Arizona Republican Party Declares War On Latinos

Doug Kahn, who lives in Phoenix, has been warning me lately about some really extreme legislation coming out of his adopted state. There's some crazy new gun law that makes it possible to carry concealed weapons without permits; at least you can't conceal a tank or a nuke! And this week the whole country was shocked at the draconian new anti-immigrants law Arizona passed-- well, not the whole country. McCain is using it to prove to teabaggers that he's one of them at heart and hates Latinos as much as they do.

Cardinal Roger Mahony, on the other hand, isn't hesitating to compare Republicans like McCain to Nazis, pretty strong message for the head of the nation's largest Roman Catholic archdiocese.

The measure wrongly assumes that Arizonans "will now shift their total attention to guessing which Latino-looking or foreign-looking person may or may not have proper documents," Cardinal Roger Mahony said in his blog Sunday-- a day before Arizona's Legislature sent the immigration enforcement measure to the Republican governor.

Gov. Jan Brewer has not indicated whether she will sign the bill, which creates a new state misdemeanor of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document. It would also require officers to determine people's immigration status if there's reason to suspect they're in the country illegally... Mahony, whose archdiocese has a huge Hispanic immigrant population, said the Arizona Legislature was passing "the country's most retrogressive, mean-spirited, and useless anti-immigrant law."

Similar laws that were previously passed in other states have been repealed or struck down in the courts, he said.

"The tragedy of the law is its totally flawed reasoning: that immigrants come to our country to rob, plunder, and consume public resources," Mahony said.

"I can't imagine Arizonans now reverting to German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques whereby people are required to turn one another in to the authorities on any suspicion of documentation," the cardinal said. "Are children supposed to call 911 because one parent does not have proper papers? Are family members and neighbors now supposed to spy on one another, create total distrust across neighborhoods and communities, and report people because of suspicions based upon appearance?"

"The country's most retrogressive, mean-spirited, and useless anti-immigrant law?" Exactly what McCain was looking for. In fact, virtually the entire Arizona Republican Party just found something to run on. This law is a Tom Tancredo/Heath Shuler wet dream. Congressman Raúl Grijalva, easily Arizona's most beloved and respected member of Congress-- at least in terms of ordinary Arizona families-- doesn't agree, not even a little. He asked Gov. Brewer to veto the clearly unconstitutional law which forces police to stop and question "anyone" (though probably not Irishmen or Swedes suspected of being an illegal immigrant, including a demand for papers verifying U.S. citizenship).

“This bill will be rejected by the courts, and in the meantime, Arizonans will be subjected to unnecessary indignity at the hands of a racist law,” Grijalva said. “I cannot stress enough the scale of the damage Arizona’s prestige and credibility will suffer if this bill is finalized.”
 
Grijalva called on national organizations of all kinds to reject Arizona as a convention destination unless the bill is vetoed. A Super Bowl ban by the National Football League Players Association after the state refused to recognize Martin Luther King Jr. day was effective in changing the policy in 1993.
 
“If the state follows through with this, the cost will be high,” Grijalva said. “This bill is not a serious approach to the immigration issue. This is grandstanding at taxpayer expense. Turning every police officer in the state into a roving immigration official, armed with a racial profiling mandate, is un-American on its face and cannot withstand even casual legal scrutiny.”

"Grandstanding at taxpayer expense?" Seems like no one can get John McCain off their minds these days. Raúl will be speaking on the Keith Olbermann show on MSNBC at 5:00pm, Arizona time (8:00pm eastern). SB 1070 is a racist law that will negatively affect Arizona's economy. It allows for racial profiling and it is simply un-American. We should all stand with Raúl as he urges Governor Brewer to Veto SB 1070.

Are Republicans Slitting Their Own Throats On Immigration Reform... Again?

The Republican coalition, frayed and even falling apart as it is, has two disparate wings working at cross purposes when it comes to immigration reform. The mainstream conservative "grown-ups," who take their walking orders for Big Business and know full well on which side their bread is buttered have only one real goal: guaranteeing an uninterrupted source of cheap labor. But the grassroots-- the boots on the ground and the voters, the dittoheads, the Lou Dobbs' followers, secessionists, and participants in stunts like the tea parties-- aren't for cheap labor. They're for keeping colored people out of their faces.

I was born in Brooklyn but after I graduated from college I went to Europe "for the summer." The summer lasted nearly 7 years, 4 of them in Amsterdam and the rest mostly traveling around Asia. Except for when I rented a flat in Amsterdam (and a hut in Goa), I lived in my VW van. I was close to the ground and very open to meeting lots of people. I learned very quickly that Americans-- far more than Brits, Canadians, Germans, Frenchmen, Italians or anyone else-- are extremely paranoid when people are talking in a language other than their own. No one ever seems to mind anywhere else in the world but Americans-- here at home and on the road-- always seem to think that when two people are speaking another language they're talking about them. It could be anything; they could be making fun of their clothes or weight or plotting a terrorist attack. Americans are just paranoid!

Here in the States, Americans get pissed off when they hear people speaking Spanish. I mean they get really angry. I've never seen anything like that anywhere else in the world.

That was a tangent. Let me get back to Republicans being at each other's throats over immigration reform-- the racists and bigots vs the bloodsucking exploiters of humanity still furious that do-gooders went and abolished slavery. McCain has always been more comfortable kissing up to the rich and powerful; it's the story of his entire disgraceful career in politics. His immigration "reform" initiative was meant to accomplish two things-- keep the flow of cheap labor available for corporate farms and factories and warehouses while endearing him-- and his party-- to the country's burgeoning Latino and Asian populations. Instead he drove a shiv into the heart of the GOP, destroyed his own shot at the presidency and helped guarantee large Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.

Republican Hispanic outreach has failed dramatically, first in California and more recently in Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Arizona, and Nevada. It's even going down the tubes in Florida where non-Cuban Hispanics are overwhelmingly Democratic, don't like the Cuban rightists at all, and are being joined in negative feelings about the GOP by younger, less ideological, Cubans to boot. Instead of offering Latinos a hand in friendship, the GOP runs raving, deranged xenophobes like Rosanna Pulido, founder of the Illinois Minutemen and a coordinator for the hate group FAIR, for Congress-- in a heavily immigrant district of Chicago. Watch her attacking McCain on CNN last year:



It doesn't look like the extremists and haters like Pulido will have McCain to kick around any longer. Last week he drew a line in the sand-- cheap foreign labor, of course-- and said he won't support any immigration reform that doesn't include that. Labor unions, of course, want to put a stop to cheap foreign labor and it looks like their plan is going to be backed by the Democrats. That puts McCain and the GOP in the awkward position of opposing immigration reform because they want more foreign workers flooding into the labor market.

“The current plan being developed by the administration and organized labor calls for immigration reform that does not adequately address either securing the border or a legal temporary worker program and is a plan I cannot support,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the lead Republican sponsor of the immigration bill that died in the Senate after a conservative uprising against it in 2007... The business community, including the Chamber of Commerce, has long supported the guest worker program.

McCain's Erratic Stands On The Economy Jeopardizing A Recovery

I'm not voting for either former Vietnam captive

OK, OK, everyone knows that McCain doesn't know anything about economics-- he's admitted it over and over-- and most people have figured out that he also isn't interested and just wants to get into the White House so he can start some wars and make up for whatever psychological problem is still haunting him from his failures in Vietnam. And Sarah Palin isn't exactly an economist either. But McCain doesn't need failed corporate plutocrats like Carly Fiorina and sleazy, crooked lobbyists like Phil Gramm to tell him what he has to say about the economy. All he has to do-- which is what he has been doing lately-- is go back to his old voting record and do the old McCain flip-flop.

