Posts with the tag GOP Convention

McCain for Secretery of Defense?

Michael Oakes — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 21:56:55 EDT

Hi ,I had a response from family concerning the smears they had forwarded me, with one line and more anonymous e-mails attached.No mention of the phony smear e-mail you were so aghast at last time?No mention of the Bridge to no where lies?No mention on the lies about Sen. Obama's lack legislative achievements?No mention of her record as mayor: political firings, banning books, hiring lobbyists to bring in earmarks, and sending that town of 8-10,000 into $20 million in debt?Just another e-mail circulating with no name or source, which looks like more of the non-stop stream of fake e-mails the Right Wing keeps circulating. This one, to put the best spin possible on her actions. Of course it could be real- in which case it was not created but selected to put the best spin on her. If real, all it shows that one or two admitted Republican's who bash all Democrats as corrupt, got to chat with her and like her. Is this a surprise? Now, the details of this case are yet to come out. The Trooper may be bad news, but he deserves a hearing. Was the commissioner who refused to fire him without due process also deserving of being fired without due process? Well there is an ongoing investigation to find out. The Republican's are now trying to squash it. Is the Legislator running the investigation also corrupt? We don't know, but as the anonymous writer slanders all Democrats, we can't blindly accept his biased opinion. Was the Librarian who refused to ban books in Wasilla, and the Police chief, and other officials in that small town also deserving of being summarily fired or threatened with it? Well two of them sued her and one won, so we can likely say, not all of them. The point here is we really don't know her. She may have some good and some bad in her short record. Let's look at what actual facts come out in the wash. However, what we do know is that someone is spreading rumors, lies, and gossip as fact. I suggest we rely on legitimate news sources like the Newsweek fact check I sent you. Check out the Fact-check on Obama's web site, and follow them back to their legitimate sources, rather than taking in every anonymous e-mail as fact, whether it exonerates the Republicans or smears the Democrats. What troubles me for our country is the lack of concern for years evidence of serious corruption in the Bush Administration, which even McCain alluded to, though did nothing about. Election fraud, manipulation of intelligence to promote an illegal war, corporate corruption with Cheney's company, Halliburton, ripping off our military in time of war, and Bush's buddies at Enron nearly bankrupting our state, and destroying the lives of their own employees. Illegal spying, detention, and torture of innocents. Killing of civilians. 1.2 million dead, and 4 million refugees in an unnecessary war. Ignoring the overwhelming worldwide Scientific consensus, and refusing to follow much less lead the rest of the world in averting the disasters of Climate Change for our children. Corruption certainly seems to be in the eye of the beholder. But what can you behold in the posture of an ostrich? From most Republican's I've witnessed a "See no evil" attitude toward their own, and a self-serving credulity and shameless rumore mongering toward Democrates. Coupled with and a disdane for our free press and science, it poisons our civic discourse and undermines our democracy.But all these years you have refused to even watch V.P. Al Gore's Academy Award and Nobel Peace Prize winning documentary on the science of Global Warming, or Michael Moore's Oscar winning documentaries, because you said they were biased. Yet you'll watch Fox News, without knowing who and what its owner, Rupert Murdock is. You'll read and accept books published by the most discredited right wing smear artist. And you accept and pass on demonstrably false rumors, gossip, lies, and smears from fake and anonymous e-mails. Surely, this is biased.The last thing I want to note about the GOP convention, was the paucity of policy. The lions share of all the speeches were about John McCain's biography, with a heavy emphasis on his military family background and mostly his time as a POW. Solid policies were also sorely lacking in Palin's speech. Other than "drill baby drill", they said very little. The overall effect was emotional. The message seemed to be, we deserve to be in office because of our personal stories, not our wise leadership, sound judgment, and well thought out policies. The tone of all but McCain's speech was very sarcastic, derisive and divisive for our country; it was the same old appeal to culture wars that goes back to the '60's, and the Red bating of the "50's. The facts were spun, distorted, and ignored to amp up the emotional attack. And the overwhelming emphasis on military service and personal suffering, and the lack of concrete, comprehensive policies on the major issues of our day made me think he was running for Secretary of Defense, or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, rather than President. Commander in Chief is only one role our President must play. And he does not plan the strategy and tactics of our wars; that's what our great military does. The civilian authority decides when and where to use our military might - judgment which John McCain, and even more so Sarah Palin, have not demonstrated, and Sen Obama has. The President must exercise skill in diplomatic, economic, intellectual and moral leadership; everything I've seen demonstrates Sen. Obama can do all that, and Sen. McCain can not. Now you might bridle at least at the moral leadership; but when you support a bloody illegal war and never discuss the human and economic costs, when you support torture (as McCain ended up doing after initial resistance), when your instincts are to bomb our way to peace, no matter how patriotic you may feel, you only tarnish the reputation of America as a beacon of justice. Who would make a better war lord? Perhaps Sen. McCain. Who will make better policy and a better President. Definitely Sen. Obama. Who is the more known and qualified V.P., definitely Sen. Biden. That's my considered opinion.I know you may differ on all this, but at least let us differ honestly, base on the facts and not on lies, innuendo, and rhetoric. We owe that to our country.Love,Michael Oakes

