Big Hearted Bomber

In a rather shallow and amusing piece about John McCain, Steve Inskeep gets deep with Jon Meacham of Newsweek. There were some very funny assertions made about singin' John the Bomber (not to be confused with Joe the Plummer!).

According to Meacham, McCain "has a very sophisticated view of the Vietnam War." And that view is...that the military was stabbed in the back and could have won - very sophisticated.

Meacham also notes that "this [the McCains] is a family that understands the price of war, and John McCain is not eager to use force...." Oh yeah, John McCain is soooo reluctant to use force (like in Iraq, Syria, Sudan and Iran). Yep, he was just so patient and careful about suggesting military action after 9/11 that some of us were wondering if he'd become a closet pacifist.

In fact regarding foreign policy Meacham sees McCain as "...ultimately a big hearted man who believes in, he has a far more romantic view of America's role in the world than Senator Obama does...has a more epic sense that America can be the America of 1945..." Gosh, doesn't that just make you feel all warm inside?

BS Machine IDs Gaffe Machine

(Click picture for source)

Mara Liasson (a fox in sheep's clothing) was at it again on ATC Monday night. Liasson was doing a piece on McCain's stump speech. After airing former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson's remarks that "You're trying to take advantage of the themes of the moment, the gaffes of the last week, trying to get any traction you can" - Liasson chimes in with this:

"On this day the gaffe McCain uses was from the Democrat's gaffe machine and Vice Presidential candidate, Joe Biden."

I really thought I misheard, and had to replay it from the web. Yes, she really did call Biden the "Democrat's gaffe machine." This struck me as a bit unusual, and shall we say a wee bit unprofessional. I've heard journalists refer to Biden as having a reputation for making gaffes, but to call him a "gaffe machine." Hmmm, where could such a moniker come from?

Well, what do you know, if it isn't one of the talking points of the McCain campaign (including a video the McCain camp put out). It's also interesting to Google "gaffe machine" and notice that it's a favorite smear term against Obama used by the likes of the venomous Malkin.

Who Needs 527s

With McCain flailing and no 527s coming to his rescue, who better to put in one last super McEffort than NPR? ATC on Wednesday had not one, but two McCain Country campaign ads. One was an "opinion" piece from NPR favorite, Rich Lowry of the National Review (let's see how often NPR turns to The Nation's Katrina vanden Heuvel - I'd say 1 to 41 seems pretty fair and balanced to me...) The other was a McCain background feature from fetid baloney reporter, Ted Robbins, who serves up a big heaping helping of McMaverick b.s. (nothing new here, here, or here.)

In case you missed these fine pieces of radio journalism, here's a few excerpts:

From Lowry's piece:

• "...he salvaged his reputation after the political hell of the Keating Five scandal."
• "Even the most hardened Democrat has to appreciate the man's pluck."
• "But there's another enduring McCain quality — and that's courage. He has been willing to root out corruption in his own party; he has bucked his own party's leadership..."

From Ted Robbins "report":

• "McCain entered the U.S. Senate and gradually adopted his own Western theme. The persona fits well with Arizona's Old West image — a place for rugged individualists to make a new start. After all, that's what McCain did when he married his second wife, Cindy, and moved to the state."
• "...political pollster Bruce Merrill says the voters have embraced the brand. 'They admire him as a POW. They admire him as a maverick, a gunslinger kind of a guy,' he said."
• "The problem is that McCain has taken stances opposite of his own party."
• "State Republican leaders differ with McCain on campaign finance reform, embryonic stem cell research and, most notably, on immigration."

Well, dang...at least cigarette ads now have to have the Surgeon General's warning label affixed to them.

All's Quiet in the Henhouse

Tonight on ATC, Michelle Norris and Mara Fox News Liasson pretend that all is about equally negative between the two candidates for President, and Norris asks, " Is there a more negative tone than we've been hearing in previous campaigns?"