Every single position he has supported-- from massive and irresponsible deregulation to more tax cuts for the wealthy-- has turned out to be wrong, dead wrong. So now all he has to do is talk about how he opposes everything he's ever stood for. And this morning he tried a new one. Many of McCain's supporters have a great deal of money in their checking accounts that federal insurance doesn't insure. The FDIC only insures bank deposits up to $100,000. What about all McCain's millionaire supporters? Well, following Senator Obama, McCain quickly came out for upping the federal insurance on deposits from $100,000 to $250,000. This is especially interesting since McCain has always opposed this-- loudly. In fact, in 1991 McCain introduced an amendment that limited insurance on Individual Retirement Accounts.

That same year, just two years McCain was caught in a massive bribery scandal, the Keating Five, which he was able to wriggle out of, he blamed the failure of Savings & Loan banks-- which he was an active participant in defrauding and robbing-- on "the perversity of Federal Deposit Insurance." Here's what he said then-- very different from what he's saying today: "The perversity of Federal deposit insurance is exemplified by the taxpayer bailout of the savings and loan industry. Mr. President, I think it is generally acknowledged that the failure of the savings and loan industry, to a
large degree, can be directly attributed to the unwarranted expansion of deposit insurance by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. Basic coverage was increased from $40,000 to $100,000. No longer was deposit insurance for the small depositor. It became the safety blanket for large, sophisticated depositors and freewheeling bankers."

More recently (last February), the Boston Globe reminded voters of McCain's key role in the Keating Five scandal that was a test run for today's Wall Street meltdown, trying crooked political hacks to avaricious bank executives.

"The story of how the 'Keating Five' senators allegedly pressured regulators to lay off a failing Arizona S&L became a major scandal, and marked a turning point in McCain's life-- the near-death of his political career… The events of 1987, when McCain met with regulators, and 1991, when the Senate Ethics Committee concluded that he used 'poor judgment' in the matter, are only dimly remembered by many. … McCain met Keating in 1982, during McCain's successful run for
Congress, and soon began accepting offers from Keating to fly McCain's family on a corporate plane to Keating's house in the Bahamas. McCain did not pay for most of the trips until years later, when the matter became public. Keating, meanwhile, complained regularly to McCain that a proposed regulation would hurt his business. … He cosponsored a resolution sought by Keating, but it failed to postpone the regulation."

McCain's spectacular flip flops are normally on issues like the FDIC which he was against years ago and now supports, But today he was flip flopping in a matter of minutes from one position to another. While the Republican Party was releasing an ad blaming Obama for supporting the unpopular bill to infuse liquidity into the credit system-- which Republicans, not understanding it, killed yesterday-- McCain was urging Americans to support the exact same bill!

While McCain and his surrogates have been running around like a bunch of chickens without heads sending mixed messages, sowing discord, politicizing the issues and telling every audience what they think it wants to here-- even though they contradict each other, Obama has been calm, clear and consistent. This crisis has shown, once again-- as if people still needed more proof, that McCain is erratic, ineffective and untrustworthy. Listen to Obama this morning and compared that to McCain's crazy-quilt of hysterical, always changing pronouncements:

Even If McCain Is Never President... He'll Still Be King-- King Of The Flip Flop

McCain seems more and more frail and confused by the day. Reporters who have gotten close to him say he's like the walking dead. Voting for McCain is like voting for Sarah Palin to be president (of the United States... of America). That may be enough for millions of thoughtful voters-- regardless of party-- to decide to vote for Obama. But McCain's floundering and flailing on the transcendent issues of the day, even without his naked, arrogant display of bad judgment and contempt for America with the Palin pick, should be as big a disqualifier. Does anyone really know what we're getting if we pick McCain-- other than a pig, lipstick or not, in a poke? Where does he stand on deregulation? Where does he stand on immigration reform? Where does he stand on campaign finance reform? Where does he stand on the undue, unethical influence of lobbyists on government? Where does he stand on anything? McCain stands for one thing and one thing only-- and on this he has always been consistent: the accrual of personal political power. John McCain is not someone Americans can trust-- on anything.

What better occasion could there be to celebrate the straight talking of Young Johnny McCranky than Professor Irwin Corey's birthday (give or take)?

Yesterday was Professor Irwin Corey's 94th birthday. Here, in a regrettably poor-quality clip, is the world's foremost authority appearing with the Smothers Brothers in 1966. Just don't forget: Wherever you go, there you are.

by Ken

Poor Keith Olbermann couldn't get over it last night. It has finally come to this: Confronted with yet another contradiction between something Senator McCranky has just said andf what are supposed to be official McCranky positions, the McCranky campaign announced more or less officially -- it's hard to know what constitutes officialness in this wackjob of a campaign -- that the candidate doesn't speak for the campaign.

The candidate doesn't speak for the campaign.

Okay, it might seem more accurate to say that the campaign doesn't speak for the candidate, but in this case the distinction seems statistically insignificant. There's a whole lot of yammering coming out of McCranky Enterprises (meaning the entire entity comprising the candidate and the campaign), but it doesn't really seem to speak for anyone or anything. It's just talk.

It doesn't tell us anything about either (a) what Senator McCranky believes or (b) what he might do as president, but surely it isn't meant to. It's just meant to make listeners feel good, or feel mad, or feel something that would make them in some way feel like voting for the Crankyman. I would submit that at this late date in the senator's public career, about the only thing we know for sure about his beliefs is that he wants to be president. Oh yes, he wants very badly to be president.

By now we have learned that this is not, in general, a good or healthy thing, this business of wanting to be president. It may be the single most discouraging feature of our political system: that the sort of person who wants to be president badly enough to be willing to do what you have to do to have a realistic shot at becoming president is almost by definition someone no sensible person would want to be president.

Just why Young Johnny wants so badly to be president is an interesting question, and maybe we'll poke at it some other time, but for now it's not, except to note that it doesn't seem to have anything to do with all that stuff that's been coming out of his mouth -- or, for that matter, out of the campaign's mouth. That's just stuff he/they say.

Clearly it's becoming a growing annoyance to Senator McCranky when B-list (or lower!) reporters (you'll notice it's hardly ever the better-mannered high-profile reporters) actually press him on the flagrant contradiction between a position he's just enunciated and the one(s) he's staked out in the past. This makes him really, you know, cranky, and by now he's tried about every trick in the book -- heck, he's writing the book -- to avoid explaining the contradiction.

Starting with denying that there is any contradiction. Somehow Rachel Maddow always seems to be involved in Countdown discussions of the latest McCranky flipflops, and I love that look of bemused incredulity that comes over her face as she suggests the senator doesn't realize that the world has changed, and all that old stuff he said is still there on videotape, and computer users of even average skills can pull it up in a matter of minutes if not seconds.

Now that those reporters -- again, the B-list ones -- are getting more uppity about challenging the Crankyman about Stuff He Says, his responses are becoming almost comical. More and more frequently, for example, he employs the cunning strategy of not having a fucking clue what the reporter is talking about. He has no memory of supporting/opposing that proposition or voting for/against that bill. This could be just a memory problem, of course, but it could also be an inattention problem. Maybe that's how much attention he paid when he took his previous position on the proposition or bill in question.

Mind you, when he just lies about his record, I don't find it so funny, like when he was (finally!) challenged on his appalling record on veterans' issues and he went straight into one of his Liar Boy McCranky Hissy Fits of Indignation, called the questioner a liar, and shrieked how proud he is of his record on veterans' issues. That's not funny because in fact his record sucks. For a man whose one credible belief seems to be that we can never send enough American military people off to points abroad to kill and be killed, his record of lack of support for veterans should have him hooted off the platform every time he shows his smarmy mug in front of self-styled true patriots. But then, maybe he really doesn't know! All that tedious law-making and voting stuff really seems to exceed his interest level.

