McCain Proves He Really Really Really Doesn't Get It

On Tuesday, the 25th, John McCain gave a speech before the Orange County Hispanic Small Business Roundtable. (Read the text here. ) The main topic of the speech was to address the current financial crisis faced by the US., namely the aftermath of the subprime mortgage collapse.

McCain pointed the finger at a few of the parties responsible (curiously leaving out the Federal Reserve and George Bush, who both have some culpability.) He blames the homeowners who bought more house than they could afford, and the mortgage companies that loaned them the money. I agree with his assessment that those two groups are partially to blame.

He then goes on to say:

The other part of what happened was an explosion of complex financial instruments that weren't particularly well understood by even the most sophisticated banks, lenders and hedge funds. To make matters worse, these instruments -- which basically bundled together mortgages and sold them to others to spread risk throughout our capital markets -- were mostly off-balance sheets, and hidden from scrutiny. In other words, the housing bubble was made worse by a series of complex, inter-connected financial bets that were not transparent or fully understood.

While his explanation of the mortgage-backed securities scam is not complete, it will suffice. The important part is where he says these instruments "were mostly off-balance sheets, and hidden from scrutiny." And the part about "financial bets that were not transparent..." The problem is that the convoluted mechanisms that banks used to turn high-risk loans into triple-A rated securities was hidden from view and understood by very few people.

So far, I'm with him.

But then he said, "Let's start with some straight talk," so I knew the BS was to follow.

His plan to help homeowners is to do nothing to help homeowners. Any assistance that the government offers to people with mortgages must be limited to those who didn't act irresponsibly. So he wants to give aid only to those people who don't need it, because if someone signed on to a mortgage they didn't understand or couldn't afford, then they should lay in the bed they made (which will probably be in a refrigerator box under a viaduct.) "Central to those reforms," he says, "should be transparency and accountability." He wants people to be accountable. There's some straight talk.

So how would Saint McCain handle the banking industry, which has brought our economy to the very brink of collapse, requiring a several-hundred-billion dollar bailout by the Fed?

Our financial market approach should include encouraging increased capital in financial institutions by removing regulatory, accounting and tax impediments to raising capital.

The financial institutions that a few minutes earlier he was lambasting for using unregulated, hidden tactics to spread massive risk throughout the economic foundation of America should be allowed to do whatever they want to make money.

So to sum up: after very nearly destroying the economy (and really, the jury is still out on that) these titans of greed should be trusted to do whatever they feel is appropriate to increase their bottom line. Remember when McCain said, "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should"? Well, this is what he was talking about.

.

McCain Takes Much Needed Break From Reality

Earlier today, John McCain spoke about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. According to the NY Times, he said:

withdrawing American military forced [sic] in those countries could allow them “to sink back into chaos and extremism” that would “determine the fate of that critical part of the world, but our fate, as well.”

If US forces leave, he says, Iraq could sink back into chaos and extremism. I hate to be the one to break it to him, but if Iraq has risen out of chaos and extremism (which is itself a dubious claim) it is already well on its way to sinking back into the quagmire. The Christian Science Monitor reports:

Residents and Mahdi Army militants alike appeared to be bracing for a coming battle, guarding against US and Iraqi forces advancing to stop the rockets allegedly fired from Sadr City that hit the Green Zone again Wednesday for the third day since Sunday.

Although it's in Basra, the oil-rich southern city, where the Mahdi Army and Iraqi forces were locked in a bitter fight for a second day, killing at least 55, many in Baghdad fear that clash will trigger a new battle in Mr. Sadr's Baghdad stronghold. Already there were reports by US-funded Al Hurra TV, citing hospital sources, that at least 20 people have been killed and 140 wounded in sporadic clashes in Sadr City since Tuesday.

Now, in a place where the US has done battle many times before, a sense of siege and helplessness has replaced some of the flickers of optimism that emerged over the past few months as a result of improved security made possible by the US surge and the Mahdi Army's seven-month cease-fire, which now looks to be shattered.

McCain went on to say:

We have incurred a moral responsibility in Iraq. It would be an unconscionable act of betrayal, a stain on our character as a great nation, if we were to walk away from the Iraqi people and consign them to the horrendous violence, ethnic cleansing and possibly genocide that would follow a reckless, irresponsible and premature withdrawal.

One of the most disturbing talking points of the right is that there is a possibility of ethnic cleansing taking place in Iraq if US troops pull out. How can we trust McCain to lead this country if he doesn't even know that Iraq has already fallen victim to ethnic cleansing? How far up his own ass has McCain stuck his head? Is he getting the same daily briefings that Bush gets? The ones that say, "Everything Is Good?"

You can Google Iraq ethnic cleansing and see for yourself, but in case you don't feel like doing that, here's a bit from Patrick Cockburn:

Civilian casualties have fallen from 65 Iraqis killed daily from November 2006 to August 2007 to 26 daily in February. But the fall in the death rate is partly because ethnic cleansing has already done its grim work and in much of Baghdad there are no mixed areas left.

