org
Care Net - http://www.care-net.org
Heartbeat International - http://www.optionline.org

Question: Why is he whipping up the base? They are all gonna vote for him, anyway. What do his handlers have in mind to do with this angry mob of cretins?

I don’t think its about getting them to the polls.  Its not as if the base needs a push with a black Democratic candidate and Governor Teen South Carolina on the ticket. 

No, what you’re seeing now is the campaign realizing its toast and going straight to poisoning the well.  Its 1992 all over again.  Bill Ayres is the new Gennifer Flowers.

This just goes to prove that enduring unspeakable pain and horror doesn’t ipso facto make you a good person.  Bad things can happen to bad people and even unethical weasels can be POWs.

No, what you’re seeing now is the campaign realizing its toast and going straight to poisoning the well.  Its 1992 all over again.

Ding ding ding.

The Right is pretty sure that it will lose this election.  It still might be stolen by the GOP or lost by the Dems, but the odds are solidly on a Democrat President.  They need everything they can to justify to themselves and the country the frightening rampage of obstructionism and political sabotage that they are planning for 2009 and after.  Please remember how badly Clinton was treated because the GOP and its supporters could look in the mirror and tell themselves that It Was All Okay Because Clinton Wasn’t Legitimate, or Wasn’t Moral.  Doug H is spot on: this is about the base, yes, but also about de-legitimizing Obama in advance as a rationale for the Anything Goes shit that will follow.  They don’t think that any election that they lose produces a legitimate result, ipso facto an Obama presidency will be illegitimate.

If you think these nutters are bad, wait to you see what the ten thousand GOP time bombs in the civil service—partisan hacks occupying what used to be career slots—will do.  Picture “Out Ta Getcha!”  Linda Tripps in countless key positions.

Forked - I was thinking also of phone polls, where someone might be expected by their family/etc. to vote a certain way.

Beast - thanks. LifeNews is always good for a laugh. (I actually cited one of their articles in a civics paper a few weeks ago. As an opinion piece.)

You know, I’m starting to think that the RNC is letting McCain throw this away.  It’s easy to rig a close election, it’s a lot harder to rig one when you have to explain a swing in the polls by 10 percent or more.  Add on top of that, they never liked McCain much anyway, and I don’t think they want to waste a chance as getting caught rigging on McCain, they’re probably going to wait until 2012 and make sure they have a contender they can get behind.

If McCain got elected, there would be no way he could run in four years.  However fair/unfair it is to to him, his age, at 76, would be a severe liability.  This would make Palin the nominal choice to run.  Clinton would more than likely get the Nomination (assuming she still wants it at this point, and no other power players have emerged) for the Dems and crush Palin with out breaking a sweat.

I just think the RNC would rather lose now, and rebuild for 2012, than win now (And have to deal with a Democrat Legislature) and have the democrats crush them in 2012 and hold the presidency for 8 years then.

I think this election is going to be too hard to fix, with the margin increasing.

at least that’s what I keep telling myself, otherwise I’m going to be way too paranoid for the next month wondering how the Republicans are going to steal the election.

I just think the RNC would rather lose now, and rebuild for 2012, than win now (And have to deal with a Democrat Legislature) and have the democrats crush them in 2012 and hold the presidency for 8 years then.

Voice in the Crowd on 10/09 at 03:28 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have thar same awful feeling.

Whomever wins the next election is going to inherit a shitstorm that will position the opposing party for a win in 2012.

“This is not unexpected, when you’re coming against abortion in America, and the hurt and the pain and the lives lost, the lives destroyed through that - there always going to be oppositions,” Delahoyde said.

(boldface mine) It’s true, we do tend to oppose hurt, pain, and lives lost. That’s why we’re shutting your shithead fauxclinics down.

Dumbass. Can’t even lie correctly.

If the ignorance exhibited in that Palin rally could be turned into a power source, our reliance on fossil fuels would be history overnight.

I just saw, this week, a crisis pregnancy centre advertised in the abortion services section. So, right, they don’t ever, ever do that—except that every single ad I’ve seen tries to make it sound like they’re fine with you getting an abortion, they just want you to “look at all your options.”

I was in a rather blue city last week, and was amazed and pleased to see ads on the bus for the local women’s health center, that came right out and said that they had long-term contraception, that you shouldn’t have to be afraid of getting pregnant, and that they could help set you up with the contraception that was right for you, and do it for a reasonable price. The attitude was that contraception was obviously a good thing, and they’d help you get the best value looking for it. It was so refreshing.

Er, back to the topic now.

“It would also force the Federal Trade Commission to create and enforce rules to prohibit deceptive practices that pregnancy centers say they never use to reach women—such as advertising under the “abortion services” section of the phone book.”

