July 16, 2008

7/16: On Iraq And Gorillas

Barack Obama's national security address was received positively by the netroots, who were pleased (and perhaps a bit relieved) that the IL senator "vowed to stick to his plan to withdraw combat troops within 16 months of becoming president". On the other hand, The Washington Post's editorial page editor, Fred Hiatt, was unhappy about Obama's commitment to a timetable, and he wrote a scathing editorial slamming Obama's "foolish consistency." Conservative bloggers were delighted by Hiatt's editorial, which they see as a sign that Obama "isn't wearing well" and that "public opinion" is turning against him on the war. Of course, the netroots would argue that Hiatt isn't representative of public opinion on the war, much less Dem opinion.

Meanwhile, the netroots are buzzing about a 1986 Tucson Citizen article describing allegations that John McCain told a crude joke involving rape and gorillas during his initial run for Senate (no, we're not making this up). The Huffington Post contacted the reporter who wrote the story and she said that she believes the incident happened:

"I'm not sure exactly what the wording was of the joke, but something was said. Some joke involving a rape and ape was said. Enough women repeated it to me at the time and the McCain campaign had a non-denial denial."

Liberal bloggers are slamming McCain and pointing out that he has made sexist jokes before. At least one liberal blogger is arguing that disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters now have another reason not to support McCain.

MCCAIN: What A Comedian!

Liberal bloggers are buzzing about a report that McCain told a crude joke about rape during his 1986 run for the Senate. The AZ blog Rum, Romanism and Rebellion broke the news to the blogosphere when it dug up a 1986 Tucson Citizen article. The article describes allegations that McCain told the following joke during a March 1986 appearance before the National League of Cities and Towns:

"Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, 'Where is that marvelous ape?'"

McCain was immediately denounced by women's groups, and he said that he did not "recall" telling the joke. The Huffington Post's Sam Stein contacted the original reporter in that story, Norma Coile, to find out if she thought the story was true:

"'I'm not sure exactly what the wording was of the joke, but something was said. Some joke involving a rape and ape was said. Enough women repeated it to me at the time and the McCain campaign had a non-denial denial,' said Coile, now with the Arizona Daily Star. 'It came after his "Seizure World" joke, in which he referred to the [retirement community] Leisure World as Seizure World...I just think it reinforced this idea that John McCain is humor-challenged. Whatever his qualities, he seems to have a tin ear for how these jokes will go over.'"

Liberal bloggers are slamming McCain and pointing out that he has made sexist jokes before:

• Digby: "I know that this kind of joking is fairly typical of frat houses and locker rooms and other all-male enclaves, but you'd think that a professional politician would understand that it's unacceptable to make these sorts of jokes in public. Even in 1986, that gorilla joke (even if it were funny) would have been out of line. But McCain has always been handled with kid gloves by the press and so even when he calls his wife a cunt in front of reporters, they don't write about it. And I suspect that these sexist bon mots are among the comments the the boys on the Straight Talk Express have admittedly withheld from the voters over the years to protect him. It's all in good fun, right? [...] But the Republicans had better keep their traps shut about civility and decency from now on because their standard bearer is a disgusting pig."
• Crooks and Liars' John Amato: "Do you think John McCain has a little problem with women? His Chelsea Clinton joke was as tasteless as it goes. And of course his answer about birth control and Viagra was classic. But this 1986 joke during his Senate run is just off the wall. [...] Pretty disgusting if you ask me."
• Firedoglake's Attaturk: "Given his track record, there seems no reason to doubt McCain made this incredibly awful joke about rape. Of course, the likelihood of this being looked into beyond we Dirty Effing Hippies? Low. Yes, disenchanted Clinton voters this is the guy you want to vote for. The guy against abortion rights, against non-Ozzie & Harriet Adoptions, against equal pay but totally for more of those awesome wars and really awful slanderous jokes."
• Daily Kos diarist Geekesque: "As many folks know -- because the MSM wouldn't let you not know -- [MN Sen candidate] Al Franken told some nasty, disgusting and genuinely offensive jokes back in the day. Worst of all, while brainstorming for a skit, he threw out the idea of including rape. I'm not going to defend that. Why would I? It was wrong, and he should have to repent that kind of garbage. And he's taken some political hits -- because the Republicans have gone on the attack, and the media has gone along with it. Which is fair enough. But, that makes the media's complicity in John McCain's hatred of women all the more galling. John McCain has said even WORSE things than Al Franken has ever dreamed."
• AMERICAblog's John Aravosis: "Hey, it was a youthful indiscretion. I mean, McCain was only 49 years old at the time."
• BooMan: "Will John McCain disown himself?"

MCCAIN II: Straddling The Fence On Gay Adoption?