To which Liasson answers, "I dont' think so. That 'too risky for America,' I bet you and I have heard that every single election cycle....no, we haven't seen a Willie Horton ad, we haven't seen John McCain accused of fathering an illegitimate black child. I think this is rather tame if you look at the history of campaigns. I do think it is getting tougher. I think the difference is that you see Barack Obama basically saying that McCain is mentally unstable, that he's erratic...what McCain has been doing is using a kind of guilt by association charge, raising the question of whether Obama has been completely truthful about his relationship with William Ayers..."

Well, I guess if you draw some of your pay from the sleaze machine called Fox News, then it all looks "pretty tame." And it's ironic that Liasson mentions the 2000 "whisper campaign" against McCain, when the vile anti-Muslim/Arab whisper campaign against Obama is the heart and soul of the McPalin mob strategy.

In addition to taking her morals from the Fox News den, I guess Liasson is not Arab or could care less how they are trashed by the Hate Talk Express. The racist overtones of the McCain camp seem to elude her too, although the report tonight opened with Norris noting that this past weekend Masa McCain promised to "quote, whip his you know what." I guess that means the "you know what" on "that one."

The Hate that Never Dies

Yesterday I made the "mistake" of watching the video posted here on Crooks and Liars: depressing and repulsive stuff. In just a few short minutes I noted the following from these McPalin supporters:

• "you're stupid"
• "hangs around with terrorists"
• "he's a terrorist"
• "Obama's a Muslim; he's a terrorist himself"
• "here it is" [giving the finger]
• "commie faggots"
• "get a job"
• "go to Russia"
• "socialist swine"
• "screw Obama"
• "die"
• "European socialist"
• "he is a Muslim"
• "I don't know what he is"
• "sleazy scum of the earth" [of ACORN & Obama]

Watching it I had a weird déjà vu experience. I had seen this crowd before, but where? Then it hit me, during the POV special about the Chilean judge investigating Pinochet there is a scene during Pinochet's funeral where his supporters taunt victims and opponents of Pinochet with nearly identical epithets: faggot, terrorist, etc. You can get a feel for these Pinochet fans by checking out this clip on YouTube.

One of the readers of this blog noted below that the issue of McPalin mob hatred and vitriol is "not being properly addressed by the major media." So when ATC on Friday covered just this topic I wondered how they would cover it. The title of the web post gives a clue: "Anxiety Rules at McCain Campaign Stops." Anxiety?

Melissa Block opens the piece with "Republican John McCain held a series of rallies and town hall meetings with increasingly anxious supporters. It's not just the slumping economy that has them worried..." Anxious? Worried? That's interesting because I've been around a lot of anxious and worried people in my time, and they don't usually scream at people, calling them liars, terrorists, faggots, etc.

Scott Horsley takes over and tells us the following about the McMob: They are "outspoken in their dismay" and "there's more defiance than celebration" in them. Outspoken? Defiance? And then after not really addressing the fundamental - and dangerous - issue of McCain and Palin cultivating this viciousness, Horsley wraps it up with a plug for McCain: "McCain and NPR has been embracing his underdog status."

One Important Question

Consider this assessment of Iraq offered by Bob Siegel on Tuesday's ATC:

"Despite recent security gains in Iraq, one important question remains: 'If American troops leave, is the Iraqi army ready to assume responsibility for the country's security?'"

The unstated premise of Siegel's question is that American troops have brought security to Iraq. Let's just say that 5 years (and counting), 5 million refugees (and counting) and one million (and counting) dead Iraqis is one a hell of a legacy of security for the Iraqi army to maintain. No wonder Siegel questions whether it is up to the task.

