John McCain appears to be a little bit testy these days. Time Magazine gets to step into the dusty confines of the press area on the Amazing Flying Straight Talk Express, and gets a face full of grizzled obstinance for their trouble.
There’s a theme that recurs in your books and your speeches, both about putting country first but also about honor. I wonder if you could define honor for us?
Read it in my books.
I’ve read your books.
No, I’m not going to define it.
But honor in politics?
I defined it in five books. Read my books.
[Your] campaign today is more disciplined, more traditional, more aggressive. From your point of view, why the change?
I will do as much as we possibly can do to provide as much access to the press as possible.
But beyond the press, sir, just in terms of ...
I think we’re running a fine campaign, and this is where we are.
Do you miss the old way of doing it?
I don’t know what you’re talking about.
It would be irresponsible not to ask...is John McCain Kodos? It not only sounds like he had no desire to do the interview, but that he’s utterly unfamiliar with the concept of conversation between two human beings beyond the snippets he caught watching from his spaceship. He sounds addled and angry, burdened by the simplest of questions. If John “I Drink Patriotism And Piss Honor” McCain can’t define the basic concept of his campaign beyond “go read my books, kid”, he not only has problem but - dare I say? - sounds like a prima donna professional athlete who can’t be bothered to sign an autograph or even say “Go Team” without cash in his hand and an endorsement deal on the table.
The comments on tit-staring make me wish the women could occupy a man’s body for a day. Ignoring tits in your visual field is as easy as it is for a woman to simply ignore a cute baby in the vicinity.
If it’s as hard for a man not to gawk at someone’s tits as it is for me not to squeal and run to a cute baby, then it must be very easy for men to avoid looking at tits indeed. Like, they anti-want to look at tits. I can think of few things that are less biologically programmed and more socially mandated than the squealing at babies thing for women. It’s very pressure-intensive. In fact, if I was to list the three times in life when I wish I could just be a guy for an hour or so to get through the situation with the minimum amount of fuss, it would be:
1) Walking alone at night
2) When creepy older men with boundary issues are around looking for young women to hit on
3) When someone’s passing the new baby around
It’s so unfair, it really is. Men get off with a nod towards the new human being and a compliment. But if you’re a woman, and you fall short of gushing praise and requests to hold the baby, you’re being rude. If you do find the baby in your arms, everyone is evaluating you for your holding skills, whatever those might be.
I’m not saying that babies aren’t cute or that I dislike them. But I don’t want to hold a baby. I just don’t. And I’m not a squealer. The whole situation of squealing and asking to hold the baby makes me feel like a fool, completely out of place. I try to be nice by smiling a lot and offering a lot of compliments, but since I can’t manage the squeal, I’m falling short in this department. I kind of admire other women who’ve learned the squeal. It strikes me as one of the top level feminine skills you have to acquire, and I’m a complete failure.
Going into the last day, I’m inclined to say that the convention has amazing momentum, and I hope that it’s not going to get fucked up. The speakers have all been on message. A clear pro-woman case is being made, which makes me really happy. But what’s really jumping out at me is that the Democrats are showing an uncharacteristic but hopefully soon to be characteristic amount of determination to win this thing. The media manufactured this PUMA story in hopes of making it true, and the party is pushing back with a strong show of unity and purpose. I’m impressed.
What’s especially interesting is how humility is being deployed nicely, which I think is a major strength for a number of reasons. Like Ezra said about Kerry’s speech:
he message of Kerry’s speech could be summed up like this: “From one flip-flopper who would say anything to get elected to another, Mr. McCain.” Kerry was brutal.
Here’s the thing---the media narrative about Democrats is that they’re out-of-touch elitists. And too big for their britches. And they think they’re better than you. And you can’t fight back against those sort of accusations by being defensive. But what you can do, and what I’m seeing, is that you can simply behave in ways that appear humble and let your actions speak for you. I think that’s how Al Gore regained his reputation. For those of us who already liked him, the scenes in An Inconvenient Truth where you see Gore crouched in planes or walking through security like everyone else, where he’s a humble everyday man who has gone on this mission, well, those scenes were a little corny. But for people trained to see him as a yappy elitist who thinks he’s so much better than everyone else, those scenes brought him down to earth.