After McCain told The New York Times, "I don't believe in gay adoption," gay and lesbian groups condemned his remarks. McCain's campaign subsequently issued a statement indicating that McCain "was not endorsing any federal legislation" banning the practice and that he supports gay adoption when there is no "alternative." Liberal bloggers were not satisfied by the campaign's clarification, and they're criticizing McCain's stance:

• Aravosis: "So basically, rather than put the kids to sleep, McCain would let them be adopted. I'm sorry, but the year is 2008. I'm not going to accept John McCain saying that gays are less fit to be parents, or that gay parents don't have as much to offer as straight parents, and then have him say in the same breath that as a last resort gays are fit as parents. Either we are or we're not, you can't have it both ways."
• The Carpetbagger Report's Steve Benen: "What [McCain] said, and what [McCain communications director Jill] Hazelbaker described as his policy, are completely different. In reality, my suspicion is that McCain simply doesn't know what he thinks. The Times brought up a topic that he doesn't frequently consider, [he] heard the word 'gay,' and reflexively expressed his opposition. I'm glad McCain's position on July 15 is better than McCain's position on July 13, but I'd be even happier if he could get the basics right the first time."
• MyDD's Todd Beeton: "This really comes down to the definition of what a parent is and it's clear that for John McCain, one can only be a parent if one is married to someone of the opposite gender. So not only does this rule out gay couples, but it also rules out single people, whether straight or gay. Pretty interesting considering he didn't seem to have a problem with his ex-wife raising his kids as a single parent when he decided he was done with her."
• The Washington Independent's Matthew DeLong: "According to the American Psychological Assn., research shows 'that children of gay or lesbian parents are just as mentally healthy as children with heterosexual parents,' and there may even be some positive effects. Also, the sexual orientation of parents has no impact on that of their children. [...] Whether McCain actually believes homosexuals are incapable of raising 'successful' families or he's just pandering to the GOP's Christian conservative base is irrelevant. If this information is to be believed, then the net effect of McCain's position would be to deprive parent-less children of the potential for adoption into a loving, supportive home. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, there are about two and a half times as many children waiting to be adopted as are adopted every year. As an adoptive parent himself, you would think McCain would be willing to take a more humanitarian position, for the sake of children who don't have parents."
• The Atlantic's Matthew Yglesias links to DeLong's post and adds: "But the facts are a small price to pay for the sake of discriminating against gay and lesbian couples."

McCain is also taking some heat for his position from social conservatives, as CBN's David Brody reports: "McCain said in an interview he's against gay adoption but his campaign muddied the waters afterwards when they tried to clarify and soften his position. [...] This is just the beginning of reaction to this gay adoption story. You can bet that this type of straddling the fence position by the campaign will be another talking point among social conservative leaders."

MCCAIN III: Flip-Flop Alert

Liberal bloggers continue to criticize McCain for telling the National Council of La Raza that he supports the DREAM Act when he previously told conservative bloggers that he opposes it. Liberal bloggers are also criticizing the press (again) for not covering McCain's apparent reversal:

• dday: "It's important to ponder how John McCain either doesn't believe in recording equipment or has so much faith in the people doing the recording, i.e. the BBQ-stained media, that he has no problem saying 100% different things to different audiences. Conservative groups hear 'I don't support the DREAM Act,' and Hispanic groups hear the opposite. That's some straight talk."
• Atrios: "McCain's ability to be on 15 sides of an issue which really only has 2 sides is quite astounding. I suppose that's what his base in the mainstream media are talking about when they refer to his mavericky straight-talking action. The actual problem with 'flip-flopping' was forgotten at some point during Tim Russert's tenure at Meet the Press, where even just changing your mind in response to new facts became a political sin, but surely McCain's tendency to tell different audiences different thing would qualify as that or as that other sin supposedly loathed by journalists, 'pandering.'"
• AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay: "It's good to be John McCain. Not only is he one of the very rich and famous with nine homes and counting, but McCain can say anything he wants with impunity. McCain knows the media will give him a free ride. So, he makes things up, changes position and sometimes just outright lies. But, it's okay. He's John McCain. But, lying/flip-flopping/obfuscating about the DREAM Act to a kid is still pretty low -- even for John McCain. And, if he didn't lie to the kid, he lied to the conservative bloggers."

MCCAIN IV: Copycat!

