John McCain: Still Lying. Again.

[Brassmask]

And there isn't any way this is an "honest mistake", because the figures for Alaska earmarks have been floating around as a major campaign issue, the last week. He's just a liar:

    MCCAIN: Well, first of all, earmark spending, which she vetoed a half a billion dollars worth in the state of Alaska.
    WALTERS: She also took some earmarks there.

    BEHAR: A lot.

    MCCAIN: No, not as governor she didn’t, she vetoed...

    WALTERS: As Mayor.

    MCCAIN: Well, look, the fact is that she was a reform governor.

Um, no. Not even close. Alaska under Palin still sought more earmark dollars per-capita than any other state. Alaska requested $750 million dollars in earmarks during the time she was governor. Denying that she took earmarks is about as credible as McCain announcing he won the Tour de France (maybe he's saving that one for next week.) And yes, Walters was correct to note that as Mayor of Wasilla, Palin was also an avid earmark seeker.

Not even Bush was this flagrant, in his campaigns. The Bush campaigns would waffle, parse, omit, and yes, lie, but there was nothing like this -- a weeklong campaign in which absurd, transparently false, multiply-debunked lies are horked up again and again, with absolutely no compunction or remorse.

I'd say its a pathology, but it's rather clearly just an intentional campaign strategy of the worst and most cynical sort. John McCain doesn't care if he lies through his teeth -- he knows that many in the audience of "The View" won't know the truth, and is hoping the lie will connect with those people. The rest of us -- and the media, which is finally and increasingly, I must admit, calling him out on this stuff -- can go suck eggs.

What would it be like to have this guy as president -- someone who lies this easily, and about everything, and about plain facts that aren't just easily looked up but that have been in the news frequently, such that there's just no way to credibly believe the campaign isn't fully aware of the truth? What exactly does McCain stand for, as a conservative, or as a "maverick", or whatever else he wants to call himself, if everything he says he stands for is a campaign fabrication?

I have to believe that not even our media -- and not even, dare I say, "real" conservatives -- can put up with a candidate who comes up with outlandish, baldfaced lies during nearly every campaign appearance. Who will be the first conservative to call McCain out as being a cheap and crooked candidate?

http://www.dailykos.com/

[Brassmask]

http://news.yahoo.com/s//ap/20080908/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_palin_1

[BT]

When they rebuild a ghetto in Memphis is that an earmark or an appropriation?

[Brassmask]

When they rebuild a ghetto in Memphis is that an earmark or an appropriation?

When they do or don't, you won't hear me saying that I was totally against it and out to reform the culture of out-of-control earmarking (which you seem to have forgotten was once called "pork barrel spending") when I was an active supporter and participant in said ghetto rehab and culture of earmarks.

Obviously, you and your team would rather lose your dignity than lose the election.

[BT]

So you are in favor of pork barrel spending?
How about your candidate?

[Michael Tee]

<<Not even Bush was this flagrant, in his campaigns. The Bush campaigns would waffle, parse, omit, and yes, lie, but there was nothing like this -- a weeklong campaign in which absurd, transparently false, multiply-debunked lies are horked up again and again, with absolutely no compunction or remorse.>>

Brass, it works.  They lie and get away with it.  Every Democrat has to be prepped so that on every public appearance, every TV or radio broadcast, as soon as Palin's name is mentioned, the lies have to be brought out.  That is the only way to get this out, since McCain lies so brazenly.

I've never seen anything like this before.  Just utter contempt for the truth.  You summed it up, he lies without shame, hoping it's going to con a certain percentage of the audience and everyone else, who know that he's lying, can just go to hell.  Lying means nothing to these people.  The guy is a born liar and bullshit artist.  I just KNOW the "torture" he's always whining about is fake, too.  It's hilarious.  If these two characters get in, it'll be the last straw.

[BT]

The ignorance of both you and Brass amazes me.

Just in another thread you blasted Bush for not funding stem cell research.

Here's a clue, if he did fund it (more accurately congress) those funds would be allocated to research centers. Maybe a center in Calif was competing with a center in Mass. senators and reps for both states would be jockeying for the dough. Governors and mayors would be lobbying hard because research grants bring jobs. That is one of their primary jobs.  And in the end when votes were traded line items would show up in huge appropriations bills earmarking x to mass and y to california.

There is a huge difference between earmarking and pork.

Recently our congressman allocated 250k for a watershed study that included our city. Basically consultants measuring flow etc. We turned it down because our matching share was 50k and we didn't see the benefits of that study being worth it.

back to governors and mayors soliciting grants. That is their job. Every dime that comes from the states or the feds is one less dime they need to tax the homeowners.

