Why is Chris Rock always just so right about everything?

Via Jack & Jill Politics:

As an aside, I recently met Chris Rock. Twas an honor.

Ever noticed all you ever heard was Palin saying “Bristol and the young man she will marry.” You never heard the “young man” say he was going to get married.

He doesn’t want to, and he won’t if McCain-Palin loses.

If he did, he would have a while ago.

Of course, he might just do it if they win. The White House is a lot more fun than Alaska.

Just a prediction.

Well that was going to be my prediction and post until I happened across this mindblowing article this afternoon:

McCain camp prays for Palin wedding
The marriage of the vice-presidential candidate’s pregnant teenage daughter could lift a flagging campaign

In an election campaign notable for its surprises, Sarah Palin, the Republican vice- presidential candidate, may be about to spring a new one — the wedding of her pregnant teenage daughter to her ice-hockey-playing fiancé before the November 4 election.

Inside John McCain’s campaign the expectation is growing that there will be a popularity boosting pre-election wedding in Alaska between Bristol Palin, 17, and Levi Johnston, 18, her schoolmate and father of her baby. “It would be fantastic,” said a McCain insider. “You would have every TV camera there. The entire country would be watching. It would shut down the race for a week.” (link)

Mindblowing. I’m just sort of speechless. Talk about a shotgun wedding.

Think about that . . . what a horrible basis to select a Presidential ticket . . . because of some nice WEDDING PICTURES!

Anybody who defended Sarah Palin, and honestly believed her family should be off limits, should give some deep thought to her playing politics with the lives of children (and hockey jocks in the wrong place at the wrong time for that matter).

If that’s the kind of strategy the McCain camp is relying on, the “country first” slogan is getting more pathetic everyday (I won’t even get into the campaign suspension ridiculousness right now).

Note to self – never date a politician’s daughter.

Just after CNN asks the McCain campaign to free Sarah Palin, we’re forced to ask the Republican nominee to free himself.

According to John McCain, although:

“I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated,” McCain told the Wall Street Journal in late November. (link)

he’s desperately needed in Washington to negotiate a bailout agreement that McCain’s pro deregulation policy stance helped create. Indeed, despite the fact that there are 98 or so other senators working on the issue, despite the fact that Democrats (the majoriry party) have essentially agreed on a plan, and despite the fact that McCain has done literally nothing to assist the last week’s negotiations on the crisis, and despite the fact that the crisis began last week but he didn’t hear anything about suspending a debate until his number tanked, 48 hours before the first debate he is desperately needed.

John McCain is a loser.

He can’t win on any issue so he tries to capture people’s imagination by simply doing unpredictable things.

Well my friends, being unpredictable is not being a maverick in any positive sense of the word. A maverick doesn’t just go a long with the crowd to be a contrarian, but does not do so for a good principled reason.

McCain is just trying to be unpredictable for unpredictability’s sake.

Moreover, this unpredictableness has no relation to actual policies, it’s only campaign tactics. While the political talking heads might praise these tactics, think of how such a politician would govern. Trying to keep the opposing party on their toes, McCain would govern erratically, by way of erratic political tactics and maneuvering. If that doesn’t alarm you , just think of this tactical approach applied to Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea.

Imagine going back in time to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Although Obama is about as even tempered as they come, imagine a leader of a potentially dangerous nation reacting to one of McCain’s stunts. McCain simply flunks the Cuban Missile Crisis test for President I discussed in an earlier post.

In any event, I don’t think McCain’s little stunt will do him much good. Most Americans think it was the wrong move, and nobody likes a loser.

McCain will always be the guy who backed down. Somehow, despite all the experience he campaigned on for so long, he can’t manage two important tasks at once.

McCain’s position is that he cannot get on the telephone and talk to members of Congress, while also preparing for a debate.

He needs to be physically present to help fix an issue even the people on Wall St. don’t fully understand, all the while while his campaign manager was on the books of those responsible to the tune of almost $2 million. That’s a credibility problem from hell where most American never see 2 million dollars . . . ever.

