John McCain in his own words ...

... collected by Ta-Nehisi Coates: "Fear Is the Path to the Dark Side."

Hey, you know what I forgot to mention about "Honorable" John McCain?

Earlier, when I noted his latest idiocy concerning fiscal responsibamility, I mean?

John McCain used to make fun of spending money to study grizzly bears.

I wonder why he doesn't do that anymore.

Pardon Our Venting. Mood Under Construction.

I've been chatting with Twin about the Man Who Will Be Senator Forever Since You Bastards Wouldn't Give Him The Presidency He So Richly Deserved After All Of His Service And By The Way Have You Forgotten THAT HE WAS A POW, and well, why should Twin have to absorb all of my bile, even if he did ask for it? So here is your chat transcript (leaked from GangOfJournolist12).

Originally Posted by TwinSwords

Key graf:

"... McCain has noticeably veered right on issues ..."

[TPM link]

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

Yep. Been noticing this for a while now.

Also.

Originally Posted by TwinSwords

So, even if the tea party candidate loses, we end up with a Republican Party that's to the right of where it was before. Right? Or is McCain sui generis? Or another possibility, is McCain not really moving to the right, but only paying lip service to the tea baggers?

Originally Posted by bjkeefe

My first reaction when I saw the poll numbers and how far he is ahead of Hayworth was: So why did you have to lurch so far to the right, Mr. So-Called Maverick Who Puts Country First? Fuck you, your craven careerism, and your junkie's need for the spotlight.

But you know what? Ever since the early 2000s, when it became clear that McCain was laying the groundwork for another run, after getting beaten on his right by W, I have had no respect for him expect [corr: except] in a Machiavellian sense: (1) he knows he owns the Villagers, (2) no matter how far right he campaigns, he knows he'll be able to get a good chunk of low-info voters and bonehead "I hate the divisiveness" centrists, precisely because of (1), (3) he knows he will never be able to get most of the left, no matter what he does, due to the (R) after his name, so he's figured out a working strategy that has kept him in office since 1982.

As to how much more St. John will stay to the right once safely ensconced for another six years, well, I would ask, how much further could he go? I can't think of a single damn thing he's done to buck the party line on any issue of any importance since McCain-Feingold and some decade-old talking points on immigration reform.

I wanted Hayworth to win because I figured he'd be easier to beat in the general, and that if he got past that, then he'd be an better face of the GOP to go after once he was in office. I am sick beyond words of the phoniness of John McCain and how so few in the MSM will ever call him on it, and that's not even taking into account his disgraceful choice of St. Sarah for a running mate.

P.S. I wanted to double-check that 1982 date, and while Googling, I happened across this more tempered view (via someone who belongs in that previous paragraph): Dick Polman's "The tragedy of John McCain." A good read, that may help you understand where the bug up my ass came from, should you care, and worth it for other reasons, as well.

(pic. source)

---

As it happened, Twin took a break from the back and forth above (due to "work" or some shit) and then when he came back, to see my message requesting his permission to share the above, he had in mind a new line he wanted to pursue. Since this is my blog and I wanted to have the last word, because that's how I do I'd like to encourage others to jump in, I have posted Twin's next response in the Comments. Pile in! Or on!

Ready for some Straight Talk™ about Arizona, My Friends™?

Sorry, Jim Newell. Your post must be stolen in its entirety.

No, Illegal Immigrants Do Not Kidnap and Behead Everyone in Arizona

If you have heard John McCain and Jan Brewer making hyperbolic claims of illegal immigrants kidnapping, murdering, raping, and beheading everyone and their brother in Arizona these days — their justification for the immigration law — then consider ignoring them?

The Washington Post's Dana Milbank, who usually spreads this unchecked conventional wisdom on a weekly basis, has written an excellent column debunking the myths of exponentially surging illegal immigrant violence along the border that right-wing Arizona politicians are shouting about all day, in order to justify that harsh, racial-profiling immigration law.

For example: Jan Brewer, the flustered Arizona governor, claimed last week on television, "Our law enforcement agencies have found bodies in the desert either buried or just lying out there that have been beheaded." But when this was fact-checked, "medical examiners in Arizona's border counties and the coroners said they had never seen an immigration-related beheading."

