Why McCain is going so negative, so often
By: Jonathan Martin
September 13, 2008 10:42 AM EST
It’s hard to imagine a more unlikely perch for John McCain to be shamed for his increasingly hard-edged and truth-stretching campaign than the middle seat on “The View.”
Yet on Friday morning, there sat the Republican nominee — a politician who has built an all but saintly reputation for “straight talk” over the years — caught in a vise between Joy Behar and Barbara Walters and getting a lecture from each on honesty.
“They’re lies,” Behar said of two recent lines of attack from the McCain campaign.
“By the way, you yourself said the same thing about putting lipstick on a pig,” Walters interjected as a defensive McCain struggled to respond.
The two daytime talk show hosts are hardly alone.
McCain’s tactics are drawing the scorn of many in the media and organizations tasked with fact-checking the truthfulness of campaigns. In recent weeks, Team McCain has been described as dishonorable, disingenuous and downright cynical.
A series of ads — including accusations that Barack Obama backed teaching sex education to Illinois kindergartners and charges that Obama called Sarah Palin a lipstick-wearing pig — have provoked a cascade of criticism of McCain’s tactics.
The furor presents a breathtaking contrast to McCain’s image as a kind of anti-politician who plays fair, disdains politics as usual and has never forgotten how his 2000 presidential campaign was incinerated by a series of loathsome dirty tricks in the South Carolina primary.
The defense from the candidate himself — heard only on “The View” because he hasn’t held a news conference in more than a month — is to essentially assert that he’s savaging Obama because the Illinois senator wouldn’t agree to the series of town hall meetings McCain proposed at the end of the Democratic primary season.
“If we had done what I asked Sen. Obama to do, because I’ve been in a lot of other campaigns where I have appeared with the opposition with the people and listened to their hopes and dreams and aspirations, I don't think you’d see the tenor of this campaign,” he said.
That’s the candidate’s public answer — and one that a former adviser suggested that McCain may have convinced himself to believe is true.
Current campaign aides and other Republicans who’ve closely watched the race, however, have a very different response to the media elites and good-government scolds: We don’t care what you think.
McCain seems to have made a choice that many politicians succumb to but that he had always promised to avoid — he appears ready to do whatever it takes to win, even it if soils his reputation.
“We recognize it’s not going to be 2000 again,” McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said, alluding to the media’s swooning coverage of McCain’s ill-fated crusade against then-Gov. George W. Bush and the GOP establishment. “But he lost then. We’re running a campaign to win. And we’re not too concerned about what the media filter tries to say about it.”
Rogers, who hung tough with McCain through the dark days of the primary and has lived through every high and low of this turbulent and unpredictable race, argues that they tried to run a high-ground campaign and sought to keep the candidate in front of the media in the fashion he enjoys. His point: No one paid any attention.
“We ran a different kind of campaign and nobody cared about us. They didn’t cover John McCain. So now you’ve got to be forward-leaning in everything,” he said.
Rogers concedes that they were understandably overshadowed by the historic Democratic primary through June, but contends that even after the general election began they could get attention only when McCain committed a gaffe.
“When he’s sitting in back of a bus and getting questions about Viagra, I think we understand at that point you’ve got to make some tactical adjustments,” he said, recalling a particularly awkward gotcha-of-the-day moment on McCain’s bus in early July.
A senior adviser to the campaign echoed Rogers’ point: “Some of the traditional tactics we did for a long time weren’t working, so we adjusted.”
So instead of doing things the traditional McCain way, they tried out the Steve Schmidt way.
Turning to the playbook of a campaign manager who has been running take-no-prisoners campaigns for years brought immediate changes. It meant ending McCain’s anything-goes sessions with reporters on his bus that had become politically untenable in the Internet- and cable news-dominated, 24/7 modern media age. And it meant embracing, rather than fighting, the notion that Obama was the star of the race.
When the August “celebrity” ads cut through the clutter and, for the first time in the campaign, put Obama on defense, McCain aides felt they’d gotten their answer about whether tougher was smarter.
Similar affirmation came when Obama first suggested McCain would bring race into the campaign — and the Republican side smothered the tactic by countering that it was Obama who was playing the race card.
McCain strategists now have became even more sure of themselves after the picture-perfect reaction — in the GOP’s view — to the decision to put Palin on the ticket. The choice provoked derision from elites, jubilation among conservative voters long skeptical of McCain and uncertainty from Obama about how to respond. If you are a McCain staffer, it doesn’t get better than that — so who cares that the candidate had met her only once and her chief foreign policy credential seems to be that she lives closer to Russia than other Americans.
With polls moving in their direction and a unanimous view in the political world that the fundamentals of the race have changed dramatically in the past few weeks, McCain aides aren’t about to drop a flood-the-zone approach that they believe has worked. “Most people would have been afraid to have called him out on race,” boasted an adviser. “And we’re not going to let sexism or denigration of her go unchecked now.”
On all three counts — their portrayal of Obama as a celebrity, outrage at his purported use of race and his flat-footedness and confusion on how to respond to Palin — McCain aides saw weakness and indecision.
It adds up to a campaign that is now unapologetically aggressive and aimed almost entirely at keeping Obama off-message, even if it means hitting him below the belt in the process.
“Clearly we intend to stay on offense,” Rogers said. “That’s what we need to do because the campaign is fundamentally about him. We feel comfortable about the ads we’re running and arguments we’re making.”
And, given their surge in the polls and Obama’s uncertainty about how to respond to the Palin phenomenon, they’re going to keep it up.
“Every day not talking about the economy, the war and how to fix a broken system is a victory for McCain,” said John Weaver, a former top strategist to the nominee who left the campaign last year. “They’re going to ride it as long as they can and as long as the mainstream media puts up every ridiculous charge.”
The negative and often exaggerated or misleading claims being made about Obama and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, especially those playing on Palin’s gender, are just too irresistible for the process-consumed online and cable news media that now drives the campaign conversation, Weaver said.
“Unless there is a hurricane, they’re going to cover it,” he observed.
Added Terry Nelson, McCain’s former campaign manager: “It works in part because Obama responds to it.”
The question now, though, is just how long McCain can keep riding the wave of process and Palin.
“If they don’t attack her, she’s going to go back to being the vice presidential nominee,” Nelson said of the Democrats. “And in the natural scheme of things, the focus will go back to McCain and Obama.”
At that point, “the biggest burden for the McCain campaign will be to convey a compelling, positive vision for the country’s future.”
A top McCain adviser said they’re hoping to keep the still-flowing momentum from their convention going as long as they can.
“But we’ve always been planning to get back on the economy, jobs and energy,” said this strategist.
And even if they weren’t, the campaign calendar would demand it.
McCain and Obama face off in three debates, beginning Sept. 26 at the University of Mississippi — events that will force a focus, at least temporarily, on issues rather than pigs and lipstick.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Newsday take
Newsday examined the positions of Obama and McCain on 10 key issues, first looking at the economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, national security, energy and the environment/climate change.
Here are the next five issues.
WHERE MCCAIN STANDS
On health care: Opposes federally mandated universal coverage, saying competition will improve quality of health insurance. Pledges to reform tax code to offer choices beyond employee-based health insurance coverage. Every family would receive a direct refundable tax credit for $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families. Wants families to be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines and have their policy follow them from job to job.