-----Original Message-----
Subject: FW: Sarah Palin comments from people who know her

Abuse of Power maybe in the eyes of the beholders…… Sarah Palin First, comments by a political cynic and Second, those of a Palin relative that lives in Alaska gives us her feelings toward McCain's running mate And from a Alaska man who is a very serious cynic about all things political here is my take on Sara.I met and spoke with Sara Palin about two years ago at our downtown Park Strip. It is a place for walking, carnivals, political outdoor things and such. She was cooking hotdogs at a fund raiser and introducing herself to the public as a Governor hopeful.She came by and said the usual "Hi, I'm Sara Palin and I am running for Governor"...and I expected her to keep on to the next person but she asked me who I was and what I did in Alaska and we ended up talking for 15 minutes about me, Air America (she was all agog!) and my career in the Army and AAM. She is a pilot (Super Cub) I'm told although all she told me about that was that she loved flying.As I watched her over the next six months as she successfully ran for Governor I was really impressed. I was impressed greatly even before that after she resigned a good position (Alaska Gas and Oil Regulatory Commission) because a fellow Commission member (Chair of the Alaska Republican Party) misused their office and position. He was using the FAX, computers, printing room and all to promote the Republican endeavors while in a State job. That is a huge no-no in any government employment position.She resigned and made her point and within weeks Randy Ruderich (the above bad guy) found his ass out on the street and a subsequent investigation found him guilty and he was fined $12,000. Small change actually but a giant point was made.Next she went after our most horrible Governor ever, Governor Murkowski, and damned if she didn't beat him! All of us here in Alaska , except the Democrats, are sick of our State's corruption. That fact was shouted to the heavens after she was elected with an overwhelming point spread.After she got into office she started after corrupt legislators and with the FBI's help we've put four of them in prison, indicted six more and the "Corrupt Bastard's Club" as they arrogantly called themselves (even had hats made with CBC on the front!) suddenly found it no fun anymore. Club membership is now in the toilet!!The current flap which has cost her a ten point loss of popularity (she's still 82%!) was over firing a popular Commissioner of Public Safety who is responsible for our Alaska State Troopers. She fired him for no STATED reason which was her prerogative as the Gov. He served entirely at her option. She and her whole family had a bad, bad experience with a rogue Trooper who was married to Sara's sister. His name is Trooper Wooten. This dimwit Trooper had threatened Sara's father (death threat!), threatened Sara ("I'll get you too"), tasered his 12 year old stepson, drove drunk in his AST cruiser, got a pass by a fellow Trooper who stopped him for erratic driving a second time while in civvies and just a host of other things not yet released to the public. He got away with it and got another pass by the Commissioner's appointed AST Trooper Internal Affairs investigator with a tiny slap on the wrist. Five days off without pay to be exact!!This maverick Trooper is still on the payroll but only just. The Union intervening saved his malcontent ass. He'll yet get his I'm sure. Incredible heat is being heaped on the Troopers. Public heat, not the Governors office.The Democrats had the audacity to appoint a obviously biased investigator, Rep. "Gunny" French (so called because he lied about being in the USMC while running for the Legislature) is a staunch liberal and under the orders of Senate President Lyda Green who hates Sara. She hates Sara because after being elected Governor Sara told the whole Legislature in one of her first meetings with them that, quote; "All of you here need some Adult