Watch and weep at this extensive history of legislative malfeasance. H/T Jawa.
Robert Bidinotto has been doing the best job of detailing the media and blogosphere agitprop against Sarah Palin, this morning I recommend that you read his two part series on the ABC interview:
One other thing: the question on “Bush Doctrine” was obvious setup to declare McCain / Palin as four more years of Bush, which is the main campaign point that Barack’s campaign would have you believe. ABC’s collusion in trying to perpetuate that is ridiculously transparent in the snips I’ve seen. While the left will tell us that Charlie gave Sarah pause on the question, in reality it’s like asking her to futher the talking points of the left. I would have paused at that question too, since the Bush Doctrine means many different things to many different people, and the left boiling it down to “pre-emptive strikes” is foolishness. It really was more than pre emptive strikes, and it has changed over the years since 9/11.
My reply would have been “Which Bush Doctrine Charlie?” By making him specify what he was getting at she helped make the ploy transparent. The only thing she might have done better would be to say that the McCain Doctrine is what saved the Bush Doctrine from defeat in Iraq.
I don’t think the left’s BDS has as much traction or heft as they think it does, as President Bush’s poll numbers continue to rise while Congress’ numbers lie in the sewer. This post is the last in which I will compare Bush and McCain, the differences are many, and that’s direction the left wants the conversation to go. I’d rather look at the future, as the candidates should be.
The conversation needs to turn to energy, the economy, and victory in Iraq, not the crap we’ve been re-hashing for five years as that’s gotten rather circular.
Update: Charles over at Little Green Footballs has the interview up, it’s a must see.
While the MSM continues to paint John McCain as weak on the economy, he continues to exhibit signs that he has firmer grasp of economic reality than his opponent Obama. This as evidenced by McCain’s anti-tax and anti-spending positions as well as his long record on both issues. (The notable outlier was his original opposition to Bush tax cuts because they did not at the same time reduce spending. If conservatives had listened to that message perhaps the 2006 election cycle would have gone a bit better for them.)
This morning McCain is on attack again as he challenges Obama’s weakness on taxes:
If you are one of the 23 million small business owners in America who files as an individual rate payer, Sen. Obama is going to raise your tax rates. If you have an investment for your child’s education or own a mutual fund or a stock in a retirement plan, he is going to raise your taxes. He will raise estate taxes to 45%. I propose to cut them to 15%. His plan will hurt the American worker and family. It will hurt the economy and cost us jobs,” McCain will say today, according to excerpts released by the campaign. “At a time of increasing gas and food prices, American families need tax relief and I, not my opponent, will deliver it.
Who knew that Obama had 100 million plus in Earmarks during his short senate stint?