As the 40th anniversary of Dr. King’s murder comes up, this is worth noting.
1983: McCain Voted Against Creating Martin Luther King Holiday. McCain voted against the Hall (D-IN) motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill to designate the third Monday of every January as a federal holiday in honor of the late civil rights leader the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. [Vote 289, HR 3706, Motion agreed to 89-77, D 249-13, 8/2/83; CQ 1983]
Was any reason given?
This must be another one of those important policy issues that will dominate the campaign right Oliver?
Tonight on the Factor: It’s been revealed recently that Senator McCain voted against making MLK day a national Holiday. Will this revelation make Barack Obama an even MORE horribly terrifying black man? With more on this we’re going to Geraldo Rivera, reporting live from the concrete bunker where all the nation’s white women have been locked up. Geraldo?
Jay, I don’t think it was Oliver who was peddling this line of bull:
“This notion that it won’t be about policies is absurd.”
What a maverick!
Apparently to Jay civil rights and racism don’t really count as policy issues.
So, is it the consensus of the group here that, of all the Americans who ever lived, only Dr. King is worthy of a federal holiday named after him and him alone?
My own state, New Hampshire, first had “Civil Rights Day,” then “Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Civil Rights Day.” I think that is the right approach — we should honor his cause, not the man. Making it about the man opens his accomplishments vulnerable to attacks on his character.
Believe me, I heard them all when NH was debating adding his name to the holiday.
J.
The MLK Day vote is unsurprising but minor. Last I checked McCain was at about 1% on the ACLU congressional rankings. All Obama will need in the general election is the knowledge of McCain’s whereabouts and a good flashlight.
So, is it the consensus of the group here that, of all the Americans who ever lived, only Dr. King is worthy of a federal holiday named after him and him alone?
It has been the consensus of most Americans, the congress, etc. that Martin Luther King should have a national holiday. Evidently you and McCain disagree. Dr. King is among our greatest - in my mind, greatest - Americans ever. His cause is intrinsically tied in to his character and its why we are where we are now.
So, is it the consensus of the group here that, of all the Americans who ever lived, only Dr. King is worthy of a federal holiday named after him and him alone?
Yeah. That’s it. Only MLK. Jesus, Jay Tea, time and time again you prove yourself willing to swallow any bullshit without ever bothering to check the facts.
There’s a little thing on the Federal Holiday calendar called Washington’s Birthday. Ever heard of it? It’s often erroneously called President’s Day in the popular idiom, so I guess I should cut you a little slack this time but the government’s official name for the third Monday in February is, in fact, Washington’s Birthday.
http://www.opm.gov/Operating_Status_Schedules/fedhol/2008.asp
I would estimate that 98 percent of the posts i have read from you have been based on at least one egregious, but easily corrected, factual error. You really have a problem here, my friend. You may want to suspend posting for some serious reflection on what it is that’s really propping up your world view.
So, is it the consensus of the group here that, of all the Americans who ever lived, only Dr. King is worthy of a federal holiday named after him and him alone?
No. I think Cesar Chavez also deserves one. So do Abe Lincoln and George Washington–I think “President’s Day” is dumb. If it was up to me, I’d give Mark Twain a holiday, just because he was awesome. Alexander Cartwright probably deserves one, but we already have Opening Day, so that’s close enough.
Of course, I don’t think federal holidays should be limited to celebrations of Americans or their achievements. So I hope Congress will pass a resolution honoring “Funny Walk Day” on John Cleese’s birthday, October 27.
With more on this we’re going to Geraldo Rivera, reporting live from the concrete bunker where all the nation’s white women have been locked up. Geraldo?
Well, there’s a dumb idea. Cue The Continental.
“This must be another one of those important policy issues that will dominate the campaign right Oliver?”
As much as all the attention given to Reverend Wright, who said all those outrageous things that Barack Obama did not say.
“So, is it the consensus of the group here that, of all the Americans who ever lived, only Dr. King is worthy of a federal holiday named after him and him alone?”