Supervision!!!". Sara was seriously pissed and not afraid of anyone there.That played wonderfully well with Alaskan's after all of our corruption and after all of her successful battles against a seriously entrenched corrupt government here in Alaska . It pissed off the whole Legislature though! They have stayed pissed but also afraid of her because of her popularity.She reminds me personally of our Alaska wolverine which will fight anything in it's path if it see's fit to do so. No respect at all for size or position. Wife Cindy is in this category too. Unfortunately.In closing I must tell you that she is the best, most moral and most focused leader I've seen since President Reagan. I feel, really strongly, that like Alaska the rest of our country will love her within a few weeks. Put simply, she represents middle America like NO leader we've ever had. I think McCain made a totally brilliant move in choosing her. She's a maverick who is probably tougher and more focused than McCain himself....and she won't be a total "Yes Man" or more appropriately, woman. McCain will love her.In 2012 she will be President.My best to all of you in the hurricane belt. I hope you are all OK. We just had another mini Air America reunion here in beautiful Soldotna , Alaska along the Kenai river. Milt Olson, Mike Seal and Ernie Brace (McCains POW buddy) were all here. Ernie's wife, Nancy, is a class act and a wonderful gal. I wish you'd come up and see us. We'll be doing this every year now I guess. Like our Flying Tiger pal's before us there are not that many Air America guys left. I'm 71 myself this September 16. Where the hell did the years go so fast?My best to you old buddy.Semper Fi from the friend of a friend A relative that lives in Alaska gives us her feelings toward McCain's running mate.We were excited to hear Sarah was McCain's choice.... She is an awesome candidate.... She has proven herself a strong leader in AK and Alaska girls are pretty tough.... Around here their favorite bumper sticker is that " Alaska Girls Kick Ass" and they aren't kidding....Sarah is known for being "common folk" ... she refused her security detail, and picks up her own dry-cleaning. She lives in her own home instead of the Governor's mansion so her kids can go to their regular schools.... He husband is an Alaska Native (Indian) her kids are named after Alaska things... "Trap" is the oldest, Bristol (Bristol bay), Willow and baby Paxon are named for places, and Piper for an airplane (AK's primary transportation) She and her husband Tod still net salmon commercially during the fishing season, and she is an avid hunter, and respects the state's traditions...One of the favorite recent stories concerns the birth of her last baby... She was scheduled to speak at a big conference of Governors in the Southwest and shortly before going on stage her water broke, and she went into labor with her 5th child... She still gave the speech which was 20 minutes long and no one knew she was in labor... she was then whisked to a plane and flew back to AK because she said it just wouldn't do for the Gov. of AK to have her baby out of state!She is also a strong leader, and managed to push through a LNG pipeline contract that the men had been talking about for 20 years without action and she has only been Governor for 2 years.... She has given the good old boys a run for their money, in a state where politics are pretty rough.... She has cut spending, and believes that the PEOPLE own the resources and not the government... remember AK has no income tax, and we actually get paid to live here.... this year we will get about $3300 apiece to compensate for gas prices and our usual share of government oil revenue... She is smart, practical and Real! She also cleans up well and has a good sense of decorum in addition to speaking well and being comfortable in crowds.... Overall we are thrilled by this choice and optimistic that the McCain/Palin ticket will bring the change that the country needs... Can you tell we approve?

