“Loophole King” from this week’s SEIU protest at John McCain’s campaign HQ.  Open thread below….

Hey Now.

“This kind of stuff is an example of McCain being McCain.”

My God, that’s his peeps response? OK, line em up in the comment thread…

The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming “incontrovertible.”

This, coming the same day as Al Gore’s speech, was apparently quite exciting to those on the right who prefer to deny global warming and/or its causes.

One said, “The Association of Physical Scientists has reversed its position on anthropogenic global warming. Where it once considered its position ‘incontrovertable’ [sic] it is now sponsoring open debate on the matter… This is a big deal.”

Another argued, “[Physicists] bailing on Gore…. The rats are leaving the ship. Global warming alarmists are frauds.”

Jonah Goldberg initially said, “The same day that Al Gore does his man-to-the-moon spiel on global warming, the American Physical Society — the second largest professional association of physicists — rescinds its total support for the global warming. I await the usual chorus to sing us a tune about how the APS is ‘anti-science.’”

Red State told readers, “The headline at The Drudge Report website, ‘Group Repping 50,000 Physicists Opens Global Warming Debate…’ [linked to dailytech.com] says it all.”

Except, in this case, it didn’t say it all. Climate Progress explains the story very well, including all the reasons the right is wrong about this.

Former senator Phil Gramm announced last night that he has stepped down as cochairman of John McCain’s presidential campaign to end the “distraction” caused by his remarks the nation was filled with “whiners” who complain about the economy.

“It is clear to me that Democrats want to attack me rather than debate Senator McCain on important economic issues facing the country,” Gramm said in a statement the McCain campaign issued. “That kind of distraction hurts not only Senator McCain’s ability to present concrete programs to deal with the country’s problems, it hurts the country.”

However, even if he is gone from the campaign, MoveOn PAC doesn’t want you to forget that Gramm’s policies live on in McCain’s economic platform.  

McCain’s campaign co-chair Phil Gramm had to step down because of controversy over his comment that we were in the middle of a “mental recession.” But the truth is, John McCain threw Phil Gramm under the bus for saying, less artfully, what he himself has said repeatedly.  

The audio is a little tough to hear, so to clarify, McCain insisted that “we have succeeded” in Iraq. In fact, he said it multiple times: “I am happy to stand in front of you to tell you that this strategy has succeeded. It has succeeded. It has succeeded.”

(It reminds me of the time Marge Simpson told Bart that Springfield is “a part of us all. A part of us all. A part of us all.” She then explained it would help him remember and believe the line if she repeated it this way.)

OK, McCain probably misspoke again. He must have meant that he thinks Bush’s strategy is “succeeding,” not has “succeeded,” right?

Wrong. He’s now referring to Bush’s Iraq policy in the past tense, as if the war is over.

McCain added on the campaign bus: “I repeat my statement that we have succeeded in Iraq — not we are succeeding — we have succeeded in Iraq.”

Gotcha. It’s over. We won. The policy worked — not is working, but worked. Good to know.

In a political context, McCain had a series of rhetorical options. He could say that we will succeed in Iraq, but Americans have grown impatient. He could say that we’re in the process of succeeding, but that’s not quite good enough, either. So, McCain just made up his mind — we’ve already succeeded. We may not know it, and this victory may be limited to McCain’s over-active imagination, but it happened. Just trust him and don’t ask any questions.

Can we get out of Iraq, then? Apparently not: “The success that we have achieved is still fragile and could be reversed.”

I have to say, I thought “success” was going to look a little more successful, but maybe that’s just me.

McCain, like Bush, considers this “mission accomplished.” I guess neither want to be taken especially seriously.

 Download | Play   Download | Play 

“The price of oil is… is attributed to two oil men in the White House and their protectors in the United States Senate.”

