Sunday Snapshot -- Negative Nancies?
Economic policy dominated the Sunday shows, but there was still some talk of politics.
Obama strategist David Axelrod and McCain mgr. Rick Davis appeared together on "Fox News Sunday," where the two discussed the tone of the campaign and Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) comparing John McCain to George Wallace.
Axelrod, on the negativity coming from the McCain camp: "A week ago, an official of the McCain campaign said, 'We're going to start aiming at his character, because if we have to talk about the economy we're going to lose.' And the economy does hang from their neck like the anchor from the Lusitania. I understand that. But this is really not the place we want to take -- we've got to pull together as a country. And there are parameters, and those parameters have been crossed. Now, we give Senator McCain credit for, at the end of the week, taking on a couple of these comments in his appearances. But the ads are continuing to drive this. And you know, you have to take responsibility."
Davis: "The kind of comments made by Congressman Lewis, a big [Barack] Obama supporter, are reprehensible. The idea that you're going to compare John McCain to the kinds of hate spread in the '60s by somebody like George Wallace is outrageous. Where was John McCain when George Wallace was spreading his hate and segregationist policies at that time? He was in a Vietnam prison camp serving his country with his civil rights also denied. Nobody knows sacrifice like John McCain does. And the idea that Barack Obama did not address this issue directly, had his campaign walk out with a half-baked statement that didn't even address the comments made by Lewis as it related to John McCain -- Barack Obama should apologize to John McCain directly for the kinds of comments made by John Lewis yesterday, and that should be the end of this sordid affair."
More after the jump.
(KATHERINE LEHR)
Davis, on McCain's ad calling Obama a liar: "Obama's campaign commercials themselves call John McCain a liar. John McCain's never used the liar phrase until Barack Obama put it up on air. You know, Obama has a whole habit of doing this. You know, back in the days when he used to make statements like, 'Oh, they're going to call me risky, you know, they're going to think that I don't look like one of those guys on the face of the dollar bill,' you know what he did next? He then ran an ad against John McCain calling him risky. I mean, that's the most hypocritical statement I've ever seen."
Axelrod, asked if he condemns the comments made by Lewis: "We issued a statement right away and said there's no comparison between George Wallace and John McCain. ... What I haven't heard Rick say is that there's anything wrong with the kind of statements that are coming out in these rallies. And that's the issue."
Davis: "Oh, absolutely. Look, I'll say right away ... for the record, there's absolutely nothing appropriate about those statements. ... There's absolutely nothing being done on the stage by our candidates, John McCain or Governor [Sarah] Palin, that would incite that kind of thing. You know, people are angry right now."
Fox's Wallace, on McCain telling a town hall attendee that he does not need to be scared of Obama as POTUS: "If McCain stands by that ad and that Obama is consorting with a former terrorist, blind ambition, bad judgment, lies, why shouldn't we be scared about Barack Obama as president?"
Davis: "First of all, let's be clear. The person who he is addressing specifically said very nasty things about Barack Obama that had nothing to do with that commercial. He was addressing someone who stood up in one of our town halls, which -- by the way, we let anybody who wants to come to our town halls. We don't require any kind of checks. Anybody can stand up in those town halls and say anything they want to John McCain. Sometimes they say inappropriate things. In this case, it had nothing to do with that commercial. So I wouldn't mix and match them."
Axelrod: "They're running commercials right now with Bill Ayres in them, and in the same commercial they attack Senator Obama for his support from Bill Daley, the former commerce secretary who was confirmed by Senator McCain's committee and who Senator McCain called one of the great commerce secretaries in history. ... These commercials are insidious. ... All these commercials are designed ... to distort and inflame."
Wallace, to Davis: "You obviously have no problems confronting David Axelrod about William Ayres. Will John McCain confront Barack Obama about his relationship with William Ayres and explain why it's relevant at the debate on Wednesday?"
Davis: "Oh, I don't know what's going to happen at the debate on Wednesday. And it depends upon the kinds of questions that the moderator asks. I didn't notice that the moderator asked any questions about Bill Ayres. I don't notice that the press asked any questions to Barack Obama about Bill Ayres. I mean, this is one of the reasons why I think it's a germane topic in this debate, because the press has basically given a free pass to Barack Obama so that none of his background gets challenged. And so whether it's his relationship with Bill Ayres, his relationship with Tony Rezko, his relationship with the ACORN group which is ... under investigation right now, and many other things, if you would just come clean in the Obama campaign and actually tell the public what's been going on in Obama's life -- look, there are legitimate questions about his experience and his background that deserve ... public scrutiny" (10/12).