On Social Security: Wants to supplement Social Security benefits with individual investment accounts. Prefers slowing growth of benefits rather than raising taxes. Asked about Social Security during a GOP debate, he said: "Every man, woman and child in America needs to know it's going broke and we've got to do the hard things. We've got to fix it for the future generations of Americans. ... It's got to be bipartisan."
On education: Favors charter schools, home schooling and voucher system -- when approved by local officials -- and giving parents tax credits to help pay for private schools. "We need to reward good teachers and find bad teachers another line of work," he has said. Voted for No Child Left Behind legislation, but says that is only the beginning of education reform. Wants to expand virtual learning in part by targeting $500 million in current federal funds to build new virtual schools and develop online courses.
On immigration: Co-sponsored a 2006 Bush-backed bill that would have allowed some illegal immigrants to stay in the country and would have provided a legal path to U.S. citizenship after learning English, paying fines and back taxes, and passing a background check. Supports construction of 700-mile fence along U.S.-Mexico border, and now says he would secure the border first.
On abortion: Opposes abortion rights, and believes Roe v. Wade is flawed and should be overturned by the Supreme Court. Voted for the Prohibit Partial Birth Abortion bill in 2003, and supports Supreme Court ruling upholding it. Voted for Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions amendment in 2007.
WHERE OBAMA STANDS
On health care: Would create a national health insurance program for people without employer-provided health care and who do not qualify for other existing federal programs. Program would be mandatory for children, but not for all adults. He hopes to achieve universal coverage by requiring employers to share costs of insuring workers and by offering coverage similar to plan provided to federal employees. Estimates costs at up to $65 billion a year after savings from making system more efficient. To help pay costs he would eliminate Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000.
On Social Security: Strongly opposes privatization, pledges to keep Social Security solvent and protect middle-class families from tax increases of benefit cuts. Believes way to strengthen system is through payroll tax system. Social Security payroll tax currently applies only to first $97,500 a worker earns. Wants to increase maximum amount of earnings covered by Social Security. Pledges to work with Congress on reform package to keep the system solvent for at least next half century.
On education: Backs expansion of pre-K programs, pledging to quadruple Early Head Start with $10 billion-a-year injection and also increase funding for Head Start. Plans to reform No Child Left Behind, recruiting high-quality teachers and rewarding talented ones in part with higher pay not linked to standardized test scores. Proposes tax credit of up to $4,000 for college students who perform 100 hours of community service a year. Wants to make community college entirely free nationwide.
On immigration: Voted for the same 2006 bill, which also would have increased funding and improved border security technology and improved enforcement of existing laws. Supports construction of fence.
On abortion: Favors abortion rights and opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade. Disagrees with the Supreme Court ruling to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Did not cast vote on Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions amendment in 2007.
Copyright © 2008, Newsday Inc.
Here are the next five issues.
WHERE MCCAIN STANDS
On health care: Opposes federally mandated universal coverage, saying competition will improve quality of health insurance. Pledges to reform tax code to offer choices beyond employee-based health insurance coverage. Every family would receive a direct refundable tax credit for $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families. Wants families to be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines and have their policy follow them from job to job.
On Social Security: Wants to supplement Social Security benefits with individual investment accounts. Prefers slowing growth of benefits rather than raising taxes. Asked about Social Security during a GOP debate, he said: "Every man, woman and child in America needs to know it's going broke and we've got to do the hard things. We've got to fix it for the future generations of Americans. ... It's got to be bipartisan."
On education: Favors charter schools, home schooling and voucher system -- when approved by local officials -- and giving parents tax credits to help pay for private schools. "We need to reward good teachers and find bad teachers another line of work," he has said. Voted for No Child Left Behind legislation, but says that is only the beginning of education reform. Wants to expand virtual learning in part by targeting $500 million in current federal funds to build new virtual schools and develop online courses.
On immigration: Co-sponsored a 2006 Bush-backed bill that would have allowed some illegal immigrants to stay in the country and would have provided a legal path to U.S. citizenship after learning English, paying fines and back taxes, and passing a background check. Supports construction of 700-mile fence along U.S.-Mexico border, and now says he would secure the border first.
On abortion: Opposes abortion rights, and believes Roe v. Wade is flawed and should be overturned by the Supreme Court. Voted for the Prohibit Partial Birth Abortion bill in 2003, and supports Supreme Court ruling upholding it. Voted for Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions amendment in 2007.
WHERE OBAMA STANDS
On health care: Would create a national health insurance program for people without employer-provided health care and who do not qualify for other existing federal programs. Program would be mandatory for children, but not for all adults. He hopes to achieve universal coverage by requiring employers to share costs of insuring workers and by offering coverage similar to plan provided to federal employees. Estimates costs at up to $65 billion a year after savings from making system more efficient. To help pay costs he would eliminate Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000.
On Social Security: Strongly opposes privatization, pledges to keep Social Security solvent and protect middle-class families from tax increases of benefit cuts. Believes way to strengthen system is through payroll tax system. Social Security payroll tax currently applies only to first $97,500 a worker earns. Wants to increase maximum amount of earnings covered by Social Security. Pledges to work with Congress on reform package to keep the system solvent for at least next half century.
On education: Backs expansion of pre-K programs, pledging to quadruple Early Head Start with $10 billion-a-year injection and also increase funding for Head Start. Plans to reform No Child Left Behind, recruiting high-quality teachers and rewarding talented ones in part with higher pay not linked to standardized test scores. Proposes tax credit of up to $4,000 for college students who perform 100 hours of community service a year. Wants to make community college entirely free nationwide.
On immigration: Voted for the same 2006 bill, which also would have increased funding and improved border security technology and improved enforcement of existing laws. Supports construction of fence.
On abortion: Favors abortion rights and opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade. Disagrees with the Supreme Court ruling to uphold the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Did not cast vote on Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions amendment in 2007.
Copyright © 2008, Newsday Inc.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
RNC Protests silenced
http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2008/09/01/pepper.mpg
more:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/01/donna_brazile_hit_by_pepper_sp.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-dantoni/amy-goodman-violently-arr_b_123062.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/31/national/main4401941.shtml
more:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/01/donna_brazile_hit_by_pepper_sp.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-dantoni/amy-goodman-violently-arr_b_123062.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/31/national/main4401941.shtml
Friday, August 29, 2008
A Future of McCain and Palin on Women’s Rights
Today the news was broken that Republican Senator John McCain presidential nominee of the Republican Party picked Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska as his Vice Presidential nominee. Both are in support of Pro-life. John McCain is so against Abortion he hopes to over turn Roe vs Wade once in office, as well he offers no solutions as to prevent unwanted pregnancies like sexual education or affordable access to birth control pills. Sarah’s belief falls deeply in line with John. She is extremely pro-life and a reformer of welfare. Sarah has helped grow our overly populated world with her family of five her newest offspring was born in April who was born with Downs’s Syndrome. This obviously has no affect to Sarah’s family who is very wealthy. They have access to nannies, and care for her disabled child.
I would like to ask the McCain camp propose to do when they do not believe in pro-choice and do not support welfare. Perhaps we could be like India and have the problems such as: “Sonu, Toofan, Bobby and Bhagwan are skinny boys with impish grins and the mischievous ways of children everywhere. But for them, there has been no childhood. Wily and street smart, they live and survive in a homeless, hungry, lonely and often brutal world circumscribed by New Delhi Railway Station. They scrounge for leftovers from the garbage of incoming trains and dodge the kicks of angry porters as they hustle to carry luggage for a few cents. There are hundreds of others like them around the busy station, and millions more elsewhere in India, where the population is nearing 850 million. About 120 million children, including those helping their parents in farms and shops, are working more than 12 hours a day to earn their own bread, 55 million of them in slave like conditions”(CROSSETTE).
