Hey, if you say it enough times, it must be TRUE!

I think McCain's stroke is getting closer and closer.

Don't worry, reality is not important. The average person believes what is said on TV or "on the internet."

It doesn't matter that he is deliberately and blatantly lying. He won't be called out by the MSM and most people won't bother to check out the claims much less read CQ or ThinkProgress...

"He's a Maverick", "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" and "Drill, Baby, Drill" are so much easier to remember and catchy too!!

Interviews with McCain and his surrogates need to begin with, "Why is the McCain campaign lying about...?" And if the media finds a pair, maybe they will.

Notice Whoopi, just smiling at her lap, not saying a thing. Baba Wawa can "attack" but if Whoopi did it the "right" blogs would be all over it!

No wonder they are deperately trying to push the idea that any criticism of Palin ia "disrespectful." That's the only way to stop these questions from coming.

But is it really going to matter? Is there some libel law that prohibits the reporter/journalist from stating outright something like, "With all due respect, Senator McCain, that is not correct. You're stating words that are not consistent with facts."

sigh...

Well why didn't Whoopi or whoever stand up and call it a lie? They should have kept on about it and not let him off the hook.

This guy is pathological but we're seeing a country that seems to be okay with this guy. And Obama gets reamed on the slightest mistake.

It's clear you really can't win an election based on issues. The American people have been fully dumbed down by public schooling.

Doomed. May as well elect the lying sack of shit and continue the decline of the American Empire.

CHUTZPAH WATCH.... On the campaign trail, John McCain and Sarah Palin characterize a $3 million earmark to study bear DNA in Montana as "evil" and "corrupt."

Calling the Montana congressional delegation and Gov. Schweitzer! Calling the Fish and Wildlife Department!

Reforming Washington sounds great and mavericky as hell. That Palin and McCain haven't provided any details as to how they're going to approach this herculean task suggests that their desire for reform is more rhetorical than practical.

I need clarification here, because I want to make sure I have my facts straight. There seems to be a conflating of "requesting" and "accepting" earmarks. The ThinkProgress article says:

McCain’s claim that Palin never accepted earmarks as the governor of Alaska is divorced from reality. In fact, she actively sought them:

"Accepted" and "sought" are NOT the same thing. I realize this is a semantic distinction. She isn't against them if she *sought* them. But if she *sought* them but didn't *accept* them as governor, then what McCain says is technically true, if fundamentally dishonest.

Here's what I want to know before I call the McCain campaign liars: What earmarks did Palin *accept* as governor?

He's out of touch with reality. He doesn't even know his own running mate's record, how could he be expected to know what the average American is going through?

The McCain campaign has gotten into the MSM's OODA loop. They know there is about a 24-36 hour timeframe between the time when they can make a claim and when someone in the MSM actually briefly mentions and challenges it, usually with typically equivocating language like "not entirely accurate" or "somewhat misleading". Most people hear that and think "ok, but some aspect of it is still essentially correct, then." When one of the reporters on the trail then asks about it, the spokesperson can pretend like it's old news and chide the reporter for "still harping on that old story" before putting out an entirely new lie they can push for at least another day or two. They must be polling and focus grouping the earmarks story and finding that people haven't really been paying attention to the debunking, so why not keep it going?

If McCain is in a "Bush" bubble now, would that change if he becomes elected? Does he not read newspapers? What kind of information are his aids feeding him? Are people close to him afraid to bring him the bad news?

McCain/Palin -- the more they change the more they stay the same. The Bubble in the Muddle.

But this is, demonstrably false.

There's a small bit of wiggle room on her opposition to the "bridge to nowhere". Yes it's miniscule, and beside the point, but it's there.

There's no wiggle room on this "no earmarks as Governor" score, right? I mean, one has to be living in an alternate universe for that to be true. It runs completely against the public record.

Maybe McCain will contend that she was forced to accept the earmarks against her will or it was actually her body double?

Even if these claims were true, how is the largely powerless VP going to enact any of these reforms?

Most people don't care. Palin is popular because they like her glasses.

I would like to know why Palin wanted to collect seal DNA with taxpayer money, but refused to collect criminals' DNA with taxpayer money (i.e. rape kits)?

If this doesn't end up in an Obama ad, then I give up! All the O campaign has to do is show him saying "She doesn't accept earmarks" and then list all the earmarks she requested. How hard is that??

I need clarification here - Carl

It really is quite simple. Palin requested earmarks through lobbyists when she was mayor of Wasilla. As Governor she merely coordinated with Ted Stevens. Among the earmarks she "accepted" is the 200+ million that was originally to go for the bridge to nowhere.

The bigger question is what earmarks did she fight. I assume they were from the state legislature, and then the issue is merely one of which branch of government should control how budgeted money is spent.