Based on this Dick Morris column, Barack Obama will win the votes of every woman in America.
I’m consistently amazed at the ways our punditariat has of explaining why every good thing for the Democrats is actually bad. Hillary giving a good speech is bad for Biden and Obama. Biden giving a good speech is even worse for Obama. Obama giving a speech that makes John McCain break down into a quivering mass and announce that his running mate will be his blankie is horrible news for Democrats in general, for we are a people who, particularly heading into the colder months, appreciate and revere our blankies.
When Obama wins, he’s going to have the problem of all those states he didn’t win. He’s going to have to deal with the awful problem of having a Democratic House and Senate, the terrible burden of figuring out how the Presidency works, and the soul-crushing emptiness of being the only man in the world in his position. Dammit, I need a blankie now.
That I’m loving how the convention is making the case that this election is about women and feminist issues---equal pay, violence against women (the VAWA is a big plus for Biden), and the whole buffet of issues that feminists push for, not just the right to abortion. It’s smart. “Women’s” issues are often just a way to describe the economic and social issues that hit right at home, which is where Americans, male and female, are feeling it the worst. And it really shows how little McCain gives a shit about everyday people.
And thanks to Senator Clinton for this move. Very, very classy.
CNN’s been talking since Obama was officially nominated about how Obama is the first black major-party candidate, yadda yadda yadda.
So, the highest ranking African American elected official in the country steps on stage...and CNN cuts away.
Then they come back to cover a seven-minute musical number by Melissa Etheridge replete with shots of teary-eyed delegates.
Wolf Blitzer then tells us that CNN is dedicated to covering more than just the speeches. I assume in the same way that ESPN is dedicated to covering more than just the House of Commons by not fucking doing it at all.
Of course, there is no backdrop that Obama could have for his speech that wouldn’t play into Republican attacks on his “celebrity”—if he had it in the Pepsi Center, it would be compared to glitzy stage shows by (just throwing out a name here) someone like Madonna. If he took it to a small, intimate setting, it would be compared to a wine party among celebrities. If he takes it to Invesco Field and parachutes in from a blimp and starts shooting streamer guns into the audience in a giant orange top hat, it would be compared to the awesomest shit that ever happened.
What is the proper method for such a presumptuous man as this to accept the nomination of his party? It’s obviously not in any way that a Republican would accept it, because the very acts of hubris that make a man like Obama a foppish dandy dippily doodling his way along to the Oval Office are tamed and converted into powerfully heterosexual normality by the sheer pulsating power of Reaganism. Shall Obama accept the nomination on an upscaled corner stoop, James Clyburn and Maxine Waters shuffling by with a curt, respectful head nod? Should the nomination of the first major party black candidate in America’s history happen in a gloriously reimagined welfare line, where a dolled-up John Kerry dressed as Uncle Sam hands him the welfare check of the $400,000 a year Presidential salary?
Please, you heartland patriots, design the Black Liberal’s Acceptance Speech. And don’t skimp on the Black Power salutes, either.
No, before you ask, I don’t think I’m going to change any minds by harping on a vocal minority, but dammit if the PUMAs aren’t garnering themselves Washington Post headlines:
Many Clinton Supporters Say Speech Didn’t Heal Divisions
The first quote is from a Hillary “supporter” who appears to think that she’s an insincere empty suit:
...Jerry Straughan, a professor from California, who listened from his seat in the rafters and shook his head at what he considered the speech’s predictability. “It’s a tactic,” he said. ”Who knows what she really thinks? With all the missteps that have taken place, this is the only thing she could do. So, yes, I’m still bitter.”
Who indeed knows what Hillary really thinks? Certainly one thing we can’t do is believe her sincere, heartfelt speech of last night.