Or maybe we should become like China? Enforce the idea of one child per person? But, wait what Sarah Palin is beyond her limit! See we could tie women’s tubes as soon as they have that one child right there in the hospital. They got raped? What would you say “Oh too bad, one kid is the limit.” The baby was conceived out of incest? What would you say? “Oh too bad, one kid the limit.” But wait the baby has a genetic disorder, disease, the baby or mother’s health could be affected? What would you say then? “Oh that’s too bad!” Hey China is on to something. See John McCain and Sarah Palin what we could do if we could control all women’s bodies? We’d have them all off welfare, control population, and be just like China. Guess what though China would be a head of us in several ideas, and abortion is legal in China's and China provides education and support for alternative birth control methods. Look at that, they would be a head of the curve with you two in charge.
America does not need to turn back the pages to 1973 before women’s rights on Roe vs Wade, and we don’t need you two telling us we can’t have access to birth control pills or sexual education for our children with the high rise of teen pregnancies , STD’s , HIV, and AID’s in this country. Sarah Palin go back to Alaska and take care of your children and John McCain retire and enjoy your last days on this earth with your family and friends, not ruining our country!
Work Cited
CROSSETTE,BARBARA. “Homeless and Hungry Youths of India” .Dec. 23rd 1990. The New York Times. August 29th http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE0DA1531F930A15751C1A966958260
I would like to ask the McCain camp propose to do when they do not believe in pro-choice and do not support welfare. Perhaps we could be like India and have the problems such as: “Sonu, Toofan, Bobby and Bhagwan are skinny boys with impish grins and the mischievous ways of children everywhere. But for them, there has been no childhood. Wily and street smart, they live and survive in a homeless, hungry, lonely and often brutal world circumscribed by New Delhi Railway Station. They scrounge for leftovers from the garbage of incoming trains and dodge the kicks of angry porters as they hustle to carry luggage for a few cents. There are hundreds of others like them around the busy station, and millions more elsewhere in India, where the population is nearing 850 million. About 120 million children, including those helping their parents in farms and shops, are working more than 12 hours a day to earn their own bread, 55 million of them in slave like conditions”(CROSSETTE).
Or maybe we should become like China? Enforce the idea of one child per person? But, wait what Sarah Palin is beyond her limit! See we could tie women’s tubes as soon as they have that one child right there in the hospital. They got raped? What would you say “Oh too bad, one kid is the limit.” The baby was conceived out of incest? What would you say? “Oh too bad, one kid the limit.” But wait the baby has a genetic disorder, disease, the baby or mother’s health could be affected? What would you say then? “Oh that’s too bad!” Hey China is on to something. See John McCain and Sarah Palin what we could do if we could control all women’s bodies? We’d have them all off welfare, control population, and be just like China. Guess what though China would be a head of us in several ideas, and abortion is legal in China's and China provides education and support for alternative birth control methods. Look at that, they would be a head of the curve with you two in charge.
America does not need to turn back the pages to 1973 before women’s rights on Roe vs Wade, and we don’t need you two telling us we can’t have access to birth control pills or sexual education for our children with the high rise of teen pregnancies , STD’s , HIV, and AID’s in this country. Sarah Palin go back to Alaska and take care of your children and John McCain retire and enjoy your last days on this earth with your family and friends, not ruining our country!
Work Cited
CROSSETTE,BARBARA. “Homeless and Hungry Youths of India” .Dec. 23rd 1990. The New York Times. August 29th http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE0DA1531F930A15751C1A966958260
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Sunday, August 24, 2008
The Bush Administration officially backs the conscience rule
This is heavy, serious business.
The Bush Administration officially backs the conscience rule
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iEW9FYay0lFbUS4UMghrpSYEKE9AD92MU8IO0
For those who are unaware, this legislation states that all medical facilities that receive government funding would essentially need to promise that they wouldn't fire their doctors (or nurses or scalpel washers) for deciding that, based on "moral objections", they would not treat their patients. Officially, this is meant to apply to abortion, but the new legislation makes the definition of "abortion" so fuzzy that it would also allow health clinics to deny birth control prescriptions or emergency contraception to rape victims.
Please, do something. This is the rule, as it will appear.http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2008pres/08/20080821reg.pdf This will go into effect in 30 days. Here are some quick and easy ways to speak up:
--Write to your legislator.https://secure.prochoiceamerica.org/site/Advocacy?JServSessionIdr009=jyxke0wa26.app43b&cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3253 This is insanely easy. You fill in your name, address and state, and this site will automatically find your state legislator and send them an email. You can even choose for it to be a form email, if you're not feeling eloquent. Or you can write one of your own.
--Send an email to consciencecomment@hhs.gov (Make sure to put provider conscience regulation as the subject line
--Make a donation to Planned Parenthood, who is fighting this issue as hard as they can.
--if you're especially proactive, you can use congress.org to search for your state government officials (by zipcode) and contact them directly.
Please. I don't care if you're eloquent, witty, or whatever. This is not only just about abortion, either -- this is about being allowed to make your own choices about what is best for your own health.
I know plenty of women who take birth control for reasons other than preventing pregnancy, but even that aside, that choice should not rest in a stranger's hands.
Any doctor who would put their own mental comfort before the physical well being of their patient is not a doctor I would want, nor is it a doctor who anyone should have to be attended by. Any doctor who would make that choice is unfit for the position.
As patients, we are told that we can trust our doctors -- strangers! -- with our lives. We can trust that they will do their best to keep us safe and healthy. Allowing doctors to pick and choose which people they will help, based on their own moral leanings, completely destroys that trust.
I wrote a couple of letters, this afternoon. I got a response back from Senator Murray's office -- and while most of it is more or less c/p form, it at least acknowledges that my opinion was heard. It also states that she is a)aware and b)opposed and working against the legislation. These are positive things. Also provided is more information about the issue itself:
Thank you for writing me about the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) proposed rule regarding reimbursement to facilities that offer contraception. It is good to hear from you.
As you may know, on July 15, 2008, the New York Times reported that HHS is drafting a rule that would require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire health care professionals who object to abortion. This proposal contains an ill-considered, overbroad definition of abortion, defining it as "any of the various procedures.that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation." This definition would allow health-care corporations or individuals to classify many common forms of contraception, including the birth control pill and emergency contraception, as "abortions." This definition would allow these health professionals to refuse to provide contraception to women who need it.
I am extremely concerned about this proposal's potential to affect millions of women's reproductive health. It is a poorly veiled attempt to rollback women's health care options before the current Administration leaves office. Instead of undercutting access to contraception and family planning services, the Bush Administration should be putting prevention first. You will be pleased to know that I have joined my colleagues in sending letters to the Secretary of Health and Human Services on two separate occasions, urging him to abandon plans to formulate such a rule.
Rest assured, I will continue to fight this misguided plan to put in place new obstacles for women accessing family planning services and as I do, I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind.
Again, thank you for contacting me about this issue. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates.