But it's kind of funny when he's exhausted his diversionary tactics on a particular subject and just declares, as he did the other day over the issue of gay adoptions, that that's not why he's running for president. Huh??? In fairness, it was at least a better answer than his by-then-rote-repeated belief in "two-parent families." Um, uh, Senator McCranky, you do realize that these same-sex couples adopting children are, er, couples? And that every couple on God's green earth consists of two of whatever has been coupled?

(Parenthetical question: Is it absolutely essential that every serious presidential contender be able to count all the way up to two? Isn't there a secretary of arithmetic to deal with that higher math stuff like trigonometry and such?)

I guess what I'm trying to say here is, it's an exercise in futility giving serious attention to what we might call, with a wry smile, Senator McCranky's "positions." That's not what his presidential campaign is about. It's about . . . well, don't ask me. It's not as if it was my idea that he run for president.

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain," the Wizard of Oz exhorted when the jig was pretty well up. In the same spirit, Senator McCranky might advise us to pay no attention to the stuff coming out of his gaping piehole. Actually, isn't that what his campaign just told us?


ABOUT PROFESSOR IRWIN COREY

And here's the good professor explaining it all in his inimitable fashion this year (at age 93!) at the Cutting Room in New York City.

From Wikipedia:

Dressed in seedy formal wear and sneakers, with his bushy hair sprouting in all directions, Corey would amble on stage in a preoccupied manner, then begin his monologue with "However..." He created a new style of doublespeak comedy; instead of making up nonsense words like "krelman" and "trilloweg," like other comics, the professor would season his speech with many long and florid, but authentic, words. The professor would then launch into nonsensical observations about anything under the sun, but seldom actually making sense. Changing topics suddenly, he would wander around the stage, pontificating all the while. His very quick wit allowed him to hold his own against the most stubborn straight man, heckler or interviewer.

#

Club For Growth Clubs McCain And Frightened Liddy Dole Decides To Skip GOP Hate Fest This Year

Wouldn't be caught dead at the GOP Convention this year

Last week we listed a number of Republican officials hoping to run away from their own rubber stamp records by avoiding the Republican Hate Fest in the Twin Cities. It's just too risky for reflexive rubber stamps like Gordon Smith, Ted Stevens and Susan Collins to be caught on film with Bush or McCain or even old Twin Cities hand Larry Craig. Today another endangered Republican, North Carolina wingnut Liddy Dole, announced she already had a "busy week scheduled" and she won't be able to make it.

Dole, widely considered a carpetbagger with no current connection to the state she represents, claims she just can't pull herself away from North Carolina to attend the nomination ceremonies for the man she hopes to rubber stamp for the next 6 years.

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole will be a no-show at her party's big bash in St. Paul, Minn.
Dole spokeswoman Katie Hallaway confirmed Monday that Dole won't be at the Republican National Convention in September.

"She's got a busy week scheduled in North Carolina," Hallaway said. "When there are breaks in the Senate schedule, she spends as much time as possible in North Carolina."

Hallaway said nothing should be inferred about Dole's missing the convention-- either about her support for Sen. John McCain or about the security of her re-election in November.

Kay Hagan, the Republican-lite, me-too opportunist that Chuck Schumer saddled North Carolina Democrats with, seems so bent on proving that she is exactly-like-Dole-but-a-tad-better, that she is also toying with the idea of not going to the Democratic Convention. I hope she doesn't go and that the enthusiastic Obama voters in North Carolina remember in November and ignore her.

Meanwhile, Club for Growth isn't waiting for the Republican Convention to start attacking McCain. We weren't the only ones appalled by McCain's performance/trainwreck on Stephanopoulos' show Sunday.

"We listened with concern yesterday to your interview with George Stephanopoulos on Social Security," the club's president Pat Toomey writes in a letter to McCain. "When asked if you would be open to raising the payroll tax, you refused to rule out a tax increase, saying 'There is nothing that’s off the table.' This statement was particularly shocking because you have been adamant in your opposition to raising taxes under any circumstances."

Then, the club pulls out one of McCain's own quotes from February of this year: “No new taxes... In fact, I could see an argument, if our economy continues to deteriorate, for lower interest rates, lower tax rates, and certainly decreasing corporate tax rates, which are the second highest in the world, giving people the ability to write off depreciation in a year, elimination of the AMT.”

"We strongly applaud the above statement and believe further tax cuts would play an important role in stimulating the country’s economy," Toomey continues. "But your comments yesterday send American taxpayers and businesses a mixed message about where you stand on this issue."

The close: "We hope you will clarify where you stand on this important issue and reaffirm your commitment to eschew all tax increases."

Toomey-- and the rest of the country-- needs to come to grips with the fact that McCain has no policies and that his "agenda" is just getting elected. He will say whatever he has to say to whatever audience he's speaking to, even if it's the exact opposite of what he said to another audience 5 minutes ago. And because he has pre-TV instincts, he never seems to remember that whatever he says is on tape. That's why people are starting to go light on the flip-flopper appellation and get right to the "bodacious liar" description.

McCain Has Abandoned Every Other Principle-- Is He Now Flip Flopping On Iraq Too?

McCain always said he detests Mitt Romney because he sensed-- correctly-- that Romney has no inner core and stands for nothing, no principles whatsoever, just opportunism and blind ambition. To most people who have watched him closely over the years, this sounds exactly like a self description of McCain himself. And now McCain is ready to move on from his denunciations of Romney and select him, albeit at Bush's and Cheney's insistence, as his running mate. But a little flippin' and floppin' from McCain, given his record, is hardly newsworthy anymore-- at least when it comes to selecting someone to share his doomed ticket. However, flip flopping on Iraq? That might be harder, even for a practiced liar like McCain, to explain away.

New Mexico Congresswoman and close McCain ally and surrogate, Heather Wilson, sensing the groundswell of enthusiasm for Obama's proposals to end the war in Iraq sent out a message today paving the way for McCain to back away from his one and only issue-- endless war.

The McCain campaign has come up with an intriguing new way to sell his opposition to a timetable for withdrawal: McCain just might withdraw from Iraq sooner than Obama's 16 month deadline!

"He'd like troops to come home earlier than 16 months if the conditions allow it," said Congresswoman Heather Wilson of New Mexico, on a conference call with reporters just now. "Senator Obama has said it's a 16-month timeline no matter what."

How confused and disoriented is the McCain campaign? They are reeling from Obama's successful trip to Afghanistan and Iraq. And Spencer Ackerman has an analysis up that is positively mindboggling in the scope of McCain's nonchalant dishonesty. McCain is trying to claim, in an interview on CBS News, that the "Anbar Awakening" is the product of his surge. The assertion is as false and deceptive as all of his other self aggrandizing claims about Iraq. And like most of these claims, it is the product of a fuzzy mind rapidly losing a grip on reality. This video is worth watching to see McCain desperately weaving and bobbing with Truth. Truth wins.

McCain's Double Talk Express Pulls Into La Raza Conference-- And He Lies His Ass Off

If conservatives don't trust him, why should anyone?

It wouldn't matter if your first language was English or Spanish, figuring out where McCain stands on immigration reform is all Greek to anyone trying to follow his strained twisting, turning and tap dancing at the National Council of La Raza's annual conference in San Diego today. "I do ask for your trust that when I say, I remain committed to fair, practical and comprehensive immigration reform, I mean it." That would be news to the Republican base he's been reassuring that he's learned his lesson and that he no longer backs the legislation he claimed to have helped Ted Kennedy write. He then added "At a moment of great difficulty in my campaign, when my critics said it would be political suicide for me to do so, I helped author with Senator (Edward) Kennedy comprehensive immigration reform, and fought for its passage." The moment of "great difficulty" wasn't when he was supposedly helping Kennedy to write the act. It came after it was introduced and the Know Nothings, racists and xenophobes rose up and forced McCain to back down and abandon the bill. It was a typical McCain act of cowardice, something that has marked every step of his shameful and dishonest career, a career whose hallmark is double talk. The man will say whatever it takes to get elected, regardless of hat he said the day before or what he plans to say the next day.