Other reactions to McCain's ads and Lewis' comments:
NJ Gov. Jon Corzine (D) and ex-Rep. Rob Portman (R-OH) appeared together on "Meet the Press," where they were asked about negative ads.
NBC's Brokaw: "In Minnesota, the senator, Norm Coleman, the Republican candidate for re-election, has stopped all negative advertising. Would that be a good idea for the presidential campaigns in the midst of this financial crisis when the country is so focused on their future?"
Corzine: "First of all, I think that actually is a good idea. ... I'm not going to say everybody's innocent."
Corzine, asked if it was inappropriate for Lewis to compare McCain to George Wallace : "I just think it is playing into what I think is the strategy that is going on here about this whole Ayers issue and everything else. We want to turn the page on economics, because it's not working in the debate for Senator McCain, and get on to something else. It's a distraction away from the most fundamental debate that we ought to be having in this country. ... We need steady, thoughtful, careful analysis and presentation of policy so we can make a decision who'll be the best president."
Portman: "I agree with Jon on the fact that the economy's the key issue, and I totally disagree with him that anybody's turning the page in the McCain campaign. ... This is what John McCain's going to keep talking about. He's focused on the economy, how to get us out of the ditch that we're in. And he's got new innovative policies to do it."
More Portman, on Obama: "There had been nine different explanations about his relationship with Bill Ayers and when he met him and who he thought he was and so on. And so that's the issue, is his judgment and his truthfulness. In terms of this campaign, as we get toward, you know, the last few weeks here, it's heated up, there's no question, on both sides. And Senator Obama's rallies are, you know, he also inspires the crowd, and they can get pretty rowdy as well."
Brokaw, in response: "You're comfortable with the ads. You don't think they're too negative."
Portman: "Well, you know, you look at the negative ads. Senator Obama has run more negative ads in this campaign than any presidential campaign in history. Easily. And far more negative ads than Senator McCain has run" (NBC, 10/12).
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), on Lewis' statement: "[It] is an absolute offense to people like me who are close friends of John McCain, to all of his supporters. And we're not going to be intimidated by this playing the race card simply because Senator Obama's record has been attacked in a very fair way. The rhetoric and the record don't match when it comes to Senator Obama, and this is not going to work. It may have worked with the Clintons, but it is not going to work with us."
More Graham: "We can't be responsible for what one person says at a rally, surrounded by thousands, but John McCain has never conducted himself in any way to incite hatred. ... We're not going to take this. We're going to challenge Senator Obama's record versus his rhetoric" ("Face the Nation," CBS, 10/12).
CASE CLOSED?
Davis and Axelrod were also asked about the AK legislature finding that Palin "abused power."
Davis: "This whole thing has been a kangaroo court from day one. The person who is heading the investigation into this is one of Barack Obama's biggest supporters. This was going nowhere until the point at which Sarah Palin was asked to join our ticket and at which point it became a big public circus. And frankly, everyone in Alaska has treated it as such. The reality is there was absolutely no wrongdoing found in the report -- 1,000 pages, an enormous waste of time. And the best that they could come up with was no violations of any kind of laws or ethics rules. ... The bottom line is this thing now drops dead, and there's absolutely no follow-up to this at all."
Axelrod: "And one thing that is clear is that we've had examples of abuse of power in Washington over the last eight years that are concerning to people. ... If we're going to move this country forward and reform this government, then, you know, we certainly don't want more of that philosophy in government. ... But that's up to voters to decide and to judge the facts of this case" ("Fox News Sunday," 10/12).
MAKE A NEW PLAN, STAN. YOU DON'T NEED TO BE COY, ROY.
There was also discussion about McCain's proposal to refinance mortgages at full value:
Ex-Treas. Sec James Baker, asked if he agrees with McCain's proposal: "I think it's a good proposal. It's certainly a very good political proposal, and I think it could be a good substantive proposal, provided the mechanics of how you get there are delineated a bit more" ("This Week," ABC, 10/12).
House Min. Whip Roy Blunt: "There's merit in the McCain plan. That's why ... some of it's already in the FHA reauthorization bill. Some of that flexibility is here. But you have to be sure, again, that taxpayers are protected. And I think, when see the specifics of the McCain plan, you'll see those kind of protections" ("This Week," ABC, 10/12).