While it might be easy (and typically accurate) to blame everything on President Bush and Vice President Cheney, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to lay the current crisis at the White House’s doorstep. Sure, there are some uncontrollable market forces at work, but both Cheney and Bush are oil patch guys; it would be the height of naivete to assume that they would have an energy policy that didn’t benefit Big Oil.

From Day One, Dick Cheney was plotting how to take over Iraq oil fields. Before the war, it was obvious to everyone that the invasion or Iraq, and the instability it would caused in the region, would only drive prices up further. For all the lip service President Bush pays to his commitment to renewable energy, the fact is spending has been on the stagnant since the mid-1990’s.

What we really need is a leader with the wisdom to acknowledge the magnitude of the problem and the courage to tackle it head on. “Green Screen” John McCain is clearly not that leader.

 Not much to say here.  Other than the fact that this is a huge huge huge deal.  Article speaks for itself.

In an interview with Der Spiegel released on Saturday, Maliki said he wanted U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible.

“U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes”[..]

And

“The Americans have found it difficult to agree on a concrete timetable for the exit because it seems like an admission of defeat to them. But it isn’t,” Maliki told Der Spiegel.

Is there anything left to say?

 Jake Tapper reports that the White House “accidentally” emailed the article to its extensive distro list.

The misfire comes at an odd time for Bush foreign policy, at a time when Obama’s campaign alleges the president is moving closer toward Obama’s recommendations about international relations — sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, discussing a “general time horizon” for U.S. troop withdrawal and launching talks with Iran. 

Obama’s campaign issued this statement (from an email):

There are two problems with John McCain’s political attacks on Barack Obama’s foreign policy. First, on the biggest foreign policy questions of the last eight years, Barack Obama has made the right judgment and John McCain has sided with George Bush in making the wrong one. Second, the failure of the McCain-Bush foreign policy has forced John McCain to change his position, and to embrace the very same Obama approaches that he once attacked.

Just this week, Senator McCain has been forced by events to switch to Barack Obama’s position on two fundamental issues: more troops in Afghanistan, and more diplomacy with Iran. On both issues, Obama took stands that weren’t politically popular at the time - opposing the war in Iraq as a diversion from the critical mission in Afghanistan, and standing up for direct diplomacy with Iran - while John McCain lined up with George Bush. Time has proven Obama’s judgment right and McCain wrong.

The next shift appears to be Iraq. For months, Senator McCain has called any plan to redeploy our troops from Iraq “surrender” - even though we’d be leaving Iraq to a sovereign Iraqi government. Now, the Bush Administration is embracing the negotiation of troop withdrawals with the Iraqi government - a position that Senator Obama called for last September, and reiterated on Monday in the New York Times. And now, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki supports Barack Obama’s timeline, telling Der Speigel that, “Barack Obama is right when he talks about 16 months.”

Ooh, that’s gotta leave a mark when you make your campaign all about your foreign policy expertise.

• Take the Pew News IQ Test and post your score. Also notice that while 84% know Oprah campaigned for Obama, only 28% know that over 4000 American soldiers have died in Iraq. Good job, media!

• Yesterdays fundraising appeal for Sean Tevis was a great success. He reached his goal in just 37 hours…and it’s still going.

• Pathetic excuse for a human being Michael Savage on autism: “A fraud, a racket. … In 99 percent of the cases, it’s a brat who hasn’t been told to cut the act out.”

• Remember all the fauxtrage from the McCain campaign after Gramm’s “Americans are whiners” comments? Well, it look like McCain has gotten over it, because he’s keeping Gramm around. 

• Netroots Nation tries to label FOX as “opinion news.”

• McCain’s Media™ withholds favorable Obama polls.

• After word magically “leaks” out that Jesse Jackson said more than “nuts,” O’Reilly threatens to waterboard his staff to get to the “truth.”

• Even though McCain thinks Social Security is a “disgrace,” that’s not gonna stop him from cashin’ in those checks.

• Michael Chertoff has a message for you: I’m trying my best, but you still may die.

