AZAMATTEROFACT

New Home

2008-12-18T22:31:00.001-05:00

You can catch my new posts at http://www.letsgetthisright.com

Live Streaming Video from McCain-Palin Election Night Headquarters

2008-11-02T03:00:00.003-05:00

Brad Marston will be live streaming on internet video at the top of every hour starting at 7 pm Eastern Standard Time until we have a result.

Live Broadcast by Ustream.TV

OnLine Phone Bank for McCain-Palin

2008-10-28T14:08:00.000-04:00

Can you invest 20 minutes a day to make history?

We need you to make 20 calls/day using our on-line phone bank. Making calls from home is easy to do; simply click on the following link and select a state: http://JohnMcCain.com/phonebank

We provide the names, numbers and call scripts right on your computer screen. All you need to do is make the call, read the script and record the results.

If you have the passion and time, you can truly make a difference.

Thank you!

Bill Bloomfield,
Director of Volunteers
http://JohnMcCain.com/phonebank

Sarah Palin - Ready To Lead?

2008-10-22T23:28:00.003-04:00

Cross Posted from Let's Get This Right

So much has been written about Governor Sarah Palin and her "inexperience." Of course I think it is more the loathing of the left and the Main Stream Media towards a plain spoken, or should I say Straight Talking conservative Republican woman. Obama supporters don't really care about experience (evidenced by the fact that they are Obama supporters). They care about Hope and Change and hating Republicans.
As for the experience argument I share the following.

Question: What is America 's first line of missile interceptor defense that protects the entire United States ?
Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard.

Question: What is the ONLY National Guard unit on
permanent active duty?
Answer: 49th Missile Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard

Question: Who is the Commander in Chief of the 49th Missile
Defense Battalion of Alaska National Guard?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska

Question: What U.S. governor is routinely briefed on
highly classified military issues, homeland security, and
counter terrorism?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska

Question: What U.S. governor has a higher classified
security rating than either candidate of the Democrat Party?
Answer: Governor Sarah Palin, Alaska

According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain
in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used
to keeping secrets. She can be entrusted with our national
security, because she already is.

Now you know too, please, pass it on!

Minutes For McCain-Palin

2008-10-18T13:03:00.002-04:00

Don't let those free cell phone minutes go unused!

Don't let those Rollover minutes expire!

Let's use our Minutes for McCain-Palin 2008!

Let’s Get This Right

in conjunction with

McCainGoogleGroups.com, McCainVictory08.com, McCainNow.com,

McCain State Facebook Groups,

PoliticoMafioso and MadIrishman

is urging EVERYONE to use their

MINUTES FOR McCAIN-PALIN 2008!!!

Working together, we can make 100,000 calls for McCain-Palin 2008 between now and November 4th. If you believe you pay enough taxes, if you believe Barack Obama shouldn’t spread YOUR wealth around, if you believe in the 2^nd Amendment, if you believe that Barack Obama should NOT nominate the next two Supreme Court justices, if you believe that the best government is that which governs least YOU NEED TO MAKE THESE VITAL

GET OUT THE VOTE CALLS TO BATTLEGROUND STATES SUCH AS PENNSYLVANIA, FLORIDA, OHIO, NEW HAMPSHIRE, COLORADO, VIRGINIA, NEW MEXICO, NEVADA, MISSOURI AND NORTH CAROLINA.

You can make 20 calls in each session using the OnLine Phone Bank at www.JohnMcCain.com. It will take about 45 minutes depending on the number of people you actually reach.

If EVERY loyal McCain-Palin supporters who read this make just 20 calls a day between now and Election Day we can EASILY make our goal of 100,000 calls for McCain-Palin 2008 (if not more.) According to polls, 59% of Americans describe themselves as “conservative” or “somewhat conservative.” There was no Liberal groundswell in the 2006 election. Conservatives and Republicans just stayed home.

45 MINUTES A DAY WHICH WILL SHAPE THIS COUNTRY FOR THE NEXT EIGHT YEARS! 45 MINUTES A DAY FROM THE COMFORT OF YOUR OWN HOME. INVITE YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY OVER WITH THEIR LAPTOPS AND CELL PHONES AND WORK TOGETHER.

Election 2008 is NOT over!

2008-10-13T17:36:00.001-04:00

Cross-posted from Let's Get This Right.

If only half of the people who read this message take a couple of hours to make 100 phone calls and write 10 Letters to the Editor, we can contact 200,000 voters and write 20,000 letters between now and Election Day. We should actually be able to do better than that to make certain John McCain, Sarah Palin and America wins on November 4th.

A McCain-Palin victory on November 4th will require two things. First is a reversal of the current financial/banking crisis and an accompanying rebound in the stock market. Second is continued determination and hard work by grassroots volunteers in the face of seemingly impossible odds.

We can all hope for a turnaround in the market, but we can't cause it. We can all hope for a change in the McCain-Palin campaign message and strategy but we can't control it. What we can control, individually and collectively is how hard and effectively we work over the next three weeks to Get Out The Vote.

I encourage everyone who receives this message to visit the McCain-Palin 2008 Voter2Voter Online Phone Bank. The instructions are easy and the script is simple and straightforward. While you can choose to call your home state, I would suggest that we focus on the six of nine "toss-up" states that went for Bush in 2004 but that are currently leaning towards Obama-Biden. These are Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Colorado, Nevada and Virginia. We absolutely MUST hold on to these states and their 89 Electoral College votes if we are to have any hope of keeping Barack Obama out of the White House.

The other thing we need to do is convince Obama leaning and undecided voters that an Obama-Biden administration with an overwhelmingly democratically controlled Congress would be a disaster for the American people. The main stream media is never going to give the McCain-Palin ticket a fair shake nor are they going to expose just how bad an Obama-Biden administration would be for our economy.

Our only hope is to go around the Main Stream Media and go straight to the people. You can e-mail friends or post on your blogs or comment on others. However, let's remember that in spite of the growth of the internet a huge number of people still get their news from their local paper. I would encourage everyone to write letters to the editor of their local papers. Actually, at www.publishaletter.com you can send a letter to almost any paper big or small in the country. If you need some ideas, please read below and click on the links to learn more.

According to an Op Ed piece by Bruce Ash, "Should Barack Obama be trusted with proposing tax policy, when he has voted nine times against lowering the capital gains tax rate, seven times against implementing tax incentives for small businesses, six times against lowering the estate tax and three times against repealing a more than decade-old increase in taxes on Social Security benefits."

Brad O'Leary in his book on Barack Obama, The Audacity of Deceit has a great chapter, "War on Success" that details ten different Obama proposals to raise taxes. You can download this or any other chapter FREE by clicking HERE.

In Monday's Wall Street Journal, the lead editorial was titled Obama's 95% Illusion which clearly shows that Obama's "tax cuts" are really marginal tax rate increases masked by "refundable tax credits" whether one actually pays taxes or not.

"There's another catch: Because Mr. Obama's tax credits are phased out as incomes rise, they impose a huge "marginal" tax rate increase on low-income workers. The marginal tax rate refers to the rate on the next dollar of income earned. As the nearby chart illustrates, the marginal rate for millions of low- and middle-income workers would spike as they earn more income.

Some families with an income of $40,000 could lose up to 40 cents in vanishing credits for every additional dollar earned from working overtime or taking a new job. As public policy, this is contradictory. The tax credits are sold in the name of "making work pay," but in practice they can be a disincentive to working harder, especially if you're a lower-income couple getting raises of $1,000 or $2,000 a year."

We have 21 days to win this thing. Please give at least a few hours to help secure America's future. .

Obama's Attack on Success.

2008-10-13T14:29:00.002-04:00

My friend Tony GOPrano of PoliticoMafioso sent me this Op Ed piece written by our mutual friend Bruce Ash, Republican National Committeeman from Arizona. You can learn more at AshForArizona.com

Many investors are nervous because of the current uncertainty in the stock market, and the general lack of liquidity in the financial markets. Now, however, is NOT the time to sell. There are some unique buying opportunities in a market that has lost 20% of its value. If you can avoid the herd mentality fueled by the same type of speculation that caused this crisis, there are good profits to be gained in the future - if you are prudent and patient. The American economy is still the strongest in the world. Success from Wall Street to Main Street, however, may have something to do with who is elected President in 2008. Read the rest of Bruce's Op Ed here

Obama Campaign Lies About Keating Economics

2008-10-06T14:07:00.001-04:00

Cross posted from McCain Victory 08.