House of Mirrors

signsSansSignifieds — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 18:45:45 EDT

I’ve posted my take on the extraordinarily dishonest GOP convention on my personal blog, which includes lots of links to sources debunking as many lies as I had the energy to counter (admittedly, the supply is almost inexhaustible).

Please drop in & see if any of it is of use in your efforts to register, convince and/or motivate potential voters.

On another note, Obama and Biden were on fire today.

The Republican Convention was the Real Bridge to Nowhere

Stefan — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 16:52:50 EDT

The republican convention last weekend in St. Paul was a phenomenon. We saw thousands of people cheering to politicians that really did not reveal any points of their agenda, but based their entire strategy on patriotism, old values, and attacks on the democratic nominee for President. After watching most of the GOP convention, I came to the conclusion that this event was indeed a “bridge to nowhere.”

The slogan of the convention was “country first,” a slogan that implies that someone else does not put his country first and a very hypocritical statement. Is McCain arguing that Obama does not put his country first? Is he saying that the only reason Obama is running for President is for his own personal benefit? Well, it sure seems that he does, but even if not, Sarah Palin definitely did explicitly say that “there is only one candidate in this race that puts in country first, and that is Senator John McCain.” Not only is this an insult to a man that went into community service after graduating from Harvard and having a lot of opportunities to make ten times as much money somewhere else, it is also controversial. If anybody in this race does put himself over his country it would have to be John McCain. First of all, he changed a dozen of his personal agendas to fit those of the Republican Party in order to get support from traditional republican voters. He used to be against offshore drilling, he used to favor the Hurricane Katrina Investigations, and he changed his position on social security privatization. On almost every major issue he now stands with the republican strategies, which is a clear indicator that he puts his career first.

Furthermore, McCain’s campaign used to base all of their arguments on the theory that Obama is just too inexperienced to lead. McCain also said that he would pick a Vice President that is most capable of leading in case of his death. He picked a two year governor, who is younger and has less experience than Obama does. Either McCain was wrong about Obama being too inexperienced, or he did not pick the most capable leader for his VP ticket. Republicans are now arguing that Palin has more experience than Obama because she is a governor. Palin, however, has been dealing only with issues of the state of Alaska, and she has done so only for the last two years. Obama has been dealing with nationwide and international issues for the last twelve years. The republicans are trying to escape this logical fallacy in a very cheap manner.

Every speaker at the convention was talking about change. The idea to bring change to Washington by electing the Republicans is not only ridiculous, the slogan is simply stolen. Obama’s campaign slogan has been “Change” ever since he started campaigning in the primaries. So now the Republicans bring about change? Repeatedly it has been said that the liberal government is responsible of the mistakes made in the past years. Well, the Executive has been conservative since 2000, our Supreme Court has a conservative majority, and until 2006 Congress was conservative as well. Who are those liberals in the government? Seriously, bringing change to Washington by electing the party that has been running Washington for the last eight years is as ridiculous as using the wrong size wrench on a car and refusing to change the wrench. “If I try long enough, it might just change and fit.”

“It’s not that Obama doesn’t care, he doesn’t get it” was another stolen slogan from republican speakers at the convention. Word by word this is exactly what Obama said about McCain at the democratic convention in Denver. Every college would consider such an act plagiarism and reward it with an “F.” Untrue statements about Obama wanting to raise taxes for most Americans, never reaching across the aisle to work with republicans, and giving oil companies social welfare benefits are supposed to attract voters? It is very easy to research these issues and find out that they are sheerly not true.