 Download | Play   Download | Play 

Here is just a small taste of the smackdown:

Maddow: “Noah, when it gets down to concrete issues, and when it gets down to making a judgment call, I think if people are looking at Bush and McCain in deciding to go after Osama bin Laden by invading and occupying for five years a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 — or — actually going after Osama bin Laden where he is, probably in Pakistan, I think people will probably go with the latter judgment.

Oppenheim: “Are you suggesting an invasion of Pakistan?”

Maddow: “He hasn’t said he would invade Pakistan. He said he would go after Osama bin Laden where he is instead of outsourcing the fight against al Qaeda to General Musharraf who happily took our billions of dollars worth military aid and then gave al Qaeda and the Taliban safe haven in the tribal regions. So go after bin Laden or fight Iraq? I’d take the former.”

Ouch. Remember when President Bush said this in his 2004 State of the Union address?:

“America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country. “

The same people who defended President Bush and attacked Senator Kerry back then are now attacking Senator Obama for stating that, as President, his policy will be to pursue Osama bin Laden wherever he is, even if that means we have to go into Pakistan against Musharraf’s wishes. How is that possibly a controversial concept? Are these right-wingers really arguing that we need a “permission slip” in order to hunt down the man responsible for 3000+ Americans?

Thank the media gods for Rachel Maddow.

As it happens, it has.

[Ron Fournier, the new head of The Associated Press’s Washington bureau] is a main engine in a high-stakes experiment at the 162-year old wire to move from its signature neutral and detached tone to an aggressive, plain-spoken style of writing that Fournier often describes as “cutting through the clutter.”

Fournier calls the trend “accountability journalism” and “liberating … the truth.”

In principle, I couldn’t be more pleased. If the AP wants to bring accountability to campaign coverage, I’d be thrilled.

But I’ve seen the results of Fournier’s experiment. The AP is failing badly.

A few weeks ago Stephen Colbert aired his second edition of the John McCain ‘Green Screen Challenge‘.

 Download | Play   Download | Play 

Well ladies and gentlemen the big story out there continues to be the high cost of gasoline. Four bucks a gallon. I have stopped traveling anywhere that is not down hill. Luckily John McCain has the solution, Jim…
 
Three hundred million dollar prize for the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leap frog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars…..
 
Fabulous prizes!…Who says McCain’s campaign has no new ideas? They have the new idea of offering millions of dollars to people who actually have ideas. Ladies and gentlemen this is the latest example of John McCain’s brave fight to keep Americans awake while he talks. It all started three weeks ago when he spoke in front of a green screen, challenging Americans to fill that green space with something more interesting than John McCain. Well to help his valiant effort I posted that green screen footage at ColbertNation.com and you the heroes have responded to my make McCain exciting challenge.

I believe this one topped the first edition and the Vogue clip was my favorite. SilentPatriot said his vote was for the Elvis clip. Which one is your favorite?

Gristmill: A simple regulatory fix to the coming power crisis

Ken Silverstein: Russian and Serb interests paid for Congressman Curt Weldon’s family vacation to Europe.

The Existentialist Cowboy: How “stealth ideology” helped Bush shred the Constitution.

Economist’s View: Can young Americans compete in a global economy?

Instaputz: Really, Putz? Really?

 Download | Play   Download | Play (h/t Heather)

CNN.com

BLITZER: But Bernie Sanders says he’s a socialist.

JEFFREY: Well, I think Barack Obama is a socialist, and let me defend that remark.

First of all, I would say Barack Obama is the most left-wing candidate that’s ever been nominated by a major party for president of the United States. But is he a socialist? This is a man who’s campaigning with Hillary Clinton, arguing for who had a better nationalized health care program. A nationalized health care program, Wolf, is socialism. Another thing that Barack Obama…

BLITZER: Just because it’s government sponsored doesn’t mean it’s socialist. […] Do you believe Medicare or Medicaid is socialist?