Of course, as these things will do, the headline belies the fact that many, if not most, of the supporters in the article are going to vote for Obama, if not as enthusiastically as they might have liked to. Fine. But headline-skimmers will more likely be left with this impression:
“I hate Obama so much that I’m going to devote as much time to McCain as I did to Hillary,” said Adita Blanco, a Democrat from Edward, Okla., who has never voted for a Republican. “Obama has nothing. He has no experience. The Democratic Party doesn’t care about us. You couldn’t treat [Clinton] any worse.”
And, no, as long as 20 percent of “Clinton supporters” intend to vote for McCain, I don’t feel particularly embarrassed about highlighting this insanity. Sen. Clinton said it herself:
I haven’t spent the past 35 years in the trenches advocating for children, campaigning for universal healthcare, helping parents balance work and family and fighting for women’s rights at home and around the world ... to see another Republican in the White House squander the promise of our country and the hopes of our people…
Were you in this campaign just for me? Or were you in it for that young Marine and others like him? Were you in it for that mom struggling with cancer while raising her kids? Were you in it for that boy and his mom surviving on the minimum wage? Were you in it for all the people in this country who feel invisible?
Voters like Straughn and Blanco answer that question resoundingly.
I’m about to head out the door for my first real day of law school orientation, but I just felt the need to remark that this may be the worst bit of non-Myspace writing the internet has seen in months. Brutally tortured metaphors, horrifically constructed sentences, the prospect of a rain-soaked checkers-playing celebrity-king…
I tried to find an image to fit this post, but “confused pile of shit”, while evocative as a phrase, doesn’t pull up what I need on Google.
ADDENDUM: This is entirely unrelated to the above, but the talking heads have been periodically lamenting that they got played by the McCain camp on their Clinton ads which, uh, aren’t being aired anywhere. It’s rare that they actually acknowledge this, but reporters get played like this constantly. Republicans are masters of running an ad once during the 6 PM news in St. Louis and using that as a pretense to get media to cover it.
I understand that the last thing you want to do as a news channel is be the last to cover the breaking news that Candidate A doesn’t think Candidate B should be elected, but have any of them ever thought of actually doing some reporting and figuring out if/when an ad is being aired before giving it hours of screen time?
Apologies for being MIA here at Pandagon. I’m here in Denver writing, taking photos and video to try to give readers a taste of the convention that you don’t see on the television coverage. I’ll just share a few of the things that are being filed over at The Blend.
I attended the Human Rights Campaign/Victory Fund LGBT Delegate luncheon. There are over 260 out LGBT delegates in Denver, and they (and we) were treated by a surprise appearance by Michelle Obama, who spoke movingly about why an Obama administration will strongly support civil equality.
This very public support and acknowledgment of the LGBT community during the convention is a clear sign that political change is in the wind. One of the other noticeable things about this luncheon is that it’s the only one so far that is overbooked—there are so many elected officials, activists and supporters of the community who turned out for this event.
Ah yes, feminists = baby killers. Tons of anti-abortion protesters outside the University Club protesting the “Women’s Equali-Tea” on Women’s Equality Day at the DNCC. Lots of cops, too, just in case any of us butch feministas decide to pop a protester in the mouth. (Kidding! I kid!) Actually, the protesters were by and large young, hip-looking women; whoever coordinated this particular protest was pretty savvy about appearances.
In other words, anti-choice protesters were protesting a party that was organized to celebrate women’s suffrage. It makes sense. The hard right wingers try to filter every objection they have to women’s rights through the abortion lens, because they know that bald protestations against women’s basic rights tend to go over poorly. (Except for some reason, the Title IX whiners don’t feel any need to hide their agenda.) But with the fancy new “everything’s abortion” argument, I expect we’ll start seeing some creative inroads against arguing against other rights for women.
Initial review: great speech that did largely what it needed to do, and raised my hopes that Clinton does a joint ad with Obama at some point.
Morning after: somehow, all the coverage has turned this into a potential indictment of Joe Biden and Barack Obama’s speeches. And the scattered pro-Hillary and anti-Obama people are still getting inordinate play:
I somehow get the feeling, years down the road, that this convention’s zombie lie will be that the Clintons didn’t endorse Obama and set up the convention to overshadow the actual ticket. I don’t know how they did it, but those Clintons are some Machiavellian sumbitches.