The reduction of the eventual exit of American forces from Iraq (hopefully sooner rather than later) to just one question is pretty silly (and continues the McCain lie of selling of the Surge as some kind of great success). There are actually endless questions remaining; I'll suggest a few of the obvious:

• Will the people responsible for the war crime of invading Iraq ever be brought to justice?
• Will the US ever pay reparations for the destruction of infrastructure that it wreaked on Iraq?
• Will the corporations who swindled the US and Iraq out of "reconstruction" billions ever be held to account?
• How many foreign extremists have been created by the Iraq War?
• Will the US soldiers physically and psychologically wounded in Iraq ever receive the services they deserve?
• Will Baghdad ever be a religiously, ethnically mixed city again?
• How will the sectarian divides created by the US war play out in the next several years?
• Will the Shia-dominated government of Maliki seek to crush the Sunni minority once the US forces are gone?

You can probably come up with a few of your own...

McSame Sh%*!, Different Day

McCain picks a political nobody who supports teaching "creation science"[sic], has rabid anti-abortion views that would do the Taliban proud, and who says of global warming, "I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made." When a friend told me about an email from MoveOn.org covering these extremist views of Palin's (including her opposition to abortion even in cases of rape and incest) I was surprised - I hadn't heard such details on NPR. So I thought I'd reprise NPR's coverage of Palin through today (Sunday, August 31) and see what emerges:

(Friday morning) Horsley:

• She has a lot in common with John McCain; she is considered a reformer.
• a strong anti-abortion voice
• a colorful character.
• a runner up in the Miss Alaska pageant
• a life member in the NRA,
• Husband works part time...for BP, the oil company...
• became governor in 2006
• was in city government in Wasilla, Alaska

Friday ATC with Horsely again:

• McCain saw...a kindred spirit who's battled wasteful government spending, corruption, and the Republican party itself in Alaska
• one time hockey mom
• working on the PTA to the city council in Wasilla
• little if any foreign policy experience
• commands the Alaska National Guard
• a son in the army who is headed for Iraq next month
• she and her husband have five children
• she's a fierce anti-abortion advocate

Friday ATC "profile" by Martin Kaste

• has sort of a gee whiz manner
• efforts to clean up Alaska's political system
• some consider her a policy lightweight
• evidence suggesting the governor may have tried to get her sister's ex-husband fired from his job as a state trooper

Saturday's Weekend Edition with Horsely

• was chosen Miss Congeniality 24 years ago in a Wasilla Alaska beauty pageant
• colorful biography
• has a reputation for crusading against corruption and wasteful spending almost as strong as McCain's own
• mother of five
• a former commercial fisherwoman
• a lifetime member of the NRA

By this point you see that her extremist stand on abortion gets called "strong" or "fierce" with no mention of detail. There is also no mention of her radical ideas on global warming or creationism. In addition to softening her radicalism, there is another disturbing thread that runs through NPR's coverage of Palin: that Palin's outsider, reformist, anti-corruption actions are identical to McCain's. You can see above that on Friday Horsely states that "She has a lot in common with John McCain; she is considered a reformer," and she is "a kindred spirit who's battled wasteful government spending, corruption, and the Republican party itself."

This discredited nonsense about McCain being a maverick and a reformer reaches a crescendo on Weekend Edition Sunday. Hansen has Chuck DeFeo of the rightwing Townhall.com and lets him say the following with no follow-up whatsoever:

• both McCain and Palin have strong records of reform, strong records of really bucking the Republican establishment
• There's no doubt that John McCain has been truly a maverick, someone who has fought for change, has fought for change in Washington, has fought for reforms. With his choice of Palin, he's found someone who's kind of that ideological soulmate

I couldn't believe that Hansen just lets him rehash this misinformation about McCain without even a polite request for a teeny, tiny bit of evidence. This interview was followed by an interview with Joe Trippi, a Democratic campaign consultant, and I assumed he'd been brought on to offer a bit of needed counterpoint. Instead he simply warned Democrats to take Palin seriously and stated that the choice of Palin will be brilliant if McCain can "sell this as a maverick who picked another maverick, two reformers willing to challenge corruption in their own party."
Man, if I had a dollar for every time NPR calls McCain a maverick, or lets someone call him a maverick without challenge I'd have enough money to buy seven maverick houses for myself!