Liberal bloggers are accusing McCain of adopting Obama's position on Afghanistan:

• TPM's Josh Marshall: "Is everybody missing this? That McCain is now trying to catch up to Obama on Afghanistan? In fact, he's now adopting Obama's position. Obama has been saying for almost a year that more troops are needed in Afghanistan. McCain has said that wasn't the case, that Iraq was the central battleground in the war on terror. Moreover, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs says that we need more troops in Afghanistan but we none are available unless we pull substantial numbers out of Iraq -- which McCain is ruling out. So let's all say it out loud: McCain is now copying Obama's position on Afghanistan. And with troops that he doesn't have since he's against pulling any out of Iraq."
• Mark Kleiman: "Riverboat John McCain is gambling that no one in the press will have the backbone to say the obvious: that McCain's new strategy -- reduce troop levels in Iraq to increase them in Afghanistan -- is borrowed from Barack Obama. I think that's a pretty good bet. And it's virtually a sure thing that McCain's reversal of position on where it is that we need more troops won't be called a 'flip-flop.'"
• Benen: "While Obama has been arguing for a year that he wants to send additional troops to Afghanistan, McCain has always held the opposite position, opposing the deployment of more U.S. troops, and arguing that any additional troops come from NATO. Yesterday, however, McCain reversed course, change his position, and embraced Obama's policy as his own. [...] Remember, the premise of John McCain's presidential campaign is (a) his expertise on foreign policy and national security; and (b) his consistency. By any reasonable measure, this had to be humiliating for McCain. Not only did he flip-flop on his policy, and not only did he borrow Obama's policy as his own, but he had to keep clarifying what he actually meant."

The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan thinks McCain's position and Obama's position are "converging": "McCain focuses on Afghanistan. He's packaging it as a 'surge', according to Eli Lake. I'm not sure how the tactics of Iraq can be transferred that easily to the remote mountains of Afghanistan, but the new focus is good news, and further narrows the gap with Obama. These two candidates are converging."

Kleiman disagrees with Sullivan: "I can't see how anyone can say that the McCain and Obama positions are 'converging.' [...] How fast we get out of Iraq is a superficial issue. The core issue underlying it is whether to get out of Iraq. McCain is fully on board with the imperialist program; that's the meaning of '100 years.' Bases, oil concessions, the whole nine yards. Obama wants us out."

OBAMA: You Want Contrast? Here's Your Contrast!

Liberal bloggers are praising Obama's speech on Iraq and national security:

• Benen: "Once in a while, I'm reminded that Obama 'gets it.' Today's speech is a reassuring example. Obama isn't defensive, and he's not relying on conservative frames to discuss national security. He's taking steps -- and I hope he takes even more -- to argue that the nation has been arguing in a fundamentally flawed way."
• Firedoglake's Christy Hardin Smith: "[Obama's speech] is a refreshing change from the 'Yee Haw!' idiocy of the [George W.] Bush/[Dick] Cheney regime and the 'me too!' policies of John McCain. [...] Nice to see some recognition that diplomacy and something other than flexing military muscle and making petulant demands of obeisance might be under consideration, isn't it? [...] The shame of it is that we all -- Americans, Afghans, Pakistanis, Iraqis...you name it, we all pay the price for the piss poor policies of the Bush/Cheney Administration. And if we elect John McCain in November? There are a number of reasons he's been dubbed McSame..."
• MyDD's Josh Orton: "This is a great speech. The Bush administration lead us down a black hole -- an unnecessary war waged on false intelligence and questionable motivations. It was A Big Lie. McCain backed The Lie all the way, and now almost cartoonishly stumps around the country to continue The Lie. No strategy. No explanation. It'll be like post-war Korea, he says, where American troops patrol peacefully and free from the threat of casualty. No one asks how. [...] Obama delivers clear contrast with his opponent, assigning responsibility for this disaster where it belongs. But he also lays out a real, comprehensive national security strategy. I have doubts that our press is capable of communicating it in a substantive way, but I suppose it's important to hope."
• TAPPED's Tim Fernholz: "Obama's big Iraq speech today was good, if a bit listless in delivery -- he was in professor mode -- but all in all it laid out a foreign policy liberals can believe in (while not flip-flopping). [...Obama offered] the most complete and pragmatic descriptions of the endgame in Iraq that I've seen from a politician, even if some questions remain (just how big will that residual force be?). It's a clear signal to the Iraqi government that it had best get its house in order. Judging by Prime Minister Nuri al Maliki's request for a withdrawal timetable, that is a signal they're ready to receive."

On the right side of the blogosphere, The Weekly Standard's Dean Barnett doesn't underestand by the netroots aren't upset by Obama's rhetoric about Afghanistan: "If a majority of Democrats disagree the war was worth fighting in the first place, you can wager a mega-majority of Netroots' denizens disagree. And yet the left is silent regarding Obama's belligerence towards the Afghanistan theatre. It's positively puzzling. Could the explanation be that the left has suddenly developed, contra the ABC/WaPo poll, an unprecedented enthusiasm for extirpating Jihadists? I doubt it. More likely is that the left is closing ranks around its candidate, confident that he doesn't really mean his bluster."

