by Teh Nutroots | As Damozel posted earlier at BN-Politics, McCain's attempt to present his wife as a biker chick hasn't panned out too well for him. A man who goes a-wooing the far right evangelicals can't really be too buttoned-down or zipped up. This is one sort of mistake I don't remember ever seeing George Bush make. As we've all seen, far right Christians are fine with violence, but they hate any whiff of sex.
And now there's a Christian PAC that's come out in support of Obama. (Washington Wire) It's true. This must be that "Christian left" that Damozel is always going on about---which I kind of thought was a myth---or maybe it's the Christian center or not-so-far-right. I don't know. I don't know jack about God.
A recently launched Christian-based political action committee, the Matthew 25 Network, will air a television ad in support of Barack Obama touting his family values that will coincide with a faith-based forum on Saturday hosted by Pastor Rick Warren at the Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif.
Posted by Damozel | cross posted at BN-Politics | Hey, what do you know? McCain's ad, "The One," portraying Obama as Antichrist (see the ad here) seems to have worked! In "debunking" the "rumor," CNN actually treated this as a serious question. (cf. The Raw Story)
That such a subject is even speculated about in any but the most
backwards, unreconstructed segments of American society -- let alone on
a 24-hour cable network -- is a testament (no pun intended) to the
depths to which political debate has fallen. But there was the caption
on CNN Friday in big bold letters: "OBAMA THE ANTICHRIST?"
Apparently a not-insignificant number of Americans, after viewing John McCain's Web ad The One,
with its Messianic overtones -- come away thinking that Barack Obama
has been sent from Hell to Earth to turn its citizens against God. For
inspiration, some of these people seem to be drawing from the fictional
Left Behind series, which posits a dystopian future where the Anti-Christ comes to Earth as a charismatic politician. (The Raw Story)
Chalk one up for McCain! He did exactly what he wasn't---he assures us---setting out to do.
by Teh Nutroots | Riddle me this: Wasn't it only 2-3 weeks ago that the Republicans were moaning about the presumptuousness of Barack Obama? If so, how do they explain McCain's sudden accession to an authoritative role in Georgia---so much of one that he is sending his own "envoys" to deal with the situation?
Was it not presumptuous after all? Or...are they applying the hoary old "it's different when Republicans do it" rule?
All Barack did was make a speech. John McCain is speaking every day to Georgia's loose cannon-in-chief, his friend "Misha," despite "Misha's" calling him out the other day ('very cheering...Words, not deeds." Doesn't Bush mind? F*** me. I'd mind. For once I kind of admire Bush's restraint.
I'd be like, "Dude? Excuse me; I believe I am still president here?"
by Teh Nutroots | As he mulls over his former support for the war in Iraq, provides a summary of McCain's militarism in a nutshell .
For him, it is always 1938 somewhere; America's duty is to control,
occupy or intervene wherever any rival seeks influence and any group
does not share our alleged values. And so American power must be
brought to bear in Georgia and Iraq and Iran and Burma and Darfur and
Bosnia and anyplace else where American interests are threatened or
democratic allies seek help. And for militarist American
exceptionalists, this all makes sense. This is the higher purpose
McCain lives for: the glory of liberation, the thrill of conquest, the
adoration of the soldier, the defeat of evil.
I've never understood in the first place why this attitude was ever meant to be "conservative." The only thing they're conserving is American arrogance at the expense of everything else.
by Teh Nutroots | Okay, we've dissed Edwards. We've said what there is to say, i.e. [accompanied by the sound of a newspaper whapping him on the nose]:
BAD BAD BAD! [::whap::] How could you do it to Elizabeth? [::whap::] How could you do it to your supporters? [::WHAP WHAP::] How could you encourage us to vote for you, thereby encouraging us to vote for a candidate who could scuttle the whole election? (here) [::whappity whap whap::] How could you be such a hypocrite? (here) [whappity whappity WHAP WHAP WHAP]
Since he didn't win the nomination, he didn't inflict the harm---though it wasn't for the want of trying. So it's an issue, though not a major issue.
The New York Times raises the question of the media's "reticence" toward the no-longer-campaigning former Senator and his incurably ill wife. As noted below, the no-longer-campaigning Edwards isn't the only beneficiary of such reticence.
Joe Klein---working hard to redeem himself, but as usual failing to see the trees for the forest---says: