In this post at pandagon Obama Haterade discussing the hate campaign against Senator Obama by the Right some trolls to lend their thoughts. Maybe the modrn Conservative mind really doesn’t get it. They equate disagreeing with McCain and goodness forbid, calling him things like McSame as the same thing as the hate e-mail like this. There is nothing comparable in the hateful smear department going on against John McCain on the popular Democratic blogs or magazine sites like The Nation or Alternet. Pointing out McCain multitude of hypocrisies, panderings and lies is not hateful, its politics. More often then not liberals tend toward satire or snark mixed with some genuine and usually justfied outrage.
As far as i know there is no liberal version of nuts like Jerome Corsi, Jerome Corsi: Obama Camp Fighting Swiftboat Attack
Marc Ambinder has more on how Barack Obama’s campaign is quietly pushing back:
Barack Obama’s campaign hasn’t said much publicly about Jerome Corsi’s 2008 polemic against Barack Obama, but don’t think for a minute that his aides aren’t paying attention, and don’t confuse the relative silence for a lack of action. Chastened by Sen. John Kerry’s 2004 refusal to respond quickly enough to Corsi and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads, the campaign is determined to discredit Corsi, quickly.
“We are aggressively attacking the factual errors in this book, and making sure that everyone knows about the deeply offensive things Corsi has said that will give readers of any political affiliation pause and ample reason to question the lies he’s written,” Tommy Vietor, an Obama spokesperson, said in a statement. …
The campaign is quietly shopping around research to anyone who wants it and is encouraging allies to look into Corsi’s background.
So far, it seems to be working. Last night, Larry King and his guests all assailed Corsi for his poor sourcing and unprofessional past. Even the Republican strategist on the air said, “I would strongly encourage Republicans not to use [the book]. I think going after someone’s religion is the lowest form of politics.” Joe Klein pummeled the book (and its backer Mary Matalin)
Corsi and the people that swallow the crazy swill he writes are haters. Thy could careless about actual issues and civil debate. Its all about eliminationism. if you’re not a paid up member of Wingnuttia then any kind of character assassination is allowed. The Corsis are all about the cult of fringe right conservatism, the very antithesis of an enlightened modern democracy.
Michelle Malkin is up to her usually low standards of accuracy in reporting. The Somali man found with sodium cyanide in his room was in typical knee jerk fashion declared to be a Muslim by Malkin and the right-wing blog echo. Tuns out he was probably a Christian, When wingnuts go looking for terrorists. Does that mean then that all Christians are bad because of this guy. Of course not. A ridiculous idea and one that goes both ways. If he had been a Jew or Hindu that would not in anyway constitute proof that those religions and every member of them is a bad person. This on going effort to use antedoctal evidence to paint millions of people as evil based on the actions of a few isn’t a case of the Right knowing better and putting on an act. This is the way they think. The sky is constantly falling and the liberals, Muslims, women, African-Americans, ad nauseum are out to get you.
Who died and made John Mccain president, McCain’s Focus on Georgia Raises Question of Propriety
Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili says he talks to McCain, a personal friend, several times a day. McCain’s top foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, was until recently a paid lobbyist for Georgia’s government.
[ ]…”We talk about how there’s only one president at a time, so the idea that you would send your own emissaries and really interfere with the process is remarkable,” said Lawrence Korb, a Reagan Defense Department official who now acts as an informal adviser to the Obama campaign. “It’s very risky and can send mixed messages to foreign governments. . . . They accused Obama of being presumptuous, but he didn’t do anything close to this.”
[ ]…”You know, I think he spends less time on his presidential campaign these days and lots of time on Georgia,” Saakashvili said. “And I really appreciate that, because Senator McCain has been fighting for freedom of Georgia for many, many years.”
He added a moment later: “And the same for Senator Obama.”
Taylor Marsh sums it up,
This is exactly what’s wrong with U.S. foreign policy wrapped up in one single sentence. Our interests are absolutely not the same as the Georgians. By walking into Saakashvili’s trap, McCain has not only been played, but he’s also arrogantly implied that the America’s interests are tied to Georgia. Playing president without the people’s vote is hubris at its most alarming level.
Joe Biden has it exactly correct. Russia has a lot to lose here, but instead, John McCain is putting the emphasis on America’s solidarity with Georgia, ignoring the implications of such a hinted promise that extends beyond humanitarian aid, with some rearmament already hinted. The focus, again, must be on Russia and the repercussions financially….as well as the legitimate questions about Russia’s actions….
America cannot continue being the world’s policeman without collapsing in financial ruin. McCain’s no genius on economics, but his basic ignorance of our current challenges is frightening.
We all sympathize with Georgia even if they are partially to blame for the current state of affairs, Putin reminds me of a Russian Bush. Andrew Sullivan puts McCain’s bluster in historical context,
McCain is very, very comfortable in this situation. It speaks his language. A thoroughly twentieth-century figure, he lives and breathes war and conflict as a state of being. For him, it is always 1938 somewhere; America’s duty is to control, occupy or intervene wherever any rival seeks influence and any group does not share our alleged values.
The shorter version. McCain and that part of the Right cheering his completely inappropriate and possibly dangerous meddling is the inability to differentiate between spreading democracy and death and destruction.