Nice C-grade wingnut dodge. Perhaps McCain could propose a John Hagee holiday, where every 30% tool can take the day off to smack themselves in the forehead.
Or maybe, Jay Tea, we could take a page from the Bush Administration’s management plan for national parks and sell off sponsorships of national holidays to large corporations.
Me, I look forward to replacing Fourth of July with McDonnell-Douglas Cruise Missile Day.
” … where every 30% tool can take the day off to smack themselves in the forehead.”
That would be al-Arbaeen, the Shiite holiday when pilgrims to Karbala scourge themselves to commemorate the martyrdom of Imam Hussein in 680. No doubt the first national holiday to be enacted by Barak HUSSEIN Obama.
Fafaroo, I stand corrected. I, like a significant percentage of Americans, had fallen to the presumption that “Presidents Day” was the formal name of the holiday, and had just presumed that “Washington’s Birthday” had been amended. I thank you for the correction.
That being said, I still am leery of naming holidays after individuals. As I said, that runs the risk of the person himself (or herself) becoming the focus of the attention, not their causes and deeds. I can still recall the bitter fighting over the initial rejection of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, the passage of Civil Rights Day to coincide with the federal MLK holiday, and the almost-incidental adding of Dr. King’s name to the state holiday.
I also wonder how Dr. King would feel about his name becoming the focal point of the kinds of arguments many people had when the issue of his holiday came up. I suspect, from what I have read of the man, he would have said to “keep our eyes on the prize” and go for the Civil Rights Holiday. That, I think, would have been in the spirit of his “I’ve been to the mountaintop” speech.
J.
Writing from “the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire” — or, at least, within sight of a few of them
“So, is it the consensus of the group here that, of all the Americans who ever lived, only Dr. King is worthy of a federal holiday named after him and him alone?”
Learn to read. No one here said anything that came close to that.
that runs the risk of the person himself (or herself) becoming the focus of the attention
Um, no, that’s the point of declaring a holiday in honor of a person.
“Fafaroo, I stand corrected.”
Given the frequency with which you need to be corrected, I think you should just sit down embarrassed.
If you haven’t the humility to be embarrassed for your woeful understanding of basic facts on a host issues, you should definitely be embarrassed for trying to put words in MLKs mouth. Seriously. What arrogance.
As far as I’m concerned two national holidays named after individual Americans hardly requires such ridiculously fussy hand wringing. George Washington was no freaking saint but I don’t see anyone using his personal foibles to undermine the significance of his role in the founding of the country. No, that only happens with the black American but we shouldn’t read anything into that.
And when you wrote “that runs the risk of the person himself (or herself) becoming the focus of the attention, not their causes and deeds” are you suggesting that it’s possible to separate an individual from their deeds, or vice versa?
God forbid we should celebrate George Washington, the man, and not the crossing of the Deleware “by some guy.” Maybe we should also just celebrate the “I Have A Dream” speech and forget about whoever it was that wrote and delivered. Do you even think before you write?
Finally, naming holidays after Washington and MLK makes perfect sense. Washington helped found this country and MLK helped move it closer to living up to the ideals of its founding. In between was Lincoln who, by the way, should have a national holiday named after him, too. Of course, I can only imagine the bitching we’d hear about that from all those Southern “heritage” folks.
If you haven’t the humility to be embarrassed for your woeful understanding of basic facts on a host issues,
Faf, I think you meant to write, “a host of issues,” didn’t you? Or did I just reveal your secret plagiarism detector?
Ooops! Sorry.
LOL! Yes. You got me!
“you should definitely be embarrassed for trying to put words in MLKs mouth. Seriously. What arrogance. ”
No, one thing you can say about JT, no matter what douchebag argument he puts forth, he is never embarrassed.
That whole “What MLK would have thought” is a common credo among conservatives, most of who hated everything he stood for and most who would have fought him in his lifetime. Remember the “MLK would have been a conservative Republican” arguments that come up from time to time.