As well as discussion about McCain's plans to unveil a new economic plan:
Graham, asked if McCain is going to unveil some new economic proposals: "Yes. We are going to talk this afternoon, but I think it goes along the lines that now is the time to lower tax rates for investors, capital gains tax, dividend tax rates, to make sure that we can get the economy jump-started. The worst thing we could do now is to increase federal spending and increase taxes on small business like Senator Obama would propose, or mandate from the federal government health care requirements on individuals and business, with fines if you don't comply. So it will be a very comprehensive approach to jump-start the economy, by allowing capital to be formed easier in America by lowering taxes" ("Face the Nation," CBS, 10/12).
Corzine: "Now is the time for steady leadership. We can't have a new economic program each morning we wake up. That's what's been going on" ("Meet the Press," NBC, 10/12).
GENTLEMEN'S CLUB
And Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) appeared together on "Late Edition," where Specter accused Schumer of breaking a gentleman's agreement by going after Senate Min. Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who is up for re-election.
Specter: "You find there's a real political squabble. For example, Senator Schumer, as head of the campaign committee, is going after Mitch McConnell. There had been a gentleman's agreement that that wouldn't be done, and now Senator Schumer is quoted in the Washington Post this morning as saying that, if the votes led up to the problem, then the gentleman's agreement doesn't stand. The question is whether we have gentleman here. But votes leading up to it, many people were a party to, including Senator Schumer ... who was against reform measures on hedge funds, who was against reform measures, back in 2004, on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, so that, if we take partisanship out of this mix, I think we'd have a lot better chance of going to the heart of the substantive problem and solving it."
Schumer: "Well, I find it ironic that Arlen first says, let's take partisanship out of it and then makes a partisan comment ... after we agreed on what to do. ... It is a legitimate issue to discuss what brought us to the brink here. And many people believe -- I do -- that abject deregulation, saying let financial industries do whatever they want, in any way, led to it. Now, that's a legitimate campaign issue. As for the rescue package, many of us voted for it. You did, Arlen. I did. Mitch McConnell did. That's not mentioned in any of the ads that the DSCC has put in."
Specter: "I don't think it is legitimate when Senator Schumer is a principal architect of the bailout program and there is an agreement, a gentleman's agreement, not to use it for political attack."
Schumer: "The gentleman's agreement -- and there wasn't any explicit agreement -- but the gentleman's so-called agreement was that the rescue package for people who voted for it would not be part of the attack, whether you voted for that or not. There are Democrats who voted for it, Democrats who voted against it, Republicans who voted for it, Republicans who voted against it. And that's fair, I think. However, when you talk about the rescue package, that's one small vote. What we're talking about here is an issue, and I'm proud and I think we should have this issue, that the deregulation that the Bush administration proposed and most Republican senators, including Senator McConnell went along with willingly and happily, has led to this problem."
Specter: "You don't need an explicit agreement when there is an implicit agreement among gentlemen, you follow it through. And when he says that McConnell was responsible for prior votes, well, so was he. He was a leading voice in 2004 against regulating Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He was a leading voice against regulating the hedge funds. ... When Schumer points the finger at McConnell, he ought to look in the mirror" (CNN, 10/12).
ROUNDTABLE ROUNDUP
The "This Week" roundtable discussed the economy and WH '08.
George Will: "Remember where the McCain campaign was 14 months ago. It was in the ditch, widely criticized for being improvisational and chaotic. 14 months later, we're back at the same movie."
Washington Post's Balz: "The fundamentals of this election have always been bad. If you talked to the McCain camp this week, as opposed to three weeks ago, they're in despair about their situation. ... They've been an improvising campaign, and that's the way he's always operated. He's always talked out of his gut. ... It has not served him well" (ABC, 10/12).
The "Fox News Sunday" roundtable discussed WH '08 and the economy.
Weekly Standard's Kristol, on the McCain camp's strategy: "The main thing to say about these negative ads ... they haven't worked. Obama's favorable rating is as high as it's been in three months. It's actually gone up in the last month. So it's a stupid campaign. It's not a horribly mean-spirited or racist or disgraceful campaign. But it's really become a pathetic campaign in the sense that there's no strategy. They're flailing around. They do things that don't work and keep on doing them. They're out of sync with their own candidate now" (10/12).
The "Late Edition" roundtable discussed WH '08 and the economy.