American Citizen, that is a brilliantly pithy point.

But Steve, it's important that we "teach the controversy". Some people say she took earmarks, some people say she didn't. Some people say people lived with dinosaurs a few thousand years ago. Who's to say who's right?

This bring's me back to Juan Williams disgusting cover for the bridge to nowhere lying: 'well, they *believe* it's true.'

... John McCain and Sarah Palin characterize a $3 million earmark to study bear DNA in Montana as "evil" and "corrupt." What they fail to mention is that Palin requested an $3.2 million earmark to study the genetics of harbor seals, and an additional $500,000 earmark to study the mating habits of crabs.

All these scientific studies sound wasteful until they're fleshed out. Unfortunately, both politicians and journalists are so abysmally ignorant about science that they would think that passing a law to make Pi equal to 3 would be a good idea. All they can do is look at bumper sticker slogans and pretty pictures.

Studying the genetic makeup of endangered a threatened species is vital if we intend to preserve them. So the question to be answered is whether the bears in Montana are related to bears from Yellowstone or from Canada. If we know the answer we can protect the migratory trails they need to breed while allowing development elsewhere. Ditto the harbor seals.

The mating habits of crabs is important scientifically and economically. Around here, the Chesapeake Blue Crab is in serious decline. It is a major industry for local fishermen. Most of the decline is probably due to pollution, but it might be related to humans dredging up their breeding grounds. We won't know until someone studies it.

This debate is the same anti-intellectualism that makes too many Americans think that Obama is too smart to be president.

Unless we want to depend on India or China to do these kinds of scientific studies, we need to fund them through our taxes. And maybe it is as kind of welfare for scientists. But our national security and future prosperity depend of having a healthy cadre of American-grown scientists -- including animal geneticists.

Damn these lying politicians! That's why, come November, I'm going to vote for the party of Small Government: The Republican Party!

That is, if I can keep on remembering how to breathe until then.

-A Swing Voter

This article would seem to suggest that, indeed, she has requested more than her fair share of earmarks as governor. The requests have come directly from her office.

How can that possibly be spun otherwise?

He's white, Christian and an ex-POW--to many of our brethren, a winning trifecta.

The question is, how should Obama (or better yet, surrogates) spin this?

We could call it what it is - a pathetic lying self absorbed a-hole who thinks that people are patently stupid. But then we run smack into the 'faith' McCain. If the 'historical' McCain, adulterous, corrupt, flip flopping, explosive, petulant... hasn't killed the 'faith' McCain yet, this won't either.

I think we need a new narrative. Give lipservice to the McCain myth (as well as his legitimate service many decades ago), but, instead of calling him out for lies, start attributing it to age and senility.

'The press is right, this CAN'T be the McCain we've known all these years. You don't spend 26 years in Washington and not learn not to tell foolish lies on TV. McCain believes this stuff, otherwise he wouldn't say it. Understandably, John McCain wants people to look at his character, but I think we have to also take a hard look at his temprament and faculties...'

-jjf

Studying the genetic makeup of endangered a threatened species is vital if we intend to preserve them. So the question to be answered is whether the bears in Montana are related to bears from Yellowstone or from Canada. If we know the answer we can protect the migratory trails they need to breed while allowing development elsewhere. Ditto the harbor seals.

Look, I agree that these sorts of things can be valuable scientifically. But they shouldn't be coming from earmarks. They should come from the NIH or NSF, where peer review is in place.

In any case, the point of the seal earmark isn't that such work is bad per se, it's that John McCain has made a point to make fun of the bear DNA earmark. It's the hypocrisy that matters here.

I remember Obama saying, "You can't just make stuff up." But they do, all the time. He needs to know that they can and do.

I was watching Chris Mathews (who is sometimes a little too much for me)last night and he brought up a valid point. These messages end with "I'm John McCain and I approved this ad" Why has no journalist asked him to his face " Do you really believe that Obama wants sex education for kindigarten? " He needs to be held personally responsible for the slim his campaign is slinging over the fence. I am sure he would stutter and blurb his way out of it as he did last night when responding to the Community Organizer slurs. Accountability is what it should be about.

Steve Benen wrote: "The entire argument is so patently absurd, it's almost frightening that McCain seems to mean it."

What's frightening is that the corporate-owned mass media not only allows Palin and McCain to lie with impunity, but works hand in hand with the Republican Party and the overtly partisan right-wing media to enable, legitimize and amplify their lies and their sleazy, racist character assassination of Obama.

Ignoring lying for the moment, it shapes up as a contest to see whether McCain knows less about Palin's record or Palin knows less about McCain's.

As I've said elsewhere, she'd have been better off taking more of an interest in the mating habits of teenagers, as well as crabs.