But in the end, you have to remember that, true patriot that JT is, that all he is trying to do is “avoid the infighting” that goes along with honoring noteable African-Americans. Ignoring, of course, that the infighting is because of the intransient racism of his fellow travellers.
Quaker, I’d missed that.
No, let me correct that. I had not known about that.
I can’t say I missed it.
Those people are really sad (to coin a phrase). Not a single thing to contribute, just an overwhelming urge to pull everything down to the level they can piss on.
Thanks for reminding me why I make a point of ignoring them.
J.
He builds an argument on a false premise (for about the 487th time) but the people that point is out are sad and pulling the level of discourse down.
Uh, right JT.
BTW, before I get spelling flames, I spelled “notable” “noteable” so that I can detect plagiarism.
Thanks for reminding me why I make a point of ignoring them.
Not at all, Mr. Tea. My pleasure, I’m sure.
Jay, I don’t think it was Oliver who was peddling this line of bull:
No, it was Oliver that said the GOP never discusses policies. And you and Fafaroo parroted the same huge stinking, steaming pile of horsehit, making it seem like the Noble Democrats were about those important issues and only the GOP slung the mud.
Now, as to what we know about this vote? Well, there’s nothing to defend except Oliver says this:
It has been the consensus of most Americans, the congress, etc. that Martin Luther King should have a national holiday. Evidently you and McCain disagree.
Of course, there’s no round of condemnation from the Fafaroo the self appointed Grand Poobah of accuracy. The sentence in question leads one to believe that McCain still stands by his vote. Of course, he does not:
In 1990, Arizonans were given an opportunity to vote to observe an MLK holiday. McCain successfully appealed to former President Ronald Reagan to support the holiday. In a letter to voters, Reagan wrote that he hoped Arizonans would “join me in supporting a holiday to commemorate these ideals to which Dr. King dedicated his life.”
In December 1999 McCain told NBC’s Tim Russert, “on the Martin Luther King issue, we all learn, OK? We all learn. I will admit to learning, and I hope that the people that I represent appreciate that, too. I voted in 1983 against the recognition of Martin Luther King….I regret that vote.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/the-complicated.html
Of course, I can only sit back and chuckle that the very same people wagging their fingers at GOP operatives for supposedly “race baiting” with regard to Wright, are probably relishing the thought of the DNC and their political goons milking this as much as they can.
Twits.
Quaker: Add Thomas Edison for a holiday.
Jay said:
“No, it was Oliver that said the GOP never discusses policies.”
Uh, no, Oliver said this:
“Republicans are going to run a policy based campaign? This is new, a first in my lifetime, and contrary to all evidence we’ve seen to date.”
Jay went on to say
“And you and Fafaroo parroted the same huge stinking, steaming pile of horsehit, making it seem like the Noble Democrats were about those important issues and only the GOP slung the mud. ”
Uh, actually, farfaroo and quaker said nothing of the kind, only condemning his attempts to dismiss GOP slime. I guess jay is having (and losing) another epic battle with his strawmen.
Uh, no, Oliver said this:
Uh. It’s the same thing using different words. Stir shit around and you still have shit pal.
Uh, actually, farfaroo and quaker said nothing of the kind
Uh. Yes they did.
I guess jay is having (and losing) another epic battle with his strawmen.
Please learn what a strawman argument is before using the word, thanks.
“Not a single thing to contribute, just an overwhelming urge to pull everything down to the level they can piss on.”
Hilarious. Jay Tea, on reading their post, I don’t think they had to pull very hard, or at all, in your case.
Do you really pause after you believe you’ve written a REALLY AWESOME sentence and think, “Wow, this is TEH AWESUM i should go back and put typos in it in case someone wants to plagarize it”? You really do that? That may be the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
As to Jay’s comment, I didn’t make any comments about McCain’s vote or position on MLK day one way or the other. My comments were directed entirely at Jay Tea and his idiotic, nonsensical reasoning and fact checking. I just couldn’t believe he threw up another post predicated on yet another glaring factual error.