CNN's Henry, on Lewis' comments: "John Lewis went a bit far, he had to kind of walk it back late last night, clarify his statement. Maybe the Obama campaign should have let this play out a little bit, but I think they feel that the rhetoric was getting so hot, that it was getting a bit dangerous" (10/12).
The "Meet the Press" roundtable discussed WH '08 and the economy.
Wall Street Journal's Gigot, on the McCain camp's strategy: "They didn't want to run a campaign about the economy as the main issue. They wanted to run a character campaign, an experience campaign. John McCain, seasoned, somebody who's seen hard times vs. the rookie, the neophyte, somebody who really hasn't been around. That's been blown out of the water by events on Wall Street, events in the financial system. And now John McCain is being forced to play on turf where he is not as comfortable as he is on foreign policy and duty, honor, country. ... You've seen the campaign kind of move from idea to idea, and especially without a consistent narrative that the American people right now want to hear. ... You need a larger narrative. ... I think McCain has to address the economy."
CNBC's Harwood: "The strategy of the McCain campaign is at war with events in the world, which are lifting Barack Obama. ... The only candidate who has ever closed a mid-October lead approaching this size was Ronald Reagan in 1980 when he was running against Jimmy Carter. ... John McCain's got to dominate the undecided, and he's got to turn some people. ... I was talking to a McCain adviser the other day who said 1 in 5 white voters is still persuadable. They're people that we can raise doubts about Barack Obama, and that's why they do this Ayers stuff. They've got to talk about the economy because ... it's the issue everybody's thinking about, but it's still not the core of the strategy in the end" (NBC, 10/12).
Wait -- McCain was a POW? Why is this the first I'm hearing of this?
I think McCain took the '1 in five white people are persuadeable' to mean '1 in five white people are incredibly stupid and have subconscious racial hatred in their blood.'
What a tool.
I used to have a lot of respect for the man. Not so much now. Some people have given him a pass on this, or say that his remarks to the woman who called him an arab made up for the tone of his campaign's rallies. I disagree whole-heartedly. McCain should have seen this coming. Their are a lot of what I would call 'sheep' in our country the same way there is in every country. Just as people fell in line with Bush, or the Taliban, or even bin Laden, there are people who do not think for themselves and allow the the hateful venom spewed by others to become what they actually believe. If McCain didn't see this coming then he was either naive or wanted it to happen because the hate-rallys were the only real excitement he had seen coming out of his campaign. He allowed for it because it gave his campaign a spark. Unfortunately for him, the vast majority of us saw the rally's for what they were and condemned the Republicans because of it.
This is America, and we won't stand for that kind of racism and bigotry any more.
I think McCain took the '1 in five white people are persuadeable' to mean '1 in five white people are incredibly stupid and have subconscious racial hatred in their blood.'
What a tool.
I used to have a lot of respect for the man. Not so much now. Some people have given him a pass on this, or say that his remarks to the woman who called him an arab made up for the tone of his campaign's rallies. I disagree whole-heartedly. McCain should have seen this coming. Their are a lot of what I would call 'sheep' in our country the same way there is in every country. Just as people fell in line with Bush, or the Taliban, or even bin Laden, there are people who do not think for themselves and allow the the hateful venom spewed by others to become what they actually believe. If McCain didn't see this coming then he was either naive or wanted it to happen because the hate-rallys were the only real excitement he had seen coming out of his campaign. He allowed for it because it gave his campaign a spark. Unfortunately for him, the vast majority of us saw the rally's for what they were and condemned the Republicans because of it.
This is America, and we won't stand for that kind of racism and bigotry any more.
This country still has deep racism and prejudice towards the people of color. I live in very conservative area of VA and I have seen daily racism attitude towards the people of color even on college campuses. That is sad. This is a great country and we all need to grow up and we do not need this kind of crap anymore. Lewis is right in many ways. African Americans are the heart of the USA. Without them, we would not be United States we stand for today. Hopefully Obama will win this election.
McCain is out again today telling the same lies about Obama that were discredited months ago. McCain's ads and his campaign is dangerously negative and hateful and he is doing nothing to reign it in. One statement to one woman at one rally is not reality about McCain's true campaigning. Today, McCain threw out another half-baked economic idea his campaign staff dreamed up last night. Is this leadership? Is this the kind of stability we want in times of crisis? McCain is all over the place, erratic and desperate, negative and hateful and completely unfit to lead. Palin just seals the argument on what kind of judgment McCain has.