Wait a Minute

This morning John Ydstie was on to talk about the tax policies of John McCain and Barack Obama. I have to say, that tax policy is out of my league - but I think I know when I'm being hornswoggled. Ydstie had this to say:

"...for McCain the big idea is, a Republican idea going back to Ronald Reagan, and that is to boost growth...." After hearing a sound bite of McCain claiming that our corporate tax rate is the "2nd highest in the world" Ydstie is back to add "...and I think most economists would agree - if you cut corporate tax rates, if you cut personal income tax rates, you're going to boost growth. The rub is this: if you don't pay for those tax cuts and you increase the deficit, you could very easily undermine that growth..."

Now wait there one second fella. Before you go and sell the store claiming such miraculous powers for supply-side economics, I just don't think it's all that straightforward. I did a little research and currently there does seem to be a lot of religious faith (CATO institute and AEI, of course) in the powers of cutting taxes for corporations - but that "most economists" stuff is pretty darn sloppy. As this article from Smart Money notes, the tax rate is one thing, but what corporations in the US actually pay is a quite a different story. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities has some interesting views on the whole "most economists agree" angle, too.

The thing that I have discovered is that since the Reagan-Thatcher counterrevolution of the 1980s corporate taxes have been falling globally (see the CATO article above). And I don't know about you, but looking around at jobs, real wages, health insurance, infrastructure, etc. - I'd say the period has been marked by definite growth (the rich getting a whole lot richer) combined with some serious shrinkage in the quality of life for most humans on the planet, and a lot of downward pressures on the middle class.

I'd be happy to hear from anyone with a bit more expertise in this area.

The Double Talk Express

Wow, McLiasson is working extra McHard:

On ATC Tuesday:

Liasson: "You can't really say that McCain switched his positions. What McCain did is the bill he proposed and sponsored had a path to legalization for undocumented aliens, also it had some border security measures. He hasn't given up on the path to citizenship, but he now says we have to secure the border first because if we don't Americans won't support comprehensive immigration reform."
[Holy smokes, McCain couldn't have spun it better himself.]

Liasson: "...both these candidates are for the same thing."
[Fact based journalism at its best.]

Liasson: "...but McCain did change his emphasis and Obama sees that as an opening."
[That Obama is a wily devil!]

And then on Wednesday's ME Liasson is back at it, with a little help from her friends:

Inskeep: "One of his strengths is his record on immigration reform. McCain favored a path toward citizenship for illegal immigrants and he paid a heavy political price for that."
[So heavy that he lost the Republican primary...okay, not that heavy.]

Liasson: "...on immigration reform Obama and McCain are very similar."
[At least it's no longer "the same thing."]

Liasson: "Last year McCain took on his own party."
[Along with that maverick George Bush.]

Liasson: "to the McCain campaign, Obama is trying to get credit for a bipartisan compromise that he supported but also tried to torpedo by sponsoring or voting for labor union backed amendments that if passed would have weakened support for the bill."
[Labor backed amendments? Same thing? Very similar? Hmmm.]

(an attendee at the LULAC conference): "I actually voted for Obama in the primaries. I think I just kind of jumped in the bandwagon and sort of voted because I really like his personality and I always say I like him with my heart and I like McCain with my head."
[Surely a representative perspective.]

Pretty amazing stuff.

Keeping the Liar in Liasson

"Maverick" journalist Mara Liasson was on Morning Edition today to burnish the "maverick" myth of John McCain. Here are a few priceless assertions:

"McCain has made a career of taking heat from his own party for working with liberal Democrats like Russ Feingold on campaign finance reform, or Ted Kennedy on immigration and these bipartisan efforts are both the source of his maverick reputation and the cause of his ongoing problems with the Republican party's conservative base."

Actually the source of his "maverick" reputation are hacks in the media who keep repeating it despite of a wealth of evidence to the contrary. Liasson's assertions of "taking heat from his own party" leaves one asking, What heat - has he ever been passed over for important committee appointments? Has he been denounced publicly by the leadership of the party? Has he been sanctioned in any way? Facts be damned, Liasson is not about to be deterred:

"...if the criteria is who's stuck their neck out on difficult issues and paid the price for doing it, McCain has it all over Obama."