At the end of the day, McCain is conceding he (and his VP nominee) can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, and that his younger less experienced opponent can.

Man, I’m just happy my candidate can execute two tasks at once.

That’s a huge concession, and the Obama campaign should implicitly press the point until November 4, 2008.

I leave with a comprehensive history of John McCain’s endless quotes deriding the benefits of regulation, that he now wished to simply cover up now that deregulation of Wall St. may risk the next big depression.

Quotes can be that inconvenient sort of truth . . .

Progressive Accountability.com:

John McCain: The Deregulator

I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.”
– John McCain [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08]

McCain Is An Avid Supporter Of Lax Rules For Financial Institutions

McCain Supported A Banking Bill Because It Eliminated “The Tremendous Regulatory Burden Imposed On Financial Institutions.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “This legislation takes a small but important step toward eliminating the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on financial institutions… One principal reason banks are unable to make loans is the bewildering array of statutory and regulatory restrictions and paperwork requirements imposed by Congress and the regulatory agencies. While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Supported A Bill To “Takes A Small Step Forward Toward Eliminating Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens Imposed On Banks.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community … This bill recognizes this fact, and takes a small step forward toward eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens imposed on banks.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Said The Best Thing Government Can Do For Business Is “Stay Out Of Its Way.” While speaking about the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act on the floor on the Senate in 2000, John McCain said, “I am convinced that the best thing government can often do to advance the fortunes of the private sector is to stay out of its way. I support this bill because it makes progress toward that end, by improving companies’ flexibility to hire the talent they need, while providing for the regulatory framework and new educational opportunities to protect and promote American workers.” [Congressional Record, 10/3/00; emphasis added]

In 1999, McCain Supported Phil Gramm’s Banking Deregulation Bill. In 1999, John McCain voted for passage of the Senate version of a bill that would eliminate current barriers erected by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and other laws that impede affiliations between banking, securities, insurance and other firms. The bill also would exempt small, non-urban banks from the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), revise the Federal Home Loan Bank system and require that owners of automated teller machines (ATMs) provide notice on the ATM and on-screen of any charges imposed for the use of the terminal. The bill passed 54-44. [S. 900, Vote #105, 5/6/99]

McCain Missed The Vote For Final Passage Because He Was Campaigning In New Hampshire. John McCain missed the final vote on Phil Gramm’s banking deregulation bill because he was campaigning in New Hampshire. [NPR, “Morning Edition,” 11/5/99; S. 900, Vote #354, 11/4/99]

McCain Has Based His 2008 Campaign On Promoting Less Regulation

McCain: “I Don’t Think Anyone Who Wants To Increase The Burden Of Government Regulation And Higher Taxes Has Any Real Understanding Of Economics.” During a McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, John McCain said, “When we come out of this recession and we will because I believe that the fundamentals of our economy are good … Sen. Clinton wants the government to make the decisions for you on your health care, I want the families to make the decisions on their health care. I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.” [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08; emphasis added]

McCain: “I Understand Why The AFL-CIO And Maybe Other Unions May Oppose My Free Market, Less Regulation, Right To Work.” During an appearance on Fox’s “Special Report with Brit Hume,” John McCain said, “I understand why the AFL-CIO and maybe other unions may oppose my free market less regulation right to work. I think we have honest differences of opinion. I respect those labor unions, but I’m sure that those differences are very intense and very real.” [Fox News,” Special Report with Brit Hume,” 3/12/08]

McCain: “Let’s Reduce Regulation.” While speaking about the economy in St. Louis, Missouri, John McCain said, “I’m asked all the time are we in a recession or not in a recession. And I don’t know the answer to that because it’s kind of a technical term… I do not believe we should raise your taxes. I think it would be the worst thing we could do. And that means to me I think the tax cuts need to be made permanent. When you’ve got a bad economy, the worst thing you can do is increase people’s tax burden. Let’s reduce it. Let’s reduce regulation.” [CNN, “Ballot Bowl, 3/15/08]