Please, don't just sit there quietly. This is (y)our country. If you know any women at all that matter to you. Your mother, your friends, yourself. Please
The Bush Administration officially backs the conscience rule
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iEW9FYay0lFbUS4UMghrpSYEKE9AD92MU8IO0
For those who are unaware, this legislation states that all medical facilities that receive government funding would essentially need to promise that they wouldn't fire their doctors (or nurses or scalpel washers) for deciding that, based on "moral objections", they would not treat their patients. Officially, this is meant to apply to abortion, but the new legislation makes the definition of "abortion" so fuzzy that it would also allow health clinics to deny birth control prescriptions or emergency contraception to rape victims.
Please, do something. This is the rule, as it will appear.http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2008pres/08/20080821reg.pdf This will go into effect in 30 days. Here are some quick and easy ways to speak up:
--Write to your legislator.https://secure.prochoiceamerica.org/site/Advocacy?JServSessionIdr009=jyxke0wa26.app43b&cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3253 This is insanely easy. You fill in your name, address and state, and this site will automatically find your state legislator and send them an email. You can even choose for it to be a form email, if you're not feeling eloquent. Or you can write one of your own.
--Send an email to consciencecomment@hhs.gov (Make sure to put provider conscience regulation as the subject line
--Make a donation to Planned Parenthood, who is fighting this issue as hard as they can.
--if you're especially proactive, you can use congress.org to search for your state government officials (by zipcode) and contact them directly.
Please. I don't care if you're eloquent, witty, or whatever. This is not only just about abortion, either -- this is about being allowed to make your own choices about what is best for your own health.
I know plenty of women who take birth control for reasons other than preventing pregnancy, but even that aside, that choice should not rest in a stranger's hands.
Any doctor who would put their own mental comfort before the physical well being of their patient is not a doctor I would want, nor is it a doctor who anyone should have to be attended by. Any doctor who would make that choice is unfit for the position.
As patients, we are told that we can trust our doctors -- strangers! -- with our lives. We can trust that they will do their best to keep us safe and healthy. Allowing doctors to pick and choose which people they will help, based on their own moral leanings, completely destroys that trust.
I wrote a couple of letters, this afternoon. I got a response back from Senator Murray's office -- and while most of it is more or less c/p form, it at least acknowledges that my opinion was heard. It also states that she is a)aware and b)opposed and working against the legislation. These are positive things. Also provided is more information about the issue itself:
Thank you for writing me about the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) proposed rule regarding reimbursement to facilities that offer contraception. It is good to hear from you.
As you may know, on July 15, 2008, the New York Times reported that HHS is drafting a rule that would require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire health care professionals who object to abortion. This proposal contains an ill-considered, overbroad definition of abortion, defining it as "any of the various procedures.that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation." This definition would allow health-care corporations or individuals to classify many common forms of contraception, including the birth control pill and emergency contraception, as "abortions." This definition would allow these health professionals to refuse to provide contraception to women who need it.
I am extremely concerned about this proposal's potential to affect millions of women's reproductive health. It is a poorly veiled attempt to rollback women's health care options before the current Administration leaves office. Instead of undercutting access to contraception and family planning services, the Bush Administration should be putting prevention first. You will be pleased to know that I have joined my colleagues in sending letters to the Secretary of Health and Human Services on two separate occasions, urging him to abandon plans to formulate such a rule.
Rest assured, I will continue to fight this misguided plan to put in place new obstacles for women accessing family planning services and as I do, I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind.
Again, thank you for contacting me about this issue. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates.
Please, don't just sit there quietly. This is (y)our country. If you know any women at all that matter to you. Your mother, your friends, yourself. Please
Top 10 John McCain Dumb Quotes
"I think -- I'll have my staff get to you. It's condominiums where — I'll have them get to you." --after being asked how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own, interview with Politico, Las Cruces, N.M., Aug. 20, 2008
"Ma'am, let me say that I don't disagree with anything you said." --after a woman at a town hall meeting said, "If we don't reenact the draft, I don't think we'll have anyone to chase Bin Laden to the gates of hell," Las Cruces, N.M., Aug. 20, 2008 (Watch video clip)
"I was trying to hear through the wall." –after Rev. Rick Warren asked if the "cone of silence" was comfortable during the forum he moderated at Saddleback Church. McCain was supposed to have been in a sound-proof room so that he couldn't hear Warren's questions or Obama's answers, but McCain was in fact in his motorcade on the way to the forum during Obama's part of the live broadcast. (Lake Forest, California, Aug. 17, 2008)
"I think if you're just talking about income, how about $5 million?" --after being asked by Rev. Rick Warren to define "rich," Lake Forest, California, Aug. 16, 2008
"My friends, we have reached a crisis, the first probably serious crisis internationally since the end of the Cold War. This is an act of aggression." --on Russia's invasion of Georgia, forgetting crises such as the Gulf War, 9/11, and the Iraq war, Aspen, Colorado, Aug. 14, 2008
"In the 21st century nations don't invade other nations." --on Russia's military action against Georgia, Birmingham, Mich., Aug. 13, 2008
"I was looking at the Sturgis schedule, and noticed that you had a beauty pageant, so I encouraged Cindy to compete. I told her [that] with a little luck, she could be the only woman to serve as both the First Lady and Miss Buffalo Chip." --on the Miss Buffalo Chip Pageant, which features topless (and occasionally bottomless) contestants, Sturgis, South Dakota, Aug. 4, 2008 (Watch video clip)
"I'm running for president of the United States, because I want to help with family values. And I think that family values are important, when we have two parent -- families that are of parents that are the traditional family." --interview on "This Week," July 27, 2008
"The fact is we had four years of failed policy. We were losing. We were losing the war in Iraq. The consequences of failure and defeat of the United States of America in the first major conflict since 9/11 would have had devastating impacts throughout the region and the world." --forgetting the war in Afghanistan, which was launched in October 2001, CBS News interview, July 21, 2008
"We have a lot of work to do. It's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border." --referring to a border that does not exist, ABC News interview, July 21, 2008
"I was concerned about a couple of steps that the Russian government took in the last several days. One was reducing the energy supplies to Czechoslovakia." --referring to a country that no longer exists, Phoenix, Arizona, July 14, 2008
"I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself. I don't expect to be a great communicator, I don't expect to set up my own blog, but I am becoming computer literate to the point where I can get the information that I need." --New York Times interview, July 13, 2008
"Maybe that's a way of killing them." --responding to a report that $158 million in cigarettes have been shipped to Iran during Bush's presidency despite restrictions on U.S. exports to that country, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, July 8, 2008
"Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today. And that's a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace and it's got to be fixed." --on Social Security, Denver, Colorado, July 7, 2008
"That's not too important. What's important is the casualties." --on when U.S. troops will return from Iraq, "Today," NBC, June 11, 2008
"I will veto every single beer, um, bill with earmarks." --speaking at the National Small Business Summit, Washington, D.C., June 10, 2008 (Watch video clip)
"Well, basically, it's a Google." --on how he's conducting his VP search, Richmond, Virginia, June 9, 2008
"We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies." --Kenner, Louisiana, June 3, 2008
"I'm glad to have his endorsement. I condemn remarks that are, in any way, viewed as anti-anything. And thanks for asking." --after being asked by George Stephanopoulos about receiving the endorsement of Evangelical pastor Rev. John Hagee, who has made a number of controversial remarks, including calling Catholicism "The Great Whore" and blaming Hurricane Katrina on gays
"Make it a hundred...That would be fine with me." -to a questioner who asked if he supported President Bush's vision for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq for 50 years
"I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated."