While he was working both sides of the fence at the La Raza conference in San Diego, Carly the economic advisor was spinning another tall tale, and blowing more smoke, completely at odds with McCain's long public record:

In an interview, Carly Fiorina, a top adviser, explains that any tax increases on "middle- and working-class" Americans are off limits. She says if a bipartisan coalition is "creative enough" to fashion tax increases on wealthier Americans, that may prove palatable."

At the La Raza conference McCain must have forgotten to mention his promise-- yesterday-- to right-wing activists that he and Lindsey Graham would pass a bill to make undocumented status a criminal misdemeanor. Nor did he mention that during one of the Republican presidential debates (January 30th on CNN) when he was asked if he would vote for the immigration reform bill he was bragging about at La Raza today and asking for people to trust him on, his reply was uncharacteristically straightforward: No, I would not. Another in a long string of John McCain profiles in courage.

Today my pal Todd Beeton at MyDD shows McCain answering a question from a young woman asking if he would support the DREAM Act, which would provide high-achieving high school students who are long-term illegal immigrants, and who wish to serve in the armed forces or attend college, an opportunity to become legal residents-- a great bill that was filibustered to death by Republicans in the Senate October 24, 2007. McCain gave a one-word answer: "Yes." He gave right-wing bloggers a more in depth answer: "No." McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act but he skipped out on the vote so as not to go on the record for or against. But the right-wing bloggers cornered him and demanded to know his position.

...As for the Dream Act, McCain told us that he would have voted against cloture (i.e., in favor of preventing a vote) because he "got the message" this summer that Americans want the border secured before we "go on to the rest." McCain would deem parts of the border secure when the governor of the relevant state so certifies.

Since McCain is clearly on record as to how he would have voted on the Dream Act cloture motion, and since his vote was not needed to prevent cloture, there seems to be no basis for criticizing his departure for Iowa prior to the vote.'

I kind of wonder what excuses the right-wing bloggers will have for McCain after his performance today.

HAS McCAIN SETTLED ON HIS GAY STRATEGY YET?

Will gay-bashing rescue McCain's moribund campaign? Right-wing strategist and propaganda agent Fred Barnes thinks so. Watch this clip from the Republican Party TV show, Fox News Sunday:



Basically, Obama is taking the position that government should stay out of people's personal lives as long as they aren't harming anyone and McCain is drifting towards a more fascist model advocated by extremists and authoritarians in his party that advocates controlling every aspect of everyone's lives. When giant, powerful corporations want to use the disproportionate power they wield against workers and consumers, McCain and the Republicans claim the government shouldn't interfere. As representatives of working Americans and consumers, the Democrats feel it's important to get the balance right and protect society at large from the deprecation of predatory capitalism. Republicans don't see that as a legitimate function of government. Instead they see government trying to regulate people's private lives as legitimate. Perhaps that's why Republican strategists were dismayed yesterday when Rasmussen reported that libertarian voters, who have tended to vote for Republican presidential candidates, are rejecting McCain in favor of Obama, 53-38%.

McCain is very uncomfortable talking about gay issues and he comes across as confused, fearful and insincere. He's the ultimate flip-flopper. Last week the San Jose Mercury published a short, pointed editorial that clearly shows why, no matter where you personally stand on gay issues, Obama would make a better president than McCain.

John McCain's support for the initiative to ban gay marriage in California - Proposition 8 - was predictable, given his conservative base of support. But Barack Obama's opposition, announced this week, was not a given. Nor is it a flip-flop on principle, as his opposition claims.

Obama and McCain both have said they believe marriage should be between a man and woman. They part company on the impulse to legislate their personal belief in a way that removes rights now granted to Californians in the state constitution.

Make no mistake. This is a civil rights issue. Under law, only marriage confers certain legal rights of inheritance, medical decision-making and child custody.

The distinction Obama makes between personal belief and what should or should not be law is in keeping with American political tradition. Many Republicans and Democrats over the years have personally opposed abortion, for example, but would not take away a woman's right to make such a personal decision.

Granted, this nuance of thought and judgment makes for an easy target for Swift Boat crews revving up their political engines.

It also makes for a better president.

McCain has tried very hard, at times, to come across as a moderate, an independent and a maverick. His image has gone from maverick to contortionist on a wide range of issues. He just doesn't stand for anything-- except war, war, and more war. Now he's desperately trying to shore up the extreme right of his party and is more than willing to follow the advice of GOP consultants and media whores like Barnes to use gay families as a wedge issue to take peoples' minds off the Bush-McCain economy and the Bush-McCain disaster in Iraq. Where he was once the darling of the Log Cabin Republicans, ever since he got serious about running for president he has strived to be the darling of the extreme right religionists and the homophobic bigots. How do you feel about this record?

OPPOSED Ending Discrimination Against GLBT Americans in the Workplace. Senator McCain cast a deciding vote against the federal Employment Non Discrimination Act

OPPOSED Protecting GLBT Americans from Hate Crimes. Senator McCain voted three times against expanding the federal hate crimes law to include sexual orientation.

PROPONENT of Discriminatory Military Policy. Senator McCain supports Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and does not believe that gays should serve in the military.

OPPONENT of Equal Benefits for Same-Sex Couples. Senator McCain voted for the Defense of Marriage Act which prohibits same-sex couples from receiving federal rights and benefits in any state.

ACTIVELY SUPPORTED State Ban on Domestic Partnerships. Senator McCain campaigned for a ban on same-sex relationship recognition in his home state of Arizona – even appearing in a campaign television ad.

SUPPORTED the Confirmation of Anti-GLBT Equality Judges. Senator McCain voted to confirm President Bush’s judicial nominees who had taken anti-GLBT positions. He has pointed to Justice Samuel Alito as a role model for future Supreme Court appointments.

SUPPORTED a Discriminatory HIV/AIDS Policy. Senator McCain supported a Jesse Helms strategy to cut off funding for prevention efforts aimed at the gay community and voted to prohibit foreign nationals with HIV from immigrating to the United States.

PAWLENTY VETOES POPULAR FORECLOSURE AND STEM CELL RESEARCH BILLS... FALLING IN LINE WITH EXTREME RIGHT NATIONAL GOP

A couple of serial flip-floppers

While Bush and Rove are trying to shove Mitt Romney down McCain's throat, McCain is hoping that he'll at least be allowed to pick someone he can stand being in the same room with-- like Alaska Governor Sarah Palin or Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty.

Last week Pawlenty probably killed his chances to ever be elected to anything in Minnesota again but he may have had a different audience in mind. And it goes beyond just the fact that in 2006 his biggest campaign contributors were from the real estate industry. He vetoed the Foreclosure Deferment Bill-- something sure to endear him to fat cat GOP donors... and John McCain. He didn't seem to care that "the measure would’ve kept nearly 15,000 Minnesotans from losing their homes by giving them the time and authority to renegotiate their loan terms while they make a required good-faith effort to pay."

U of M professor Prentiss Cox, a former assistant attorney general who helped create the bill with Sen. Ellen Anderson (DFL-St. Paul), says Pawlenty’s reasons for killing the bill are short-sighted. “This is a false allegation in this context, in my opinion,” Cox says. “There is no substantial subprime or negative amortization mortgage credit being issued to homeowners right now. A law can’t have an impact on credit that doesn’t exist.”

