August 31, 2004
John McCain's "black" childPolitics
Every time you hear the name of Arizona Senator John McCain this week, with regards to the Republican National Convention, you will hear in the same breath how he is helping Bush despite the fact that he really doesn’t like the man. Is it really true that McCain doesn’t like Bush? We may never find out until we see his memoirs, but their might be cause for the animosity. The ill feelings might have their roots in Bush’s Brain, the evil genius Karl Rove. Elanor Clift of Newsweek Magazine writes:
The Kerry campaign thinks it has succeeded in discrediting the scurrilous attack on Kerrys military service, but Rove got what he wanted. Instead of talking about a failed war in Iraq and a new report that shows 1.3 million more Americans living in poverty, we’re debating what happened in the Mekong Delta in 1968. The strategy “came straight from the West Wing,” says the GOP staffer. “Nobody should be confused.” Asked to explain, this Republican says Rove is smart enough to keep technical distance. But all it takes is a well-placed wink to activate a web of Bush family hit men, confidantes and deep-pocket donors. “They know what to do—it’s like sleeper cells that get activated,” he says, likening the players to “political terrorists.”
They sprang into action in 2000 when Bush was running in the primaries against John McCain. After getting beat in New Hampshire by McCain, Bush’s first event was at Bob Jones University in South Carolina. Standing next to Bush on the stage was a veteran who went right at McCain, questioning his Vietnam service while Bush remained silent. A whisper campaign told voters that McCain had a black child. (The McCains have an adopted daughter from Bangladesh.) McCain lost the primary; the veteran became a Bush administration appointee.
abhi on August 31, 2004 08:40 AM in Politics · T·r·a·c·k·b·a·c·k address · Direct link · Email post
¤ ProgressNow.org Weblog said: They Have No Shame
I was watching McCain last night, and while I haven't really seen his public speaking style so I may be wrong, but he sounded like every few minutes he needed breather or he was going to puke. I had so much respect for the man, but just like Powell, being around these people makes them compromise their intregity (just like Dole did recently).
What losers, those Bushies. Why resort to a wink-wink, nudge-nudge campaign when you can get a (in McCain's own words) 'disingenuous' film-maker to do your dirty work for you? And then have that film go on to reap millions of dollars, to boot. Now that's the way to go after somebody.....
(Oh, Abhi, why do I even bother? You think what you think and I think what I think! I guess we are definitely not the .00002% of people that are undecided, and yet, will decide the election :) )
The McCain smear was that his adopted Bangladeshi daughter was the child of a black prostitute:
Bush loyalists... claimed in parking-lot handouts and telephone "push polls" and whisper campaigns that McCains wife, Cindy, was a drug addict, that McCain might be mentally unstable from his captivity in Vietnam, and that the senator had fathered a black child with a prostitute. Callers push-polled members of a South Carolina right-to-life organization and other groups, asking if the black baby might influence their vote. Now heres the twist, the part that drives McCain admirers insane to this very day: That last rumor took seed because the McCains had done an especially admirable thing. Years back theyd adopted a baby from a Mother Teresa orphanage in Bangladesh. Bridget, now eleven years old, waved along with the rest of the McCain brood from stages across the state, a dark-skinned child inadvertently providing a photo op for slander.
The difference between Karl Rove and Michael Moore is that Rove works directly for the President. Didn't Bush enter the Whitehouse to clean it up? Secondly, and more importantly, whether or not one thinks Moore is misleading, he is only dealing with actual issues. Any falsehoods in these issues can be conutered with facts, and will lead to a healthy debate of the issues. Rove and the Republicans however never lie about issues. They only distract from them (who cares what happened in the MeKong in '68?). As you watch the campaign from now until the election you will note how seldom Republicans talk about issues. Look at their speakers for the convention. Rudy and Arnold don't even agree with much of the party platform. Interviewed on Russert this past weekend Rudy kept saying, "I don't agree with that" as Russert read the platform to him. Rove is a genius. I admire the guy for his brilliance even as I pity the American public for their ignorance. As far as the election, I am decided. Like others on the left, I don't support Kerry as much as I depise the Bush Administrations policies (and I was more pro-war than most). The "war on terror" is a distraction while the right wing pushes its agenda. For example, just today the EPA, given free reign by the Bushies, raised the allowable limits of Selenium that businesses can pump into the environment. Its cheaper for businesses that way.
I'm always conflicted when these kinds of posts go up on SM - on one hand, I try to keep overtly political stuff off the blog - there are hundreds of others out there and tons o' desi material to toss up without geting too political....
On the other hand, I'm a weak man and have a hard time avoiding a big piece of bait waving in front of me. For ex., Manish's excerpt about Bush/Rove slamming Mccain's "black child" left out this part -
"maybe working for the campaign, maybe just representing its interests"
This is as close to Bush as Moore is to Kerry when Moore is spouting crap like more US soldiers need to die in Iraq or calling Americans the dumbest people on the planet. Or the various loonies sporting "Bush=Hitler" signs....
I doubt they were directed / endorsed by Kerry / Bush...
Average partisans make purple heart band-aids. They don't hire professional polling firms to conduct push-polls.
trying to short circuit this debate.... lemme summarize. Pushpolls are bad BUT they are as much the work of "average partisans" as $100M Michael Moore documentaries or ANSWER-sponsored political riot techniques... In both cases, I doubt they were directed / endorsed by Kerry / Bush but they are unalloyed in their partisan effect.
I doubt they were directed / endorsed by Kerry / Bush...
False moral equivalence: the 'child of a black prostitute' smear was demonstrably false, nasty at a deeply personal level, and made in private phone calls to voters rather than in a public film. The question is whether the push pollers worked at the direction of the Bush campaign. Campaign insiders, including McCain himself, say yes.
the 'child of a black prostitute' smear was demonstrably false, nasty at a deeply personal level
As is "Bush=Hitler"....... or Powell=Bush's Chimp.
Yeah, I should just avoid the red flag myself...
During the DNC, I saw 'Bush knew' bumperstickers. Some people are morons. What are you going to do? Put them in a freedom cage outside the Fleet Center?
So a politician who loses thinks the winning guy played dirty pool? Ok. Innuendos from campaign insiders doesn't cut it with me.
And you know, so what if there are people in the Republican party who disagree with some of the party's planks? What am I supposed to do? In either party I will be asked to put up with some seriously egregious stuff, that I absolutely do not believe in. I'm a pragmatist. I try my best. Once again, during the DNC I heard a lot of people say they disagreed vehemently with a lot of the party platform and with John Kerry but at least he's not Bush.
And finally, look at the make-up of the 527's. There is as much if not more money in the Kerry supporting 527s. Moveon.org etc.
As is "Bush=Hitler"...
I missed where the Kerry campaign ran a Bush = Hitler push poll in a closely contested state?
Innuendos from campaign insiders doesn't cut it with me.
If a campaign's dirty tricks operation leaves fingerprints, it's not doing its job. What you look for is whether the candidate publicly denounces it and makes the partisans shut it down. Partisans respond to these kinds of calls. No such thing happened with the McCain smear.
In addition, no partisans would push-poll undecided voters in the final days of a close election without checking with the campaign first and testing the message for blowback.
But all you need to do is see whether the campaign heeded calls to condemn the lie. If it didn't, it was complicit.
