Flashback: McCain Favored Abolishing Department Of Education
In Obama's ad hitting McCain on education this morning, there's this throwaway line:
"He even proposed abolishing the Department of Education."
What's the basis for this charge? It turns out that in December of 1994, McCain said: "I would certainly favor doing away with the Department of Energy and I think that given the origins of the Department of Education, I would favor doing away with it as well."
Here's the full context of a CNN interview on December 11, 1994 (via Nexis), when Newt-mania was gripping the land:
FRANK SESNO: Senator McCain, would you favor doing away with the Department of Housing and Urban Development or the Department of Energy?Sen. JOHN McCAIN: I would certainly favor doing away with the Department of Energy and I think that given the origins of the Department of Education, I would favor doing away with it as well. HUD had experienced many failures under both Republican and Democrat administrations and I would certainly want to revamp it from the bottom up, because, clearly, public housing in America is almost as big a disaster as the welfare program...
We're working to determine if McCain has ever retracted this. Either way, it's an extreme position that some moderate Republicans would be reluctant to embrace these days. Even McCain probably wouldn't be willing to embrace it now, and it's probably something Obama or the Dems will use to hit McCain on education going forward, partly because it could alienate female voters.
Interestingly, the GOP's rapid response push-back on the Obama ad, which fought back against some of the spot's other charges, didn't even try to debunk the Department of Ed charge, even though it's among the more explosive ones.
Well, hook that one up with his statement about abolishing unemployment insurance - I think that's explosive in these times of high unemployment.
He's just a Bush Repug on steroids. He's a Grover Norquist disciple.
September 9, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
...or at least he was 14 years ago...had Obama even started his stint as neighborhood watch captain in 94?
September 9, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a matter of fact, he was three years into his first term as a state senator, from a district with approximately 800,000 people. Palin, meanwhile, was still mayor of Wasilla (pop. ~ 6,750). When he was a community organizer, Palin was busy participating in beauty pageants and shuttling between several different colleges, in search of an evasive B.S. degree.
To say the two records are comparable is patently ludicrous.
September 9, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Slam! good one :)
September 9, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah...good one...too bad it's a lie...not that that stops you guys. In 1994 Gov. Palin was beginning her second term on the Wasilla city council. She was a beauty pagent contestant 10 years earlier.
September 9, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama wasn't elected to any office until 96...
September 9, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
correct.
i believe that in 1994 obama (who had graduated magna cum laude from the harvard school of law where he served as president of the law revue) was a constitutional law lecturer at the university of chicago law school and a member of the boards of directors of public allies, the joyce foundation, and the woods fund of chicago.
in 1994 joe biden was chair of the senate judiciary committee and a member of the senate committee on foreign relations. he was also an adjunct professor of law at the widener university school of law.
in 1994 mccain was (as best i can tell) a member of the armed services committee, the commerce committee, and the indian affairs committee.
in 1994 sarah palin was in her first term as a member of the wasilla city council.
September 9, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, that makes a big difference. OK, she's as experienced and qualified as he; now I get it.
September 9, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
So what part was a lie? Obama was 3 years into his first term as state senator (800,000 constitutents) when Palin was made mayor of Wasilla (pop 6000).
If being a mayor of a town of 6000 is pretty pathetic experience for VP, why do you think her being on that town's council previously is even worth mentioning?
Not only being mayor of such a dinky town not relevant considering that Obama had a much higher per capita constituency, you citing her council position of this dinky town as more evidence of her "experience"?.
Let me know when I can stop laughing. Or as Obama would say "The RNC thinks you are stupid"
You really expect people to be swayed by this?
September 10, 2008 12:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are ver' ver' funny man. Please to haz yur sence of huumor and righteous indignation. It's working. Ha ha.
I am teh convinced! Republicans are aaiight!
September 9, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are ver' ver' funny man. Please to haz yur sence of huumor and righteous indignation. It's working. Ha ha.
I am teh convinced! Republicans are aaiight!
September 9, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget that both the DOE and Education Dept became cabinet level departments in the Carter Administration, both of which ran afoul of conservative Republican Party orthodoxy.
The DOE was evil because it oversaw development of a national energy policy and regulated an industry and the Dept of Ed was evil because it was considered an unconstitutional intrusion of the federal govt into states' affairs & a violation of states' rights.
Reagan campaigned on a promise to eliminate the Dept of Education as a cabinet post, and it became a feature of the Republican Party Platform throughout the 80s (part of the whole "rollback of federal govt" plank). Bob Dole also promised to cut it when he ran in 1996. John McCain is just More Of The Same.