McCain: “We Need To Return To The Reagan Years… We Need Less Regulation.” As shown on PBS’s “Washington Week,” John McCain said, “We need to return to the Reagan years. We need to have fiscal conservatism. We need less government. We need less regulation. We need to end of spending spree which has eroded our base of Republican support.” [PBS, “Washington Week,” 1/25/08]

McCain Promised To “Give Them Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Less Government In Their Lives.” As shown on CNN’s “CNN Newsroom,” John McCain said, “We’ve got to do the other things necessary to encourage business and give them lower taxes, less regulation, less government in their lives, and that means a simpler, fairer — tax code. The tax code in America is broken and it needs to be fixed.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 2/14/08]

To Fix the Economy, McCain Would “We’ve Got To Take Specific Actions, Keep Their Taxes Low, Less Regulation.” As shown on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” John McCain said, “That our economy is in terrible shape, that we’ve got to take specific actions, keep their taxes low, less regulation, get – start exploring and exploiting offshore oil deposits.” [ABC, “Good Morning America,” 7/2/08]

McCain Said The Difference Between Obama & Himself Would Be “More Regulation Or Less Regulation.” During a media availability in Phoenix, Arizona, John McCain said, “I think the important thing is that there will be stark differences between either Senator [Clinton] or Senator Obama and me because they are liberal Democrats and I’m a conservative Republican… whether we pursue the present strategy in Iraq or whether we — or whether we set a date for withdrawal, which will mean Al Qaida wins; whether we have more regulation or less regulation.” [McCain Media Availability via CQ Transcriptions, 3/3/08; emphasis added]

McCain: “Less Government, Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Safer America Is What I Can Give America.” During an appearance on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” John McCain said, “I can make a case that a less government, lower taxes, less regulation, safer America is what I can give America. But I don’t underestimate the size of the challenge.” [CBS, “60 Minutes,” 3/9/08]

McCain Is Long-Time Supporter Of Deregulation

McCain: “I Am A Deregulator. I Believe In Deregulation.” While speaking about the cable and satellite television during an appearance on CNN’s “On the Money,” John McCain said, “I am a deregulator. I believe in deregulation.” [CNN, “In the Money,” 7/13/03]

McCain: “The Basic Core Principles Of The Republican Party… Less Government Is Best Government, Less Regulation.” When asked how the Republican Party can recover after the losses in the 2006 election, John McCain said, “By returning to the basic core principles of the Republican Party, very careful stewardship of tax dollars, less government is best government, less regulation, lower taxes, strong national defense, community and family values.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 11/8/06]

McCain: “I Have A Long Voting Record In Support Of Deregulation.” The St. Petersburg Times quoted McCain at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing as having said, “I have a long voting record in support of deregulation.” [St. Petersburg Times, 6/5/03]

McCain: “I Continue To Believe In A Strong National Defense, Free Trade, Deregulation.” During an appearance on CNN’s “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” John McCain said, “I continue to believe in a strong national defense, free trade, deregulation. I’m pro-life. There are many, many issues that I feel would make it very difficult for Democrats to embrace me.” [CNN, “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” 5/8/02; emphasis added]

McCain: “Keep The Regulation Of The Government As Much As Possible Out Of People’s Lives.” During an appearance on PBS’s “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,” John McCain said, “If you inspect my 17-year voting record, it’s a proud conservative Republican who acts on principles and one who obviously has a very strong commitment to the leadership role the United States has to play… I think that’s probably one of our first efforts – keep the regulation of the government as much as possible out of people’s lives.” [PBS, “NewHour with Jim Lehrer,” 2/2/00]

McCain: “I Believe In Smaller Government… Less Regulation.” During an interview on PBS’s “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,” John McCain said, “, I would argue that I have 17 years of legislative experience with a clear voting record of a strong conservative. I believe in smaller government, stronger defense, lower taxes, less regulation, encouragement of entrepreneurship, encouragement of legal immigration. I think that my fundamental philosophies and beliefs are very clear, and I’ve articulated them for years and years. And most importantly, I voted on them.” [PBS, “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,” 10/15/99]