So I got an e-mail Monday morning [excerpts below] from Obama Campaign puppet master David Plouffe announcing that they would be releasing a 13 minute “documentary”, “Keating Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis.” I was curious how many lies of commission and omission the Obama campaign could fit into a single short e-mail.

Now I didn’t expect Plouffe to mention that Barack Obama has received in three years, five times the political donations from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that John McCain has received in twenty years. I didn’t expect Plouffe to explain what Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought with those payments.

Over the weekend, John McCain's top adviser announced their plan to stop engaging in a debate over the economy and "turn the page" to more direct, personal attacks on Barack Obama.

Okay. According to RealClearPolitics it wasn’t McCain’s top adviser and what he said was "looking to turning the page on this financial crisis and getting back to discussing Mr. Obama's liberal, aggressively liberal, record and how he will be too risky for the Americans." I guess talking about Senator Obama’s record is a personal attack. I mean he did personally establish his record as a hard left liberal.

In the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great
Depression, they want to change the subject from the central question of this election. Perhaps because the policies McCain supported these past eight years and wants to continue are pretty hard to defend.

Well that is demonstrably false as we are not “in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.” While we are at risk of it, the worst economic crisis since the great depression is still the stagflation brought on by the Carter economic policies when home foreclosure rates were higher than they are today.

Actually John McCain supported greater oversight and regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both in 2003 and 2006. John McCain had the foresight to predict the crisis that led to the Government bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Obama’s buddy, Senator Chris Dodd wouldn’t even let the bill out of committee.

But it's not just McCain's role in the current crisis that they're avoiding. The backward economic philosophy and culture of corruption that helped create the current crisis are looking more and more like the other major financial crisis of our time.

Actually over regulation and misguided regulation caused this crisis.

During the savings and loan crisis of the late '80s and early '90s, McCain's political favors and aggressive support for deregulation put him at the center of the fall of Lincoln Savings and Loan, one of the largest in the country. More than 23,000 investors lost their savings.

Actually John McCain was never at the “center of the fall of Lincoln Savings and Loan”.
The Senate Ethics Committee probe of the Keating Five began in November 1990 and committee Special Counsel Robert Bennett [a Democrat] recommended that McCain and Glenn be dropped from the investigation. They were not. McCain believes Democrats on the committee blocked Bennett's recommendation because he was the lone Keating Five Republican.

I also find it interesting how Plouffe tries to spin the phrase “investors lost their savings” implying that people with savings accounts lost money (They didn’t as they were FSLIC insured.) and unless Mr. Plouffe knows all the investors personally, I am not sure he can also imply that they lost all of their savings.

Plouffe also doesn’t mention that the policies of Obama, helping to block stricter oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has already cost the government billions of dollars and investors have lost over $60 billion of their savings in the last year alone with the collapse of FNMA common and preferred stock.

Overall, the savings and loan crisis required the federal government to
bail out the savings of hundreds of thousands of families and ultimately cost American taxpayers $124 billion.

Sound familiar?

In that crisis, John McCain and his political patron, Charles Keating,
played central roles that ultimately landed Keating in jail for fraud and McCain in front of the Senate Ethics Committee.

This from wikipedia on the Keating Five Scandal

After a lengthy investigation, the Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings, with Cranston receiving a formal reprimand. Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised "poor judgment".

[Plouffe fails to mention that it was only Democratic Senators who were found to have acted improperly and in fact all three chose to not run for re-election.]

And this time, McCain's bankrupt economic philosophy has put our economy at the brink of collapse and put millions of Americans at risk of losing their homes.

Actually again, no. It was the policies of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and Barack Obama that have put millions of American’s at risk of losing their homes. Of course, most of those people couldn’t really afford those homes in the first place.

If Barack Obama through David Plouffe can tell that many lies about John McCain in a short e-mail, I wonder how many he can tell in a 13 minute documentary.

But of course neither Plouffe or Obama will tell you that.

An open Letter to Congressman Shadegg

2008-09-29T03:52:00.000-04:00

Congressman Shadegg,

I have to assume that when you asked for the opinion of people you meant your consituents (I live in Boston) but I have been working with Jeff Vath of Arizona for well over a year in support of Senator McCain for President and he forwarded your message on to me.

I come to this issue with some degree of understanding if not expertise. Aside from a degrees in Government and Economics from Georgetown University, my father was a former Senior VP of Washington Mutual (back when it was a sleepy little thrift institution) and then a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board and later Chairman under Presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter. (My dad was sworn into office by long time family friend Senator Barry Goldwater.)

I spent 13 years on Wall Street as a Mortgage Backed Securities salesman, trader and ultimately Senior VP and Managing Director of a major regional firm. (I can't tell you how delighted I am to be out of the business today. Back then losing a Million dollars in a day was big deal. Now that is pocket change.)

Yes. Something must be done and quickly because yes, we face an economic crisis but this bill is a lawyers and lobbyists wet dream.

I disagree with John McCain when he says this problem was caused by "greed and corruption on Wall Street." With all due respect, the dumbest Wall Street Bond Trader is smarter than the brightest government regulator, congressman or senator.

This problem was caused by government regulation and government social engineering. The government through Regulation Q told banks and thrifts how much they could pay for deposits. Unfortunately they didn't tell money market funds how much they could pay. Smart people took their money out of banks and thrifts and invested in Fidelity and Vangard and thrifts ended up paying 18% to finance 30 year mortages at 6%.

This problem was caused by government regulation and won't be solved by more government regulation. The source of the problem is that the US government decreed under then President Carter and then expanded under President Clinton that banks and thrifts had to make more loans to minorities or face legal penalties. The only way they could meet those quotas was by relaxing credit requirements.

So here is my advice.

Vote against the bill because the free market is ALWAYS better than the governmental alternative even given how bad the free market can be at times.

Don't vote for a bill that allows the Government to buy illiquid asets. Vote for a bill that suspends mark to maket rules on illiquid assets.

Instruct the Fed to flood the market with liquidity that allows these institutions to finance their assets and forces them to lend.

Vote for a bill that suspends CRA requirements and allows banks and thrifts to only grant loans to people who can afford them

Vote for a bill that forces lenders to adjust loans so that prople who tok them out can afforf them.

Government caused this problem.

Restrict executive salaries but vote for a resolution that says no Senator or congressman can take a salary above the median income until TARP is abolished.

Just my thoughts,

McCain Obama Debate

2008-09-28T04:48:00.001-04:00

McCain at the next debate.

The Joe Biden Health Watch

2008-09-12T11:22:00.002-04:00

Cross-posted from Let's Get This Right.

I had a discussion last night with my good friend Tony GOPrano of PoliticoMafioso during which I suggested that if the health of the Obama campaign doesn't improve dramatically by October 1st, you can be assured that Joe Biden's will decline just as dramatically over the same time frame. Tony disagreed with me strongly. Granted he lives in Arizona, has volunteered for John McCain campaigns for years and has one of the most highly read pro-McCain blogs out there.

However, when I woke up and saw the headline in the Financial Times Democrats on Capitol Hill Fear Obama Fallout I knew that the Joe Biden Health Watch was on.

Let's remember that it was those same Democratic party bosses that selected Barack Obama over Senator Hillary Clinton not because they felt he was more qualified to be President but rather for the dollars and new voters he would bring to the party. Barack Obama was going to lead the charge for "change", 40 more seats in Congress and a filibuster proof Senate.

Well as the saying goes..."Not so much."

"Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election. Party leaders have been hoping to strengthen Democratic control of the House and Senate in November, but John McCain’s jump in the polls has stoked fears of a Republican resurgence."

According to an article today on Real Clear Politics, Palin's popularity has trickled down to other races. "John McCain successfully closed the gap with Barack Obama when he chose Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his running mate. But beyond the presidential contest, Republican leaders in Congress see a shifted landscape for their candidates, and for the first time in months, they have reason to be cautiously optimistic about the November elections.

