Moses Kagan's Aurora Borealis

"Instead of idly debating the precise extent of global warming or the precise timeline of global warming, we need to deal with the central facts of rising temperatures, rising waters and all the endless troubles that global warming will bring,” Mr. McCain said at a wind power plant in Oregon, a state that is expected to be a political battleground in the general election and where the environment is a central issue for voters. “We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great." - NY Times

Here's a link to an NPR report showing his predecessor's position(s) on the issues:
Candidate Bush on global warming

Are Republicans credible on this issue?

Labels: Bush, global warming, McCain

From Politico:

"I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on," she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."

"There's a pattern emerging here," she said.

Wow.

Labels: Clinton, politics

...comes from Newt Gingrich, of all people. He was talking about the midterm congressional elections in 2006. For the Dems, he suggested a slogan which I think would work for either Clinton or Obama against McCain.

Feeling the pain of the country as it bore grim witness to the orgy of sloth, idiocy, corruption and dishonesty that, objectively speaking, occurred under eight years of Republican rule, Gingrich (of all people) suggested two words:

"Had enough?"

Labels: Gingrich, politics, slogan

Let's get this out of the way first: I think McCain is a decent human being, which makes him some kind of moral superman compared to most politicians.

McCain is undeniably physically courageous. He mostly behaves with an admirable level of personal integrity (at least, excluding the Keating Five scandal and his recently exposed relationships with, respectively, a female lobbyist and an Arizona property developer). He is very pro-Israel, which I think most Jews appreciate.

Despite all of the above, I think his administration would be awful for America, and here's why: Just because McCain is decent and moral and willing to buck the (occasionally insane) orthodoxy of his party doesn't mean his staffers will be.

Let me give you an example that makes me worry. I worked on one of Gov. George Pataki's reelection campaigns in New York some years ago. As most will remember, Pataki was (is?) a moderate, at least as far as Republicans go. So you'd think that Pataki's staffers would be middle-of-the-road, New England, moderate Republicans.

Not so. One of them, having moved to New York from the Upper Midwest to work on the campaign, actually advised his wife not to leave the apartment. He also made sure to bring his and her pistols when he moved east of the Hudson River. You can imagine his views on things like abortion, etc.

What does this have to do with McCain? A lot.

A McCain Administration would be staffed by Republicans. Most of them would, of course, be alumni of the Bush Administration. The Deputy Under-Secretary for Housing and Urban Development under Bush would probably be the Under-Secretary under McCain, and so on up and down the line.

Why is this a problem? Because the Bush Administration has broken all previous records for managerial incompetence and corruption. In every department, from Homeland Security (remember FEMA during Katrina?) to Justice (waterboarding, anybody?) to, wait for it, Housing and Urban Development (the secretary just resigned in disgrace), the Bushies have combined ideological extremism with managerial mediocrity or worse.

So you may think that, in voting for McCain, you'd get a nice, center-right administration. But you'd likely be getting the same kind of losers, morons, and crooks who staff the present, soon-to-be-not-widely-missed Bush Administration.

Labels: Bush, McCain, politics

I'm a bad blogger. Things have been so fast and furious at Cazt (6,500 vids and counting) that I haven't had much time to post. We've been having a great time with the new venture - the team's cool, the customers are appreciative, etc. Here's hoping it will continue.

Meanwhile, I'll get back to posting here more regularly.

Come on Eliot, we were so close to taking over NY. Of all the prostitution rings, you had to walk into this one...

Here's the Times article: nytimes.com.

Labels: prostitution, Spitzer

Here's a quote from John McCain's communications director about the NY Times article alleging McCain had an inappropriate relationship with a lobbyist:

"It is a shame that The New York Times has lowered its standards to engage in a hit and run smear campaign," communications director Jill Hazelbaker said in a prepared statement sent about an hour after the Times posted their story online. "John McCain has a 24-year record of serving our country with honor and integrity. He has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists, and he will not allow a smear campaign to distract from the issues at stake in this election."

I actually like McCain, but good old Jill may be over-stating her case a bit. Here's the relevant section from McCain's Wikipedia entry:

"McCain's upwards political trajectory was jolted when he became enmeshed in the Keating Five scandal of the 1980s... Between 1982 and 1987, McCain received approximately $112,000 in political contributions from Keating and his associates. In addition, McCain's wife and her father had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center in April 1986, a year before McCain met with the regulators. McCain, his family and baby-sitter made at least nine trips at Keating's expense, sometimes aboard the American Continental jet...

Eventually [Keating's] real estate venture failed, leaving many broke. Federal regulators ultimately filed a $1.1 billion civil racketeering and fraud suit against Keating, accusing him of siphoning Lincoln's deposits to his family and into political campaigns. The five senators came under investigation for attempting to influence the regulators. In the end, none of the senators were convicted of any crime, although McCain was rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment" for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating."

Labels: McCain, ny times