This issue - how Republicans fundamentally don't believe in good government - hasn't been given nearly enough scrutiny.
Why should we trust people who are motivated to run for public office on the promise of making government so small it could be drowned in a bathtub? and is anyone surprised that government functions have been so thoroughly mismanaged by the people who as a matter of principle hate government? Gross government negligence & incompetence provide the opening to say, "See, you can't trust government to do anything. Just let the private sector do it."
I think we need to be more directly affirmative about this essential difference between a future Obama Administration and John McCain.
Voting for a conservative Republican to run the government is like asking someone who hates kids to babysit.
Makes absolutely no sense at all.
September 9, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget that both the DOE and Education Dept became cabinet level departments in the Carter Administration, both of which ran afoul of conservative Republican Party orthodoxy.
The DOE was evil because it oversaw development of a national energy policy and regulated an industry and the Dept of Ed was evil because it was considered an unconstitutional intrusion of the federal govt into states' affairs & a violation of states' rights.
Reagan campaigned on a promise to eliminate the Dept of Education as a cabinet post, and it became a feature of the Republican Party Platform throughout the 80s (part of the whole "rollback of federal govt" plank). Bob Dole also promised to cut it when he ran in 1996. Guess what? John McCain is just More Of The Same.
The bigger issue - that Republicans fundamentally don't believe in good government - hasn't been given nearly enough scrutiny.
Why should we trust people who are motivated to run for public office on the promise of making government so small it could be drowned in a bathtub? (speaking of Grover Norquist)
And is anyone surprised that government functions have been so thoroughly mismanaged by people who as a matter of principle *hate* government? Gross government negligence & incompetence provide the easy opening to say, "See, you just can't trust government to do anything. We should let the private sector do it instead."
I think we need to be more directly affirmative about this essential difference between Democrats and Republicans - between a future Obama Administration and John McCain.
Voting for a conservative Republican to run the government is like asking someone who hates kids to babysit.
Makes absolutely no sense at all.
September 9, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and voting for a liberal Democrat to run it is like asking a pedophile to babysit.
September 9, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was both moronic and uncalled for. SFC, I'd come to expect at least a little better from you. For Shame.
September 9, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well of course McCain wants to do away with the Department of Education.
The less educated people there are the more Republicans there are. It is simple math, so simple even Republicans can do it.
September 9, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Simple enough for someone who went to 6 colleges in 5 years?
September 9, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know, that is pretty damn simple.
September 9, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has it been proven that she actually got a degree?
Or is that another lie?
September 9, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know, why don't we ask her?
Oh, that's right, because asking her questions is sexism, silly me.
Question: If she were ready for the job as VP would she be avoiding the press like she is? Answer: No, of course not.
September 9, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Degree or not, she majored in teleprompter reading -- a fact that should be pointed out every time she uses one.
September 9, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now she's an empty suit who gives a good speech off of the teleprompter?!? Would you guys just like to borrow all of our Obama lines for the past year and change the name? I can't wait for the first Obama Celebrity commercial calling Palin "The One"....you're killing me with this stuff!
September 9, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah, but the crucial difference, wallace - when we say them about Palin, they're true.
Bugs you, doesn't it?
September 9, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
What cracks me up is that you guys rail about the experience of our VP selection who, in a side by side comparrison with your Top of the Ticket, has your guy offering up his last year running his campaign to try to top her in the "experience" department...it's truely amazing...
September 9, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's had 140 days of governing experience over a state with less than 1/5 of the population of the City of Dallas.
You need to get a new line - that one is really absurd, Wallace. No one buys that anymore. No one.
ShootingStarSarah shot that one down, dude. I mean completely.
September 9, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ach! I could have sworn I typed less than 1/2 - not 1/5, which is nonsense.
September 9, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yawn...seriously, don't you have anything else to contribute other than "She's got more experience"?
You can keep repeating it, but none of us - along with most of the rational world and several right-wingers (Frum, Will, Stein and Savage for example)don't believe that she's got enough experience for the job. You can keep saying "executive experience" but do you think that's all it takes? And even so, what did she do as mayor other than get the town into debt, raise sales taxes, try to ban library books, and make rape victims pay for their own rape kits? What about as governor? She says she stopped the bridge - but then why didn't she give it back? Instead, she kept the money from the defunct bridge and proceeded to hand it out as refunds to her constituents....I thought you guys were against "income redistribution"? Seriously....enough. Save the talking point for people who are low enough on information to actually believe it.
September 9, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well when all you guys say is she doesn't have enough experience...pointing out that she has as much, if not more that your number 1 is all that's required.