"In the last three or four weeks, Democrats thought, especially after their convention, they thought things were all moving in their direction," National Republican Senatorial Committee chair John Ensign told Real Clear Politics. "The momentum has totally changed, and it's on our side."

Real Clear Politics' own polling data shows the Democrat's lead in generic Congressional polling has shrunk to 3.6% from double digits only a few weeks ago. Especially vulnerable are Democratic freshman congressmen defending tradionally Republican seats. The Democratic party leaders are not going to let all of that slip away without a fight. Given that those who said that the Palin pick was not a "game changer" have been proven totally wrong, the only remaining game changer for Democrats is a sudden illness for Senator Biden and an Obama-Clinton ticket.

The Joe Biden Health Watch is on.

Fred Thompson at the RNC Convention

2008-09-02T22:52:00.002-04:00

Cross Posted from McCain Victory 08.

Former Senator Fred Thompson offered a full throated defense of Gov. Sarah Palin when he addressed the Republican National Convention tonight.

“She is from a small town, with small town values but that is not good enough for those folks who are attacking her and her family. … Let’s be clear. The selection of Governor Palin has the other side and their friends in the media in a panic. She is a courageous, successful, reformer who is not afraid to take on the establishment.

Sound like anyone else we know?”

Thompson, in just a few short phrases, made crystal clear why the liberal pundits in the lefty blogs and the main stream media have been so brutal in their attacks. They are afraid. They are afraid of the fact that Governor Palin has more executive experience that the Obama-Biden ticket combined. They are afraid that if they do not immediately define the narrative of her, the American people are going to listen to Governor Palin and like what they hear.

One thing Thompson didn’t say (but it is no less true) that the main stream media and the far left blogs are taking up the attack so that the Obama campaign (at least after they all got the same memo) won’t have to.

After recounting McCain’s amazing story of service to his country, Senator Thompson took some well aimed shots at Senator Obama. Well maybe they weren’t shots so much as the fact that Senator Obama so badly pales in comparison to John McCain.

“The Senate has always had more than its share of smooth talkers. And big talkers. It still has.
But while others were talking reform, John McCain led the effort to make reform happen.”

“ The respect he is given around the world is not because of a teleprompter speech designed to appeal to American critics abroad but because of decades of clearly demonstrated character and statesmanship.”

Then Thompson brought out the big guns.

“To deal with these challenges the Democrats present a history making nominee for president.
History making in that he is the most liberal, most inexperienced nominee to ever run for President.”

Thompson gave the crowd here what they wanted and what the abbreviated convention needed.

Bravo Zulu John McCain

2008-07-31T00:00:00.000-04:00

I just wanted everyone to know about Bravo Zulu John McCain which is a fundraising effort on behalf of the McCain Campaign being spearheaded by Blogs For John McCain. The date of the "event" is 8/01 commemerating the date that John McCain was promoted to Captain.

They are very close to their goal so please visit and learn how you can help!

Brad Marston on Blog Talk Radio

2008-07-05T05:09:00.003-04:00

Brad Marston on Heading Right Radio with Media Lizzy

Conservative Candidates Can Not Wait

2008-06-29T02:47:00.001-04:00

John McCain is correct . . .

We have entered a critical phase of the campaign season. Senator Obama and his liberal friends have pulled out all the stops in their cynical campaign of distortions and outright lies, and with the help of their special interest allies are continuing to raise staggering amounts of money.

Collectively the Obama campaign and their cohorts have turned their full attention- and their massive war chest - toward defeating conservative candidates up and down the ticket.

They have begun their assaults against conservatives in earnest, and we must immediately respond.

To battle back against their barrage of media attacks the McCain Camp has authorized and approved their own media advertising in every key battleground state from coast to coast. These ads have started running and tell the true story of McCain service, his leadership, and hopefully introduce many undecided voters to the bold solutions he will bring to the White House. We have done the same in selecting conservative candidates.

Purchasing media time is extraordinarily expensive . . . and it will draw down heavily on our financial resources. But we have no other choice. Liberals are outspending conservatives at an alarming rate . . . especially in congressional races.

So please click here to rush conservative candidates an emergency media contribution of $20 or $50

There is not a moment to waste!

Folks we are counting on our closest friends, men and women like you , who have remained by our side throughout this rough and tumble campaign season to stand by conservatives once again at this critical juncture. The scale is much larger and the stakes are as high as ever. We have to focus on all of our conservative brothers and sisters across the Nation.

We will run respectful campaigns - but will not shy away from fairly showing voters the clear differences between our vision for our nation's future and that of the liberals . . . and the differences could not be more stark.

Our vision for a better America calls for strong economic growth policies, including tax cuts, free and fair trade and energy independence. These pro-growth policies will help create jobs, increase wages and make our economy more secure.

The liberal rhetoric speaks glowingly of new jobs, opportunities and economic growth. But the specifics of their plans call for massive tax hikes, strangling regulations and more government control of the economy. This is a recipe for grinding our economy to a halt, not growing it.

Our vision for America in the world is one of strength and clear purpose. We must strengthen and improve our military force that is already second to none. We must complete our mission in Iraq with victory by establishing a stable, democratic government. We must continue to press al Qaeda and disrupt terrorist networks. We must establish a League of Democracies that will work with us to apply pressure to promote peace, stop genocide and improve human rights throughout this world.

The liberals vision of America's role in the world is dangerously naive. They have promised to retreat from Iraq without fully considering the risks. They have advocated negotiating with rogue dictators without preconditions. And they have promised to abrogate trade agreements and turn their back on vital allies and trading partners.

The American people deserve more. We need a President who has a record of change versus merely rhetoric of change. We need a President whose judgment is proven and who is ready to be commander in chief on day one. We need strong conservatives who share our core beliefs across the nation to be shown our full support.

You can be sure Barack Obama and his liberal allies will do everything in their power to muddy the waters, distort our records and distract voters with baseless claims. They will hit hard - and they will hit fast. We will take the blows - but we must be able to fight back quickly with strength and the truth.

That is why our media campaigns for conservatives are so critically important. Our ads will clearly delineate the sharp contrasts between liberals and us. We simply must have the financial resources to fully implement our media campaigns - and your immediate contribution is essential.

Running TV ads in states from Pennsylvania to New Mexico is extremely costly. A 30 second national ad on The O'Reilly Factor costs $25,000. So it takes 500 supporters each giving $50. to run just that one ad!

Friends, we must raise millions to keep our media campaigns running. And to do that we need you to make a contribution of $10 or even $50 today!

Our campaigns have been called futile, yet we have succeeded despite being under funded and practically written off. All is not lost for conservatives! We must have perseverance and faith that the voters will continue to listen to our message and cast their ballot for experienced leadership and a renewed sense of optimism for America as well as the core beliefs that made America the greatest nation in the world.

We've been through this before. We are running against better funded opponents, but we have the RIGHT message and the RIGHT vision. If we continue to hold strong and stand together, we will win.

Visit the Let's Get This Right Contribution link to help a conservative candidate now. And here is the rest of it.

Obama and his curious choice of friends,

2008-06-05T17:07:00.004-04:00

Obama has interesting tastes when it comes to friends and advisors...spiritual or otherwise.

This from Human Events.

Greg Craig: Obama's Next Thorn
by Ericka Andersen
Posted: 06/04/2008

He defended John Hinkley, Jr. after the latter’s attempt to assassinate President Ronald Reagan. He defended former Bolivian Defense Minister Carlos Sanchez-Berzain, a human rights violator accused of 67 deaths. He was a “personal attorney” for Kofi Annan in the UN Oil for Food scandal and he provided “special counsel” to Bill Clinton during his impeachment trial. Currently, high powered attorney Greg Craig of the DC-based Williams and Connolly law firm, is defending Pedro Miguel Gonzales, President of the Panamanian legislature, accused of murdering U.S. Army Sgt. Zak Hernandez.

And he’s a senior foreign policy advisor to presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama. A poster child for limousine liberal lawyers, Craig’s participation in the Obama campaign may give rise to the kind of conflict of interest that has prevented more than one candidate to fail.

Click here to read the rest about Barack Obama and Greg Craig.