Change will only come if we elect a new government. How can McCain’s campaign expect people to believe in them bringing change to the White House when they started lying now already? How can we think anything will change if we pursue the same old policies and the same old agenda? How can we believe McCain’s slogan “country first”, which to me is a self evident requirement for any politician, when he changes his position to comply more with republican strategies in order to get their support? Whereas Sarah Palin was using her refusal to have the federal government build a bridge to a local community in Alaska in order to advertise her strength to the American Public, she was actually supporting that bridge when she was running for Governor. She simply ‘changed’ her position after she was elected. So with this considered her only “bridge to nowhere” would have to be her appearances in public as well as the entire republican national convention.

Obama on the Republican Attacks

Cindy in Salt Lake — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:12:12 EDT

“You know, I’ve been called worse on the basketball court.”

Inspired by the GOP convention.

Lise — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:47:29 EDT

As many of you can probably assume (and likely sympathize), the GOP convention is making me ill. Not only because watching the people in the audience is like playing "Where's Waldo" of minorities (that's not the America I know), but because this party is completely fine, proud even, to be blatantly lying about Obama, his intentions, and the people who support him. And yes, some are very gifted at it. Sarah Palin even had me thinking "she's not so bad" for a second, before she brought forth a slew of lies that contradicted EVERYTHING Barack has said he will do while in office. Yes, I am proud that Obama, a democrat, finally stood up to the GOP. But when he did it, he was using actual facts, not speculation. McCain's voting record is clear. You can go to http://www.votesmart.org/ if you doubt what Obama says is true. However the speechwriters of the GOP seem to think that speculation and assumption is all that is needed to sway the undecided American public in their direction. I hope, for all our sakes, they are wrong.

Giving to perhaps one of the most intelligent, well spoken, and caring "community organizers" I've ever seen run for office makes me feel a little better. I know that if I support someone I really believe in, I'm making my voice be heard and putting Obama one little step closer to the White House. And while donating time is also nice and I encourage all of you who aren't doing so already to take an evening or weekend to do so, the campaign is still funded by money. Obama has funded his campaign on small donations sent by millions of Americans. Keep in mind that the more we send to any candidate (regardless of which party we're supporting), the less dependency politicians have on special interests. So I encourage you to give now. I mean, how many dinners out or pairs of shoes would you give up to see someone in the White House we can trust? How many car washes would you forgo for American women to retain their right to choose. How many drinks at a bar would you give up if it meant the rights and privileges of heterosexuals were extended to all communities? McCain is a person who voted no on a nondiscrimination act that would have meant a lot to me. And while I'd love to receive the same privileges as married couples, I'm not referring to his vote to approve the defense of marriage act. No, I'm referring to his no vote on an act that would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. (In case you didn't know, that bill did not pass and yes it is legal to refuse employment based solely on a person's sexual orientation in the majority of states in this nation). For a party that seems to say the word freedom more times than George Michael's song on repeat, they don't seem to know what the word means.

For those of you reading this who are Republican, I urge you to look at why you're voting the way you are and ask yourself if the past 8 years really have been all you have wanted them to be, both in your community, at home as well as globally. Because if McCain's voting record is any indication of how he'll run the country, Barack's absolutely right in saying that a McCain administration will mean more of what we've been getting for the past eight years. And not just on civil rights issues, but on issues involving health care, foreign policy, aid for our troops, and the environment. And with 3 potential vacancies on the Supreme Court, he will undoubtedly ensure that his legacy lives on for many decades to come.

Let's do something to change the course our country has been on, shall we? If this blog moved you in any way, you can show your appreciation by contributing to his campaign right now. Even if it's $5, that's $5 with your beliefs written all over them.

http://my.barackobama.com/helpfightback

Thank you for reading.