ALL I CAN SAY IS THE HATE-TALK EXPRESS. ALL PALIN IS GOOD FOR IS INSIGHTING THE RACIST TO DO SOMETHING DRASTIC IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS. WHEN WILL WE GET THE PHOTOS OF THE KLAN HANGING OUT TO GET INTO THE MCCAIN PALIN RALLIES, I HEARD THEY ARE OUT THERE AND DAMN IT IF THEY DON'T NEED TO BE BROUGHT TO THE PUBLIC.
HATE-TALK EXPRESS
HATE-TALK EXPRESS
HATE-TALK EXPRESS
HATE-TALK EXPRESS
HATE-TALK EXPRESS
HATE-TALK EXPRESS
MCCAIN/PALIN= NEO-NAZIS
Why is it a surprise to Mccain that he has tokeep telling people at his rallies that Obama is not a Muslim, and that he is not a terrorist. He attracts loopy people that are seriously in need of a psychoanalysis.
Up here is Wisconsin, Mccain runs negative ads connecting Obama to terrorists, every five to ten minutes. No wonder he gets people asking him whether Obama is a terrorist.
At what point is Mccain going to show that he can lead the nation, instead of dividing it?
Mr. McCain may urge his "supporters" to go easy atthe rallies, but they know he is doing it becasue he has to - it's politics. They will continue doing it.
However, after all the barking Ms. Palin is doing, obviously with Mr. McCains blessing, he has no reason to cry about anything said against him.
Mr. McCain may urge his "supporters" to go easy atthe rallies, but they know he is doing it becasue he has to - it's politics. They will continue doing it.
However, after all the barking Ms. Palin is doing, obviously with Mr. McCains blessing, he has no reason to cry about anything said against him.
Mr. McCain may urge his "supporters" to go easy atthe rallies, but they know he is doing it becasue he has to - it's politics. They will continue doing it.
However, after all the barking Ms. Palin is doing, obviously with Mr. McCains blessing, he has no reason to cry about anything said against him.
Mr. McCain may urge his "supporters" to go easy atthe rallies, but they know he is doing it becasue he has to - it's politics. They will continue doing it.
However, after all the barking Ms. Palin is doing, obviously with Mr. McCains blessing, he has no reason to cry about anything said against him.
Mr. McCain may urge his "supporters" to go easy atthe rallies, but they know he is doing it becasue he has to - it's politics. They will continue doing it.
However, after all the barking Ms. Palin is doing, obviously with Mr. McCains blessing, he has no reason to cry about anything said against him.
When the McCain camp said they were going to go negative, they announced very clearly that the only way to win was to make Obama look risky, or un-American. I took offense today to Palin's comment about being American as it sounded too much like she was implying that Obama was not.
I do believe that Palin over used the word terrorist in refering to Ayers, as did some of the ads refering to Ayers. It was only a matter of time before all of that negativism was going to set in people's minds. And those comments fomented and anger, fear, hatred were heightened.
McCain can still win; it is just a matter of one (or two) states. The problem is which state(s)? I believe this because race is still an issue and there will be those who won't vote for a bi-racial president. I wish people would quit calling Obama Black and refer to him accurately as a bi-racial candidate.
The negative tone of the campaign, Sarah Palin, the economy and oh yeah that little war (remember that) is too much for any Republican to overcome.
Obama - the issues of an uncommon name, and being a man of color is taking a back seat to the lack of message of leadership and vision and that is something Senator McCain has not delivered.
The tricks of the past are not working this time, the serious problems facing this country cannot be glossed over. At the end of the day Senator Mc Cain has failed to deliver a positive message and Palin has proved to be more of a liability than an asset. What a dumb choice she has been.
The negative tone of the campaign, Sarah Palin, the economy and oh yeah that little war (remember that) is too much for any Republican to overcome.
Obama - the issues of an uncommon name, and being a man of color is taking a back seat to the lack of message of leadership and vision and that is something Senator McCain has not delivered.
The tricks of the past are not working this time, the serious problems facing this country cannot be glossed over. At the end of the day Senator Mc Cain has failed to deliver a positive message and Palin has proved to be more of a liability than an asset. What a dumb choice she has been.
The negative tone of the campaign, Sarah Palin, the economy and oh yeah that little war (remember that) is too much for any Republican to overcome.
Obama - the issues of an uncommon name, and being a man of color is taking a back seat to the lack of message of leadership and vision and that is something Senator McCain has not delivered.