September 9, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Snoooze.......
September 9, 2008 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
if it were true.
it isn't.
that you think it is has caused me to lose all respect for you.
her CV is a joke on ANY point of head-to-head comparison against biden OR obama.
just to humor you (not that any facts would ever keep you from repeating your desperate and ridiculous claims about sarah palin's qualifications and experience) let us compare the republican VP candidate to the democratic candidate for president:
education/academics
palin: (reportedly) graduated with a BS in communications-journalism from University of Idaho.
obama: graduated with a BA in political science/international relations from Columbia University. graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School (served as president of law review)
private sector/work experience
palin: worked as a sports reporter for less than a year at KTUU-TV in anchorage; "helped out" in husband's fishing business
obama: fellow/senior lecturer, University of Chicago School of Law; published author; worked for: business international corporation and new york public interest research group; summer associateships with: sidley & austin and hokins & sutter; associate attorney with davis, miner, barnhill & galand.
community work/volunteering experience
palin: member, wasilla PTA; member, "ted stevens excellence in public service" 527 (about 2 years)
obama: director of developing communities project; consultant for gamaliel foundation; director of illinois project vote; board of directors: public allies, woods fund of chicago, joyce foundation, chicago annenberg challenge, chicago lawyer's committee for civil rights under the law, center for neighborhood technology, lugenia burns hope center.
elected office/gov't work
palin: member, wasilla city council (4 years); mayor, wasilla (6 years); alaska oil & gas commission (about 1 year); governor, alaska (almost 2 years)
obama: state senator, illinois (8 years); US senator (almost 4 years) [committees: foreign realtions (4 years), environment & public works (2 years), veteran's affairs (4 years), health education labor & pensions (2 years), homeland security and gov't affairs (2 years)]
to give a fair comparison of the constituencies that palin and obama represent(ed) (and the inherent complexities of their jobs and the issues they face):
palin
city of wasilla population: less than 6,000
state of alaska population: 683,478
obama
illinois state senate district 13 population: about 210,000
state of illinois population: almost 13 million
summary of elected office public policy experience:
palin
local public policy: 10 years
state public policy: 2 years
national public policy: ZERO years
obama
local public policy: ZERO years
state public policy: 8 years
national public policy: 4 years
September 9, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and the true death knell to the Obama campaign:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/09/2360240.htm?section=world
September 9, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
LMAO -
That might be true, if every voter was a fucked up as you - but fortunately, they aren't.
Most people see that for the positive it is.
September 9, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
So true. She has way more experience on matters on domestic and foreign policy. [Help me out and fill in her executive experience with national domestic issues and foreign policy matters or at least her developed positions on these matters] She's got all the right experience and in my estimation should be at the top of the ticket.
Palin-McCain!
In all seriousness, I could give two shits about Palin and her supposed experience. If McCain thinks she's ready, then that's all I'm concerned with right now. McCain and his judgment. The man doesnt need to be within a 1,000 feet of the White House.
September 9, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
The point you're missing is that the experience claim was the centerpiece of McCain's campaign. The Obama campaign never went around crowing about experience.
September 9, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
...but his is now, and everyone (except his deciples) realizes that the emperor has no clothes...
September 9, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
As soon as the Presidential qualifying committee finds Obama's Birth Certificate they'll start looking for her degree.
September 9, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
WHERE IS JOHN MCCAIN'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE?
He wasn't born in the US.
September 9, 2008 12:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
He was born on a Navy base in the Panama Canal Zone...one of the few military instalations overseas that won't qualify you for dual citizenship.
September 9, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I was born in the Canal Zone, too - my father was in the military. Technically, I have naturalization papers. I was recently required to present them when I got a passport.
September 9, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was born in Honolulu. Hawaii was still a territory. Which makes me sound ancient, but it became a state the year I was born.
All I had to show to get my passport was my birth certificate.
September 9, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wha?
I was born on an army base in Landstuhl, Germany (evidently one of the other "few" bases where you don't get dual citizenship) and I am a natural-born citizen of these United States. This was in 1970, and I know the law hasn't changed since then. Has this not always been the case that being born of American parents makes you an American unless you renounce that citizenship? (One doesn't even have to be born on a military base.)
Oh, and for SFCWallace: Obama's birth certificate has been posted.
September 9, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wha?
I was born on an army base in Landstuhl, Germany (evidently one of the other "few" bases where you don't get dual citizenship) and I am a natural-born citizen of these United States. This was in 1970, and I know the law hasn't changed since then. Has this not always been the case that being born of American parents makes you an American unless you renounce that citizenship? (One doesn't even have to be born on a military base.)