The bill would’ve required homeowners with a subprime or negative amortization loan originated before August 1, 2007 to pay either 65 percent of the payments due when the loan defaulted, or the minimum monthly payment when the mortgage was first created, whichever is less, for a one-year foreclosure-deferment period.

The bill’s originators created the plan as a stop-gap to state foreclosures before the federal government implements a solution to the growing crisis. It would’ve been the only law in a series of subrpime-crisis legislation that would provide relief to homeowners in the foreclosure process. So far, Minnesota has been at the forefront of creating anti-predatory-lending laws that make certain types of mortgages illegal and require tougher standards for mortgage brokers.

“This notion that lenders will refuse to make financially sensible mortgage loans of a different character in the future based on Minnesota helping subprime borrowers now can accurately be described as a threat of class warfare,” Cox says. “It may make good, if divisive, politics-- inciting fear in the affluent against homeowners in need-- but it doesn’t make sense from a market perspective. And such threats, which are consistently made against any proposed laws designed to help consumers in the financial services area, have a track record of being wrong.”

Another way Pawlenty decided to burnish his v.p. credentials was to flip flop on (as in against) stem cell research. He went from encouraging the legislature to support research because it "offers tremendous opportunities to improve human health and well-being by addressing serious diseases such as diabetes and Alzheimer's" to vetoing the bill on Friday. Sounds like a perfect match for McCain.

McCain's Agenda Seems Incoherent and Inconsistent-- Just Like His Record

He has tried branding himself a maverick-- and he gets plenty of help from the corporate media lackeys-- but when you examine his record, you come away feeling he is more confused, incoherent and catering to conflicting special interests than he is anything approaching being either a moderate, independent or any kind of a maverick. I was reading some of Cliff Schecter's definitive McCain book, The Real McCain at lunch today and I came across his perpetually flip-flopping stands-- if you can call them stands-- on equal rights for gay people. Let me quote from Cliff's book, just after he explains McCain's confused and contradictory for and against gay marriage statement on Hardball in October of 2006. He seemed to be for gay marriage until one of his aides explained the power of broadcast TV and that he wasn't just talking to a small studio audience. Then he was against it.

The next month McCain was a guest on This Week With George Stephanopoulos. Stephanopoulos asked McCain whether he was against civil unions for gay couples. "No, I'm not," McCain replied. A few minutes later Stephanopoulos tried again. "So you're for civil unions?" "No," McCain said. Neither for nor against civil unions, McCain went on to clarify his position. He was against "discrimination" and he referred obliquely to certain partnerships qualifying for things like "hospital visits."

Fortunately, that year Arizona voters weren't fooled by McCain's flip-flopping and deception and they rejected the state constitutional amendment he campaigned for that would have denied even hospital visits to gay couples. But today it is neither gay marriage or hospital visits that is in the news. It's McCain's breathtaking changes and flips on climate change.

You may recall that it was just a week or two ago that McCain was using his position on climate change (he was strongly for policies that would combat the man-made elements of global warming) to point out to voters how different he is from George Bush. By yesterday one of his lobbyist staffers had persuaded him to change his opinion again-- ostensibly because the very generous (donation-wise) nuclear energy lobby is unhappy with the Lieberman-Warner bill McCain had vowed to support. Now he vows to avoid the Senate and not vote for it. Time Magazine:

Despite stressing the issue on the stump, McCain says he won’t be in the Senate to vote on a landmark bill imposing mandatory greenhouse gases limits.

“I have not been there for a number of votes. The same thing happened in the campaign of 2000. The people of Arizona understand I’m running for president.”

PARSLEY ESCALATES HIS WAR WITH McCAIN... BUT HASN'T EXACTLY ISSUED A FATWA AGAINST HIM YET

This was a very bad week for McCain; everything went wrong, especially all that lobbyist stuff that finally broke into the mainstream media. And between that and the scary cocktail of mind-altering drugs he takes daily, he flipped out when the majority of Republican senators abandoned him and voted for the GI Bill, helping Obama and Hillary pass it with a veto-proof majority. He struck out blindly, first at Senator Obama and then at the Christian conservatives who he had wooed so assiduously for the last year. He threw first John Hagee and then Rod Parsley under the bus... and rather unceremoniously. He rejected both of their endorsements and made some pretty rude comments about them and their (admittedly loopy) beliefs.

Hagee, who he called "crazy," withdrew his endorsement but on Friday Parsley said he would let his endorsement of McCain stand. He changed his mind today

The pastor of World Harvest Church, in the Canal Winchester area, issued a statement almost identical to one he had sent late Friday night, but with one key change: the addition of the sentence “Therefore I withdraw my endorsement.”

Spokesman Gene Pierce wouldn’t shed light on Parsley’s decision, saying only “this statement is a clarification on (Friday’s) statement.”

McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, rejected the Columbus pastor’s endorsement after holding on to it for nearly three months. Parsley has criticized Islam, calling it inherently violent and saying it is “the anti-Christ religion.”

McCAIN CAN'T WASH OFF THE TAINT OF HIS LOVE AFFAIR WITH THE SNAKEHANDLERS AS EASILY AS HE HOPED

This morning's NY Times applauds McCain for belatedly severing ties with two of the crazed bigots whose endorsements he had so assiduously pursed for so long in the battle for the Republican nomination. Of course, now that he has the nomination, he needs to persuade normal Americans that he's one of them and not a follower and devotee of fanatics, extremists and snakehandlers.

It took a long time for him to do it, but Senator John McCain has finally rejected the endorsements of two evangelical ministers-- one whose bizarre and hate-filled sermons deeply offended both Catholics and Jews and the other who has used his pulpit to attack Muslims.

Mr. McCain had it right in his unsuccessful primary campaign eight years ago when he denounced the Christian right’s Pat Robertson and the Rev. Jerry Falwell as “agents of intolerance” who exercised an “evil influence” over the Republican Party. It was particularly disturbing to see him cynically pander this year for the support of that same Christian right.

His belated decision to distance himself from two of the most extreme ministers was long overdue-- and we suspect driven more by political ambition than by the principles he espoused in the past.

Mr. McCain had sought the endorsement of the Rev. John Hagee, a televangelist, for more than a year and finally won it in February, only to have the Catholic League denounce Mr. Hagee for waging “an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church.” Mr. Hagee called it “the Great Whore,” an “apostate church,” and a “false cult system.” The pastor apologized and said his remarks had been misconstrued, a truce was declared and Mr. McCain still welcomed the endorsement.

Then a recorded sermon emerged in which Mr. Hagee suggested that Hitler and the Holocaust had been part of God’s plan to drive the Jews from Europe into Palestine-- a final straw that led Mr. McCain to reject the Hagee endorsement. He also rejected the backing of the Rev. Rod Parsley whose anti-Muslim sermons have argued that America was founded, in part, to see “this false religion destroyed.”

But not everyone agrees with the Times' assessment. Earlier today we talked with Georgia state Senator Regina Thomas, who is running for the Georgia congressional seat currently held by craven Blue Dog John Barrow. One of the unspoken problems Regina has in winning-- even though her mainstream values perfectly mirror those of the district while Barrow represents no one but his corporate contributors-- is that his huge warchest is allowing him to pay off cash-hungry ministers in the district to buy their support. Hagee's psychotic ministry of Armageddon has been extremely generous to Jews-- and whereas 99.9% of Jews are smart enough to see through his crazy apocalyptic game-- there are always a few kooks-- either too thick to understand or too greedy to care.