Once everyone has been killed, it only stands to reason that the death rate will drop.

And of course McCain claims that Bush's "surge" is working.

“Political reconciliation is occurring across Iraq at the local and provincial grassroots level,” he said. “Sunni and Shi’a chased from their homes by terrorist and sectarian violence are returning."

Obviously there isn't any evidence of political reconciliation. As for the people chased from their homes, ReliefWeb puts it like this:

Hundreds of thousands of Baghdadis now live in walled-in, ethnically cleansed, heavily guarded enclaves that they are terrified to leave. Sunnis do not venture into Shia areas, and vice-versa. Sectarian hatreds have been contained, but not resolved.

2 millions of internally displaced and 2 millions of refugees ... are still struggling to survive in dire conditions. They cannot return to their place of origin, as their safety cannot be guaranteed.

I don't know what Iraq John McCain just visited, but it sounds a hell of a lot nicer than the one that we have here on Earth.

.

McCain Appears Presidential

John McCain has been on tour this week, first through the Middle East, and then on to England. The point of his trip, of course, is to provide many photo-ops of him with various leaders to shore up his claims of having foreign policy experience. He wants, in short, to appear presidential. I'd say he has succeeded.

Unfortunately, the president he resembles is George W Bush.

We all had a chuckle on Tuesday when McCain asserted more than once that Iran is training Al Queda operatives and then sending them back to Iraq. His response was that everyone makes mistakes and we should move on. (The one difference with McCain being that Bush would never acknowledge making a mistake. History would have to judge that.)

In England, McCain met with their Prime Minister for more glad-handing. According to The Telegraph, in a piece that got all wet and sloppy with how awesome Saint McCain is and how he would never have screwed up Iraq as much as W, McCain said:

"The problem with Iraq ... is because it was mishandled after the initial success. That caused great sacrifice, frustration and sorrow."

While that statement may be true to a degree, in that the occupation was indeed mismanaged and has certainly caused a great deal of "sacrifice, frustration and sorrow," that is not the problem with Iraq.

The problem with Iraq is that we should never have invaded in the first place. The problem with Iraq is that the cause for war was fabricated. The problem with Iraq is that the invasion was illegal, immoral, unjust and unnecessary. Of course, I wouldn't expect McCain to do anything but stand behind the decision to go to war in Iraq. Why would he let facts get in the way of his ideology? In an interview with the Jerusalem Post, when asked about the NIE that stated Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program, he said:

I was critical of the NIE at the time. The director says now he wouldn't do that again, but I think the damage that was done by weakening the resolve of our European allies was serious.

This latest round of sanctions that was passed at the UN is remarkable in its weakness. I don't even know how you call them sanctions. So I believe the NIE was damaging, but I do have some optimism particularly where [French President Nicolas] Sarkozy is concerned. I'm glad the [German] chancellor is here in Israel.

Over time we may be able to gather more European support as the evidence becomes clear, as it will, that Iran is progressing on the path towards construction and acquisition of nuclear weapons.

The intelligence estimate states that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program. Since that's counter to McCain's ideology, he has decided to not believe it, replacing actual intelligence with made-up "facts" that will support his agenda.

So we got to see McCain acting presidential this week, showing us a little bit of what we can expect if Saint McCain prevails in the coming election.

I don't think our country, or the world, can survive four more years of Bush policies, Bush agenda and Bush wars, which is exactly what McCain promises.

.

McCain's High Road Leads Over Cliff

Last Thursday night, Senator John McCain cast a vote in favor of a bill that would have halted the practice of earmarks for one year. According to CNN, the measure failed by a vote of 29 to 71. McCain took the opportunity to speak on the one issue that he has been consistent on over his career, and to harp on the Senate for not following the will of the people, who he claims are opposed to earmarks.

"There's only one place left in America that they don't get it," McCain told a town hall gathering outside Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, referring to Washington. "Pork-barrel spending is out of control and Americans want it stopped."

He said the result "is an interesting commentary on how the Congress and the Senate [are] disconnected from the American people."

The suggestion, of course, being that McCain is the true man of the people and that the two Democratic candidates are not, even though they both voted in support of the 1-year suspension of earmarks.

The problem with McCain's argument is that it opens him up to an evaluation of his other positions under the same microscope.

According to CNN:

A majority of Americans consider waterboarding a form of torture. ... Asked whether they think waterboarding is a form of torture, more than two-thirds of respondents, or 69 percent, said yes; 29 percent said no.

Asked whether they think the U.S. government should be allowed to use the procedure to try to get information from suspected terrorists, 58 percent said no; 40 percent said yes.

So on the issue of torture, McCain is obviously, as he puts it, "disconnected from the American people."

According to USA Today:

Which would be better for the United States?
Keep a significant number of troops in Iraq until the situation there gets better: 35%
Set a timetable for removing troops and stick to it regardless of what is going on in Iraq: 60%

Obviously, McCain is out of touch with America when he says, on his campaign website:

A greater military commitment now is necessary if we are to achieve long-term success in Iraq. John McCain agrees with retired Army General Jack Keane that there are simply not enough American forces in Iraq. More troops are necessary...