Two months ago, the Arizona Republic published an exhaustive report that found that, according to statistics from the FBI and Arizona police agencies, crime in Arizona border towns has been "essentially flat for the past decade." For example, "In 2000, there were 23 rapes, robberies and murders in Nogales, Ariz. Last year, despite nearly a decade of population growth, there were 19 such crimes." The Pima County sheriff reported that "the border has never been more secure."

FBI statistics show violent crime rates in all of the border states are lower than they were a decade ago — yet Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) reports that the violence is "the worst I have ever seen." President Obama justifiably asserted last week that "the southern border is more secure today than any time in the past 20 years," yet Rush Limbaugh judged the president to be "fit for the psycho ward" on the basis of that remark.

So poor Jan Brewer was not forced to sign this immigration bill into law because the hordes of beheading, kidnapping Mexican death monsters were surrounding her office and law enforcement needed emergency powers to shoo 'em out. And the more Brewer and McCain play up this threat of constant violence, the worse it is for Arizona's economy. And Arizona's economy is really really bad! Have you been there? Empty houses and whatnot, everywhere.

(Above: Jan Brewer gets a Wet Willie, and someone
who has NeverConsidered™ himself a Maverick™)

(pic. sources: Janny, Johnny | x-posted)

__________

[Added] I really cannot second Jim's recommendation strongly enough: read Milbank's column.

Maverick!!!1!

Jon Stewart practically loses his voice over the Sainted One's recent claim:

(alt. video link)

(h/t: Rachel Slajda/TPM)

Let's Go To The Tape!

Following up on the head-exploding post from yesterday, hurrah for TPM, I say.

(alt. video link)

(h/t: marindenver)

__________

[Added] And let's not forget the good book.

If this doesn't make your head explode ...

... you have a titanium cranium:

‘Maverick’ is a mantle McCain no longer claims; in fact, he now denies he ever was one. ‘I never considered myself a maverick,’ he told me.”

(x-posted)

[Added] See also, see also.

Line of the Day: 2010-03-01

Josh Marshall might already have won the month:

It's been pretty much shark hopscotch for McCain going back to late 2007.

It is pretty rich to hear McSame saying that he was misled by Bush. I hope he has prepared his two envelopes.

(h/t: Attaturk)

Too Old To Keep His Lies Straight?

Or is Honest John McStraightTalk just cynically calculating that piling on his earlier lies a new lie that "Obama did it too!!!1!" is enough for the Republican base?

(h/t: DougJ | pic. source)

Q: Can a Flip-Flopper Jump The Shark?

A: Yes, if his name is John McCain.

That's astounding, even for Honest John.

(previously)

(h/t: @DaveWeigel)

Rightward, Ho!

Mavericky!

Mr. McCain now sharply criticizes the bailout bill he voted for, pivoted from his earlier position that the Guantánamo Bay detention facility should be closed, offered only a muted response to the Supreme Court’s decision undoing campaign finance laws and backed down from statements that gays in the military would be O.K. by him if the military brass were on board.

No surprise here. As we have been noting, the one thing you can count on John McCain doing is fleeing to his right at the drop of a challenge, but if you'd like some more details on his most recent flip-floppery, the NYT has finally gotten around to writing them up.

Angry Johnny Follow-up

Continuing from the end of that earlier post on DADT, we now have some more details on He Who Is Nervous About His Primary And So Is Fleeing To His Right (Episode DCLXXVIII): Wonkette has your snark, and Wonk Room has your details, with a bonus from that master of the videotaped historical record, Jed Lewison.*

I wonder if Steve Benen is still maintaining his McCain flip-flop list?

Maverick!

Let's all go dance on his lawn.

__________

* [Added] With an assist from AMERICAblog, it seems. Links and bigger video on Great Orange Satan TV.

Shorter "Honest" John McCain

I sneer at your "hard-hitting" questions, David Gregory. You'll never get ME to admit what a huge mistake I made picking Sarah Palin to be my running mate.

He actually says at one point, "I don’t think she quit."