Whether it's her recent collaboration with Montagne in citing the biased National Journal's attempt to paint Obama as the ultra-liberal (Don't I wish!) or her joining in on Fox News to bash liberal bloggers - you have to wonder just how far into misinformation, smear, and outright lies someone like Liasson has to go before getting called out by NPR. Or could it be that her tactics and politics are right in line with the tactics and politics of NPR's leadership? You'll have to make that call yourself.

UPDATE: I emailed Media Matters regarding this piece and I see they've dinged NPR...again.

Lazy as Hell

If you were going to interview a shill for McCain - for example one-time McCain campaign worker and Republican strategist Mark Murphy - wouldn't you do a little homework (or have someone do it for you) and be prepared for the most obvious talking points that any McCain supporter is going to try to pass off? You'd know that your guest was going to try and pass off the usual nonsense that McCain is a "maverick." Maybe you'd peruse the Arizona Republic's website and read up on their "analysis of his Senate votes on the most divided issues in the past decade [which] shows that McCain almost never thwarted his party's objectives." Okay, so maybe that article's a bit to wordy, so you could take a peek at Steve Benen's Carpetbagger Report on it which highlights the Republic's main points. And if that's too heavy on text, there's a nice clear table on the Progressive Media's website which shows how McMaverick voted over the last 8 years in relation to Bush (usually about 90% agreement - and 100% in 2008!).

That way you'd be ready for a little reality check when you're guest pops off with "the Democrat strategy is very simple, I'm not sure it's very authentic, but it's pretty simple: is kind of glue this third Bush term idea on to McCain. Now that might work with a lot of Republicans, but McCain does have a long history of independence, being a classic maverick - so I think it's going to be tougher to do."

And if you were feeling especially non-confrontational, and willing to let that slide, you'd be ready with some handy numbers when said guest really started slinging the BS: "the Obama campaign would say 'Well, If you support the President on 10% of things you're the President,' and I think that people in this election are going to see through that kind of a simple black and white and understand that it's often shades of gray, and that as Republicans go, there's no more independent maverick-minded person than McCain..."

10% of things! What hallucination did that number come from? And Siegel's response? Not a word...of course.

Maybe a Closed Casket Next Time

Just what McCain speech did NPR's Pam Fessler attend last night? Surely not the one that got universally panned from left and right. Do any cursory search for reactions to McCain's New Orleans, 200 White Folk zombie night speech and you will find nothing but negatives from left and right perspectives, even Fox News!

But that's not going to stop Fessler from repeating all McCain's talking points unchallenged. Of Obama's claim that McCain is essentially a third Bush term, she tells us "McCain said it's just not true, that he's opposed the Bush administration on a number of policies, such as the treatment of detainees, just look at my record he told the crowd." Apparently, Fessler was so entranced with the lovely lime-green background and the dead man talking that she never bothered to look at McCain's sorry record. What Fessler did do was go sniffing around for someone who would provide a choice anti-Obama sound-bite:

"...if the crowd last night was any indication, McCain might pick up support from Hillary Clinton fans who are now looking elsewhere. New Orleans resident Vanessa Stubbs said she'd considered Clinton, but there's no way she'll vote for Obama - after his minister made what she considers racially divisive remarks."

Stubbs: "...with the recent Barack Obama and his church problems, I completely went from a liberal Democrat to a conservative Republican, and I'm very proud to say that I'm going to vote for John McCain this year."

This kind of selective journalistic rubbish deserves some scrutiny. It's clever how out of a tiny crowd of old, white McCain supporters Fessler infers that "McCain might pick up support from Hillary Clinton fans who are now looking elsewhere." She makes it sound like a major trend. I'm sorry but are there more than a handful of morons who really supported Clinton and now back McCain? And then to allow someone to say something so obviously stupid or mendacious as "I completely went from a liberal Democrat to a conservative Republican" with no follow up is inexcusable.