Please, please, put any drinks down on the table, stop munching on breakfast and keep the keyboard safe as you peruse the program of the Republican National Convention.
The press release just hit my inbox and it's a laugh-fest.
For Immediate Release Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Contact: Joanna Burgos (651) 467-2728
UPDATED: "Country First": 2008 Republican National Convention Announces Full Program
Convention Announces Additional Speakers and Program Details
SAINT PAUL, Minn. - The 2008 Republican National Convention today announced the names of additional speakers for the program of events that will run Sept. 1-4. The convention’s overall theme, "Country First," reflects John McCain’s remarkable record of leadership and service to America. Each day of proceedings will center on a touchstone theme that has defined John McCain’s life and will be central to his vision for leading our nation forward as president.
"The 2008 Convention program will bring together Americans who will speak to John McCain's vision for reforming our government, building prosperity and ensuring peace for future generations. We are excited about next week and we are looking forward to showcasing John McCain’s life-long record of putting his country first," said Jill Hazelbaker, McCain 2008 communications director.
Among the new speakers announced today are Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio), U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas), former U.S. Sen. Bill Frist (Tenn.) and Chairman of the Texas Railroad Commission Michael Williams. Their remarks will echo the themes that have been selected for each of the convention’s four days: service, reform, prosperity and peace.
"We are thrilled to announce our full program of speakers and program participants. We look forward to presenting a convention program that will share Senator McCain’s unparalleled record of experience and service with millions of Americans," said Maria Cino, president and CEO of the 2008 Republican National Convention.
The program of events follows. Additions to the program appear with an asterisk (*).
Monday, Sept. 1 Service "Love of country, my friends, is another way of saying love of your fellow countryman." -->
John McCain’s commitment to his fellow Americans, a commitment forged in service to his country, is one of the defining hallmarks of his life. Monday’s events will highlight John McCain’s record of service and sacrifice and reflect his commitment to serving a cause greater than one’s own self-interest.
The fun continues below the fold as you see who's going to show up to pass by the Larry Craig Memorial Toilet Stall.
Lilly Ledbetter just gave a good speech at the Democratic Convention talking about equal pay and the distinction between Obama (good) and McCain (evil) on the issue.
However, you wouldn’t know it by watching CNN, because they had to talk to Bob Casey about attacking McCain and what Hillary Clinton was going to do, and then cover the wacky dance party on the floor.
It’s amazing how they’ve spent 12 hours today discussing how the Democrats approach older white female voters and then blatantly ignore the older white female voter discussing a core feminist issue. Or wait, it’s not amazing at all. What the fuck am I talking about? I’m drunk off of the AWESOME DANCE TUNEZ.
John McCain appears to be a little bit testy these days. Time Magazine gets to step into the dusty confines of the press area on the Amazing Flying Straight Talk Express, and gets a face full of grizzled obstinance for their trouble.
Going into the last day, I’m inclined to say that the convention has amazing momentum, and I hope that it’s not going to get fucked up. The speakers have all been on message. A clear pro-woman case is being made, which makes me really happy. But what’s really jumping out at me is that the Democrats are showing an uncharacteristic but hopefully soon to be characteristic amount of determination to win this thing. The media manufactured this PUMA story in hopes of making it true, and the party is pushing back with a strong show of unity and purpose. I’m impressed.
Based on 
Barack Obama is apparently going to have his acceptance speech in front of a 
The handicapping of McCain’s campaign by the media is becoming brutally obvious during the DNCC. Between the lack of coverage for major speeches and puffing up the whole “PUMA” storyline to be a much bigger thing than it is, it’s becoming undeniable. 
This very public support and acknowledgment of the LGBT community during the convention is a clear sign that political change is in the wind. One of the other noticeable things about this luncheon is that it’s the only one so far that is overbooked—there are so many elected officials, activists and supporters of the community who turned out for this event.
Okay, so this post is going up the day after the