Let me ask you something, though Jay, since your so laser focussed on policy: How many times does McCain have to “learn his lesson” on a variety issues before we can start calling him a flip flopper?
On the list of Federal holidays we have a few dedicated to individuals:
Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday
George Washington’s Birthday
Columbus Day (arrival in the AMericas not birthday)
and of course
Christmas.
Sometimes to celebrate the man is to celebrate his causes, and vice versa. My kids learn alot on Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday thanks to it being a national holiday and the activities they participate in in school. As I did when I was a child. Because it’s a funny thing about kids, as a national holiday they all take part in they wonder Who was Dr. King. When explained they ask WHY, and I, for one, think that’s important.
“A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[1] To “set up a straw man” or “set up a straw man argument” is to describe a position that superficially resembles an opponent’s actual view but is easier to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent (for example, deliberately overstating the opponent’s position”
Jay should probably study logical fallacies, since he seems to engage in them pretty exclusively. As we have observed, he not once, not twice, but three times misrepresented the positions of farfaroo, quaker, and oliver. He then huffed, and puffed, and blew those strawmen, but they wouldn’t quite fall.
On another note, I guess Jay has decided not to vote for Obama, despite having indicated his inclination to do so earlier this campaign season. What a let down. Really thought we had that vote!
/lol
It wasn’t just McCain. Arizona had a number of elected officials who tried to block the holiday both federally and statewide, most notably Governor Evan Mecham, who was impeached in ‘88.
…I hate my state.
EL, congratulations. You can copy and paste. However, just because the words I wrote don’t exactly match what Fafaroo, Quaker and Oliver said, doesn’t make make it a strawman. Now, if Oliver, Quaker and Fafaroo want to deny their claims that GOP candidates don’t win elections based on campaigns that are about policies, I’d like to see them explain exactly what it is they meant. But they’re not, because that is what they meant.
And please EL. You wouldn’t know a logical fallacy if it slapped you across the face. If I had to pause every time you, Oliver, CS or any other number of people on this blog engaged in logical fallacies, I’d have to spend my entire life here.
How many times does McCain have to “learn his lesson” on a variety issues before we can start calling him a flip flopper?
I’m sure Democrats et al. are already doing that. In fact, I’m certain of it.
You know. Democrats being about the policies and all.
Just want to jump in to second Quaker’s idea that there should be a Mark Twain day. Brilliant!
“You know. Democrats being about the policies and all.”
Maybe we need to ask you just what you think a “policy” is, Jay. McCain has changed his “policy” on tax cuts, immigration and apparently, MLKs birthday. I think discussing his changes of “policy” is the very definition of a “policy discussion.”
But let’s look at how the Republicans handled Kerry when they branded him a flip flopper. They didn’t actually engage in a policy discussion about Kerry’s vote on war funding. They just endlessly repeated Kerry’s gaffed explanation of his votes.
Of course, if they had actually discussed the policies that Kerry was voting on, there whole attempt to brand Kerry as indecisive and a “blow with the wind” liberal would have fallen apart. That’s because there’s a very good reason why Kerry “voted for the bill before he voted against it”: They were two different bills with two different mechanisms for funding the war. Funny how conservatives never actually mentioned that crucial distinction in their “policy” based campaign.
That’s amazingly disingenuous, even by the low standard you’ve established over the years, Jay.
Between Oliver’s statement and mine, something else happened. Do you happen to recall what it was?
Somebody wrote:
It was then that I wrote my reply:
Now please tell me where to find the part where I “mak[e] it seem like the Noble Democrats were about those important issues and only the GOP slung the mud.”
Or do I need your special glasses to see that part?
And Doc VDH! Where you been?
if Oliver, Quaker and Fafaroo want to deny their claims that GOP candidates don’t win elections based on campaigns that are about policies, I’d like to see them explain exactly what it is they meant.
You seem to be expert in finding meanings not denoted by the actual written word. Please indicate where I have made such a claim.
“This notion that it won’t be about policies is absurd.”