JEFFREY: Well, yes. Actually, I would say that Medicare and Social Security are flat-out socialism. 

What. A. Clown. If support for universal health care is a litmus test for determining whether someone is a socialist, I got bad news for Terry: 66% of Americans are socialists:

Why do they let these idiots on television? And I’m not even talking about Jeffrey. Look at how Wolf ended the segment:

“All right, guys. We’ve got to leave it right there, but a good, serious discussion. Thanks for coming in. “

Geez.

John McCain said Thursday that his proposal to suspend the gas tax for three months this summer may need to be extended longer if high gas prices continue to take a toll on the economy.

“I think we ought to seriously look at whether we need to have it be longer or not depending on what the economy (does),” McCain said, standing beside the Grand River.

“I think we have to consider all options but the fact is we need a gas tax holiday. We need it, we need it, we need it very badly. The Americans that are hurt the most are low income Americans that are driving the oldest automobiles,” he said.

I just find it hard to believe we’re still talking about this obvious nonsense. McCain surely knows that his proposed holiday wouldn’t actually lower the price of gas. Indeed, if he genuinely believed otherwise, McCain would probably go to Capitol Hill — he is still a senator, by the way — introduce legislation, and push lawmakers and the White House to endorse his initiative.

I have to say, McCain is at his least attractive when he takes on the role of con man.

McCain wanted to eliminate the 18.4-cent a gallon federal gas tax over the summer (from Memorial Day to Labor Day). This would cost the Highway Trust Fund between $9 billion and $11 billion. McCain hasn’t said whether he’d just increase the deficit to make up the difference, or just let the transportation money disappear, costing thousands of jobs. Now he wants to make the holiday longer, costing more jobs and more billions of dollars.

And what would consumers get in return? Nothing. Putting aside the volatility in oil prices, and the fact that the cost of a glass of gas will probably go up over the summer regardless of federal taxes, Americans won’t actually be in a position to save any money if the gas tax is temporarily repealed. McCain may not be the sharpest crayon in the box, but he almost certainly realizes this.

He has to.

This is just common sense. As Paul Krugman explained in April:

Why doesn’t cutting the gas tax this summer make sense? It’s Econ 101 tax incidence theory: if the supply of a good is more or less unresponsive to the price, the price to consumers will always rise until the quantity demanded falls to match the quantity supplied. Cut taxes, and all that happens is that the pretax price rises by the same amount. The McCain gas tax plan is a giveaway to oil companies, disguised as a gift to consumers.

Is the supply of gasoline really fixed? For this coming summer, it is. Refineries normally run flat out in the summer, the season of peak driving. Any elasticity in the supply comes earlier in the year, when refiners decide how much to put in inventories. The McCain/Clinton gas tax proposal comes too late for that. So it’s Econ 101: the tax cut really goes to the oil companies.

Got that? We can cut the tax, but the price wouldn’t go down. Oil company profits — which are already breathtaking — would go up, but there’d be no extra money in Americans’ pockets.

Thomas Friedman recently offered a similar critique, arguing that a gas-tax holiday is “a reminder to me that the biggest energy crisis we have in our country today is the energy to be serious.” Friedman added that the proposal “is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away.”

This, regrettably, is McCain the Con Man. He’s selling snake oil, hoping desperately that voters won’t know the difference. That his proposal wouldn’t do anything to help American consumers, wouldn’t lower the price of gas, and would boost oil company profits seems entirely irrelevant. A confidence man in the middle of a scam can’t be bothered with reality — it only gets in the way of the deception.

On his proposal, McCain, at his most breathtakingly pathetic, concluded, “We need it, we need it, we need it very badly.”

Actually, what we need is a leader who not only tells us the truth, but is in touch with reality. John McCain has proven himself to be neither.

(song starts at 5:20)

Rush hasn’t performed live on American television in over 30 years. Well, that changed when the legendary band appeared on “The Colbert Report” for an interview and an amazing performance of their 1981 hit “Tom Sawyer.”