"Well, it's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran. That's well known. And it's unfortunate." -before correcting himself by saying Iran was training "extremists," not Al Qaeda
"I will conduct a respectful debate. Now, it will be dispirited -- it will be spirited -- because there are stark differences. I am a proud conservative, liberal Republica-- conservative Republican...Hello? Easy there."
"I am a illiterate that has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance I can get." -after being asked whether us uses a Mac or a PC
"The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should. I've got Greenspan's book."
"You know that old Beach Boys song, Bomb Iran? Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran." --breaking into song after being asked at a VFW meeting about whether it was time to send a message to Iran, Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, April 18, 2007
"Ma'am, let me say that I don't disagree with anything you said." --after a woman at a town hall meeting said, "If we don't reenact the draft, I don't think we'll have anyone to chase Bin Laden to the gates of hell," Las Cruces, N.M., Aug. 20, 2008 (Watch video clip)
"I was trying to hear through the wall." –after Rev. Rick Warren asked if the "cone of silence" was comfortable during the forum he moderated at Saddleback Church. McCain was supposed to have been in a sound-proof room so that he couldn't hear Warren's questions or Obama's answers, but McCain was in fact in his motorcade on the way to the forum during Obama's part of the live broadcast. (Lake Forest, California, Aug. 17, 2008)
"I think if you're just talking about income, how about $5 million?" --after being asked by Rev. Rick Warren to define "rich," Lake Forest, California, Aug. 16, 2008
"My friends, we have reached a crisis, the first probably serious crisis internationally since the end of the Cold War. This is an act of aggression." --on Russia's invasion of Georgia, forgetting crises such as the Gulf War, 9/11, and the Iraq war, Aspen, Colorado, Aug. 14, 2008
"In the 21st century nations don't invade other nations." --on Russia's military action against Georgia, Birmingham, Mich., Aug. 13, 2008
"I was looking at the Sturgis schedule, and noticed that you had a beauty pageant, so I encouraged Cindy to compete. I told her [that] with a little luck, she could be the only woman to serve as both the First Lady and Miss Buffalo Chip." --on the Miss Buffalo Chip Pageant, which features topless (and occasionally bottomless) contestants, Sturgis, South Dakota, Aug. 4, 2008 (Watch video clip)
"I'm running for president of the United States, because I want to help with family values. And I think that family values are important, when we have two parent -- families that are of parents that are the traditional family." --interview on "This Week," July 27, 2008
"The fact is we had four years of failed policy. We were losing. We were losing the war in Iraq. The consequences of failure and defeat of the United States of America in the first major conflict since 9/11 would have had devastating impacts throughout the region and the world." --forgetting the war in Afghanistan, which was launched in October 2001, CBS News interview, July 21, 2008
"We have a lot of work to do. It's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border." --referring to a border that does not exist, ABC News interview, July 21, 2008
"I was concerned about a couple of steps that the Russian government took in the last several days. One was reducing the energy supplies to Czechoslovakia." --referring to a country that no longer exists, Phoenix, Arizona, July 14, 2008
"I am learning to get online myself, and I will have that down fairly soon, getting on myself. I don't expect to be a great communicator, I don't expect to set up my own blog, but I am becoming computer literate to the point where I can get the information that I need." --New York Times interview, July 13, 2008
"Maybe that's a way of killing them." --responding to a report that $158 million in cigarettes have been shipped to Iran during Bush's presidency despite restrictions on U.S. exports to that country, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, July 8, 2008
"Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today. And that's a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace and it's got to be fixed." --on Social Security, Denver, Colorado, July 7, 2008
"That's not too important. What's important is the casualties." --on when U.S. troops will return from Iraq, "Today," NBC, June 11, 2008
"I will veto every single beer, um, bill with earmarks." --speaking at the National Small Business Summit, Washington, D.C., June 10, 2008 (Watch video clip)
"Well, basically, it's a Google." --on how he's conducting his VP search, Richmond, Virginia, June 9, 2008
"We should be able to deliver bottled hot water to dehydrated babies." --Kenner, Louisiana, June 3, 2008
"I'm glad to have his endorsement. I condemn remarks that are, in any way, viewed as anti-anything. And thanks for asking." --after being asked by George Stephanopoulos about receiving the endorsement of Evangelical pastor Rev. John Hagee, who has made a number of controversial remarks, including calling Catholicism "The Great Whore" and blaming Hurricane Katrina on gays
"Make it a hundred...That would be fine with me." -to a questioner who asked if he supported President Bush's vision for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq for 50 years
"I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated."
"Well, it's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran. That's well known. And it's unfortunate." -before correcting himself by saying Iran was training "extremists," not Al Qaeda
"I will conduct a respectful debate. Now, it will be dispirited -- it will be spirited -- because there are stark differences. I am a proud conservative, liberal Republica-- conservative Republican...Hello? Easy there."
"I am a illiterate that has to rely on my wife for all of the assistance I can get." -after being asked whether us uses a Mac or a PC
"The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should. I've got Greenspan's book."
"You know that old Beach Boys song, Bomb Iran? Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran." --breaking into song after being asked at a VFW meeting about whether it was time to send a message to Iran, Murrells Inlet, South Carolina, April 18, 2007
Friday, August 22, 2008
evidence says it all
Why I Will Not Vote for John McCain
Written by Phillip Butler:
As some of you might know, John McCain is a long-time acquaintance of mine that goes way back to our time together at the U.S. Naval Academy and as Prisoners of War in Vietnam. He is a man I respect and admire in some ways. But there are a number of reasons why I will not vote for him for President of the United States.
When I was a Plebe (4th classman, or freshman) at the Naval Academy in 1957-58, I was assigned to the 17th Company for my four years there. In those days we had about 3,600 midshipmen spread among 24 companies, thus about 150 midshipmen to a company. As fortune would have it, John, a First Classman (senior) and his room mate lived directly across the hall from me and my two room mates. Believe me when I say that back then I would never in a million or more years have dreamed that the crazy guy across the hall would someday be a Senator and candidate for President!
John was a wild man. He was funny, with a quick wit and he was intelligent. But he was intent on breaking every USNA regulation in our 4 inch thick USNA Regulations book. And I believe he must have come as close to his goal as any midshipman who ever attended the Academy. John had me "coming around" to his room frequently during my plebe year. And on one occasion he took me with him to escape "over the wall" in the dead of night. He had a taxi cab waiting for us that took us to a bar some 7 miles away. John had a few beers, but forbid me to drink (watching out for me I guess) and made me drink cokes. I could tell many other midshipman stories about John that year and he unbelievably managed to graduate though he spent the majority of his first class year on restriction for the stuff he did get caught doing. In fact he barely managed to graduate, standing 5th from the bottom of his 800 man graduating class. I and many others have speculated that the main reason he did graduate was because his father was an Admiral, and also his grandfather, both U.S. Naval Academy graduates.
People often ask if I was a Prisoner of War with John McCain. My answer is always "No - John McCain was a POW with me." The reason is I was there for 8 years and John got there 2 ½ years later, so he was a POW for 5 ½ years. And we have our own seniority system, based on time as a POW.