And you’ve become an expert at quoting things out of context. You see, I didn’t make the claim that only this party or only that party focused on policy discussions while the other side didn’t.
But you DID SAY that the Democrats would discuss issues like the war in Iraq, health care, the environment, social security, taxes, deficits etc. while the GOP would stick to wedges issues (wrapping your comments in “Oh I’m so glad it won’t be like that” snark) like abortion, gay marriage, and angry Negros.
Oliver said if the GOP was going to run a policy based campaign, it would be “…a first in my lifetime, and contrary to all evidence we’ve seen to date.”
Fafaroo said the GOP has done nothing but run campaigns based on wedge issues for the last 30 years.
Now, where I am wrong exactly?
I think discussing his changes of “policy” is the very definition of a “policy discussion.”
Oh this is rich. You think bringing up McCain’s vote from 25 years ago on the MLK holiday is a worthy ‘policy discussion.’ Despite the fact that McCain reversed course and actually helped push Arizona to observe it as a holiday and publicly said his vote was wrong. That’s not one of those ‘wedge issues’ that you accused the GOP of winning on for the last 30 years.
Democrats started pushing the “McCain is a racist” nonsense over a YEAR ago and should Obama get the nomination, it will only go into full screech mode.
http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/01/mccain_spends_m.php
So what? Does this mean he can’t be President? Is this even the full story? http://www.madnessletters.com
As I said, that runs the risk of the person himself (or herself) becoming the focus of the attention, not their causes and deeds.
By that logic, what is the focus of Washington’s Birthday?
You think bringing up McCain’s vote from 25 years ago on the MLK holiday is a worthy ‘policy discussion.’ Despite the fact that McCain reversed course and actually helped push Arizona to observe it as a holiday and publicly said his vote was wrong.
Do you mean “flip-flopped?”
On the list of Federal holidays we have a few dedicated to individuals:
Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday
George Washington’s Birthday
Columbus Day (arrival in the AMericas not birthday)
and of course
Christmas.
Don’t forget Easter. So we actually have TWO holidays for one individual.
Didn’t we used to have Lincoln’s Birthday off too?
Duros, yeah. Flip-flopped.
It does happen.
Barack Obama said at one time he supported the ban of production, sales and ownership of handguns outright. He said doesn’t now.
Flip-flop?
I may be mistaken but I don’t think Easter is considered a federal holiday since it always falls on a Sunday.
Jay, are you delusional or just dishonest?
Let me replay your own words for you, yet again.
Out of context? Oh, do forgive me! Let’s go back and look for that missing context, shall we?
Now we jump from the “John Henke Whine” thread to the “MLK Holiday” thread. After Oliver notes Mr. McCain’s voting history on the federal MLK holiday, you jump in at the second comment:
Of course it wasn’t Oliver who asserted that this campaign would be dominated by important policy issues. That was you. Quaker helpfully reminds you at 3:24:
Are we missing any context yet, Jay? Good! Let’s press on.
With four hours to mull it over, you return this volley, addressed directly to me:
Aha! Now we do seem to have not only missing context, but also missing content! To this point, I have not said the “Noble Democrats were about those important issues” or that “only the GOP slung the mud.” I HAVE said that if this election plays out the way you insist it will, the Democrats should be glad of it. Although you think the voting public will identify more closely with Mr. McCain’s past votes, I believe the public is more attuned to the eventual Democratic nominee’s positions on where we stand today.
(Aside: Today’s New York Times reports that 81 percent of Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction!)
Now after a diversion to debate the precise definition of “strawman,” you return to point–sort of:
Here’s the problem, Jay. I did not say that GOP candidates don’t win elections based on campaigns that are about policies!
It was you who insisted they do; I only opined that Democrats will hold an advantage is that is the focus of this election.
If we are missing any context, it is right here, but it is you, not I, who omits it. In your comment–the one quoted immediately above–you suggest that I asserted that Republicans never campaign on issues. You neglect to recall your own statement–the one I was responding to–when I commented. You also magically transform my remarks about this election into a generalization about all elections.