Well then, what’s the problem?  If, for example, you have a rule prohibiting (for example) CPCs from advertising under “abortion services”, but CPCs would never do such things . . . [/faux naivete]

(Incidentally, the text of the House bill is <a href = “http://maloney.house.gov/documents/reproductivechoice/20070531CPCBill.pdf”>here</a> [pdf]. 

Beast, that was sarcasm, right?  It’s getting harder to tell, what with the election ads referring to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (funded by late Nixon ambassador and philanthropist Walter Annenberg) as “a radical “education” foundation”

“Reports say they, “distributed more than $100 million to ideological allies with no discernible improvement in education.” ”

“Reports say”?  Not “Some say”?  I’m disappointed.  I searched for the quoted text, which seems to come from a <a href = “http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZDI4YzUyYmI1ZjA1OWUzMDA5ZDIzNTI4NTk5ZmYwYWY=&w=MQ==”>National Review editorial</a> and has no additional details or evidence as to the identity of these “ideological allies” (although presumably they were donating money to groups interested in working to improve public education, as opposed to (for example) ideological enemies who wanted to dismantle it, which would seem to be rather outside of the grant’s purpose.  I suppose one could get away with arguing that they may have omitted certain “reform” perspectives, such as union-breaking and for-profiteering, which may or may not be considered as covered in the previous sentence.  <a gref = “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge”>According</a> to wikipedia,

“In 1996-7, half of the external partners were universities or professional education organizations (e.g., Chicago State University, Columbia College Chicago, DePaul University, the Erikson Institute, Governors State University, National-Louis University, Northeastern Illinois University, Roosevelt University, the University of Chicago).[58] The other external partners represented a diverse mix of neighborhood organizations (e.g., the Logan Square Neighborhood Association), youth organizations (e.g., Youth Guidance—implementing the Comer Process), foundations (e.g., the Great Books Foundation), education reform or advocacy groups (e.g., Designs for Change), museums (e.g., the Chicago Academy of Sciences, the Chicago Children’s Museum, the Kohl Children’s Museum), parks (e.g., the Garfield Park Conservatory and arts organizations (e.g., the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, the Suzuki-Orff School of Music).[58] Of external partners in the 45 networks funded in 1999: 35% were Chicago-area colleges and universities, 28% were education reform and education services organizations, 23% were arts and cultural institutions, and 14% were neighborhood and community-based organizations.

Granted, it often seems as if much of the GOP does view colleges and universities, ed reform/services organizations, arts&cultural;institutions, and neighborhood/community based organizations as socialismaoislamisterroristicommunist evil, and hence their ideological enemies, but . . .

Although wikipedia does note that Consortium on Chicago School Research found that the Chicago Annenberg Challenge seemed to have “had little impact on school improvement and student outcomes” - the <a href = “http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/downloads/p62II.pdf”>report</a> [pdf] suggests a number of reasons, none of which involve secret muslim pro-choice terrorism or whatever - indeed, it’s suggesred that one possible contributing culprit was the (national Annenberg Challenge) approach of letting a thousand flowers bloom, its “commitment to the principles of local autonomy and self-determination . . . local initiative<i>, which almost sounds . . . Republican (rhetorically, of course). Chicago was only one of 18 Annenberg Challenge sites, with Philadelphia and LA receiving even more, and New York a fair bit less - <a href = “http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED442803&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=eric_accno&accno=ED442803”>this study</a> says that those other two cities had a basically similar lack of impact, although looking at individual cases it looks like there may have been different problems in each?  School reform is hard.

Crap, I forgot that there’s some crazy link nonfunctioning going on - or is it just me?  (Ok, the one that’s “a gref” is just me, granted . . . .)

Granted, it often seems as if much of the GOP does view colleges and universities, ed reform/services organizations, arts&cultural;institutions, and neighborhood/community based organizations as socialismaoislamisterroristicommunist evil, and hence their ideological enemies, but . . .

The second debate certainly made it clear that McCain despises the Adler Planetarium. To be fully functioning, the Skyshow projector needs parts that haven’t been made in years, so as part of a project to raise $10 million for a new one, they asked Obama to try to get $3 million in tax dollars to cover part of the cost.

The planetarium has introduced millions of schoolchildren to the wonders of our universe, which apparently is anathema to Grampy McCranky.

The planetarium has introduced millions of schoolchildren to the wonders of our universe, which apparently is anathema to Grampy McCranky.

Ever noticed that all of his examples of bad earmarks are science-related?  Between the Zeiss projector for the Adler and studying bear DNA, I’m starting to get the feeling he doesn’t like all of this newfangled “science” and “technology.”