McCain and the Hillary Democrats

2008-05-09T14:24:00.004-04:00

Newt Gingrich recently weighed in on what the Republicans need to do to avoid a disaster in November. Pat Buchanan continues the discussion over at Human Events with an article entitled The Hillary Democrats. While I don't agree with all of Buchanan's analysis, there are some words of wisdom there for the McCain Campaign, the RNC and RNCC.

In 1992, cultural, social and moral issues could have derailed Clinton, which is why James Carville told the War Room to stay laser-focused. "It's the economy, stupid!" Bush and James Baker deemed social and cultural issues unworthy of a president. And so it was that George H.W. Bush ceased to be president.

His son did not make that mistake. In the primaries and general election in 2000, Bush embraced the Christian conservatives and their agenda.

Since Pennsylvania, Barack has recognized this deficiency and sought to portray himself as a reflexive patriot who enjoys a bottle of Bud just like the next guy, a kid raised in poverty by a single mom, who turned his back on Wall Street offers to fight for steelworkers laid off when their mills closed in South Chicago and moved to China.

McCain, a war hero and POW, is a natural for Middle Pennsylvania and Middle Ohio. His problems, however, are these:

He is failing to energize the Republican base, one-fourth of which is still voting against him in primaries. On the great populist issues of 2008 -- outsourcing of American jobs to Mexico, Asia and China, and the illegal alien invasion -- he stands foursquare with K Street -- for amnesty and NAFTA -- and against Main Street.

One can argue whether comprehensive immigration reform is amnesty (I have in the past stated my case that it is not) as well as whether free trade is a net benefit to the United States and the American people.

One cannot argue that the Republican party is a dispirited bunch and this does not bode well for our chances in November. Now the question. What to do about it?

There are some lively discussions going on about this right now in the member blogs over at McCainNow.com.

Democrats Attack McCain - Surprised?

2008-05-03T04:51:00.001-04:00

There is a great deal of justifiable anger being expressed at both the DNC’s and MoveOn.org’s television ads attacking John McCain. You can read some terrific articles posted in the past few days at GOP.com, Hot Air and Flopping Aces. William Teach of McCain Blogs has a particularly good piece on how FactCheck.org thoroughly deconstructs the DNC ad as distorted and misleading.

What does have me confused are the expressions of surprise. I mean, what did we expect? One unfortunate truth about negative ads is they tend to work and as the Chicago Tribune reports this anti-McCain ad appears to be no different.

Any political media strategist will tell you that you have to run an ad with a positive message seven to ten times more often than a negative one to have the same impact. So, if you are DNC Chairman Howard Dean or one of his puppet masters over at MoveOn.org what would you do?
Let’s remember that as The Hill recently pointed out, Dean runs the only Democratic organization that is failing to out-raise its Republican counterpart. The democrats in general hold huge advantages in the upcoming election but of course, Dean has a rather glorious history of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. As it is the cash strapped DNC has to beg its members to send donations to keep its ads on the air. They have two brutally flawed candidates who are spending millions pointing out each others flaws and tearing each other apart in the process. Of course no one is surprised by the tactics of the Hillary Clinton campaign. It would take a heretofore unseen level of political naiveté to “believe” that a South Side Chicago Democrat like Barak Obama wouldn’t go negative despite all his promises to the contrary.

It is called “framing the narrative” and “defining your opponent before he/she can define themselves.” It is also called Politics 101. The narratives that the Democrats and their willing accomplices in the Main Stream Media are going with are 1) A third Bush term, 2) Continuing an unpopular and in their minds unwinnable war, (Actually Iraq is one battle in a much wider war) and 3) We are in a recession and John McCain doesn’t have the economic expertise to dig us out.

Those three elements of the democrat’s campaign against McCain are a vivid reminder of the truth of Ronald Reagan’s famous line “It’s not that liberals are ignorant. It is that so little of what they know is true.” Each is demonstrably false. My favorite is that we are in a recession when we have yet to have even a single quarter of falling GDP much less two in a row.

That the democrats are going to attack McCain and lie to do it isn’t really news or even noteworthy although I believe explaining it and putting it into some perspective may be.

So I think the more interesting question is “What should the McCain Campaign response be? There is a fair amount of debate about that. Pennsylvania political activist and pundit, Stephen Maloney has a very well written if not particularly complimentary post “The Battle For McCain’s Soul” over at his blog. Jeffrey Lord over at the American Spectator weighs in with “What if William Ayers Was Black.”

One of the problems the McCain Campaign has is a lack of an opponent which it sorely needs. Any campaign both financially and rhetorically has a finite amount of bullets it can fire and spending either of them on a candidate your campaign will never run against is of questionable value. I am guessing that both the McCain Campaign and the RNC will come out swinging once they have a target. Since both have graduate degrees in political strategy I am confident that will not forget the lessons of Politics 101. They will clearly seek to define their opponent. Of course that begs the question “How much worse do you have to make Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama look?”

However, I don’t think McCain will go negative. Will he and his campaign forcefully defend against attacks from the DNC, MoveOn and the eventual Democratic Nominee? Absolutely, but I doubt you will see an NCGOP type of ad over at JohnMcCaindotCom at YouTube.

The McCain narrative is “Service to America” and I think John McCain believes that type of campaigning would be in fact a dis-service to America. Strategically it lowers the level of campaigning to a point where I don’t think the McCain team wants to go. In Politics 102 you learn “You can’t throw mud without getting yourself dirty.”

I remember with glee when the Mastercard Moment when Clinton opened the leadership debate with her now infamous “It’s 3 am” ad. Perhaps Hillary wants to debate McCain on character. I doubt it. Perhaps Obama wants to challenge McCain on experience or in light of Obama’s dubious associations both past and present, judgment. Well, not so much.

Great McCain Links

2008-04-12T02:53:00.003-04:00

I found a great link over at NJ4McCain regarding Vets For McCain. For more great McCain Links...

McCain Victory 08
The Mad Irishman
Politico Mafioso
NH4McCain
John McCain 2008
Ali Akbar,AzaMatterofact, AzaMatteroPrinciple, Blogs4McCain, BroadSideoftheBarn, ElectionNightHQ, Hoosiers4McCain, Iowa4McCain, McCain Blogettes, McCain States, McCain Talk, McCainVictory08, McCain Campaign Blog, Metaxupolis, My McCain Blog, NH4McCain, NJ4McCain, Pardon My French, Partisan American, PoliticoMafioso, Purple People Vote, Reality Bytes, Respectfully Republican, Stand Up For McCain>The Mad Irishman, The McCain Times, Vote McCain, With Both Hands, Porter County Politics, But I am a Liberal.Blue and New, Brainster, California Thoughts and Dreams, College Kid for McCain, McCain Monitor, Empty Rhetoric, Andrew Jones for America, JohnnyMillerBlog, Keystone for Victory, Michigan4McCain, Why McCain, and Wisconsin4McCain.

McCain "Abuse" - The NonRetraction Retraction

2008-04-08T22:20:00.007-04:00

Matt Yglesias of the Atlantic.com printed a blog post yesterday .

Welcome to the Non Retraction Retraction.

Matt Yglesais posted THIS on his blog at The Atlantic.com on Monday. In his post he quotes and links to Cliff Schecter’s The Real McCain about stories of verbal abuse by John McCain towards his wife, Cindy.

I blogged about how flimsy the story was over at RedState. My one commenter was nice enough to point out that Yglesias seems to agree with me and has since retracted his story.

Or as he put it..."but there's no evidence that this particular incident happened that meets a reasonable journalistic standard."

Of course Yglesias didn’t really retract his story. In his retraction he includes a text link to the story knowing full well that the link will be repeated, move the story up in the search engine rankings and bring his blog post, the Left Wing “Raw Story” post and the Democratic Political Strategist, Cliff Schecter greater exposure and readership.

This is about smearing John McCain, driving traffic and selling Schecter’s book. On one of Schecter’s many blogs, every link referring to “exhaustive research” was in fact a link to buying his new book on Amazon.com. Matt Yglesias in his non retraction retraction repeats the “trollop” charge and then meekly states “there's no evidence that this particular incident happened that meets a reasonable journalistic standard.” In his post Matt basically says ‘I hate Republicans and John McCain so much that I just had to print this garbage knowing it was garbage.’