Old habits die hard

Peter — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:54:11 EDT

Palin acceptance speech is a cynical message painting a world in which we are supposed to cow down to high school bullies who want the world to be just as it was. Teleprompter reading by Palin of the fed lines was a well-rehearsed high school-level show. “Congrats” to the speech writers and the choreographers who puppeteered the show on sending one of the most cynical, smug, insulting messages ever in politics. By mocking Obama, you succeeded in making the rest of us feel inadequate and evoked the thoughts of school-yard bullies waiting for us after school on our way home. Now that we know that we are all complete failure, as we are told so in no uncertain terms, and that there is no hope for us and no place for us in your world, what are we supposed to do? Roll over, cry uncle, and pony up the money the bully wants so we can go home and hide? I think that the American people will chose to stand up to the high school bullies, once they realize what this show is all about. Funny, how some people never grow up…

FactCheck.org: GOP Convention Spin

Curtis — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 00:23:07 EDT

Lieberman and Thompson make misleading claims about Obama on Day Two of the party in St. Paul.

Summary

Joe Lieberman and his former Senate colleague Fred Thompson both made misleading claims about Obama in their prime time GOP convention speeches on Tuesday. We've heard two of them before – many times.

Lieberman said Obama hadn't "reached across party lines" to accomplish "anything significant," though Obama has teamed with GOP Sens. Tom Coburn and Richard Lugar to pass laws enhancing government transparency and curtailing the proliferation of nuclear and conventional weapons.
Thompson repeated misleading claims about Obama's tax program, saying it would bring "one of the largest tax increases in American history." But as increases go, Obama's package is hardly a history-maker. It would raise taxes for families with incomes above $250,000. Most people would see a cut.
Lieberman also accused Obama of "voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield." But Obama's only vote against a war-funding bill came after Bush vetoed a version of the bill Obama had supported – and McCain urged the veto.

AnalysisWe found a few factual issues in Tuesday night's big-name speeches at the convention in Minnesota's Twin Cities.

Obama on Your Side
Sen. Joe Lieberman, the former Democrat (now Independent) who supports McCain, accused Obama of not reaching out to the other side:

Lieberman: In the Senate, during the three-and-a-half years that Senator Obama has been a member, he has not reached across party lines to get accomplish anything significant. ...

We don't know what Lieberman considers "significant." But Obama has co-sponsored bills with members of the other party, some of which have been noteworthy. Obama and Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, for instance, teamed up on an initiative to lock down and secure both nuclear and conventional weapons worldwide, such as the shoulder-fired, anti-aircraft missiles that have been proliferating in recent years. According to a report on the bill by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the legislation "enhances: (1) U.S. cooperation with foreign governments to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles around the world; and (2) the United States' ability to provide assistance to foreign governments aimed at helping them detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction." Lugar hasn't objected to Obama's characterization of their partnership or the bill, which became law in 2007, in his ads.

Another example: Obama worked with Sen. Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, to write the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, which created a searchable database the public can use to look up details on federal grants and contracts. (McCain was also among the original co-sponsors of that bill, so Lieberman may have been tarring his own candidate when he disparaged Obama's legislative accomplishments). Obama and Coburn also got together on a bill to prohibit the Department of Homeland Security from issuing open-ended, no-bid contracts for emergency response activities after abuses were found in post-Katrina contracting.

The Truth on Taxes (Again)

Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, who was in the race himself earlier this year, banged the now-familiar tax drum in his denunciation of Obama when he said, "You don't lift an economic downturn by imposing one of the largest tax increases in American history."

We've been here before (repeatedly), but we're happy to reiterate: What Obama is proposing is indeed a substantial tax increase for some, but not for most. Overall, Obama says he would raise income, capital gains and dividend taxes only for taxpayers with family income above $250,000 or singles making more than $200,000. He would also raise corporate taxes through selective “loophole closings.”

For most taxpayers rates would go down. The nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center has described his plan this way:

Tax Policy Center: The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate-income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers. ... By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly $2,200 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase — a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income.

It’s true that Obama’s tax proposals overall would raise federal revenues by $627 billion over 10 years. Is that “one of the largest tax increases in American history” as Thompson claimed? And would it be a drag on the economy as he says?