OBAMA II: Right Said Fred

Conservative bloggers are buzzing about Hiatt's Washington Post editorial, which criticizes Obama for "sticking to his arbitrary, 16-month timetable" for withdrawal from Iraq:

• AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein: "While the Post editorial board is more sympathetic to the war than, say, the NY Times, it isn't exactly the Wall Street Journal either. The fact that they are starting to come down so hard on Obama for this is a sign that he isn't wearing well."
• AmSpec Blog's Quin Hillyer: "The Washington Post editorial page for several years now has been what The New Republic of the early 1990s was: the voice of the constructive and thoughtful center-left. (I wish its news pages were as consistently fairminded.) But it's still definitely left of center, which is why that editorial (see post below) was so devastating. It is just incontrovertible now that Barack Justanotherlyingpolitician Obama was wrong -- dead wrong, dangerously wrong, pathetically wrong -- about the surge. The man has absolutely no business being commander in chief. His foreign/defense policy experience is narly nil, and his foreign/defense policy judgment is appalling. To see the Post point that out is an early indicator of where public opinion is headed -- which bodes ill for Obama's sickeningly messianic campaign."
• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "It's really hard to picture the Post endorsing McCain this year, but Obama is making their instinctive endorsement of the Democrat much more difficult. [...] In the eyes of the Post, Obama has been wrong about the biggest and most pressing foreign policy decision facing the country, and continues to double down on a wrong position. Can they endorse a man who they have concluded is 'ultimately indifferent to the war's outcome'?"

Hot Air's Ed Morrissey: "The Washington Post editorial board rips Barack Obama for what it calls The Iron Timetable, but that doesn't quite capture the willful ignorance Obama shows on Iraq. The Post notes, as did John McCain, the fact that Obama wrote his policy on Iraq before speaking with the commanders on the ground to determine the facts, and concludes that Obama is 'ultimately indifferent to the war's outcome,' but that's not the real problem. Obama has to stick with his Iraq policy, not for the good of the country, but because he can't afford to cut his last tie to the Left."

OBAMA III: The Truth Is Out There

Conservative bloggers continue to mock Obama after his campaign reportedly "scrubbed his presidential Web site over the weekend to remove criticism of the U.S. troop 'surge' in Iraq":

• AmSpec Blog's Robert Stacy McCain: "The newly pragmatic Barack Obama -- the one who promises to listen to U.S. military commanders in Iraq -- has attempted to make the old anti-war Obama disappear."
• Townhall's Carol Platt Liebau: "By now, it's been widely reported that Barack's web masters were busy 'purging the surge' -- or at least, Barack's opposition to it -- over the weekend. Does this sound familiar to anybody? Remember when Hillary Clinton accused Barack of 'scrubbing' his web site of all support for the war? Here's a snippet from a January '08 piece in the Huffington Post. [...] So first Barack removed a speech opposing the war at a time (2004) when such opposition might have opened his 'judgment' to question. Now he's doing the same thing when the surge's success makes it clear that his much-vaunted 'judgment' in opposing it was nothing if not flawed. Well, removing any record of a strike-out is a great way to build a record of batting a thousand."
• Townhall's Matt Lewis: "Not only is this a tacit admission that Obama was wrong about the surge ('judgment' -- not experience -- matters most, right?) -- but this move also shows a more sinister, secretive Obama. How long before pictures of Rev. [Jeremiah] Wright are photoshopped out of Obama's wedding pictures?"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: A Weak Economy Helps McCain?

Matt Lewis makes a contrarian argument:

"Nervous people are less adventurous. McCain's experience makes him a safer pick. 'Hope' and 'change' are great when everything is going well. But when things start to go south, I think, people are less willing to take risks...including political ones. And Obama is nothing if not an unknown 'risky' commodity.

But what about FDR, you ask? First, he was much more of a known commodity. And I think that after a complete collapse, people are willing to roll the dice. 'What do we have to lose?,' they may ask. But assuming there is not a complete collapse, I would venture that, ironically, this weak economy may help -- not hurt -- McCain."

LEST WE FORGET: Obama Releases List of Approved Jokes About Himself

The Huffington Post's Andy Borowitz:

"Saying he is 'sympathetic to late night comedians' struggle to find jokes to make about me,' Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) today issued a list of official campaign-approved Barack Obama jokes. [The jokes] are as follows:

Barack Obama and a kangaroo pull up to a gas station. The gas station attendant takes one look at the kangaroo and says, 'You know, we don't get many kangaroos here.' Barack Obama replies, 'At these prices, I'm not surprised. That's why we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.'

A traveling salesman knocks on the door of a farmhouse, and much to his surprise, Barack Obama answers the door. The salesman says, 'I was expecting the farmer's daughter.' Barack Obama replies, 'She's not here. The farm was foreclosed on because of subprime loans that are making a mockery of the American Dream.' [...]

A Christian, a Jew and Barack Obama are in a rowboat in the middle of the ocean. Barack Obama says, 'This joke isn't going to work because there's no Muslim in this boat.'"

Posted by Ian Faerstein at July 16, 2008 01:17 PM