As for Schecter, he is a Democratic Operative who worked for the Clinton Campaign and if you need to know how far left he is he worked for Fed Dalton’s Campaign to defeat Joe Lieberman for Senate in Connecticut.

In a recent post about McCain’s relationship with the African American Community, Schecter referred to "John Sydney Hussein McBush. This clearly something from an ideologue, not a journalist or objective author.

Of course the left wing blogoshere is repeating this story as if it were Gospel…if the believed in the Gospels. We have the following:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/07/report-mccains-profane-ti_n_95429.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/08/new-book-mccain-once-phys_n_95595.html

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/04/07/a-trollop-and-a-ct/

http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2008/04/07/please-convince-me-were-not-doomed/

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/7/19555/14030

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=27363

http://airamerica.com/blog/2008/apr/07/mccainca

http://wonkette.com/376849/john-mccain-called-wife-awful-word-that-rhymes-with-hunt-and-punt

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/07/temper-temper/

Of course none of them have reported on Yglesias’s non-retraction re-traction. And of course, as they hoped, building a big enough biomass it would leak into the MSM which it did via The New York Daily News.

The liberal blogosphere doesn’t report much on this from Macs Mind.

Lying on McCain and Cindy
Apr 7 at 2:02pm by Macranger

Uber left wing blogger is hawking a book called “The Real McCain” in which
he delivers this “shocking story” from 1992 when during a campaign stop McCain
got irked by his wife Cindy called her the “C” word. Via the supermarket
reliable Raw Story.

“Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let
me in on another incident involving McCain’s intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate
bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as
campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy
playfully twirled McCain’s hair and said, “You’re getting a little thin up
there.” McCain’s face reddened, and he responded, “At least I don’t plaster on
the makeup like a trollop, you cunt.” McCain’s excuse was that it had been a
long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long
days.”

The only problem is that the story is false. This tale
first floated up around the 2000 election primary cycle but was quickly knocked
down by Cindy herself in an interview in 1999. Further this article - while counting the ups and downs of McCain’s
political career and marriage to Cindy makes no mention of the event.

You would think if true this story would have been old news by now.
It’s doubtful Cliff Schecter got this from anything except the top of his
head."

What is disheartening is the silence from the conservative side of the blogosphere.

Mad Irishman has blogged about this HERE.

The Pink Flamingo HERE.

William Teach of McCainBlogs has written about it HERE.

This is the kind of garbage we are up against. I am not saying that this came from the Barack or Hillary Campaigns. I am saying we need to research this kind of post, comment on them and get John McCain’s message out.

I know if I ever posted something like Cliff Schecter’s or Matt Yglesias’s piece I would get an e-mail from someone in the McCain Campaign asking me to stop. Clearly, neither Cliff nor Matt got that memo.

McCain Google Groups Website Launches!

2008-04-07T15:20:00.003-04:00

Thank You For Supporting John McCain In 2008!

McCain Google Groups is committed to improving the lives of every citizen of the United States of America. Through outreach and advocacy, we can make a difference! We support John McCain the candidate with a true vision of hope. John McCain has been successful in advocating for improvements in our country so we can build a better world for our children, with your help we can be successful in electing John McCain President of The United States of America.

Our volunteer base is growing daily as citizens have found a voice and renewed sense of hope and seen first hand what real leadership consists of. You too can make a difference. Sign up for your State Group. Volunteer in person. Volunteer online. Contribute. Recruit friends/family or simply add your name to the list of supporters.

How do I get started?
Please find your state below and join your state group. Then, you may choose from various actions such as help raise money, recruit your friends, and help get others involved in the effort. Stay informed and inform others in your state on how best to help the McCain Grass Roots effort!
Why get involved?
In order to show John McCain that he has the strong backing of loyal supporters like you, we are asking everyone to join our team and get involved. You are part of that effort. With your support, we are building a strong grassroots campaign.
I'm excited to help! What else can I do?
Boots On The Ground, Grass roots are the KEY to victory in this election. The most important things you can do are join our team and start telling your friends about McCainGoogleGroups.com and JohnMcCain.com. By joining our team and getting involved early you can make a big difference in building a strong team for John McCain.

"Common sense conservatives believe in a short list of self-evident truths: love of country; respect for our unique influence on history; a strong defense and strong alliances based on mutual respect and mutual responsibility; steadfast opposition to threats to our security and values that matches resources to ends wisely; and confident, reliable, consistent leadership to advance human rights, democracy, peace and security." -Senator John McCain

Copyright 2008. McCain Google Groups. All rights reserved.
Created By (Sheridan Folger) The Mad Irish Man's Conservative Consortium and (Jeff Vath) Politico Mafioso.

McCain Google Groups is privately owned and maintained. All contributors are volunteers unaffiliated with any campaign or political party.

Material published and opinions expressed herein are solely the responsibility of the individual authors of this site. While we enjoy participation from the campaign...this site is made up of plain ol' volunteer folks, don't forget it.

? Grab this Headline Animator

GoDaddy.com is the world's #1 ICANN-accredited domain name registrar!

2008-04-01T14:38:00.003-04:00

NOT FOOLED BY OBAMA
Media, Non-Partisan Groups, And Even Obama Himself Set Record Straight On His Distorted "100 Year" Attack
_____________________________________________________________________

Yesterday, Obama Acknowledged That Sen. McCain's Plan For Keeping Troops In Iraq Would Be Similar To The U.S. Troop Presence In South Korea:

"At The End Of The Exchange Obama Admitted That He Understands McCain Is Talking About The Korean Style Bases And Not A Hot War Like Iraq..." (Sunlen Miller, "Obama Claims Characterization Of McCain's Statement On Iraq Is Fair," ABC News' "Political Radar" Blog, www.abcnews.com, 3/31/08)

• Question: "But I think that [Sen. McCain] talks about it in the spirit of Germany and Japan..." Obama: "And we've been in South Korea for 50 years. And he's used that as an example..." (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, 3/31/08)

At The Same Time, Obama Continued To Distort Sen. McCain's Position As He Has Consistently Done In The Past:

"[R]ather Than Sticking To An Airtight Retelling Of McCain's Words, Obama Deviated From McCain's Comment On More Than One Occasion." (Teddy Davis and Talal Al-Khatib, "'We Can Run The Youtube Spot,'" ABC News' "The Note's Sneak Peek," 3/31/08)

• Obama: "John McCain -- I mean, we can run the YouTube spot -- has said that we will stay there as long as it takes and, if it takes another 100 years, he's up for that commitment." (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, 3/31/08)

• Obama: "[I]t's certainly different from saying that we would have a high level of combat troops inside Iraq for a decade or two decades or, as John McCain said, perhaps 100 years." (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, 3/31/08)

• Obama: "And when it comes to foreign policy, John McCain says he wants to fight a hundred year war, a hundred years he says, as long as it takes." (Mike Dorning, "Obama Fires Away At McCain," Chicago Tribune's "The Swamp" Blog, www.chicagotribune.com, 2/9/08)

• Obama: "[W]e are bogged down in a war that John McCain now suggests might go on for another 100 years..." (Sen. Barack Obama, MSNBC Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Cleveland, OH, 2/26/08)

• Obama: "[Sen. McCain] says that he is willing to send our troops into another 100 years of war in Iraq..." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks On Primary Results, Houston, TX, 2/19/08)

Non-Partisan Fact Check Groups Call Democrat Attacks On Sen. McCain's "100 Years" Comment False:

Non-Partisan Factcheck.Org Calls DNC Attacks On "100 Years" Comment A "Serious Distortion" And "A Rank Falsehood." "The DNC's message portrays McCain as bent on fighting an 'endless' war in Iraq. DNC: We can't afford four more years with a President who fights an endless war in Iraq. ... On the war, McCain scoffed at Bush's call to leave troops in Iraq for 50 years, saying 'Make it a hundred!' That of course is a serious distortion of what McCain actually said to a town-hall meeting in New Hampshire back on Jan. 3. ... There's little doubt that McCain is less ea ger than either Clinton or Obama to bring troops home without further suppression of insurgent attacks. But it's a rank falsehood for the DNC to accuse McCain of wanting to wage 'endless war' based on his support for a presence in Iraq something like the U.S. role in South Korea." (Factcheck.Org Website, www.factcheck.org, Accessed 3/25/08)