The Apology that Wasn't from the Story That Isn't

A little flashback to Tuesday ATC's story on Rev. Hateful Hagee's apology and it's acceptance by the William Donohue, President of the Catholic League of Rightwing Bigotry and Hate. Here's Michelle Norris' report:

"...a controversial supporter of Senator McCain's issued an apology today. It came from John Hagee, and evangelical pastor. McCain sought his endorsement earlier this year despite Hagee's habit of making comments that many find offensive....But now the pastor has sent a letter to the head of the Catholic League, William Donohue, expressing quote 'deep regret for any comments that Catholics have found hurtful.' Donohue quickly issued a statement accepting the apology and he wrote, 'This case is closed.' Senator McCain...called Hagee's letter helpful."

Norris puts in some nifty rhetorical slights of hand. She simply calls it an apology (even though it's a typical non-apology). She also qualifies Hagee's slimy bigotry as "comments that many find offensive" and she simply notes Donohue's acceptance without any information about Donohue's extreme right-wing anti civil liberties bona fides and allows his "case closed" pronouncement to stand unchallenged.

McDrivel

"I've been a big McCain supporter from day one...value hard work and personal responsibility...I believe in smaller government; I believe in the importance of economic liberalism, and a strong national defense." So says Meghan Scheidemann, an 18-year-old freshman at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Of course, a supporter of McCain can parrot whatever empty platitudes and praises of the candidate they want, but why is NPR giving this individual valuable airtime to repeat these slogans on NPR's Sunday Weekend edition?

Supposedly there is something unique and newsworthy about Meghan's situation. Hansen introduces the segment with "It's exciting to be a first time voter. A chance to have your voice heard, your vote counted. But what's it like to be a first time voter when the candidate you support isn't the one receiving most of the attention?" During the report Meghan continues this line, saying "how little media coverage is being given to my candidate."

Actually McCain gets plenty of media attention, most of it fawning and unquestioning - just like Meghan's piece (and like NPR's coverage of McCain - Feb. 29, 2008, March 14, 2008, and April 9, 2008).

I have an idea! Instead of NPR just being an echo chamber for the McCain campaign, it could do some digging on exactly what he did and when during the Savings and Loan scandals, and on his relationships to the telecom corporations. NPR could report on McCain's reactions to the latest torture memos that show all levels of the White House participated in allowing torture - or on his maverick reaction (did nothing) to Bush's despicable signing statement on the "anti-torture law." It would even be worthwhile to do some reporting on what (and who) his units were bombing - and why - during Vietnam when he became such a "war hero." And of course it would be great for NPR to do even a little reporting on the excitement of being a first time voter when your vote is NOT counted.

The Amazing, Unbelievable, Miraculous, Astounding, Mindbending, Glorious, Immaculate Military Success of the Surge

In the proud tradition of NPR skepticism about the Surge™ (see June 07, September 07, February 08, and March 08) Morning Edition trotted out old one-outlet Surge™ Protector, David Welna. Here he manages to both campaign for John McCain and be a cheerleader for the Surge™ :

"McCain sounded as if he were describing his own near political near-death odyssey last year as a presidential contender - [McCain interlude: 'We've come a long way since early 2007 and quite a distance even since General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker appeared before our committee last September'] but of course what McCain really meant was that a disputed strategy he'd strongly endorsed, last year's US troop expansion in Iraq, known as the surge, is now widely accepted as having been, at least militarily , a success. [Another McCain insert: 'This means rejecting as we did in 2007, the calls for a reckless and irresponsible withdrawal of our forces at the moment when they are succeeding.']"

Oh yeah, that widely accepted, mythically triumphant, amazingly successful Surge. Who but the reckless and irresponsible could argue with that?