I would like to know why Palin wanted to collect seal DNA with taxpayer money, but refused to collect criminals' DNA with taxpayer money (i.e. rape kits)?
Posted by: American Citizen on September 12, 2008 at 1:40 PM

Easy. These 'DNA research' grants are made to companies that harvest the animals, perform cursory tests, then sell the meat. It's the same excuse that allows Japanese whalers to keep whale meat in the supermarket there, even though whaling is prohibited by international law.

Palin wanted to skirt around the hunting regulations for harbor seals. It was corporate welfare for the fishing/hunting industry in Alaska. That's a very republican goal. The rape kit money would be a democratic goal, so she opposed it. QED.

I think the really shocking thing here is McCain was grilled on The Freaking View!?!?!

Honestly, if The Freaking View is holding his feet to the fire, then he's not in good shape with the media.

The FREAKING View?!?!

The Mind Reels*

*apologies to M. Benen

These messages end with "I'm John McCain and I approved this ad" Why has no journalist asked him to his face?

You'll laugh John, but the fine ladies on The View actually asked him that exact question this AM.

He said that yes, he approves them, and the ads are true. He also claimed that none of those types of ads would be necessary had Obama accepted his invitation for town-hall meetings. The guy should really be kicked in the teeth for being so disingenuous.

This is more than a little bit serious. If he's lying, it's one thing. But if he refuses to see facts laid out in front of him, it is irrational.

And you can quote me:

Running on the fumes of lies...

[Parenthetically: If the republicans can push this punctured lemon across the finish line, they deserve to win.]

Jake said:
Look, I agree that these sorts of things can be valuable scientifically. But they shouldn't be coming from earmarks. They should come from the NIH or NSF, where peer review is in place.

That's another problem with this discussion -- a basic misunderstanding of what earmarks are.

Basically, anytime Congress specifies any specific spending item in the budget, it's an earmark. Otherwise, Congress simply gives each department and agency a lump sum each year to be spent as the department Secretary or agency head see fit.

Specifying dollar amounts for foreign aid to Israel (or any other country), for port security or for special education funding to states are all earmarks. It's likely that the study of bear DNA was to be part of the Interior Dept. budget.

The problem in Washington isn't with earmarks per se. It's with earmarks that are inserted into the budget late in the process, so they can't be reviewed by Congressional committees or by the public.

SteveT -- First, allocation of scientific research should be driven by the peer-reviewed literature, not by Congressional (or gubernatorial!) fiat. Second, it's the McCain campaign that has decided to run on earmarks=evil. Given that, it's not that the money was spent on seals that is, per se a problem. It's the rank hypocrisy. Finally, of course, it's just dishonest.

With every passing moment, one word keeps coming to mind regarding McCain's campaign - craven! -Kevo

As I read these posts and watch some of the media coverage, mostly KO and RM on MSNBC, what I realize is that the problem is not soley with the candidates. It is with the media. The assault (it seems the words we use for any conflict are couched in militarist terms and I admit I am using one here)is best directed at the media and the personalities who continue to avoid distinguishing the candidates and their campaigns in 'fair and balanced' contexts. If some of the 'liberals' on TV and in the 'mainstream' publications were to direct their criticism at their less-than-honest colleagues, the whole conversation would change. I didn't watch The View and don't think I ever have, but once again, it sounds like McCain was allowed to skate on blatant lies. Whoopi, who I am assuming is a 'liberal', supposedly said nothing, really out of character for her. What is she afraid of? She has come a long way from a poor single mother. Is she afraid of returning to her poor, struggling roots? I'm digressing, but this is an example(I did not see the show, so am making all kinds of assumptions)of what is happening. Those people with the microphone/by line are afraid for their jobs and losing the status they have attained. And, they are willing to let this country fall into the hands of the powerbrokers without a whimper. And we are also complicit if we don't direct our anger and passion for justice at the source of information distribution. Obama is not responsible, soley, for his message not being heard. We, the people/consumers (for that is what the commercial media see us as), have to direct our dissatisfaction where it makes a difference.

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

SteveT, I'm inclined to agree with your last point, though if we are narrowing the category we are also narrowing the fiscal impact of eliminating them. But McCain is running against earmarks, not some earmarks or particularly egregious earmarks. So your beef is mainly with him (and I don't mean that rhetorically or to suggest he's "your" guy if he isn't).

Sorry, that is solely, not soley.
st john

This absolutely MUST be an ad:

Video: McCain saying (on The View) she never requested any earmarks as governor.
Announcer: FACT: Palin requested $X millions as governor, including $3.2 million for seals after McCain denounced bears...
Announcer: Why does John McCain repeat lies? Is he trying to deceive you? Or is he just out of touch?

This way it's all about McCain.
Game over.