Hagee left it to Rabbi Aryeh Scheinberg of Congregation Rodfei Shalom, a modern Orthodox synagogue in San Antonio, to provide an explanation of his offending comments.

Standing with Hagee at the news conference, Scheinberg called it "ironic and absurd" that Hagee's words were twisted and labeled anti-Semitic when Hagee was lecturing on one Jewish perspective of the Holocaust.

"Pastor interpreted a Biblical verse in a way not very different from several legitimate Jewish authorities," Scheinberg said. "Viewing Hitler as acting completely outside of God's plan is to suggest that God was powerless to stop the Holocaust, a position quite unacceptable to any religious Jew or Christian."

Scheinberg called Hagee a courageous Christian and a man guided by "an unparalleled moral compass."

And how many pieces of silver has Hagee given Rabbi Scheinberg precisely?

Most mainstream Americans of all faiths reject the divisive, hate-mongering rhetoric from Parsley and Hagee, no matter if they're targets are Catholics, Jews or Muslims. Most people realize that these outbursts are motivated primarily by hucksterism and a drive for donations from the crazed faithful. But the real problem is for the Republican Party and John McCain. According to Kathryn Kolbert, president of People For the American Way, an organization originally founded by mainstream Jews, Protestants and Catholics to battle the excesses of the religionist right, McCain's pastor problem hasn't gone away; it's gotten worse.

“For years, the Republican Party has relied on right-wing king-makers like Hagee and Parsley to bring their troops to the polls and win elections. But now, the American public is starting to understand just how far out of the mainstream these preachers and their political agendas are.

“McCain himself once called the leaders of the radical religious right ‘agents of intolerance,’ but changed his tune when he decided to run for president and knew he’d need their support. Now he’s got a hard sell: convince the public he’s a moderate, despite his conservative views, and try to win over the so-called ‘patriot pastors’ without acknowledging them publicly. Going in through the front door with endorsements backfired. Now, he’ll try the back door. After all, radical right leaders may well swallow their pride and back McCain based on his promise to give them the Supreme Court of their dreams.

“The American public has a good nose for sniffing out hypocrisy, and People For the American Way will help. For months, we’ve been pointing out McCain’s flip-flopping on Religious Right leaders, and posting the outlandish statements and over-the-top videos of Parsley and Hagee ranting away. Now the truth has reached a wider audience. We’re going to keep it up, watching for the next chapter.”

UPDATE: HAGEE AND THE JEWS

Rabbi David Saperstein is one of the wisest men of faith I have ever met. He wrote about the conundrum Jews face when thinking about allying themselves with a chacater as demented and twisted as John Hagee.

Jews can empathize with Sen. McCain because we have faced the same dilemma with Rev. Hagee. No fundamentalist Christian is more overtly supportive of Israel, raised more money for Israel, nor used his religious and political clout to more energetically mobilize support in America for Israel. Further, he was an evangelical who made clear that his relations with Jews over Israel would not be used to try to convert us. Yet, his fundamentalist views had led to reprehensible statements about gays, Catholics, and even the victims of Hurricane Katrina.



And his particular understanding of the Bible led him to use his political clout in efforts to undermine support for the Israel- Palestinian peace process and a two-state solution. Nonetheless, it had become common to find Jewish leaders joining in Pastor Hagee’s “Salute to Israel” events around the country and paying public tribute and homage to the pastor for his efforts. Two months ago, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, challenged Reform Jewish rabbis with the contradictions of participating in such events with someone who held views that were anathema to our commitment to tolerance, pluralism and intergroup respect. While I hope that Rev. Hagee continues his support for Israel, which I assume he gives for its own sake, we should refrain from allying with him in any manner that gives our stamp of approval to him generally or to the deeply troubling views he has expressed.

A JOHN McCAIN PRESIDENCY WOULD MAKE US WISH WE HAD BUSH & CHENEY BACK!

One of the themes of DWT lately is that McCain is a congenital liar and a confused and bumbling guy who should be thinking about a well-deserved blissful retirement, not the most important and most stressful job in the world. Watching TV and reading the mainstream corporate media you would barely get an idea that the Straight Talk Express has derailed and that the election of John McCain as president would actually be worse than another Bush term! You think I'm exaggerating? Tell me if you think so after you watch this video:

McCAIN ON THE ENVIRONMENT-- AT BEST A MEDIOCRE AND CONFUSED FLIP FLOPPER

I was just reading some more of Lincoln Chafee's fascinating book, Against The Tide, the chapter about how the Senate dealt with environmental issues in light of Cheney's success in persuading Bush-- if it took much, or even any persuasion-- to do a 180 on his campaign promises to be an environmentally friendly president. When Cheney announced to a gathering of Republican senators that the Regime had decided to throw away all their environmental pledges, the crowd burst out into a chorus of cowboy whoops and cheers. But Chafee-- at least in the part of the chapter I finished over dinner last night-- named McCain as one of the small cadre of Republicans who helped save ANWAR from the oil companies (a passion of Chafee's).

Today's Washington Post gets further into the weeds. Basically McCain is significantly better than Global Warming deniers like Inhofe... but not as good as the worst, most reactionary Democrats, anti-environmental hacks Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, and Max Baucus. There are also 9 Republicans with consistently better environmental voting records than McCain (Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Judd Gregg, Gordon Smith, Arlen Specter, John Thune, John Sununu, Bob Corker, and Norm Coleman-- all of whom have barely mediocre environmental voting records).

The Post makes a point that McCain is "the most unpredictable, erratic" Republican who sometimes support pro-environmental policies.

McCain has made the environment one of the key elements of his presidential bid. He speaks passionately about the issue of climate change on the campaign trail, and he plans to outline his vision for combating global warming in a major speech today in Portland, Ore.

"I'm proud of my record on the environment," he said at a news conference Friday at the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City. "As president, I will dedicate myself to addressing the issue of climate change globally."

But an examination of McCain's voting record shows an inconsistent approach to the environment: He champions some "green" causes while casting sometimes contradictory votes on others.

This year he scored the lowest of any member of Congress on environmental issues but that had more to do with him not voting than on voting badly. His lifetime League of Conservation Voters score is 24 percent (atrocious), compared with 86 for Obama and 86 for Clinton and Defenders of Wildlife gave him 38 percent in the 108th Congress and 40 in the 109th, both very mediocre. Let me quote the last Republican bullshit artist running for president and what he had to say about the environment before being elected (Sept 29, 2000):

"With the help of Congress, environmental groups and industry, we will require all power plants to meet clean air standards in order to rescue emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and carbon dioxide within a reasonable period of time."

Almost as soon as the Supreme Court declared him president, Bush peremptorily reneged on those promises without offering any excuses, although-- as though to rub salt in the wounds of citizens concerned with environmental issues-- he cynically called his pro-pollution legislation "Clear Skies."

Is there any reason to believe McCain would behave any differently. No, none at all. In fact, there is every reason, judging from past history that McCain would act just as badly. Late in 2005 when a key ANWAR vote came up, League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski and Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund President Rodger Schlickheisen met with McCain-- who had flip flopped back and forth on the issue for years.

His answer disappointed them. In the brief meeting, the senator said he was unwilling to risk blocking a bill involving the military at a time of war-- even though it was clear the broader funding bill would pass quickly and by a wide margin if opponents managed to strip the ANWR provision from it. "We told him, 'This may be the key vote, this may be the time we win this,' " Schlickheisen recalled in an interview. "He said, 'Not on this bill.' That was it."

When Obama talks about McCain's environmental record, he points out that he has "opposed real solutions to our dependence on oil time and time again." And as if his spotty voting record warning isn't enough, one would have to be wary because of serially dishonest Joe Lieberman vouching for McCain's "good intentions." Holy Joe calls him "an environmental leader."