Maverick! Let's have him on TV more often!

(h/t: Attaturk)

Part of the Problem

Rallying the troops at the College Republican Convention:

It's hard trying to do the Lord's work in the city of Satan.

Says the guy who's more or less lived in that city (Washington, D.C.), at taxpayer expense, since 1973, John McCain.

Also at the big meeting, their big media consultant told them the key to the future was using Twitter. (Where have we heard that before?) Wonder how many of them said, "Good Lord."

(h/t: Oliver Willis)

[Added] No snark about this part: the accompanying picture of John McCain on page 1 (larger version here) does not look at all good. I can't think of the last time I've seen him when he wouldn't have been slathered in TV make-up, so I hope that discoloration is not something new.

Up Is Down Watch:The Iseman Foldeth = "Complete Vindication"

Opening of a memo to staff from Dean Baquet, the Washington bureau chief of The New York Times, as obtained by Politico:

Vicki Iseman has dropped her lawsuit [warning: giant PDF --bjk] against The Times, just weeks after it was filed. We paid no money. We did not apologize. We did not retract one word of the story, which was a compelling chapter in the tale of Senator John McCain and his political rise.

Opening of a statement by executive editor Bill Keller, published in today's Times:

The commentary by Mssrs. Smolla and Allen [two of Iseman's lawyers --bjk] gives readers a general sense of the case they would have attempted to make if their lawsuit had proceeded. But the first point to make is, the case did not proceed. It was settled without money changing hands, and without The Times backing away from the story. In the joint statement we are releasing today and in a "Note to Readers," we reiterate what we have said since the story was published: that article did not allege an affair or unethical behavior on Ms. Iseman's part. We stand by our coverage, and we are proud of it.

So much for the reality-based community. Now, let's hear from the side that believes, among other things, that maintaining unanimous opposition while losing a vote in Congress means victory. Greg Sargent at The Plum Line reports:

... I just got off the phone with Iseman’s lawyer, and he claims that she won this battle — and that she didn’t drop the suit at all. He’s claiming “complete vindication.”

[...]

[Said Allen:] “We’re pleased that the lawsuit was able to be resolved successfully, with the complete vindication that Ms. Iseman sought in filing the lawsuit.”

Actually, looking all the way back to the last days of 2008, what Iseman sought was $27 million for "defamation" that caused "serious damage to her professional reputation," contending that "the paper acted with 'actual malice' -- a 'reckless disregard' for the truth."

All we need now is someone like Mark Halperin to tell us how this is actually great news for John McCain.

[Added] Props to Roger Ailes (the trustworthy one) for succinctness.

Hitchens on Khalidi

More specifically, on John McCain's attempt to use Rashid Khalidi as a way to smear Obama. Love Hitch or not, this is awesome.

In my dreams, every wingnut blogger on the Web would be required to type out this column in full ten times before being allowed to post again.

(h/t: BeachFrontView, in the Bloggingheads.tv forums)

And speaking of things no one ever could have imagined ...

... the GOP is running ads featuring Rev. Wright nationwide.

But John McCain is still honorable. These aren't his ads. Oh, no.

Signs of Looming Unity?

The NYT's editorial page gives a well-deserved shout-out to Fox News's Shepard Smith.

More on the moment in question, plus video, on HuffPo.

You might also add Rick Sanchez to the list. I was too busy chortling over Goldfarb's moment of fail to say so at the time, but I'll say it now: good on you, too, Rick.

That the NYT's opinion pages (and I) can find something good to say about at least some Fox News people suggests at least a starting point: a rejection of the depths to which the McCain campaign has been willing to sink.

Know hope.

Epic Fail: The Latest From Michael Goldfarb

Here's John McCain's Deputy Communications Director and official campaign blogger, aging frat boy Michael Goldfarb, being called out on the latest smear the Straight Talk Express^TM is trying to peddle:

(alt. video link)

More from the Goldfarb Files of Fail here, here, here, here, and here.

(h/t: Twin, via email)

---

[Added] And.

McCain Panic Watch

The erstwhile candidate of honor is now serving up robocalls smearing Obama.

In Arizona.

cf.