The tricks of the past are not working this time, the serious problems facing this country cannot be glossed over. At the end of the day Senator Mc Cain has failed to deliver a positive message and Palin has proved to be more of a liability than an asset. What a dumb choice she has been.
Hitler started like this
Look back to history - Hitler started like what Palin and McCain are doing now - Hitler raised anti-Jewish slogans in the name of Nationality, and ended up killing all those Jews.
We claim to be the model country of human rights, and let these radicals run to become our rulers! What hypocrisy!
We, including our leaders down to every idiot in this country, spread hatred on race and religious basis. Then we proclaim we are the perfect land on earth. Then we want the rest of the world to believe us. We spread untruth about Islam as a terrorist organization, we do not even refer to Islam as a religion. For the information of all the idiots who support Islamic hatred here, Islam is one of the leading religions, with followings equaling those of Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism. Mohammed descended from the same ancestral line of Jesus Christ and Abraham.
On tolerance: an 80% Hindu country, India, is now governed by an ITALIAN BORN ROMAN CATHOLIC WOMAN, SONIA GANDHI - I think we should learn a lesson from this example for respect and tolerance for human dignity.
We blame Islamic population for hating us – we forget that we spread Islamic hatred at every level in our country.
The world can see all these blogs – and they rightly judge as a racist country.
Hitler started like this
Look back to history - Hitler started like what Palin and McCain are doing now - Hitler raised anti-Jewish slogans in the name of Nationality, and ended up killing all those Jews.
We claim to be the model country of human rights, and let these radicals run to become our rulers! What hypocrisy!
We, including our leaders down to every idiot in this country, spread hatred on race and religious basis. Then we proclaim we are the perfect land on earth. Then we want the rest of the world to believe us. We spread untruth about Islam as a terrorist organization, we do not even refer to Islam as a religion. For the information of all the idiots who support Islamic hatred here, Islam is one of the leading religions, with followings equaling those of Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism. Mohammed descended from the same ancestral line of Jesus Christ and Abraham.
On tolerance: an 80% Hindu country, India, is now governed by an ITALIAN BORN ROMAN CATHOLIC WOMAN, SONIA GANDHI - I think we should learn a lesson from this example for respect and tolerance for human dignity.
We blame Islamic population for hating us – we forget that we spread Islamic hatred at every level in our country.
The world can see all these blogs – and they rightly judge us as a racist country.
Hitler started like this
Look back to history - Hitler started like what Palin and McCain are doing now - Hitler raised anti-Jewish slogans in the name of Nationality, and ended up killing all those Jews.
We claim to be the model country of human rights, and let these radicals run to become our rulers! What hypocrisy!
We, including our leaders down to every idiot in this country, spread hatred on race and religious basis. Then we proclaim we are the perfect land on earth. Then we want the rest of the world to believe us. We spread untruth about Islam as a terrorist organization, we do not even refer to Islam as a religion. For the information of all the idiots who support Islamic hatred here, Islam is one of the leading religions, with followings equaling those of Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism. Mohammed descended from the same ancestral line of Jesus Christ and Abraham.
On tolerance: an 80% Hindu country, India, is now governed by an ITALIAN BORN ROMAN CATHOLIC WOMAN, SONIA GANDHI - I think we should learn a lesson from this example for respect and tolerance for human dignity.
We blame Islamic population for hating us – we forget that we spread Islamic hatred at every level in our country.
The world can see all these blogs – and they rightly judge ours as a racist country.
Hitler started like this
Look back to history - Hitler started like what Palin and McCain are doing now - Hitler raised anti-Jewish slogans in the name of Nationality, and ended up killing Jews.
We claim to be the model country of human rights, and let these radicals run to become our rulers! What hypocrisy!
We, including our leaders down to every idiot in this country, spread hatred on race and religious basis. Then we proclaim we are the perfect land on earth. Then we want the rest of the world to believe us. We spread untruth about Islam as a terrorist organization, we do not even refer to Islam as a religion. For the information of all the idiots who support Islamic hatred here, Islam is one of the leading religions, with followings equaling those of Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism. Mohammed descended from the same ancestral line of Jesus Christ and Abraham.
On tolerance: an 80% Hindu country, India, is now governed by an ITALIAN BORN ROMAN CATHOLIC WOMAN, SONIA GANDHI - I think we should learn a lesson from this example for respect and tolerance for human dignity.
We blame Islamic population for hating us – we forget that we spread Islamic hatred at every level in our country.
The world can see all these blogs – and they rightly judge ours as a racist country.