John's treatment as a POW:
1) Was he tortured for 5 years? No. He was subjected to torture and maltreatment during his first 2 years, from September of 1967 to September of 1969. After September of 1969 the Vietnamese stopped the torture and gave us increased food and rudimentary health care. Several hundred of us were captured much earlier. I got there April 20, 1965 so my bad treatment period lasted 4 1/2 years. President Ho Chi Minh died on September 9, 1969, and the new regime that replaced him and his policies was more pragmatic. They realized we were worth a lot as bargaining chips if we were alive. And they were right because eventually Americans gave up on the war and agreed to trade our POW's for their country. A damn good trade in my opinion! But my point here is that John allows the media to make him out to be THE hero POW, which he knows is absolutely not true, to further his political goals.
2) John was badly injured when he was shot down. Both arms were broken and he had other wounds from his ejection. Unfortunately this was often the case - new POW's arriving with broken bones and serious combat injuries. Many died from their wounds. Medical care was non-existent to rudimentary. Relief from pain was almost never given and often the wounds were used as an available way to torture the POW. Because John's father was the Naval Commander in the Pacific theater, he was exploited with TV interviews while wounded. These film clips have now been widely seen. But it must be known that many POW's suffered similarly, not just John. And many were similarly exploited for political propaganda.
3) John was offered, and refused, "early release." Many of us were given this offer. It meant speaking out against your country and lying about your treatment to the press. You had to "admit" that the U.S. was criminal and that our treatment was "lenient and humane." So I, like numerous others, refused the offer. This was obviously something none of us could accept. Besides, we were bound by our service regulations, Geneva Conventions and loyalties to refuse early release until all the POW's were released, with the sick and wounded going first.
4) John was awarded a Silver Star and Purple Heart for heroism and wounds in combat. This heroism has been played up in the press and in his various political campaigns. But it should be known that there were approximately 600 military POW's in Vietnam. Among all of us, decorations awarded have recently been totaled to the following: Medals of Honor - 8, Service Crosses - 42, Silver Stars - 590, Bronze Stars - 958 and Purple Hearts - 1,249. John certainly performed courageously and well. But it must be remembered that he was one hero among many - not uniquely so as his campaigns would have people believe.
John McCain served his time as a POW with great courage, loyalty and tenacity. More that 600 of us did the same. After our repatriation a census showed that 95% of us had been tortured at least once. The Vietnamese were quite democratic about it. There were many heroes in North Vietnam. I saw heroism every day there. And we motivated each other to endure and succeed far beyond what any of us thought we had in ourselves. Succeeding as a POW is a group sport, not an individual one. We all supported and encouraged each other to survive and succeed. John knows that. He was not an individual POW hero. He was a POW who surmounted the odds with the help of many comrades, as all of us did.
I furthermore believe that having been a POW is no special qualification for being President of the United States. The two jobs are not the same, and POW experience is not, in my opinion, something I would look for in a presidential candidate.
Most of us who survived that experience are now in our late 60's and 70's. Sadly, we have died and are dying off at a greater rate than our non-POW contemporaries. We experienced injuries and malnutrition that are coming home to roost. So I believe John's age (73) and survival expectation are not good for being elected to serve as our President for 4 or more years.
I can verify that John has an infamous reputation for being a hot head. He has a quick and explosive temper that many have experienced first hand. Folks, quite honestly that is not the finger I want next to that red button.
It is also disappointing to see him take on and support Bush's war in Iraq, even stating we might be there for another 100 years. For me John represents the entrenched and bankrupt policies of Washington-as-usual. The past 7 years have proven to be disastrous for our country. And I believe John's views on war, foreign policy, economics, environment, health care, education, national infrastructure and other important areas are much the same as those of the Bush administration.
I'm disappointed to see John represent himself politically in ways that are not accurate. He is not a moderate Republican. On some issues he is a maverick. But his voting record is far to the right. I fear for his nominations to our Supreme Court, and the consequent continuing loss of individual freedoms, especially regarding moral and religious issues. John is not a religious person, but he has taken every opportunity to ally himself with some really obnoxious and crazy fundamentalist ministers lately. I was also disappointed to see him cozy up to Bush because I know he hates that man. He disingenuously and famously put his arm around the guy, even after Bush had intensely disrespected him with lies and slander. So on these and many other instances, I don't see that John is the "straight talk express" he markets himself to be.
Senator John Sidney McCain, III is a remarkable man who has made enormous personal achievements. And he is a man that I am proud to call a fellow POW who "Returned With Honor." That's our POW motto. But since many of you keep asking what I think of him, I've decided to write it out. In short, I think John Sidney McCain, III is a good man, but not someone I will vote for in the upcoming election to be our President of the United States.
"Doctor Phillip Butler is a 1961 graduate of the United States Naval Academy and a former light-attack carrier pilot. In 1965 he was shot down over North Vietnam where he spent eight years as a prisoner of war. He is a highly decorated combat veteran who was awarded two Silver Stars, two Legion of Merits, two Bronze Stars and two Purple Heart medals.
After his repatriation in 1973 he earned a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of California at San Diego and became a Navy Organizational Effectiveness consultant. He completed his Navy career in 1981 as a professor of management at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. He is now a peace and justice activist with Veterans for Peace."
Butler, Phillip. "Why I Will Not Vote for John McCain". Military.com March 27th, 2008
http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,164859_1,00.html August 22, 2008
Written by Phillip Butler:
As some of you might know, John McCain is a long-time acquaintance of mine that goes way back to our time together at the U.S. Naval Academy and as Prisoners of War in Vietnam. He is a man I respect and admire in some ways. But there are a number of reasons why I will not vote for him for President of the United States.
When I was a Plebe (4th classman, or freshman) at the Naval Academy in 1957-58, I was assigned to the 17th Company for my four years there. In those days we had about 3,600 midshipmen spread among 24 companies, thus about 150 midshipmen to a company. As fortune would have it, John, a First Classman (senior) and his room mate lived directly across the hall from me and my two room mates. Believe me when I say that back then I would never in a million or more years have dreamed that the crazy guy across the hall would someday be a Senator and candidate for President!
John was a wild man. He was funny, with a quick wit and he was intelligent. But he was intent on breaking every USNA regulation in our 4 inch thick USNA Regulations book. And I believe he must have come as close to his goal as any midshipman who ever attended the Academy. John had me "coming around" to his room frequently during my plebe year. And on one occasion he took me with him to escape "over the wall" in the dead of night. He had a taxi cab waiting for us that took us to a bar some 7 miles away. John had a few beers, but forbid me to drink (watching out for me I guess) and made me drink cokes. I could tell many other midshipman stories about John that year and he unbelievably managed to graduate though he spent the majority of his first class year on restriction for the stuff he did get caught doing. In fact he barely managed to graduate, standing 5th from the bottom of his 800 man graduating class. I and many others have speculated that the main reason he did graduate was because his father was an Admiral, and also his grandfather, both U.S. Naval Academy graduates.
People often ask if I was a Prisoner of War with John McCain. My answer is always "No - John McCain was a POW with me." The reason is I was there for 8 years and John got there 2 ½ years later, so he was a POW for 5 ½ years. And we have our own seniority system, based on time as a POW.
John's treatment as a POW:
1) Was he tortured for 5 years? No. He was subjected to torture and maltreatment during his first 2 years, from September of 1967 to September of 1969. After September of 1969 the Vietnamese stopped the torture and gave us increased food and rudimentary health care. Several hundred of us were captured much earlier. I got there April 20, 1965 so my bad treatment period lasted 4 1/2 years. President Ho Chi Minh died on September 9, 1969, and the new regime that replaced him and his policies was more pragmatic. They realized we were worth a lot as bargaining chips if we were alive. And they were right because eventually Americans gave up on the war and agreed to trade our POW's for their country. A damn good trade in my opinion! But my point here is that John allows the media to make him out to be THE hero POW, which he knows is absolutely not true, to further his political goals.