So if a waterline needs replacing and they qualify for cdbg funding they would be fools not to apply. Because the alternative would be to raise rates or millage to fund the project.

The bridge tnowhere was part of a transportation and highway allocation to the state of alaska. When that portion of the project exceeded estimates Palin was correct in changing the scope and putting fund elsewhere.

Let's review:

All earmarks are not bad.
Being in favor of federal grants is not synonymous with wasteful spending
Killing a project that is riddled with cost-overruns is the fiscally prudent thing to do as well as one of the prime responsibilities of a chief executive.

Doing the above instead of allowing contributors and cronies to suckle at the govt teat is the hallmark of a reformer.

BTW:

Perhaps most important, Obama has pledged to take public financing for the general election if he is the Democratic nominee and his Republican opponent will do the same.

http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/08/22/washington-post-on-ethics-reform-obama-leads-the-pack/

Whatever happened to that?

Did he lie to the American People? McCain is taking public financing so that condition was met.

[Plane]

BT , You are a civic official I understand.

How close to the Mayor do you work?

What kind of experience does a mayor get?

[Michael Tee]

<<The ignorance of both you and Brass amazes me.>>

Only because you either don't get what we are saying or deliberately twist and misrepresent it so you can fake amazement.

<<Just in another thread you blasted Bush for not funding stem cell research. >>

Then you better re-read the thread because that's not what I blasted him for.

Your exposition on grants, ear-marking and pork was wasted on Brass and me because it told us nothing new.  It was pure irrelevance, possibly even meant as such, and a 180-degree distraction from the issue under discussion, which I remind you was NOT the good and bad points of ear-marks but the lying fucking HYPOCRISY of your two candidates in claiming that Palin was a fearless and outspoken opponent of something that she actually took advantage of and probably with greater-than average skill and dexterity.

[BT]

Ah, I understand now. This is all about the hypocricy.

Saying one thing and doing another.

Like Obama pledging to use public funding for the campaign if his opponent did.

He didn't. He lied. and he is a hypocrit.

[BT]

BT , You are a civic official I understand.

How close to the Mayor do you work?

What kind of experience does a mayor get?

Plenty. I'll go into detail when i get back from a committee meeting.

[BT]

BT , You are a civic official I understand.

How close to the Mayor do you work?

What kind of experience does a mayor get?

Depends on the type of government the city has.

In my town we have what is known as a weak mayor- strong council type of government. What that means is the council runs the show and the mayor takes direction from them..

In Wasilla they have a strong mayor weak council type of government. In this case, the mayor runs the govt and the council simply legislates.

The mayor of Wasilla has the power to hire and fire.

The mayor of Wasilla has the power to appoint. ... police chief, finance officers, deputy administrators etc.

The mayor has the power to put out for and accept bids.

The mayor has the power to veto.

The mayor of Wasilla has the same powers as the mayor of Chicago and almost as much as the President of the US.  Of course it is to scale. But keep in mind, the mayors of smaller towns are much more hands on since they don't have near the staff resources larger cities have.


http://www.codepublishing.com/AK/Wasilla.html

[sirs]

Ah, I understand now. This is all about the hypocricy.  Saying one thing and doing another.  Like Obama pledging to use public funding for the campaign if his opponent did.  He didn't. He lied. and he is a hypocrit.

But....but....Bt, there's a rational reason he lie....I mean, changed his position on that.  He's a democrat for crying out loud.  His intentions are pure, and he;s only saying what he needs to get elected anyways.  It's only Republicans who are the evil lying hypocrites

[Michael Tee]

<<He didn't. He lied. and he is a hypocrit. >>

I guess that means you won't be voting for him.

He lied and is a hypocrite about very small and unimportant things.  Palin and McCain lie and are hypocrites abut big and essential things.

I'd vote for Obama.  Better a guy who lies about trivia than liars who misrepresent their own qualifications for office.

[BT]

He lied and is a hypocrite about very small and unimportant things.

You are a funny guy.

The centerpiece of his change mantra revolves around how Washington does business, and that includes campaign finance. He wants to extend public financing to senate and house races. Take pacs and special interests out of the equation.

But when his moment of truth came he did the exact opposite of not only what he pledged , but also went against the core of his campaign.

Your guy is a hypocritical opportunist who has no core, no soul, no center.

Look at what they do.

Palin stopped the bridge to nowhere.

Your guy takes fatcat money.

Who is the liar? That would be your guy.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/2008/4/11/obamas-public-finance-flip-flop.html