Hitler started like this
Look back to history - Hitler started like what Palin and McCain are doing now - Hitler raised anti-Jewish slogans in the name of Nationality, and ended up killing Jews.
We claim to be the model country of human rights, and let these radicals run to become our rulers! What hypocrisy!
We, including our leaders down to every idiot in this country, spread hatred on race and religious basis. Then we proclaim we are the perfect land on earth. Then we want the rest of the world to believe us. We spread untruth about Islam as a terrorist organization, we do not even refer to Islam as a religion. For the information of all the idiots who support Islamic hatred here, Islam is one of the leading religions, with followings equaling those of Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism. Mohammed descended from the same ancestral line of Jesus Christ and Abraham.
On tolerance: an 80% Hindu country, India, is now governed by an ITALIAN BORN ROMAN CATHOLIC WOMAN, SONIA GANDHI - I think we should learn a lesson from this example for respect and tolerance for human dignity.
We blame Islamic population for hating us – we forget that we spread Islamic hatred at every level in our country.
The world can see all these blogs – and they rightly judge ours as a racist country.
John McCain is embarrassing the Republican Party. McCain has managed to attract the marginal, anti-intellectual, unsophisticated, uneducated and hypnotically ignorant people to his town hall meetings. As the town hall folk feed on a steady diet of hate, bigotry, paranoia and class warfare, McCain is fast loosing the respect of his colleagues and friends too. Can you imagine a David Brooks or George Will speaking to a McCain audience? Bizarre!
Will it matter if Obama or McCain are elected in November? Hardly.
Both are rigidly backed by important members of the Trilateral Commission who hijacked the Executive Branch of the U.S. government starting in 1976 with the election of Jimmy Carter.
In Obama's case, Zbigniew Brzezinski (co-founder of the Commission in 1973) is emerging as his principal advisor on foreign policy. Ex-Fed Chairman Paul Volker has made a once-in-a-lifetime, glowing endorsement of Obama. Madelyn Albright is seen sitting next to Obama in several conferences. Shoot, even Jimmy Carter himself endorses Obama. All are top members of the Commission.
John McCain is being supported by several Trilateral Commission giants including: Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, Lawrence Eagleburger and Alexander Haig. All of these are ex-Secretaries of State who issued a joint endorsement of McCain early-on in his campaign.
And, unless Obama shoots both of his own feet (or…?) before the general presidential election in November, he is most likely to be the next president of the United States.
You would think that Americans would want to know who the "special interests" are that are embodied by this Trilateral Commission, and what they intend to do or not do with America.
What is the Trilateral Commission?
The Trilateral Commission was founded by the persistent maneuvering of David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1973. Rockefeller was chairman of the ultra-powerful Chase Manhattan Bank, a director of many major multinational corporations and "endowment funds" and had long been a central figure in the Council on Foreign Relations ( CFR). Brzezinski, a brilliant prognosticator of one-world idealism, was a professor at Columbia University and the author of several books that have served as "policy guidelines" for the Trilateral Commission.
Brzezinski served as the Commission's first executive director from its inception in 1973 until late 1976 when he was appointed by President Jimmy Carter as Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.
The initial Commission membership was approximately three hundred, with roughly one hundred each from Europe, Japan and North America. Membership was also roughly divided between academics, politicians and corporate magnates; these included international bankers, leaders of prominent labor unions and corporate directors of media giants.
The word commission was puzzling since it is usually associated with instrumentalities set up by governments. It seemed out of place with a so-called private group unless we could determine that it really was an arm of a government - an unseen government, different from the visible government in Washington. European and Japanese involvement indicated a world government rather than a national government. We hoped that the concept of a sub-rosa world government was just wishful thinking on the part of the Trilateral Commissioners. The facts, however, lined up quite pessimistically.
If the Council on Foreign Relations could be said to be a spawning ground for the concepts of one-world idealism, then the Trilateral Commission was the "task force" assembled to assault the beachheads. Already the Commission had placed its members in the top posts the U.S. had to offer.
Jimmy Carter: The first Trilateral president
President James Earl Carter, the country politician who promised, "I will never lie to you," was chosen to join the Commission by Brzezinski in 1973. It was Brzezinski, in fact, who first identified Carter as presidential timber, and subsequently educated him in economics, foreign policy, and the ins-and-outs of world politics. Upon Carter's election, Brzezinski was appointed assistant to the president for national security matters. Commonly, he was called the head of the National Security Council because he answered only to the president - some said Brzezinski held the second most powerful position in the U.S.