2) John was badly injured when he was shot down. Both arms were broken and he had other wounds from his ejection. Unfortunately this was often the case - new POW's arriving with broken bones and serious combat injuries. Many died from their wounds. Medical care was non-existent to rudimentary. Relief from pain was almost never given and often the wounds were used as an available way to torture the POW. Because John's father was the Naval Commander in the Pacific theater, he was exploited with TV interviews while wounded. These film clips have now been widely seen. But it must be known that many POW's suffered similarly, not just John. And many were similarly exploited for political propaganda.
3) John was offered, and refused, "early release." Many of us were given this offer. It meant speaking out against your country and lying about your treatment to the press. You had to "admit" that the U.S. was criminal and that our treatment was "lenient and humane." So I, like numerous others, refused the offer. This was obviously something none of us could accept. Besides, we were bound by our service regulations, Geneva Conventions and loyalties to refuse early release until all the POW's were released, with the sick and wounded going first.
4) John was awarded a Silver Star and Purple Heart for heroism and wounds in combat. This heroism has been played up in the press and in his various political campaigns. But it should be known that there were approximately 600 military POW's in Vietnam. Among all of us, decorations awarded have recently been totaled to the following: Medals of Honor - 8, Service Crosses - 42, Silver Stars - 590, Bronze Stars - 958 and Purple Hearts - 1,249. John certainly performed courageously and well. But it must be remembered that he was one hero among many - not uniquely so as his campaigns would have people believe.
John McCain served his time as a POW with great courage, loyalty and tenacity. More that 600 of us did the same. After our repatriation a census showed that 95% of us had been tortured at least once. The Vietnamese were quite democratic about it. There were many heroes in North Vietnam. I saw heroism every day there. And we motivated each other to endure and succeed far beyond what any of us thought we had in ourselves. Succeeding as a POW is a group sport, not an individual one. We all supported and encouraged each other to survive and succeed. John knows that. He was not an individual POW hero. He was a POW who surmounted the odds with the help of many comrades, as all of us did.
I furthermore believe that having been a POW is no special qualification for being President of the United States. The two jobs are not the same, and POW experience is not, in my opinion, something I would look for in a presidential candidate.
Most of us who survived that experience are now in our late 60's and 70's. Sadly, we have died and are dying off at a greater rate than our non-POW contemporaries. We experienced injuries and malnutrition that are coming home to roost. So I believe John's age (73) and survival expectation are not good for being elected to serve as our President for 4 or more years.
I can verify that John has an infamous reputation for being a hot head. He has a quick and explosive temper that many have experienced first hand. Folks, quite honestly that is not the finger I want next to that red button.
It is also disappointing to see him take on and support Bush's war in Iraq, even stating we might be there for another 100 years. For me John represents the entrenched and bankrupt policies of Washington-as-usual. The past 7 years have proven to be disastrous for our country. And I believe John's views on war, foreign policy, economics, environment, health care, education, national infrastructure and other important areas are much the same as those of the Bush administration.
I'm disappointed to see John represent himself politically in ways that are not accurate. He is not a moderate Republican. On some issues he is a maverick. But his voting record is far to the right. I fear for his nominations to our Supreme Court, and the consequent continuing loss of individual freedoms, especially regarding moral and religious issues. John is not a religious person, but he has taken every opportunity to ally himself with some really obnoxious and crazy fundamentalist ministers lately. I was also disappointed to see him cozy up to Bush because I know he hates that man. He disingenuously and famously put his arm around the guy, even after Bush had intensely disrespected him with lies and slander. So on these and many other instances, I don't see that John is the "straight talk express" he markets himself to be.
Senator John Sidney McCain, III is a remarkable man who has made enormous personal achievements. And he is a man that I am proud to call a fellow POW who "Returned With Honor." That's our POW motto. But since many of you keep asking what I think of him, I've decided to write it out. In short, I think John Sidney McCain, III is a good man, but not someone I will vote for in the upcoming election to be our President of the United States.
"Doctor Phillip Butler is a 1961 graduate of the United States Naval Academy and a former light-attack carrier pilot. In 1965 he was shot down over North Vietnam where he spent eight years as a prisoner of war. He is a highly decorated combat veteran who was awarded two Silver Stars, two Legion of Merits, two Bronze Stars and two Purple Heart medals.
After his repatriation in 1973 he earned a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of California at San Diego and became a Navy Organizational Effectiveness consultant. He completed his Navy career in 1981 as a professor of management at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. He is now a peace and justice activist with Veterans for Peace."
Butler, Phillip. "Why I Will Not Vote for John McCain". Military.com March 27th, 2008
http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,164859_1,00.html August 22, 2008
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Lieberman to speak at the Republican convention
Two words we have about Mr Lieberman: Opportunist and Traitor.
The following article was written by CNN:
Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, the 2000 Democratic vice presidential nominee, will speak on Sen. John McCain’s behalf at the Republican National Convention, a source in the McCain campaign tells CNN.
Lieberman, who became an Independent in 2006 after losing the Democratic primary in his Senate re-election bid, has been a high profile surrogate on the campaign trail for McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
Lieberman, who won re-election to his Senate seat, hinted earlier this month what tone he would strike at the convention being held next month in St. Paul.
"I'm not going to go to that convention, the Republican convention, and spend my time attacking Barack Obama,” Lieberman said in an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press. “I'm going to go there really talking about why I support John McCain and why I hope a lot of other independents and Democrats will do that. And frankly, I'm going to go to a partisan convention and tell them, if I go, why it's so important that we start to act like Americans and not as… partisan mudslingers here in Washington."
While Lieberman is campaigning on behalf of McCain, he has not cut all ties to the Democratic Party. This year, he donated $115,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, matching what he contributed to the political arm of the Senate Democratic Caucus in 2007.
And he continues to be included in the Democratic head count that gives them the majority in the Senate by the slimmest of margins – one vote. In turn, Lieberman chairs the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee — a powerful perch with wide jurisdiction over the Bush administration.
Lieberman was first elected to the Senate as a Democrat in 1988 and 12 years later found himself standing alongside Vice President Al Gore, as Gore's running mate. Six years later, it looked like his political career had come crashing down. His support for the war in Iraq prompted businessman Ned Lamont to challenge him in the Democratic primary.
After losing the primary, Lieberman vowed to continue running, a decision that caused many prominent Democrats, including fellow Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, to endorse Lamont. The endorsements weren't enough to seal a victory for Lamont — Lieberman was elected to another term.
Preston, Mark and Rebecca Sinderbrand. CNN ."Lieberman to speak at the Republican convention." August 20th 2008.http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/20/lieberman-to-speak-at-the-republican-convention/
Women’s Bodies Owned by the President?
As November approaches for the Presidential elections, many women will want to pay close attention to who will be supporting their rights. The first major milestone for women was winning the right to vote. It was not until the 1920s that the Nineteenth Amendment was put into the Constitution; it prohibits each of the states and the federal government from denying any citizen the right to vote because of that citizen's sex. In many ways, from that day forward the rights of women took many steps forward to the equality of men. On Senator John McCain’s website under his issues tab you will not find a tab that directly addresses women, but anyone who has watched the news in recent months knows exactly how Mr. McCain feels about birth control, abortion, and the magic pill Viagra. It appears John McCain avoids answering questions related to women’s issues and purposely keeps some of his views hidden from the women voters hoping to slide one over their eyes.