Inskeep and the B.S. Express

What a study in contrasts. Wednesday's Morning Edition piece looking at Straight-Talk-Express McCain's campaign begins with a clip from John Stewart's show of the night before:

Stewart: "How do you quell a civil war when it’s not your country?"
McCain: "I’m saying that we’re paying a very heavy price—(drowned out by crowd applause for Stewart’s question)....I think I know whose side they’re on."
Stewart: "No, they’re on America’s side because they’re patriots." (loud cheers and applause)

In the NPR piece Steve Inskeep talks to Mike Murphy, elite consultant, and former campaign manager for Little Mister Sunshine, John McCain. Consider this interchange:

Murphy: "...the media loved John McCain when he stood up and was feisty against the conventional wisdom of the Republican Party, but when he stands up and fights for a war that a lot of the media elite doesn’t like, all of a sudden he’s no longer courageous (smug chuckle). I think that tells me more about the media than about John McCain, and finally—"
Inskeep (interrupting) "Well, let me stop you there for just a second. We’ll get to your final point, but he is strongly supporting not just the war in Iraq, but the way President Bush is pursuing it right now and that’s something that is unpopular way beyond media circles."

I have heard people complain that young people get more of their news from John Stewart than from traditional news sources--no wonder! Notice how Stewart isn't distracted by McCain's cynical ploy of trying to discredit the audience's response by casting it as nothing but dumb group loyalty to the show's host. Stewart promptly skewers this by insisting that what the audience cares about is the state of our country and the rotten leadership running it and the rotten war ruining it. (A leadership that McCain has been pimping for at least since the Bush reelection campaign of '04).

Inskeep, by contrast offers no principled challenge to Murphy's slur on the media. Even a timid reporter could have demanded a definition of "media elite." Who might that be? Fox News, ABC, the New York Times? When Murphy says, "a war that a lot of the media elite doesn’t like" Inskeep could have interrupted to remind him that actually most of the mainstream media has "liked" this war quite a lot, and for several years running has dutifully reported the nonsense of "turned corners" and "progress." He might have asserted that it's not the media or just public opinion that has sunk McCain, but the gruesome reality on the ground--that "civil war" that John Stewart's audience understands is an unwinnable, unmitigated disaster.

Little Mr. Sunshine

Opening Morning Edition's piece on Iraq is "Straight Talk Express" McCain trying to pass off a load of b.s. about progress in Iraq: "Things are better, and there are encouraging signs....Never have I been able to drive from the airport. Never have I been able to go out into the city as I was today."

Instead of taking on McCain's lethal dishonesty and obvious con job, NPR gives him an assist with Steve Inskeep talking to Lourdes Garcia-Navarro about "some progress" in the security situation in Iraq. Garcia-Navarro is a bit more sanguine than the upbeat Steve Inskeep. She notes that "last week alone 600 Iraqis were killed...US soldier deaths are not down either...official figures from Iraq’s government shows that in general, civilian deaths were up last month about 15%..." but she does add that "the good news, it has to be said, is sectarian murders, yesterday there were 24 victims in the capital. The numbers we’re seeing go from the 20s to the 40s, and that is really much, much lower than during the height of the blood letting." She also notes what Juan Cole of Informed Comment predicted months ago: the insurgency has stepped up its attacks outside of Baghdad.

Here is the part that really got my goat. Inskeep observes, "I want to make sure I understand this. You’re saying that in recent weeks extra American troops have put their lives on the line to buy time for the Iraqi political process and so far at least people have not used the time."

Well, Inskeep, they have put their lives on the line not to "buy time for the Iraqi political process" but because they've been ordered to do it by their bumbling commander-in-chief who ignored his own Iraq Study Group and the will of the voters in a gamble to save the failure, the disaster, the horror of his making that is Iraq. They're sacrificing to buy time all right, time so that Bush can finish his term without the failure becoming an utter defeat before he leaves office. Yes, its the bloody calculus of this soulless President - and now Sunshine McCain - who feel that thousands more Iraqi and American lives are a worthwhile price for their political ambitions.