Carter's running mate, Walter Mondale, was also a member of the Commission. (If you are trying to calculate the odds of three virtually unknown men, out of over sixty Commissioners from the U.S., capturing the three most powerful positions in the land, don't bother. Your calculations will be meaningless.)
On January 7, 1977 Time Magazine, whose editor-in-chief, Hedley Donovan was a powerful Trilateral, named President Carter "Man of the Year." The sixteen-page article in that issue not only failed to mention Carter's connection with the Commission but also stated the following:
"As he searched for Cabinet appointees, Carter seemed at times hesitant and frustrated disconcertingly out of character. His lack of ties to Washington and the Party Establishment - qualities that helped raise him to the White House - carry potential dangers. He does not know the Federal Government or the pressures it creates. He does not really know the politicians whom he will need to help him run the country."
Was this portrait of Carter as a political innocent simply inaccurate or was it deliberately misleading? By December 25, 1976 - two weeks before the Time article appeared - Carter had already chosen his cabinet. Three of his cabinet members – Cyrus Vance, Michael Blumenthal, and Harold Brown - were Trilateral Commissioners; and the other non-Commission members were not unsympathetic to Commission objectives and operations. In addition, Carter had appointed another fourteen Trilateral Commissioners to top government posts, including:
• C. Fred Bergsten (Under Secretary of Treasury)
• James Schlesinger (Secretary of Energy)
• Elliot Richardson (Delegate to Law of the Sea)
• Leonard Woodcock (Chief envoy to China)
• Andrew Young (Ambassador to the United Nations).
As of 25 December 1976, therefore, there were nineteen Trilaterals, including Carter and Mondale, holding tremendous political power. These presidential appointees represented almost one-third of the Trilateral Commission members from the United States. The odds of that happening "by chance" are beyond calculation!
Realities of the New World Order
In 1972, Brzezinski's wrote that "nation-state as a fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state."
The late Senator Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) was one of a very few people who understood what Brzezinski was alluding to, when he issued a clear and precise warning in his 1979 book, With No Apologies:
"The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power – political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical."
Trilateral Entrenchment: 1980-2008
Every Administration since Carter has had top-level Trilateral Commission representation through the President or Vice-President, or both! George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Dick Cheney are all members.
In turn, these have appointed their Trilateral cronies to top positions in their Administrations.
For instance, six out of seven World Bank presidents have been members of the Commission. Eight out of ten USTR's (U.S. Trade Representative) have been members.
Secretaries of State include Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, Alexander Haig, George Schultz, Lawrence Eagleburger, Warren Christopher and Madeleine Albright. Yep, all members of the Trilateral Commission.
Follow the money, follow the power
You decide which is scarier: Obama and Brzezinski or McCain and Henry Kissinger?
Either way, Americans will continue to lose…
Every major crisis we face today is directly attributable to policies put forth and executed by members of this Trilateral Commission: Banking/lending/mortgage crisis, energy/gas price crisis, food/shortage/price crisis.
In addition, in the last fifteen to twenty years we have lost of millions of prime manufacturing jobs to China, India and Mexico. Our prime assets are being purchased by sovereign wealth funds and foreign investors. Our currency has all but been destroyed throughout the world.
Remember Brzezinski's vision that "international banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state"?
Well, that's been true enough. But, for all their acting and planning at the expense of our own prosperity and Sovereignty, who wants or needs more of the same under Obama or McCain? With friends like this, who needs enemies?
For several Presidential elections now, I have voted according to the philosophy of voting for the "lesser of two evils." Never again!
A vote for either Obama or McCain is a vote for the complete destruction of America!
Lately I'm seeing and hearing things from John McCain's campaign that make me speechless with disbelief. Please tell me that the majority of the GOP does NOT consist of those hate spewig racist bastards I had to witness on TV. All that was missing were white cloaks and caps and burning crosses.
McCain may be praised for his effort to put the record straight on Obama's falsly presumed Arab status, but if he really is that All American Hero he should have put that mob to silence.
I sincerely hope the American voters will punish him for the fact that he had to revert to personal attacks towards his opponent seeing that he could not win the discussion on real important issues.
The US and the world need a dignified intelligent leader who can keep his act together. I'm sorry to say that McCain is failing aformentioned qualifications.
Please US citizens: vote for the right candidate. You're voting for us 'foreigners' as well, so act responsibly.