The most alarming thing about John McCain is that women often get swept up with his shiny “maverick” attitude and truly don’t look for the facts. One really doesn’t have to look far on the internet to find some of the scoop on Mr. McCain. According to Planned Parenthood, one of the largest health care providers for reproductive health; when they polled “1,205 women in 16 likely battleground states, finding that despite his extreme voting record, 51 percent of women voters in battleground states have no idea what John McCain's positions are on women's reproductive health issues” (Planned Parenthood). Furthermore, of these women Planned Parenthood polled “Forty-nine percent of women currently backing McCain express pro-choice views” and, “46 percent of women supporting McCain over Obama want to see Roe v. Wade upheld.”(Planned Parenthood). This is the kind of information women voters should take another look at, if they truly knew John McCain they would know they were casting their vote for the guy who will not uphold their ideals and basic rights. Every woman voter concerned with reproductive issues and women’s rights should be more involved in examining this candidate’s positions on these topics.
One might wonder if women voters have paid attention to all the news that birth control and abortion have received lately, a lot of that news is giving a glimpse of what a future with John McCain may be like. As of recently, the Bush administration has pushed forward a proposal that would begin treating certain kinds of birth control pills as abortion. According to the Wall street Journal, “The Bush Administration has ignited a furor with a proposed definition of pregnancy that has the effect of classifying some of the most widely used methods of contraception as abortion.”(Simon). The article also said many Democrats, including Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama, have signed letters to oppose the proposal. John McCain had no comment. This seems to be a theme with the topic of reproductive issues for McCain. Last month John McCain was asked about his thoughts about health insurance companies covering Viagra but not Birth Control Pills. According to The New York times, “The normally voluble Senator John McCain found himself at a loss for words Wednesday when he was asked aboard his campaign bus on its way to Portsmouth, Ohio, whether he thought it was fair that some health insurance companies covered Viagra but not birth control. ‘I don't usually duck an issue,’ he said, ‘but I'll try to get back to you.’”(Cooper). Again, John McCain left women voters with unanswered questions on what their future might be like if he was the commander-in-chief. This promoted anger from Naral Pro-Choice America who noted that “Mr. McCain had voted against a 2005 bill requiring health insurance companies to cover birth-control pills as well as Viagra. Mr. McCain said he did not recall the vote.”(Cooper). The truth is John McCain stays quite unambiguous on his website to blind the women voters into voting for the wrong guy.
If a woman voter truly wanted to know where John McCain stood on reproductive rights a few answers are spelled out on his website. Under his issues tab there is no link given directly to women, like his opponent Obama has, but there is one called “Human Dignity and Life” (JohnMcCain.com). At the very top in bright blue colors it states overturning Roe vs. Wade. According to the website John McCain believes that “Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench.”(JohnMcCain.com). If you go over the whole list with a fine comb there in no mention of birth control pills, so again women are left with an unclear picture of his stance.
In defense of John McCain, the one option he brings up on his web-page to help women in crisis is the promotion of adoption for unwanted pregnancies. He shares his own personal story of him and his wife Cindy McCain adopting a little girl in 1993 from Mother Teresa's orphanage in Bangladesh. As stated on the website, “As president, motivated by his personal experience, John McCain will seek ways to promote adoption as a first option for women struggling with a crisis pregnancy. In the past, he cosponsored legislation to prohibit discrimination against families with adopted children, to provide adoption education, and to permit tax deductions for qualified adoption expenses, as well as to remove barriers to interracial and inter-ethnic adoptions”(JohnMcCain.com).
Yet this doesn’t seem like enough. John McCain mentions nothing of the current high rise of pregnancies across the nation. His only options for them that he spells out on his page is adoption or helping her bring the baby into the world. As he says on his site; “However, the reversal of Roe v. Wade represents only one step in the long path toward ending abortion. Once the question is returned to the states, the fight for life will be one of courage and compassion - the courage of a pregnant mother to bring her child into the world and the compassion of civil society to meet her needs and those of her newborn baby” (JohnMcCain.com) Nothing is noted on his website about prevention, sexual education, or access to birth control pills, and he absolutely will overturn the option of abortion.
In reality John McCain undoubtedly always tries to avoid questions on the topic of women’s reproductive leaving women voters with no real facts to go on. He has consigned the Bush administrations policy of only abstinence as the form of sexual education. John McCain is so opposed to contraception, the one thing that can avoid the rising pregnancies in the nation and prevent abortions, and still he voted against having insurance plans to cover it. And, rarely can the Senator McCain conveniently remember how he voted. If John McCain was voted in as President, women’s rights would slide back to the time before 1973 when abortion first became legal and birth control pills became more accessible. If women’s reproductive rights are pushed back thirty-five years it will only “drive them into back alleys where they became dangerous, expensive, and humiliating. Thousands of American women died and thousands more were maimed before abortion was legal. For this reason and others, women and men fought for and achieved women's legal right to make their own decisions about abortion.” (Planned Parenthood). American women voters truly need to read into the facts they are fed on the internet and TV and with just a little cross-checking they could find where John McCain stands on some of these vital issues and find out what he really means when he leaves issues intentionally unclear and buying many of their votes unknowingly.
-Crystal Ainardi
Cooper, Michael. "Sex, Drugs and Insurance :[National Desk]. " New York Times [New York, N.Y.] 10 Jul 2008, Late Edition (East Coast): A.19. ProQuest National Newspapers Core. ProQuest. 7 Aug. 2008 http://www.proquest.com/
McCain, John. August 9, 2008 “Human Dignity and Life” John McCain.com http://www.johnmccain.com/
Planned Parenthood. “Know John McCain” Planned Parenthood © 2008 Planned Parenthood® Action Fund, Inc. 9 Aug 2008 http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/campaigns/know-john-mccain-122.htm
Stephanie Simon. "Currents: Treating the Pill as Abortion, Draft Regulation Stirs Debate. " Wall Street Journal [New York, N.Y.] 31 Jul 2008, Eastern edition: A.11. ProQuest National Newspapers Core. ProQuest. 7 Aug. 2008
Great Article by Time
Putting US Energy in the Wrong Place:
"John McCain stood atop an oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday and proclaimed that he had the key to solving America's energy woes, slashing the price of gas, and unfettering U.S. foreign policy from its addiction to foreign oil. Drill. Drill here. And drill now."
The interesting thing about this article shows how the conversation on energy independence has been skewed towards big oil at the expense of alternatives. This is unfortunate as early on Obama had released an energy plan with renewables at the center. Yet, misdirection, pandering and lies about the actual time-frame regarding the true effects of expanding off-shore drilling have served to obfuscate the issues of global warming, environmental damage caused by fossil fuel based economies and in essence missed the entire notion behind energy independence.
If America is reliant upon a non-renewable and finite energy source regardless of its origins, then how can one claim that to be truly energy independent? Independence implies freedom and yet we will opt to be slaves to big oil companies operating right here in America!
John McSame has successfully diverted attention away from the real and serious issue facing this country in order to frame the issue as a "you're either with us or against" type of characterization (sound familiar?). In this way he has shaped the conversation through a misrepresentation of the facts and in taking a play from Karl Rove's minions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