Finally, in a masterstroke of up-is-downism, when I try to insert this missing context, you accuse me of taking your words out of context.
You’re shameless, Jay. You will distort in any way necessary to sustain a sense of consistency in your own head. I must remind you, your internal mental gymnastics don’t alter reality.
Simpler:
Faf: McCain can’t win on the issues, so he’ll run on wedge issues.
Jay: Nuh-uh. Will too run on the issues.
Quaker: Great. Bring it on!
Jay: You’re saying Republicans always sling mud!
Quaker: Whuh?
It does happen.
Barack Obama said at one time he supported the ban of production, sales and ownership of handguns outright. He said doesn’t now.
Flip-flop?
Glad we’re all about policy and issues now.
“Oh this is rich. You think bringing up McCain’s vote from 25 years ago on the MLK holiday is a worthy ‘policy discussion.’”
Um, Jay, discussing changes in policy is a policy discussion. It doesn’t matter if the policy relates to race, guns, the economy, the war etc. etc. Policy discussions can just as ugly as trumped up controversies over wedge issues and indeed there’s a lot of overlaps between policy decisions and wedge issue politics. The Willy Horton ad that Republicans ran against Dukakis was as dishonest and racist a campaign as you can find, but it claimed to be about Dukakis’ policy choices. It isn’t simply a difference between discussing policy and pushing wedge issues. It’s how one presents the policy issues, as well. We can have a serious policy discussion about affirmative action, but if it’s slanted towards the “affirmative action is reverse racism” angle, well, that’s a wedge issue approach. I never said that Dems were above wedge issue politics but I can’t think of a single Dem campaign where a wedge issue was a center piece of the Dem strategy. Wedge issues are Republican life blood.
A case in point is the post you link to on the Dem party page. I find it amazing that you think a single post on the dem party webpage rises to the same level as the non-stop mudslinging of the “Reverend Wright is a racist so Obama must be one too” variety. I haven’t heard a single Dem strategist, Howard Dean, Clinton or Obama mention McCain’s opinoons on MLK day in any context. It simply isn’t a part of their national campaigns. I have, however, seen Republican politicians, operatives and pundits on television and the radio attempt to use Wright’s words to stir up racial anxieties before national audiences in the millions. A post on a webpage, does not a wedge issue campaign make. Sending out your minions to attack a candidate’s pastor on national television and radio, does.
And let’s face it, the Wright thing has absolutely nothing to do with Obama’s actual and real policy statements and votes. It has everything to do with impugning his character and hinting that he will be some kind of radical black nationalist once elected. Republicans have already made it clear that will use Wright as a centerpiece of their campaign against Obama in the general. Of course, McCain will talk about the real policy differences between himself and the Dem candidate but he can’t win on those policies alone and he knows it. A recent New York Times/CBS News poll found that “81 percent of respondents said they believed that ‘things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track,’ up from 69 percent a year ago and 35 percent in early 2003.” You think McCain can win by telling those people he’s going to continue the policies of the Bush-era? Not a chance. He will, once again, have to find a way to get people to vote against their self-interest by playing to their fears. That’s wedge issue politics in a nutshell.
Speaking about context, let’s review the play. I wrote:
Because policy isn’t going to be the ground on which McCain can win this thing. Americans don’t want another four years of Bush Co which is exactly what McCain advocates. So if policy can’t win, it’s going to be Wedge Issue City this year, just like every other Republican campaign for the last 30 years. And whether it’s Clinton or Obama as the candidate, the wedge issues are going to be feminism and race. Simple as that.
Now I think my meaning here is pretty clear. Of course, McCain will talk about policies, but he’ll need a wedge issue or a series of them, if he wants to win. I think that’s been the edge that Republicans have used in every election of my lifetime. Sometimes it works — ie Dukakis and Willy Horton — sometimes it doesn’t — ie Clinton and flag burning, gay rights, pot smoking, adultery etc. But the Republicans always use wedge issues prominently and vocally in their campaigns. Dems, not so much.