Non-Partisan Politifact.Com Calls Obama Attacks On "100 Years" Comment "False." "Obama twisted McCain's words in the Cleveland debate. He said, 'We are bogged down in a war that John McCain now suggests might go on for another 100 years.' As we explain above, McCain was referring to a peacetime presence, not the war. So we find Obama's statement False." (Politifact.Com Website, www.politifact.com, Accessed 3/25/08)

Numerous Media Outlets Agree That Democrats Have Mischaracterized Sen. McCain's Position:

The New York Times Reports That Democrats "Mischaracterize And Distort" Sen. McCain's "100 Years" Comment. "But the timetables, flippantly tossed out, have been condensed into sound bites by his Democratic opponents, turned into fund-raising appeals and mashed into YouTube parodies. Many of the sound bites mischaracterize and distort what was said in Mr. McCain's six-minute exchange on Jan. 3..." (Kate Phillips, "McCain Said '100'; Opponents Latch On," The New York Times, 3/27/08)

The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder: "[D]emocrats imply that McCain wants to keep US troops in Iraq for 100 years under the same conditions they're fighting right now. Which is simply not what McCain said. McCain explicitly said that US presence in Iraq long-term would be predicated on the absence of violence and on the establishment of stability in the region." (Marc Ambinder, "100 Years Of Solitude? McCain And Iraq," The Atlantic's "Marc Ambinder" Blog, www.theatlantic.com, 3/31/08)

The Associated Press: "[Sen. McCain] and the Democrats vying to run against him in the fall are engaged in a debate of sorts over how long U.S. troops should stay in Iraq and under what circumstances. That's a genuine point of contention. But Hillary Rodham Clinton and especially Barack Obama have distilled McCain's position into sound bite oversimplifications, suggesting he foresees a war without end in anyone's lifetime." (Calvin Woodward, "Dems Take McCain Out Of Context On Iraq," The Associated Press, 2/29/08)
.

A Cause Greater

2008-03-31T16:52:00.002-04:00

Dear Human Events Reader,

Four years ago I started Treats For Troops with one simple mission: to make it safe and easy for every American to send packages and messages of support to our men and women in uniform year round.Four years later the need to support these brave fighting men and women - many serving in some of the most culturally-isolated and dangerous places on Earth - has never been greater.

Knowing their fellow Americans are behind them means so much - but don't take my word for it. Our latest newsletter is filled with photos, stories and notes from these outstanding men and women for whom receiving your packages and letters are literally the best part of their day!
Some of their messages will make you smile; some will make you proud, some may even bring a tear, but every one will make you proud to be an American.

Support for our troops is down, a casualty of the political controversy surrounding the War on Terror.Many of our troops feel as if their country is no longer behind them. We know that just isn't true. Click here to find out how you can let our troops know they are not forgotten.
And a sincere "thank you" to each and every one of you who sends a package that makes a soldier smile.

Wishing us all a safe and happy new year,

Deborah Crane

Founder,

Treats For Troops

Senator Obama on The US Economy

2008-03-27T21:50:00.001-04:00

Today, Sen. Obama Is Scheduled To Give A Major Address On The Economy:

"Obama Has A Major Economic Address In New York [On March 27, 2008]." (Mike Allen, "Obama To Hit McCain On Economy," The Politico's "Playbook," 3/26/08)

OBAMA'S HIGH TAX PLATFORM AND RECORD WOULD HURT THE ECONOMY

Obama Has Proposed A Laundry List Of Tax Hikes On The Campaign Trail, Which Would Hurt The Economy:

Obama Has Called For Higher Income Taxes, Social Security Taxes, Investment Taxes, And Corporate Taxes, As Well As "Massive New Domestic Spending." "Obama's transformation, if you go by his campaign so far, would mean higher income taxes, higher Social Security taxes, higher investment taxes, higher corporate taxes, massive new domestic spending, and a healthcare plan that perhaps could be the next step to a full-scale, single-payer system. Is that what most Americans want, someone who will fulfill a Democratic policy wish list?" (James Pethokoukis, "Barack Hussein Reagan? Ronald Wilson Obama?" U.S. News & World Report's "Capital Commerce" Blog, www.usnews.com, 2/12/08)

Obama Has Also Called For Tax Hikes On "Dirty Energy" Such As Coal And Natural Gas. Obama: "What we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas." ("Q&A With Sen. Barack Obama," San Antonio Express-News, 2/19/08)
The Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore: "[Obama] doesn't believe that raising tax rates is going to hurt the economy and if he becomes President ... tax rates will go up almost across the board." (The Wall Street Journal Website, www.wsj.com, Accessed 2/13/08)

CNBC's Larry Kudlow: "[Obama] has a very punitive high-tax campaign plan for the economy." (Larry Kudlow, "Obama, The Very-High-Tax Candidate," National Review's "The Corner" Blog, nationalreview.com, 2/11/08)

Ben Stein: "Mr. Obama could become president and derail everything because his understanding of economics is 100 percent wrong. ... I must say I'm so scared about Mr. Obama becoming president. I can hardly tell you." (CNBC's "Kudlow & Company," 2/14/08)

Alan Reynolds, Senior Fellow At The Cato Institute: "In Short, Obama Is A 'Tax-And-Spend' Liberal..." (Alan Reynolds, Op-Ed, "Tax Delusions," New York Post, 2/15/08)

Obama Said He'd Provide Tax Relief For Working Families, But Voted For A Budget That Raises Taxes On Americans Earning As Little As $31,850:

Obama: "We could be fighting to put the American dream within reach for every American - by giving tax breaks to working families ..." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks On Iraq And The Economy, Charleston, WV, 3/20/08)

Obama Voted In Favor Of The Democrats' FY 2009 Budget. "Adoption of the concurrent resolution that would set broad spending and revenue targets over the next five years. The resolution would allow up to $1 trillion in discretionary spending for 2009." (S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #85: Adopted 51-44: R 2-43; D 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama Voted Yea)

The Democrats' Budget Would Raise Taxes On Individuals Earning As Little As $31,850. "Under both Democratic plans, tax rates would increase by 3 percentage points for each of the 25 percent, 28 percent and 33 percent brackets. At present, the 25 percent bracket begins at $31,850 for individuals and $63,700 for married couples. The 35 percent bracket on incomes over $349,700 would jump to 39.6 percent." (Andrew Taylor, "Presidential Hopefuls To Vote On Budget," The Associated Press, 3/13/08)

The Club For Growth's Andrew Roth Notes The Budget Would Result In "The Largest Tax Hike In U.S. History." "The Democrats' FY09 budget does not extend the Bush tax cuts. As a result, Americans are set to be hammered with the largest tax hike in U.S. history." (Andrew Roth, "Tax Hike Impact By Congressional District," The Club For Growth's "Club For Growth" Blog, www.clubforgrowth.org, 3/12/08)

OBAMA HAS A LIBERAL SPENDING AGENDA; CONTRADICTS CLAIM HE'S FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE

Obama's Liberal Spending "Suggests A Lack Of Seriousness In Confronting The Nation's Fiscal Condition":

"Hillary Clinton And Barack Obama Champion Fiscal Responsibility On The Campaign Trail, But Both Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Are Promising Massive New Spending Without Providing Details On How They'd Pay For It." (Kevin G. Hall and Margaret Talev, "Clinton, Obama Ignore Budget Crisis, Promise Billions," McClatchy Newspapers, 2/22/08)

USA Today: "[C]linton and Obama both offer a long list of new spending proposals that suggests a lack of seriousness in confronting the nation's fiscal condition. Obama has received more criticism, perhaps deservedly so, because his list is somewhat longer." (Editorial, "Democrats Promise A Lot, But Who Will Pay The Bill?" USA Today, 2/25/08)

Robert Bixby, Executive Director Of The Concord Coalition, A Budget Watchdog Organization: "I couldn't help but think, 'Where is he [Obama] going to get the money to pay for these things?'" (Kevin G. Hall and Margaret Talev, "Clinton, Obama Ignore Budget Crisis, Promise Billions," McClatchy Newspapers, 2/22/08)