McCain: “I’ve Been A Good Party Member. I Agree On Most Issues, Fundamentals Of Lower Taxes, Less Regulation.” During an appearance on CNN’s “Crossfire,” John McCain said, “I’ve been a good party member. I agree on most issues, fundamentals of lower taxes, less regulation, smaller government, coherent foreign policy, strong national defense.” [CNN, “Crossfire,” 9/13/99]

McCain Supports Deregulation Whenever Possible. The Journal of Commerce reported, “A McCain aide notes in the past he has supported deregulation of other industries. ‘Any time you can responsibly deregulate, Sen. McCain wants to deregulate,’ the aide said.” [Journal of Commerce, 1/6/97]

Here’s a quick link . . .

Update: Here’s the amazing video . . .

Perfection.

“Tonight I call on the McCain campaign to stop treating Sarah Palin like she is a delicate flower that will wilt at any moment,” said Brown. “This woman is from Alaska for crying out loud. She is strong. She is tough. She is confident. And you claim she is ready to be one heart beat away form the presidency. If that is the case, then end this chauvinistic treatment of her now. Allow her to show her stuff. Allow her to face down those pesky reporters… Let her have a real news conference with real questions. By treating Sarah Palin different from the other candidates in this race, you are not showing her the respect she deserves. Free Sarah Palin. Free her from the chauvinistic chain you are binding her with. Sexism in this campaign must come to an end. Sarah Palin has just as much a right to be a real candidate in this race as the men do. So let her act like one.”

A new respect for Campbell Brown I never had before.

Free Sarah Palin! FREE HER DAMN YOU!

The problem with attacking Palin is that all of her faults are muddied. The problem is that those issues are all muddied. She tried to sell her government plane on ebay, but she ultimately didn’t. Maybe she fired somebody for improper reasons, but it’s kind of a he said she said, ad the trooper was a bad trooper. Maybe she had an affair, maybe she didn’t. She was for the bridge to nowhere, but then she was against it. She was a maverick taking on her party, but she was also cozy with its old boys network. She’s against wasteful spending, but she’s for earmarks when they go to Alaska.

These fights and discussions come out muddled.

The Obama campaign should focus on Palin’s current policy positions.

The flip flopper attacks work on people who also have an inauthentic persona i.e. Kerry and Romney. I don’t think it’s going to work on Palin (although it does work somewhat on McCain.

I don’t think that attacking the change in her views is going to be that helpful. They should focus on attacking her current policy positions, and only the policy issues.

There are many troubling issues, but the one that stopped conversation at the last house party I was at was that Palin opposes abortions in cases of incest and rape.

Brought the room to a standstill.

Most people have a vague sense of her anti-abortion stance, but don’t know that she OPPOSES ABORTION IN CASES OF RAPE AND INCEST.

For example, if her husband raped her daughter, she would support (in fact for all intensive purposes require) her daughter to keep the baby. That’s for real.

That would change the view of 50% of the independents supporting her.

(link)

Let’s put aside the fact that Obama invoked his work as an activist not as a qualification for being President, but as part of his world view and approach to politics. Let’s also put aside the fact that he did that work decades ago right out of law school.

Sara Palin said in her acceptance speech, and I quote:

I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a “community organizer,” except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don’t quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren’t listening.

Palin denigrated the value and impact of community organizing, as if, it were almost, a bad thing to be involved in. From Palin’s perspective only those working within the formal structure of government are engaged in any work that has “real responsibility” or gives them any noteworthy experience to run on.

That’s simply one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard in my life, and I hope people take note. That’s politics 101 information she does not know. I hope the press starts asking her questions (when McCain stops hiding her).