Quaker, you’re not a stupid person, but you’re acting like one.
Fafaroo: “it’s going to be Wedge Issue City this year, just like every other Republican campaign for the last 30 years.”
Oliver: Policy based campaign? “…a first in my lifetime, and contrary to all evidence we’ve seen to date.”
You: “I’m also very happy to hear that the election will not be about silly “wedge issues” like gay marriage, abortion, silly posturing on illegal immigration, and whether Mr. Obama is actually a Secret Angry Negro.”
Now if you’re saying your comment is serious, then by all means, let me know. But it came off like serious sarcasm to me. The only thing missing at the end was a, “Yeah right!” The implication is, Democrats do policy in campaigns, Republicans don’t. Now if I am wrong about what I perceive to be is your implication, then I apologize.
But Fafaroo’s initial comment about Republicans and wedge issues is part and parcel of the whining I have been hearing from Democrats for as long as I can remember. Whenever Republicans win, it’s NEVER because people thought their ideas were better and their proposals better. It’s because of some kind of ‘wedge issue’ or something else. The last time I can remember the Democrats didn’t have an excuse was when Reagan beat the crap out of Mondale in 1984.
Bush wins in 1988? “Because of Willie Horton!”
GOP takeover of Congress in 1994? “Because of angry white males!”
GOP gains in the Congress in 2002? “Because of scaring Americans!!”
Bush wins re-election in 2004? “Welcome to Jesus Land!” and “Because of Swift Boat Liars!”
The built in excuse making is already being floated. If McCain wins in November it will because of racism (if the Dem nominee is Obama) or because of misogyny (if the Dem nominee is Hillary) or because of some other boogey-man the GOP latched onto and not because voters looked at where either candidate stood on issues and decided McCain was the better choice.
And Obama might still be smoking, too.
Oooooooooooooh!
Now if you’re saying your comment is serious, then by all means, let me know. But it came off like serious sarcasm to me.
So what you’re saying is: “I can read the hidden meaning!”
The implication is, Democrats do policy in campaigns, Republicans don’t.
Ditto the above.
“Whenever Republicans win, it’s NEVER because people thought their ideas were better and their proposals better.”
Hey, man, I’ll give you Mondale and possibly Kerry, but in Kerry’s case what would that election have been like if it didn’t become all about the Swift Boat shit? I mean talk about a wedge issue campaign.
Clinton kicked the shit out of Dole and we all know Dole was the GOPs sacrificial lamb.
Gore was hurt by a media that insisted on repeating every bullshit conservative distortion of his record — “Al Gore thinks he invented the internet” — and the whole Lewinsky thing but, of course, we all know he actually won.
You’re on, Doc! See you November 30?
Let’s see…McCain voted against the MLK Holiday and all of a sudden he’s admitting he was wrong to do so now that he’s running for president? Give me a break.
“Just want to jump in to second Quaker’s idea that there should be a Mark Twain day. Brilliant!”
‘Twain and I are in very much the same position; we have to put things in such a way as to make people who would otherwise hang us believe that we are joking’.
GB Shaw
Give McCaine some slack.
Only Jesus, Columbus and MLK get their own holiday in the US.
Is MLK the greatest American that ever lived?
That’s what this holiday says.
Unless he’s like totally joking,throbo is a pretty fine example of why wedge issues work: some people are morons.
John mccain just stated on CNN that he fought for the king holiday in his state. what the hel is the limit to lying? he just clearly lied about the holiday. i use to think of this guy as a honorable person even though i did not agree with his policies, but he’s completely turned in the wrong direction. mccain is becoming a fucking idiot!
As I watch the republican nomination, I can’t believe there are blacks in the audience. I can understand that they are republicans but this is one time I would have to sit this one out. Once a racist always a racist.
Where is the rest of the story? See this is why I have an issue with political propaganda, no one tells you the whole story or the reasoning behind it. It’s not fair or productive to put out a half-assed story on either candidate without the whole story… I’m sorry but not all Americans are stupid enough to comment on this issue without further facts.