President Bush and Iraq’s prime minister have agreed to set a “general time horizon” for bringing more U.S. troops home from the war, a dramatic shift from the administration’s once-ironclad unwillingness to talk about any kind of deadline or timetable.

The announcement Friday put Bush in the position of offering to talk with Iraqi leaders about a politically charged issue that he adamantly has refused to discuss with the Democratic-led Congress at home. It also could complicate the presidential campaign arguments of Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama who have staked out starkly opposite stands about the unpopular war.

Bush repeatedly has vetoed legislation approved by Congress setting deadlines for American troop cutbacks…read on

It might be ‘very vague and nebulous,’ but it is the complete opposite of anything the White House has ever said about Iraq before. I love the timing of it all. Wait for Obama to go overseas and spring it on us…Classic Rovian tactics.

 Download | Play  Download | Play

“God bless him, bless his heart, president of the United States — a total failure, losing all credibility with the American people on the economy, on the war, on energy, you name the subject.”

It was unusually dumb, even for the WSJ editorial page, and was premised on a series of bizarre lies and distortions. Even unhinged conservatives were reluctant to run with it, and the incoherent talking point quickly faded.

Today, the McCain campaign brought it back.

The McCain campaign is taking their effort to distance their candidate from the unpopular President Bush to a whole new level: McCain’s advisers are now openly attacking Bush on Iraq — and not only that, they’re also saying that Barack Obama is the one who is like Bush on the war!

On a conference call just now with reporters, McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann compared Barack Obama’s insistence on a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq to Bush’s insistence that we were winning even as things went badly for years.

“I think the American people have had enough of inflexibility and stubbornness in national security policy,” Scheunemann said. When asked later by the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein whether the campaign was disparaging President Bush, Scheunemann dug in: “We cannot afford to replace one administration that refused for too long to acknowledge failure in Iraq with a candidate that refuses to acknowledge success in Iraq.”

That’s quite a triangulation strategy, isn’t it? The new line is that McCain sees both Bush and Obama as stubborn.

Let’s take this one step at a time.

First, it’s probably safe to assume the McCain campaign’s internal polls show McCain getting hammered on the “Bush’s third term” line of criticism. They’re so desperate, McCain’s aides are now trying to argue that Obama is just like Bush. This is just so pathetic, I almost feel sorry for the McCain campaign

Second, it’s fascinating to hear the McCain team triangulate off of Bush’s refusal “to acknowledge failure in Iraq.” Um, guys? McCain was the one cheering Bush on while he was “failing,” telling Americans we had to “stay the course.”

Third, let’s also note the irony of this claptrap coming from Randy Scheunemann. As David Kurtz noted, “Scheunemann was, of course, a significant proponent of the Iraq invasion and as Josh noted the other day worked closely with Ahmad Chalabi and the other usual suspects in pushing the U.S. toward war with Iraq.”

But perhaps most importantly, I can’t help but laugh at the notion that McCain is supposed to be the sensible, flexible one in this equation. Is McCain open to a withdrawal timeline? No. Is he open to a phased redeployment? No. Has he ever visited Iraq thinking, “I’m perfectly open to changing my mind about whether to support the president’s policy”? Of course not; he’s traveled to Baghdad with his mind made up in advance.

McCain is committed to continuing Bush’s policy indefinitely. He gladly concedes that he won’t change his mind, won’t waffle, and won’t do anything differently. McCain’s mind is made up.

Now, McCain is certainly entitled to this position. I think it’s dangerous and foolish, but that’s just me. But where does the McCain get off arguing that Obama is “inflexible” and “stubborn”? Weren’t these the same guys who were arguing last week that Obama is all over the place, and he’s too flexible and not stubborn enough?

The entire McCain operation is just a joke. I shudder to think that these guys would be like running the country, though I think the last eight years offer a pretty big clue.