It's entirely possible that McCain is simply suffering from the beginnings of dementia. It sure looks like he simply lying, but it could be that he's simply saying the first thing that comes to mind. It's probably pleasant for him to remember the days when he was looked on as a straight-talking maverick so that's the role he plays. Then it comes time to say something and *blammo*: whoppers. Then his staff has to rally round and make the best of it. (The possibility that the staff, composed largely of lobbyists, aren't involved in shaping the lies is scant. But stranger things have happened. Of course, actively trying to get a man elected whom you suspect of senile dementia is a moral horror all on its own.)

Just to be clear regarding "Running on the fumes of lies."

I believe MCain's narrative is non-sustainable.
We've reached a media tipping point.
The Emperor is naked, and everyone can see...

Either:

1) He says he misspoke.
2) He continues to try to limp home on the fumes.
3) He changes the narrative in a hurry and doesn't look back.

Either way, emmie got it right upstairs:

If this doesn't end up in an Obama ad, then I give up! All the O campaign has to do is show him saying "She doesn't accept earmarks" and then list all the earmarks she requested. How hard is that??

This is a major league blunder that wants exploiting to the max. Emmie's idea exposes as either a buffoon or a brigand. Either way it slices and dices.

So, McCain lies openly about Palin's record on the View.

Too bad no one called him a liar on the spot.

Sure, later on, the editorials may point out that he was lying.

But, now the audience of the View believe that Palin never took earmarks.

If someone tells a lie, but no one calls them a liar, then ........ tell me what happens to the truth.

Bernard Gilroy said:
SteveT -- First, allocation of scientific research should be driven by the peer-reviewed literature, not by Congressional (or gubernatorial!) fiat.

I agree. But even if Congress established a $20 million program that would provide funding scientific research projects to study migratory habits of protected and endangered species through DNA analysis with money allocated based on recommendation from a peer review panel, establishing the fund would still require an earmark.

Second, it's the McCain campaign that has decided to run on earmarks=evil

But we (okay, me -- I don't know about Bernard) progressives are going along with that formulation instead of arguing that earmarks without committee review and particularly earmarks that go directly to contributers are the problem.

Yeah, it's a little wonky. But when we say "Washington is broken" without saying how it's broken, we're just promoting the Doug Norquist idea the government = evil.

@Danp

Thanks - Palin accepting the "Bridge to Nowhere" earmark as Governor actually exposes two lies.

steve: Why on earth would McCain go on national television and claim Sarah Palin never requested earmarks as governor? He either knows that's false or should know that's false. Either way, the distance between reality and McCain's rhetoric keeps getting larger.

why would mccain claim palin sold the gov.'s jet on ebay for a profit...

...that wasn't true either...

I've said before and I still believe that at least part of John McCain's problems are age related. Over and over again he has denied saying things that have been made in public, on the record and recorded for instant review.

This may not be because he's necessarily dishonest (although I don't discount the possibility) but rather that his short-term memory may have become so degraded that he literally can't remember what he's said and therefore only his statements of the exact present moment are valid to himself.

It's like a deaf person shouting at people to "stop whispering" and not realizing where the real source of the problem is. To elect a man to the presidency in that situation is beyond stupid. It's suicidal.

I'm sorry, but in my opinion John McCain is not physically competent for this office. It's not his fault that he got old, but it's not our fault either that being president happens to be on his personal bucket list. The fate of our country is too important to risk on satisfying one old man's desire for a last hurrah.

Sarah Palin did not request earmarks while carrying out her duties as governor in Juneau.

She only requested earmarks when she went home, to Was..wah...zilla.

Calling from a personal cell phone from a hockey rink to ask for 3.2 million dollars for seal DNA research to folks in Washington DC is/was not asking for earmarks. She was merely asking for favors.

So, yeah, I kinda agree with John on this one.

That d*mn jet, again! She didn't sell the jet on eBay. She didn't make a profit. The jet was a Westwind II. It seats 8 and has a range of 2400 miles. Given the size of Alaska, and given it's remote location, I have trouble understanding how the state having a jet is so bad. Lots of city and state governments have significant vehicle fleets. I'd bet that the jet would have, eventually, paid for itself. It certainly had a better chance of doing so before it was sold at a loss to score cheap political points about your virtuous frugality.

It goes with the definition of "is".

Technically she did not ask since she is not a member of congress. She may have given someone a really really long wish list, but it was up to a Senator or Congressman to ask.

So someone should point out that if she can't ask, she can't clean it up either.

I thought he performed very well. The truth is irrelevant.

The election will be decided by marginal Dems in MI, OH, and PA that would be relieved to have a "reason" not to vote for Obama. There are scads of these folks. All they want is a reasonable alternative. McCain seemed quite reasonable on the show.

John McCain says Sarah Palin is going to reform Washington.

But, it's John McCain who is running for President -- what does HE want to reform?