Here is a short list of reasons why that show how completely devoid of thought Palin’s position is:

1) The Modern Civil Rights Movement & Martin Luther King

Although she may have forgotten this, or simply never realized, non-whites were not treated as fully human beings until the efforts of ORGANIZERS like Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and the members of other civil rights organizations like SNCC. It was the organizing efforts of people like MLK that made America into a far greater country than it was, and got us closer to fully realizing the American dream and the country’s innate potential.

In Sarah Palin’s world, she has more “experience” and is more qualified for political office than MLK. I think it is fair to say that MLK would not only have been a much better President or Vice president than Palin, but that it seems utterly delusional to say that an organizer like MLK who through non-violence, without a federal tax base to fund him, and through the persuasion of his words and organizing, was able to singlehandedly change the course of American history. In short, I would likely be sitting in the back of public buses today were it not for the organizing efforts of MLK. Alternatively, America would have been consumed by one big race riot.

In Palin’s world, MLK did not really have much responsibility. That whole saving America from implosion and creating modern civil rights isn’t as important as Palin’s duties as a small town mayor.

2) Women’s Suffrage
Ironic, given the GOP’s attempt to use her to attract the proud-to-be-a-woman vote, the work of activists Palin so casually derides were responsible for women’s suffrage in the United States:

In 1848, at the Seneca Falls Convention in New York, activists including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott began a seventy year struggle to secure the right to vote for women.
. . . .
National women’s suffrage, however, did not exist until 1920. During the beginning of the twentieth century, as women’s suffrage gained in popularity, suffragists were subject to arrests and many were jailed. Finally, President Woodrow Wilson urged Congress to pass what became, when it was ratified in 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment.

The truth is that its taken the work of activists to get much of anything important done in this country. And women’s right to vote, is a direct result of the decades of activism by its courageous leaders.

3) Unions

For anybody who supports unions, who is thinking of taking a second look at Palin, perhaps because of her husband’s membership in the Steelworkers Union, you should consider that in deriding community organizing she’s going after unions. Unions, at their core, are organizations attempting to organize workers. I guess that type of work has not been more important throughout American history than Palin’s recent contributions as the mayor of a town of a few thousand people. It only created a forty hour work week, workplace safety laws, and other little insignificant labor rights. Palin insulted her own husband’s union.

The list goes on. I won’t, but I’ll just toss in Harriet Tubman, a woman with no “responsibilities,” and for good measure Gandhi, a man whose decisions really didn’t matter.

I think that family values and family issues really should not be the center of campaigns. I believe this because in America, like many of our more coveted freedoms, we should have the freedom to raise our family as we see fit (absent abuse etc.). The values guiding a family is another important piece of the diversity that makes America a unique, and sometimes great nation.

The Obama campaign has taken the high road. I think that is politically wise and morally correct.

I am not the Obama campaign.

Palin’s family biography underlines the total emptiness of the Republican message of family values, and specifically, sex education/abstinence programs.

For decades the Republican party has lorded over Democrats for being somehow socially, morally, or religously deficient.

And yet, the shrill Palin, who advocates strongly for an abstinence only approach to sex ed, can’t keep her daughter from having what is clearly an unwanted pregnancy.

Note, the complete abscence of any mention of abortion or pro-life issues in her speech tonight… that’s a huge change from the policies of Palin.

It IS an issue that her teenage daughter is pregnant, when her mother, if she could, would restrict others’ children from getting decent sex ed programs.

Moreover, the Palin family is not typical. They are, by the everyday guy’s standard, rich. Teenage pregnancies usually have a very difficult time with less resources. So, the idea that Republicans are “proud” of the decision (probably made for her) of the daughter, is hard to believe were the Palin’s low-income, and more likely to need to rely on government support. Let’s not even get into if Palin’s daughter were a single Mom.

The Republicans railed against welfare queens, who were generally single moms without resources.

Indeed, as some in talk shows and the media have alluded, it’s amazing to think of the Republican reaction if one of Obama’s daughters got pregnant during or directly before her at the same age as Palin’s daughter.