US blogger Chris Bowers has a challenge: What Is Your Favorite Contradictory McCain Attack? Here’s his ampling from the last couple of weeks:
1. Seventeen days after taking a trip abroad to Colombia and Mexico, five weeks after giving a paid campaign speech in Canada, and two months after criticizing Obama for not going to Iraq, the McCain campaign criticizes Obama for taking a trip abroad that includes a stop in Iraq.
2. Eleven days after holding a press conference to claim that Obama is a serial flip-flopper, McCain argues that Obama is the most extremist member of the Senate.
3. Five days after releasing a documentary criticizing Obama for flip-flopping on Iraq, the McCain campaign argues that Obama is too inflexible on Iraq.
4. After spending April and May calling Obama an elitist, they spent June and July calling him “typical.”
So, people like Farrar may parrot Republican talking points about Obama’s “flip-flops”, but the fact is, “the biggest flip-flops in this campaign are the attacks that McCain makes.”
As the DailyKos puts it:
“Whether it’s Roe v. Wade or off-shore drilling or a pathway to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants, McCain has taken opposite sides. Is it flip-floppery? Or is it flim-flammery?”
“He was anti-Grover Norquist before he was pro-Grover Norquist. He opposed torture before he yielded to White House demands. He was for campaign-finance reform before he was against a reform provision he sponsored two years earlier. He opposed presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he favored it. He was anti-ethanol, then for it. He supported flying the Confederate flag on government property before he rejected the practice. He was for talking with Hamas until he was against it. He favored privatizing Social Security before he said he never was in favor of privatizing Social Security. He opposed the Bush tax cuts for the rich until he voted for them, twice.”
PS My favourite is the criticism of Obama for going to Iraq. That really does take the cake. He went there himself, and he criticised Obama for not going there.
Tags: John McCain, Obama
Jafapete's Weblog 
July 28, 2008 at 10:20 am |
Funny how people as far away as NZ are taking sides in the US election – would this happen for any other country in the world!?
July 28, 2008 at 10:38 am |
Stephen,
When it comes to this year’s US election, I understand that people *are* taking sides everywhere from Britain to, well, Kenya. Would McCain have drawn a crowd of over 200,000 in Germany?
This is partly because the US presidential election is, of course, the most important single election in the world, and partly because it’s the most interesing election in a very long time, with one outstandingly charismatic and potentially history-making candidate (not that I am suggesting that the latter is a reason for voting for him).
In terms of NZ interest, many kiwis have spent a lot of time travelling the world and spending time in places like the UK and US, and continue to have friends and relatives o/s. I’ve done all of those things, and worked for a major political organisation on Capitol Hill as well. Hence my particular interest in US politics.
July 28, 2008 at 10:47 am |
I see. Yes i’m not surprised that people are taking sides in Kenya etc, but I suspect most of these reasons are a little more superficial than those in the US (I can hope they aren’t superficial right?) i.e. most people in that European crowd probably love Obama because he’s nice and friendly and charismatic and will be a lot more multilateral – ‘yay!’
Then there are the other political geeks on Kiwiblog, perhaps here and other blogs who are debating aspects of nitty gritty policy that won’t affect them more than a very tiny bit – illegal immigration, tax proposals, gun control etc…That is more what I was getting at.
Fair point Stephen, and there’s a lot of that. You won’t find me debating US immigration policy and the like, except in as much as it might affect the outcome of the presidential and congressional elections. But how many US voters’ interest and understanding of their presidential election is just as “superficial”?
Oh, Franken, you say? Well, it could be the crucial seat that allows the Democrats in the Senate freedom to pass some really good legislation. And it is inherently very interesting.
July 28, 2008 at 11:40 am |
Must admit I know bugger-all about Franken, seems to be one of those figures I know not-too-much-about (like Jesse Jackson, Lydon La Rouche (i *do* know that he’s nuts), Al Sharpton etc) who decorate any dialogue on American politics…
“But how many US voters’ interest and understanding of their presidential election is just as “superficial”?”
Like I implied, not too many I hope.