When it comes to assessing the effect that a tax change will have on the economy, the single most relevant figure is the size of the increase or cut in relation to the size of the overall economy. And by that yardstick, Obama’s increase is hardly a history-maker. The largest was the 1942 increase enacted as the U.S. plunged into World War II, and it amounted to 5.2 percent of the entire economy in its first year.

President Bill Clinton's 1993 tax increase, which Republicans regularly and misleadingly call the largest in history, was actually about one-tenth as large, amounting to 0.5 percent of the economy over its first two years. The TPC calculates that Obama’s overall tax increase, as described by his aides and on his Web site, would be roughly 0.1 percent in its first year, and 0.3 percent on average over 10 years, compared with what people are paying now.

And how would that affect the economy? Not much. The TPC says, “Neither candidate’s plan would significantly increase economic growth unless offset by spending cuts or tax increases that the campaigns have not specified.” The tax plans of both Obama and McCain would leave the federal government wallowing in huge deficits for years to come, and compared with the economic drag created by deficit spending, the effects of either man’s tax plan is negligible.

Troop Funding Foul Play

Lieberman also said that "colleagues like Barack Obama were voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield." That's a highly misleading claim that McCain also touted in an ad this summer. Obama has voted in favor of war-funding bills at least 10 times since becoming a senator. The McCain camp and Republicans cite one vote Obama cast against a funding bill as justification for their claim – but that vote came after President Bush had vetoed a version of the bill that included a date for withdrawal from Iraq.

In fact, most Republicans voted against that 2007 war-funding bill Obama and the Democrats supported. McCain was absent for the vote, but he urged the president to veto the bill. As we said about this subject previously, "Based on those facts, it would be literally true to say that ‘McCain urged a veto of funding for our troops.’ But that would be oversimplified to the point of being seriously misleading." And the same goes for Lieberman’s claim at the convention.

— by Viveca Novak, Brooks Jackson and Lori Robertson
SourcesVictor, Kirk. "The Lugar Connection." National Journal, 2 Aug. 2008.

Tempalski, Jerry. “Revenue Effects of Major Tax Bills.” Office of Tax Analysis, U.S. Department of the Treasury, Sept. 2006.

Williams, Roberton and Gleckman, Howard. “An Updated Analysis of the 2008 Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans.” Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, 15 Aug 2008.

Office of U.S. Sen. John McCain. "McCain urges president to veto legislation requiring withdrawal deadline for U.S. troops." news release, 26 April 2007.

Office of U.S. Sen. Barack Obama. “Obama Votes to Demand Changed Course in Iraq.” news release, 24 May 2007.

Office of U.S. Sen. John McCain. “Senator McCain Statement on Presidential Veto of Iraq Spending Legislation.” news release, 1 May 2007.
Related Articles
A New Stitch in a Bad PatternA McCain ad wrongly claims Obama plans "painful tax increases" for working families. And who's talking about deficits?

Lack of Diversity at GOP Convention

Cindy in Salt Lake — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:15:49 EDT

The first day of the GOP convention has just ended. What surprised me most was the lack of diversity among those in attendance, though I did see an African-American security person tell people to move aside. Lots of cowboy hats and an Abraham Lincoln look-alike.

CNN has a live stream if you don't want to have commercials nor hear any commentary.
http://www.cnn.com/video/live/live.html?stream=stream4

Gustav and revamping the GOP Convention

KDenni, MPA — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:35:27 EDT

I am concerned with the actions of the Republican National Convention, a very important media event being rescheduled and many of the actions taken in anticipation of Hurricane Gustav's impending blow. Might the revamping of the GOP National Convention be an attempted diversion from the policy positions and recent concerns surrounding the appointment of Pulin, masquerading as a Compassionate Conversativism?

Why, if not for this reason won't GOP convention, as planned, with live shots and commentary from candidates through out the day and during planned speeches?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/31/gop-cancels-convention-op_n_122808.html