NOTE: Obama Claims He's Fiscally Conservative. Obama: "I am a progressive, but I always tell people that if you're a progressive you should be fiscally even more conservative than the so-called conservatives. ... The reason is, there are a lot of needs where we need to spend money, so we can't afford to waste money on stuff that we don't need." (April Castro, "Obama Touts Conservative Spending Approach," The Associated Press, 2/28/08)

OBAMA PROPOSED AN INADEQUATE HOUSING PLAN

Obama's Plan To Alleviate The Mortgage Crisis Has Been Criticized By Economists And Industry Experts:

"Among The Proposals To Rescue Distressed Borrowers, The Obama Plan Was Singled Out For Criticism By Financial Industry Experts." (Jessica Holzer, "Major Bailout Is Unlikely On Sub-Prime Mortgages," The Hill, 9/4/07)

Obama Supports Creating A Mortgage "Bailout Fund." "[S]en. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who is vying with Clinton for their party's presidential nomination, advocated fining unscrupulous lenders to partially pay for a bailout fund for distressed borrowers." (Jessica Holzer, "Major Bailout Is Unlikely On Sub-Prime Mortgages," The Hill, 9/4/07)

"Opponents Argue That Bailouts Send The Wrong Message To Recipients And Do Nothing To Discourage Future Irresponsible Behavior." (Robert Schroeder, "Should Washington Come To Aid Of Troubled Borrowers?" Dow Jones' MarketWatch, 8/31/07)
"Economists Question Whether Obama's $10-Billion 'Foreclosure Prevention Fund' Would Cover The Thousands Of Americans Who Already Have Lost Homes And The Thousands More Who Are In Danger." (Stephen Braun, Nicholas Riccardi and Maria La Ganga, "Rivals Differ On Foreclosure Cure," Los Angeles Times, 2/21/08)
Obama Said Fining Lenders Would Only "Partially" Cover The Cost Of His $10 Billion Bailout Fund - So Do Taxpayers Have To Pay The Rest?

Obama: "We can partially pay for this fund by imposing penalties on lenders that acted irresponsibly or committed fraud." (Sen. Barack Obama, Op-Ed, "Fine Unscrupulous Mortgage Lenders," Financial Times [London, UK], 8/29/07)

Both Clinton's And Obama's Mortgage Proposals Would Place "Some Added Burden On Taxpayers." "On the housing front, both candidates have put forward proposals that would put at least some added burden on taxpayers." (Nick Timiraos, "Candidates Differ On Housing," The Wall Street Journal, 2/20/08)

OBAMA BACKS INCREASED GOVERNMENT ROLE IN THE ECONOMY

Obama Wants Larger Government Role In Free Market Economy:

Obama Said "We've Depended On Government Action To ... Make The Market Work Better." Obama: "[W]e have a tendency to take our free-market system as a given, to assume that it flows naturally from the laws of supply and demand and Adam Smith's invisible hand. ... And although the benefits of our free-market system have mostly derived from the individual efforts of generations of men and women pursuing their own vision of happiness, in each and every period of great economic upheaval and transition we've depended on government action to open up opportunity, encourage competition, and make the market work better." (Barack Obama, The Audacity Of Hope, 2006, p. 150)

Obama: "But our history should give us confidence that we don't have to choose between an oppressive, government-run economy and a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism. ... What might such a new economic consensus look like? ... [W]e can begin to modernize and rebuild the social contract that FDR first stitched together in the middle of the last century." (Barack Obama, The Audacity Of Hope, 2006, pp. 158-159)

OBAMA'S POOR TAX, SPENDING AND BUSINESS INTEREST GROUP RATINGS

Obama Received A "Perfect Liberal Score" On Economic Issues From The National Journal:

"In 2006, [Obama] Was One Of 13 Senate Democrats With A Perfect Liberal Score On Economic Issues." (Richard E. Cohen, "Left To Right," National Journal, 3/3/07)

Obama Gets Poor Marks From Tax, Spending And Business Interest Groups:

Americans For Tax Reform Gave Obama A Lifetime Rating Of 7.5 Out Of 100. (Americans For Tax Reform Website, www.atr.org, Accessed 1/29/08)

Citizens Against Government Waste Gave Obama A Lifetime Rating Of 22 Out Of 100. (Citizens Against Government Waste, "CCAGW Challenges Presidential Candidates On Earmarks," Press Release, 12/27/07)

The National Taxpayers Union Gave Obama A Grade Of "F" For His Fiscal Voting Record. (National Taxpayers Union Website, www.ntu.org, Accessed 9/25/07)

The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Gave Obama A 55 Percent Rating In 2006. (U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Website, www.uschamber.com, Accessed 9/17/07)And here is the rest of it.

McCAIN - EVEN WHEN HE'S "WRONG" HE'S ACTUALLY RIGHT

2008-03-20T02:06:00.004-04:00

(H/T to my friend Aaron R from Florida)

Barack Obama campaign staffers, who closely follow Keith Oberman's nightly talking points, think they have found a major McCain gaffe with which they can dig themselves out of the deep media suck-hole which are the right rev. Jeremiah Wright's insane, paranoid (and highly amusing) jeremiads.

The typical critique repeated by NBC news runs along the standard leftist-meme outlined here:

From http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/18/mccain-iran-al-qaeda/

Today, as the Washington Post’s Cameron Barr and Michael Shear report, McCain further undermined his claim to be the best qualified on matters of foreign policy, when he repeated a mistaken claim that Iran was training al Qaeda fighters:

Speaking to reporters in Amman, the Jordanian capital, McCain said he and two Senate colleagues traveling with him continue to be concerned about Iranian operatives “taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back.”

Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was “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.” A few moments later, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, standing just behind McCain, stepped forward and whispered in the presidential candidate’s ear. McCain then said: “I’m sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not al-Qaeda.”

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/03/18/a_mccain_gaffe_in_jordan.html

Barr and Shear need to re-read their own paper which noted the 9-11 Comission's own documented links between al-Qaeda and Iran four years ago (see below).
9/11 Panel Links Al Qaeda, Iran
Bin Laden May Have Part in Khobar Towers, Report Says

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, June 26, 2004; Page A12

While it found no operational ties between al Qaeda and Iraq, the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks has concluded that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network had long-running contacts with Iraq's neighbor and historic foe, Iran.

Al Qaeda, the commission determined, may even have played a "yet unknown role" in aiding Hezbollah militants in the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers complex in Saudi Arabia, an attack the United States has long blamed solely on Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsors.

The notion that bin Laden may have had a hand in the Khobar bombing would mark a rare operational alliance between Sunni and Shiite Muslim groups that have historically been at odds. That possibility, largely overlooked in the furor of new revelations released by the commission last week, comes amid worsening relations between the United States and Iran, which announced on Thursday that it would resume building equipment necessary for a nuclear weapons program.

The Sept. 11 panel's findings on Iran have been eclipsed by the continuing political debate over Iraq, which the commission said had not developed a "collaborative relationship" with al Qaeda despite limited contacts in the 1990s. That appeared to conflict with previous characterizations made by President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other administration officials in their justifications for launching the war against Saddam Hussein.

In relation to Iran, commission investigators said intelligence "showed far greater potential for collaboration between Hezbollah and al Qaeda than many had previously thought." Iran is a primary sponsor of Hezbollah, or Party of God, the Lebanon-based anti-Israel group that has been designated a terrorist organization by the United States.

The commission's Republican chairman, former New Jersey governor Thomas H. Kean, also said in a television appearance last week that "there were a lot more active contacts, frankly, with Iran and with Pakistan than there were with Iraq."
But perhaps most startling was the commission's finding that bin Laden may have played a role in the Khobar attack. Although previous court filings and testimony indicated that al Qaeda and Iranian elements had contacts during the 1990s, U.S. authorities have not publicly linked bin Laden or his operatives to that strike, which killed 19 U.S. servicemen. A June 2001 indictment of 14 defendants in the case makes no mention of al Qaeda or bin Laden and lays the organizational blame for the attacks solely on Hezbollah and Iran.

Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert who heads the Washington office of Rand Corp., said that although bin Laden's then-fledgling group was an early suspect in the blasts, "the evidence kept pointing to an Iranian connection, so people tended to discount a bin Laden connection."

"What the commission report is raising is that the relationship might have been much tighter and was in fact operational and not just spiritual," Hoffman said.
U.S. officials who have worked on the Khobar case are more skeptical. A law enforcement source with knowledge of the case, who declined to be identified because of the ongoing criminal investigation, said authorities searched carefully for an al Qaeda connection but found no basis for it.

The broader notion of links between bin Laden's group and Hezbollah or hard-line elements in Iran's security forces has been a hot topic in U.S. law enforcement and intelligence circles for years. Many analysts have viewed such an alliance as dubious, largely because of ancient animosities between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. Several leaders of al Qaeda, a Sunni organization, have issued rabidly anti-Shiite proclamations.

Nonetheless, the United States previously compiled evidence of limited contacts between Iranian interests and al Qaeda. U.S. officials alleged that Iran was harboring al Qaeda militants who had fled neighboring Afghanistan after the U.S. invasion there.

Iran has denied that al Qaeda was operating from its territory, and announced earlier this year that it would put on trial a dozen suspected members of the terrorist group.

The original U.S. indictment of bin Laden, filed in 1998, said al Qaeda "forged alliances . . . with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezbollah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States."

But the Sept. 11 commission's findings regarding Khobar Towers, if confirmed, would deepen the known relationship between al Qaeda, Iran and Hezbollah. A commission staff report issued June 16 said that in addition to evidence that the attack had been carried out by Saudi Hezbollah with assistance from Iran, "intelligence obtained shortly after the bombing . . . also supported suspicions of bin Laden's involvement.

"There were reports in the months preceding the attack that bin Laden was seeking to facilitate a shipment of explosives to Saudi Arabia. On the day of the attack, bin Laden was congratulated" by al Qaeda militants, the report says.
The report recounts some of the previously alleged contacts between al Qaeda and Iran or Hezbollah and concludes, "We have seen strong but indirect evidence that [bin Laden's] organization did in fact play some as yet unknown role in the Khobar attack."

The report also says that several years before the Khobar attack, "bin Laden's representatives and Iranian officials had discussed putting aside Shia-Sunni divisions to cooperate against the common enemy." A group of al Qaeda representatives then traveled to Iran and to Hezbollah training camps in Lebanon for "training in explosives, intelligence and security," the report says.
Bin Laden himself, the report added, "showed particular interest in Hezbollah's truck bombing tactics in Lebanon in 1983 that killed 241 U.S. Marines."

Flynt L. Leverett, a Middle East expert in the Clinton and Bush administrations who is now a Brookings Institution scholar, said active cooperation between al Qaeda and Iran "cannot be ruled out as wholly implausible."

"There are going to be serious structural limits to how much al Qaeda and Iran might cooperate," Leverett said. "Within those limits, though, there is some room for very tactical and self-serving cooperation between al Qaeda and some parts of Iranian intelligence." Leverett cited as an example the allegations that Iran had harbored al Qaeda operatives fleeing Afghanistan.

But Daniel Benjamin, a national security official in the Clinton administration, said he was "still skeptical" of any link between al Qaeda and Khobar, arguing that the evidence shows "that Saudi Hezbollah was very much a creature of some in Iran."
"I don't quite see the need that this operation had for assistance from al Qaeda," Benjamin said. "Second of all, my understanding of the larger relationship between Iran and al Qaeda suggests that while there were plenty of contacts, many more than there were with Iraq, it was never clear they developed a serious cooperative relationship."

Research editor Margot Williams contributed to this report.
Iran 'is training the next al-Qa'eda leaders'
By Con Coughlin
Last Updated: 1:58am GMT 15/11/2006

Iran is seeking to take control of Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'eda terror network by encouraging it to promote officials known to be friendly to Teheran, The Daily Telegraph can reveal.

According to recent reports received by Western intelligence agencies, the Iranians are training senior al-Qa'eda operatives in Teheran to take over the organisation when bin Laden is no longer leader.

Even if he is still alive, intelligence officials are working on the assumption that his ability to control the organisation has been severely diminished, and that most of the day-to-day running is being undertaken by Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden's Egyptian-born number two.

Iran has always maintained close relations with al-Qa'eda, even though the Shia Muslim state is known to have many ideological and strategic differences with the terror group's Sunni leadership.

Western intelligence officials now believe that Iran is trying to cultivate a new generation of al-Qa'eda leaders who will be prepared to work closely with Teheran when they eventually take control.

Recent intelligence reports from Iran suggest the Iranians are particularly keen to promote Saif-al-Adel, a notorious al-Qa'eda operative who is wanted in the United States for his alleged role in training several of the September 11 hijackers.
Al-Adel, 46, a former colonel in Egypt's special forces who joined al-Qa'eda after fighting with the Mujahideen against Soviet forces in Afghanistan in the 1980s, was named in the FBI's list of 22 most wanted terrorists that was issued after the September 11 attacks.

He is also alleged to have been involved in the deaths of 18 US soldiers in Somalia in 1993 and the truck bomb attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.
Al-Adel has, technically, been living under house arrest in Teheran since fleeing to Iran in late 2001 with hundreds of other al-Qa'eda fighters following the US-led coalition's invasion of Afghanistan.

For the past five years he has been living in a Revolutionary Guards guest house in Teheran together with Saad and Mohammed bin Laden, two of the al-Qa'eda leader's sons.

Until 2003, al-Adel acted as bin Laden's security chief and since his arrival in Iran he is understood to have struck up a close personal relationship with several prominent Revolutionary Guards commanders.

The Iranians are now exerting pressure on al-Qa'eda's leadership to make al-Adel the organisation's number three which, given bin Laden's poor state of health, would effectively make him number two. This would put him in a strong position to take control of the entire al-Qa'eda network in the event of Zawahiri being killed or being unable to continue running the group.

"This is an important power play by the Iranians and the prospect of al-Qa'eda and Iran forging a close alliance is truly terrifying," said a senior Western intelligence official. "They have had their differences in the past, but with the survival of both Iran and al-Qa'eda now at stake they realise it is in both their interests to have closer ties."

Iran's attempts to forge closer links with al-Qa'eda are understood to have been ordered by President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, who believes Iran and al-Qa'eda share similar aims — destroying the influence of America and its allies in the wider Middle East. Mr Ahmedinejad is also keen to strengthen the alliance in case Iran is subjected to United Nations sanctions over its refusal to halt its nuclear enrichment programme, which many Western governments believe is being undertaken as part of a clandestine nuclear weapons programme.

If al-Qa'eda is agreeable to appointing al-Adel and other al-Qa'eda figures currently based in Iran to senior positions, the Iranians have agreed to provide training facilities and equipment.

Links between Iran and al-Qa'eda date back to the early 1990s, when bin Laden was based in Sudan. According to the US 9/11 Commission report, Iran's Revolutionary Guards helped to train al-Qa'eda fighters, and the Iranians were suspected of helping al-Qa'eda to carry out the truck bomb attacks against an American military base in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, in June 1996 that killed 19 US servicemen.
The growing links are being viewed with profound alarm in Western intelligence circles. Iran has a long history of sponsoring terror groups. The Revolutionary Guards were primarily responsible for setting up, financing, training and equipping Hizbollah, the radical Lebanese militia that now stands accused of plotting to overthrow the Lebanese government and seize power.

Any increase in Iran's influence over al-Qa'eda could have potentially devastating consequences for international security. Al-Qa'eda has made no secret of its desire to acquire weapons of mass destruction — including "dirty" nuclear bombs.
Intelligence experts believe that Iran will soon have the capacity to develop its own nuclear weapons and Teheran is also known to have developed a highly effective chemical weapons programme.

"We are looking at a Doomsday scenario here where al-Qa'eda finally fulfils its ultimate goal of acquiring weapons of mass destruction," said a senior Western intelligence official. "And unlike other terror groups, al-Qa'eda is perfectly willing to use them."

Related articles
Iran plotting to groom bin Laden's successor
11 November 2006: Iraqi terrorists 'are being supplied with arms smuggled from Iran'
3 November 2006: Iran warns US by test firing missiles