So 60% of Americans want to set a timetable for withdrawal and McCain wants to send more troops. Who's disconnected?

One of McCain's strategies is to run as an outsider. People in Washington just don't get it, he says, conveniently ignoring the fact that he is one of the people in Washington. Americans are disappointed with Congress, which doesn't listen to them, and doesn't get anything worthwhile accomplished. Meanwhile, McCain--who is a member of Congress--has totally ignored his duties as a Senator. According to that first CNN story:

McCain returned to the Senate for the first time in a month to cast his ballot for an issue that is one of his central themes on the campaign trail.

McCain's only interest in his job as a Senator is making himself look better for the presidential election this fall. Maybe we should have a poll to find out how many Americans approve of that.

.

The Conservative Media Whitewash Continues

Today, the House Democrats unveiled their own FISA bill, refusing to simply vote for the Senate version. Their bill excludes immunity for telecom companies that cooperated with President Bush's illegal domestic wiretapping program. As could be expected, the response from the right was melodramatic. According to CNN, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, Lamar Smith, said:

Today's proposal is further evidence that House Democrats are not only out of touch with the needs of the American people, but also with Senate Democrats, the White House and our intelligence community," he said in a written statement. "Their careless disregard for the concerns of our intelligence community simply proves the point that Democrats are weak on national security.

I can't say for certain that Smith believes the House Democrats are "weak on national security" just because they refuse to give blanket retroactive immunity for a few huge corporations. I do know, however, that Smith is pretty much echoing the Bush administration's opinion on the matter.

My first reaction to Bush's insistence on providing immunity was that he wanted to protect the telecom companies because they give a lot of money to the Republican party. But then I started thinking. (Dangerous, I know.) If these companies are found liable in civil cases, that may be enough to implicate Bush, whose orders they were following. Whether there would ever be legal action against Bush as a result, I can't see that being a risk that he would take. We've already seen him manipulate the system to protect himself in the Valerie Plame case, where he commuted Libby's sentence in order to prevent the convicted man from having to testify further.

But that's not what I was talking about when I mentioned the conservative media's whitewash. According to the same CNN story, the Senate version of the FISA bill "would give telecommunications companies legal immunity for agreeing to participate in the program after the 9/11 terrorist attacks."

I've noticed that it has become an accepted fact in the conservative media that Bush's illegal domestic wiretapping program started after 9/11. There is evidence, though, that the program began well in advance of Bush's so-called War On Terror. In fact, according to Wired Blog, one of the pending lawsuits claims:

The NSA program was initially conceived at least one year prior to 2001 but had been called off; it was reinstated within 11 days of the entry into office of defendant George W. Bush.

An ATT Solutions logbook reviewed by counsel confirms the Pioneer-Groundbreaker project start date of February 1, 2001.

And:

According to court documents unveiled this week, former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio clearly wanted to argue in court that the NSA retaliated against his company after he turned down a NSA request on February 27, 2001 that he thought was illegal.

So it starts to become clear why the Bush administration is so adamant about providing retroactive immunity to the telecom companies. If these, and other, suits are allowed to go forward, the most damning allegation against Bush may be proven; that he was illegally spying on Americans long before 9/11.

Clinton's Message: It's All About Me

In yesterday's primaries, Hillary Clinton won Ohio and Texas (and Rhode Island). The two larger states were seen as must-wins for her campaign if she was to have any hope of winning the Democratic nomination. Her victories in those two states, and her reaction to them, reveal that her candidacy at this point represents a real defeat for the Democratic party.

According to ABC News:

In talking points circulated late last night, the Clinton campaign acknowledges that it can never overtake Obama with pledged delegates, and asserts that it intends to overtake him with the support of superdelegates.

Clinton's strategy has shifted from actually winning the nomination through the votes cast in primaries and caucuses to being selected by the party insiders and elected officials who make up the super delegates.

Disregarding for the moment whether or not the super delegates would even give the nomination to the candidate who received fewer votes from the masses, the fact is that Clinton wants them to do just that. She has apparently decided that her own ambition matters more than the will of the people. She is clearly putting herself above her party.

As soon as the Clinton camp realized that their candidate had no chance to surpass Obama's pledged delegate total, Hillary Clinton should have dropped out of the race. If she receives the nomination through the (imo) underhanded super delegate system, it could have devastating consequences. Who can predict how many of Obama's supporters will decide not to vote, or to vote for McCain? Does Clinton believe that she would get their support just because she would be the Democrat on the ballot and arguably the lesser of two evils?

At this point, Hillary Clinton's campaign is serving no one but her. She doesn't care about the voters. She doesn't care about the democratic process. All she cares about is getting her chance, even if it means alienating her party -- and almost certainly handing Bush III (aka McCain) the presidency -- once she gets it.