UPDATE: McCAIN THINK HE CAN FOOL DEMOCRATS WITH HIS WORTHLESS ENVIRONMENTAL PROMISES

Sure enough, McCain, who is being advised by Karl Rove, is taking the same cynical and deceptive approach to the environment that Rove had Bush take: promise them anything. Today's Wall Street Journal took the bait.

After spending several weeks staking out positions on taxes, Iraq and judges designed to appeal to conservatives, John McCain is shifting his attention to independents and Democrats, with proposals on climate change.

The Republican presidential candidate also is using his stance on energy and the environment to draw distinctions between himself and President Bush, whose popularity is at a near-record low.

Sen. McCain's support of regulating global-warming gases like carbon dioxide-- the biggest environmental issue before Congress-- more closely resembles the stance of his Democratic rivals, Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, though he disagrees with them on how such regulations should be structured.

Can be fooled again? Vote McCain. Fortunately, voters seem smarter than that and 7 years of Bush and all that Rove spin has wised up a lot of us. A new Gallup poll shows clearly that McCain's relationship with Bush and with all that Bush stands for and all that he has helped Bush "accomplish," will keep him out of the White House.


UPDATE: OBAMA REACTS TO McCAIN'S ENVIRONMENTAL PLOY

Obama found it hard to believe that McCain could be so cynical. "It is truly breathtaking for John McCain to talk about combating climate change while voting against virtually every recent effort to actually invest in clean energy. You don't have to look further than the wind turbine plant where Senator McCain is speaking today to assess his commitment to this cause. While Senator McCain talks about the need to invest in alternative energy, he rejected the single biggest investment in renewable energy in history, including incentives that contributed to a nearly 50% increase in wind power generation last year, and he has repeatedly opposed renewable fuel mandates and higher fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks.
 
"In stark contrast, I've called for a national standard to ensure that we're using more renewable energy, an expansion of our green energy sector that would create millions of green jobs, and a bipartisan plan to double our fuel efficiency standards. That is why the American people will have a clear choice in November when I am the nominee – between a candidate who opposes real solutions to our energy crisis, and leadership that will solve it once and for all."

McCAIN CELEBRATES CINCO DE MAYO... UNCOMFORTABLY

Hola! Please vote for me, por favor

I don't know if Rahm Emanuel is taking Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and his boy Heath Shuler (D-NC) out for margaritas at Tortilla Coast after work today to celebrate the $23 billion anti-immigration bill they wrote. But if he does, we can be pretty certain they won't run into arch-bigot Rush Limbaugh, who just compared L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to a “shoe shine guy” or a “Secret Service agent." (Do Secret Service agents and shoe shine guys all look the same to Republican fat cats?)

Antonio is an old friend of mine. In 2000 when the ACLU honored me with their annual Bill of Rights Award, I asked Antonio to introduce me to the audience before my speech. He wasn't the mayor (or in any office) at the time. I asked him because he is brilliant and focused and committed to the same progressive ideals and values that motivate me. I knew his speech would inspire me-- and it did. If I had to guess between someone with Limbaugh's mind and someone with Antonio's mind which would wind up with a menial job, I'd bet on Limbaugh. As far as a Secret Service agent... frankly I don't know what Limbaugh was going on about there. The ones I've met have been what I'd call model citizens-- my old friend Brian, and two agents who helped me-- one when tenants of mine were paying their rent with counterfeit hundred dollars bills and one when a police horse stepped on me in front of Dubrow's on Kings Highway when I was a child and my mom took me to meet JFK.

Meanwhile, desperately trying to escape from the vicious racism and elitism of his country club party, McCain launched a campaign website in Spanish and put out a new ad en espanol today, Cinco de Mayo. And instead of spending the day with Frenchmen, McCain has announced he will be addressing the annual convention of the National Council of La Raza in San Diego on July 14 (Bastille Day). McCain: "On this day in 1862, a small group of Mexican troops overcame overwhelming force to win the Battle of Puebla. Today, we join together to remember the sacrifice that these Mexican patriots endured, as well as the struggles of all those around the world striving for freedom. We recognize as well the important friendship that exists between our country and Mexico, and celebrate the many contributions Mexican-Americans have made to our society, culture, security and economy.”

Obama had a message too: "[W]hile Mexico’s cultural traditions are an important part of who we are as Americans, the American dream is still out of reach for too many Latinos... [O]ur broken immigration system works for neither the immigrant families who are being torn apart nor the workers who are concerned about unfair competition, which is why we need to pass comprehensive immigration reform once and for all. So while I hope that all Americans are enjoying this Cinco de Mayo, I also hope that when the celebrations come to an end, we’ll take up the cause of coming together as Americans to solve our common challenges and put the American dream within reach for every family in this country."

McCain no longer backs his own immigration reform bill. Buckling under to xenophobes and extremists in his own party, he has backed away from the legislation he wrote in 2006, legislation meant "to reform immigration laws and allow illegals to apply for legal residency retroactive to their arrival. Conservatives around the nation criticized McCain for the bill, which they said was too lenient against lawbreakers. McCain has said since then that he learned the lesson that focusing on border security is primary." Today he petulantly groused that "the focus on illegal immigration during the Republican primary season has harmed his party’s image among Hispanics."

But then John W. McCain defines political opportunism and has always been a serial flip-flopper. I wonder if he and Cindy will deny Arianna Huffington's post today about how neither of them voted for Bush in 2000: "At a dinner party in Los Angeles not long after the 2000 election, I was talking to a man and his wife, both prominent Republicans. The conversation soon turned to the new president. 'I didn't vote for George Bush' the man confessed. 'I didn't either,' his wife added. Their names: John and Cindy McCain."

The fact that this man was so angry at what George Bush had done to him, and at what Bush represented for their party, that he did not even vote for him in 2000 shows just how far he has fallen since then in his hunger for the presidency. By abandoning his core principles and embracing Bush-- both literally and metaphorically-- he has morphed into an older and crankier version of the man he couldn't stomach voting for in 2000.

UPDATE: McCAIN CAUGHT LYING HIS ASS OFF AGAIN

I was horrified to read in the Washington Post this morning that John McCain, a despicable political hack who has had a long record of twisting the truth to squeeze it into his career trajectory, has called Arianna Huffington-- through an official spokesperson-- a liar. I know Arianna and there is one thing that is certain-- whether you agree with her opinions or not-- she is a highly honorable person and would never, under any circumstances, make a story like this up. McCain makes me want to vomit. There is only one question left that any media person should ask him from now until November-- will he agree to take a lie detector test about whether or not he told Arianna that he didn't vote for Bush.

McCain, in their smear of Arianna, called on voters to "consider the source." Arianna asks them to consider both sources.

My sentiments exactly -- because John McCain has a long history of issuing heartfelt denials of things that were actually true.

He denied ever talking with John Kerry about his leaving the GOP to be Kerry's '04 running mate -- then later admitted he had, insisting: "Everybody knows that I had a conversation."

He denied admitting that he didn't know much about economics, even though he'd said exactly that to the Wall Street Journal. And the Boston Globe. And the Baltimore Sun.

He denied ever having asked for a budget earmark for Arizona, even though he had. On the record.

He denied that he'd ever had a meeting with comely lobbyist Vicki Iseman and her client Lowell Paxon, even though he had. And had admitted it in a legal deposition.

And those are just the outright denials. He's also repeatedly tried to spin away statements he regretted making (see: 100-year war, Iraq was a war for oil, etc.).

So, yes, by all means, "consider the source."

JOHN McCAIN LIKES MAKING RULES FOR THE REST OF US-- AS LONG AS HE DOESN'T HAVE TO EVER FOLLOW THEM HIMSELF

Although the McCain-friendly corporate media has studiously avoided the topic, McCain has refused to release his multimillionaire wife's tax returns, even though she has financed his career-- and has acted as a bag lady at least once for his corrupt dealings (with Charles Keating of the Keating Five scandal)-- and even though the exact same media outlets, namely Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS, screamed their collective heads off about John Kerry's wife. Teresa Heinz Kerry married John Kerry when he already was a senator. She did release her tax returns, which were gone over with a fine tooth comb by the corporate media. Cindy McCain financed John McCain's political ambitions from Day One and there is no question that he would never have come close to winning his first congressional race without her wealth. Since then he has sworn he would not use her immense wealth to push his political career forward. Like much of what McCain says, that was a blatant lie meant to mislead the media (who don't care anyway) and the public.

McCain is not just one of the most personally corrupt men in the U.S. Senate, he is also one of the 10 wealthiest members of that millionaires club-- although he never actually earned any of it. He married it, and dumped a crippled wife and family to do it, first cheating on her for a year and calculating all the angles. Tomorrow's NY Times spills the beans about how McCain has managed to skirt the campaign finance laws (which he helped pass) while still staying out of prison. After prominently huffing and puffing how he wouldn't use corporate jets, unbeknownst to the public-- and unreported by his pals in the corporate media-- McCain has been using his wife's jet. The Times reminds us that "he backed legislation last year requiring presidential candidates to pay the actual cost of flying on corporate jets. The law, which requires campaigns to pay charter rates when using such jets rather than cheaper first-class fares, was intended to reduce the influence of lobbyists and create a level financial playing field." But, McCain being McCain, rules and regulations are always for other people, never, never, never for John McCain.

Allow me to run off on a tangent for a moment. A dear friend of mine, Mike Rogers, is the guy who helped out several hypocritical, right wing extremist members of Congress, lowlife Republicans who were voting to destroy the lives of gay men and women while sneaking around in the dark of night looking for anonymous sex. Because of Mike right-wing hypocrites like Ed Schrock (R-VA), Mark Foley (R-FL), James McCrery (R-LA), and Larry Craig (R-ID) have ended their shameful and destructive political careers-- and disreputable closet queens like David Dreier (D-CA), Patrick McHenry (R-NC), Lindsey Graham (R-SC) spend half their lives worrying about being outed. Not everyone appreciates Mike stellar work. I've heard him attacked not just from right wing hacks, but even from Inside the Beltway Democrats, who have benefited so mightily from his efforts. What does any of this have to do with McCain's deceitful nature? Stay with me; I appreciate the patience. Let me quote from the new issue of Out:

Once upon a time, closeted gay people mostly feared outing by Washington cops or counterintelligence agents. Now the main danger to closeted Republicans -- especially those working for antigay legislators-- comes from other gay people like Washington activist Michael Rogers. Rogers’s website BlogActive regularly outs gay Republicans-- whom Rogers considers fair game if they actively fight against the rights of gay people in their public lives or work for a legislator who does. (Because Larry Craig has a miserable record on gay rights, readers of Rogers’s blog knew all about the Idaho senator’s bathroom-based proclivities long before he was arrested for them in Minneapolis.)

What Rogers does makes some Democrats squeamish, because they think no one should ever decide for someone else when he must come out of the closet. But Representative [Barney] Frank is not among Rogers’s detractors.

“I think what Rogers does is legitimate,” Frank tells me. “I think hypocrisy is something to go after. If you had pro-life people having abortions, or if Sarah Brady had a gun, there would be no hesitation. Think of any other context in which people would be allowed to blatantly violate the public policies they advocate and say, ‘I have a right to keep this secret.’”

The erudite Frank-- often voted the smartest member of Congress by Hill staffers-- cites John Locke’s second treatise on civil government as the “philosophical grounding” for his position.

“Locke says that one of the major arguments for, in effect, representative government is, if the people who make the laws are not subject to the laws, they will make bad laws with impunity,” Frank says. “That was a very important principle in the document that was the single most important influence on our Constitution. A basic principle of free government is that rulers must be subject to the laws they make.”

You see where I'm going? Locke (and Barney) are correct and it doesn't only apply to psychotic homophobes like Larry Craig prowling men's rooms across the country looking for quickies in the stalls. McCain entire life-- starting even before he ever got into politics-- has always been premised on rules not applying to him. It's his biggest flaw and, more than anything else, the reason he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the levers of power. His Republican colleagues in the Senate all know it as well, but their patriotism is in chains and being dragged along behind the Double Talk Express.

Back when McCain was a young navy flyer he kept crashing planes-- at least half a dozen of them-- and in one instance caused a serious diplomatic incident with Spain and in another killing scores of American seamen and destroying hundreds of millions of dollars in aircraft and military equipment. These accidents had two things in common: McCain was at the controls and McCain was never, ever, ever at fault in any of them. He was grounded though and told he would never be allowed to fly again, something he was able to circumvent by pulling some family strings. His instructors at the Naval Academy were unanimous in their assessment: McCain, who graduated 5th from the bottom of his class, never followed any rules or regulations. He had over a hundred demerits while he was at the Academy. Rules have always been for the little people, never for Leona Helmsley and John McCain.

...over a seven-month period beginning last summer, Mr. McCain’s cash-short campaign gave itself an advantage by using a corporate jet owned by a company headed by his wife, Cindy McCain, according to public records. For five of those months, the plane was used almost exclusively for campaign-related purposes, those records show.

Mr. McCain’s campaign paid a total of $241,149 for the use of that plane from last August through February, records show. That amount is approximately the cost of chartering a similar jet for a month or two, according to industry estimates.

The senator was able to fly so inexpensively because the law specifically exempts aircraft owned by a candidate or his family or by a privately held company they control. The Federal Election Commission adopted rules in December to close the loophole-- rules that would have required substantial payments by candidates using family-owned planes-- but the agency soon lost the requisite number of commissioners needed to complete the rule making.

Because that exemption remains, Mr. McCain’s campaign was able to use his wife’s corporate plane like a charter jet while paying first-class rates, several campaign finance experts said. Several of those experts, however, added that his campaign’s actions, while keeping with the letter of law, did not reflect its spirit.

“This amounts to a subsidy for his campaign, which is notable given how badly they were struggling last year,” said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that collects and analyzes campaign data.

Mr. McCain was not available to be interviewed, a campaign spokeswoman said. In response to written questions, the spokeswoman, Jill Hazelbaker, said his campaign had acted legally and ethically in paying first-class airfares for Mrs. McCain’s corporate aircraft.

“The campaign carefully followed all the relevant laws and F.E.C. regulations on air travel at all times, and paid for travel exactly as required by those rules,” Ms. Hazelbaker said.

Last summer, just before starting to use his wife’s plane, Mr. McCain was quoted in a newspaper report as saying that he did not plan to tap her substantial wealth to keep his bid for the Republican presidential nomination going.

“I have never thought about it,” Mr. McCain was quoted by The Arizona Republic as saying at a July appearance. “I would never do such a thing, so I wouldn’t know what the legalities are.”

The McCain campaign turned to using the jet last August, a time when it faced mounting debts and the possibility of financial collapse. It stopped doing so in March, those records indicate.

During the first half of 2007, a time when Mr. McCain’s campaign did not use his wife’s jet, it paid out over $1.04 million for travel on noncommercial planes, F.E.C. records indicate. Over the year’s second half, when that jet was used almost constantly for campaign-related purposes, his campaign’s total spending for noncommercial flying was about one-half that much, or $542,160, those records suggest.

I don't have much sympathy for right wing Republicans, but when they complained about McCain being a hypocrite and being the most untrustworthy man in Washington... they knew exactly what they were talking about.