Oh, and for SFCWallace: Obama's birth certificate has been posted.
September 9, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
They already have Sen. Obama's birth certificate. And even the WorldDailyNet.com has concluded that it is authentic:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200808260014
Here's a question for you. Why did Sarah Palin have to "out" her 17-year-old daughter's pregnancy as proof that Bristol couldn't have given birth to Trig in April? Why not just produce the infant's birth certificate and the doctor who delivered him? Perhaps some parties are afraid of testifying in public on this one...
September 9, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
...go with that...we're sure to lose now...
September 9, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, how, uh...mavericky.
And don't think this sentiment has gone away. There are plenty of these types still around who would like to see the Dept of Ed go bye-bye. They don't like it sucking up so many federal dollars. McCain is one of them.
September 9, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can we make something of the tax that Alaska puts on the rest of the country for oil? They are making money on our high gas prices! No wonder they want more drilling! That's got to get people pissed off, that they are paying taxes to another US State where the entire population is getting welfare checks, not to mention a couple thousand per person in earmarks.
September 9, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS CRITICAL.
I agree with this totally. That would piss off everyone and I have sent that particular part of the Times article to everyone I know. Maybe you all could to the same.
Here is the paragraph from Times Alaskanomics article to copy and paste:
Alaska is, in essence, an adjunct member of OPEC. It has four different taxes on oil, which produce more than 89% of the state's unrestricted revenue. On average, three-quarters of the value of a barrel of oil is taken by the state government before that oil is permitted to leave the state. Alaska residents each get a yearly check for about $2,000 from oil revenues, plus an additional $1,200 pushed through by Palin last year to take advantage of rising oil prices. Any sympathy the governor of Alaska expresses for folks in the lower 48 who are suffering from high gas prices or can't afford to heat their homes is strictly crocodile tears.
September 9, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
What mooseshit of a response will McPaleCain give which will not confirm the accusation? This is a canny trap indeed by the Obama camp.
September 9, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hit him on the Dept of Energy comment too!
September 9, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely! Energy is a huge issue this year (bigger than education (?) ), and they should combine this desire to kill DoE with all his votes against renewable energy innovation.
September 9, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
test post, please disregard.
September 9, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Test reply. Please disregard.
September 9, 2008 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a litle off the subject, sorry. But you know how McCain and Palin are drawing big crowds, and that Palin was supposed to split off from McCain a few days ago so they could campaign separately, but that McCain's now having her stick with him instead?
I wonder if they're afraid SHE - campaigning alone - would draw 10,000 people and HE - campaigning alone - would draw a meager handful. What a contrast...hell, what a message (hah)!
September 9, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point.
September 9, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
The downfall is that they are wasting valuable time campaigning together. Biden and Obama split up occasionally to hit as many states/locations as possible. It's safe to assume that Obama draws just as many Palin/McCain do, this means that the Obama/Biden ticket separately is reaching more people than the Pailin/McCain ticket (The naming order is intentional).
Time is running out.
September 9, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weirdly enough, McLame seems to need either his wife, or the Lieberman/Graham duo with him too -- he cannot seem to campaign alone, really weird...
September 9, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rope-a-dope bee-sting.
September 9, 2008 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a lyin' liar.. McCain is running on an "all of the above" energy policy including expanding nuclear power and alternative energy, yet not long ago he advocated doing away with the federal agency that funds energy research and regulates nuclear power.
September 9, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds like a good example that illustrates a larger pattern --- McCain cares little else other than national security and foreign policy. He wants to keep fighting an expensive war (not to mention it is is a war of choice) regardless of how impoverished it has left us.
September 9, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Education is bad, but pressing him on the Department of Energy is potentially even more damaging, isn't it?
The public has huge huge concerns about energy issues, and the idea that McCain would have gotten rid of the federal department dealing with energy -- what does that say about his judgement?
Pounding him on his support for far right wing proposals to abolish education and energy seems like a great way to question his foresight and judgement....
September 9, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
These ideas are so radical - McLame-Palin is the most radical ticket I've ever seen.
They are way outside the mainstream with this bullshit. They are extremists and Americans do not like extremists. They don't - and especially after 8 years of an extreme government that everyone but about 15-20% of the voting public is completely turned off.
She's a 3-day wonder. No wonder she gets attention.
September 9, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
What I want to know is what the hell would they do if they abolished it? Did he have a plan for educating Americans?
Small government only works if it is effective, otherwise it ends up being an absolute joke. Otherwise it ends up with higher taxes covering mistakes instead of actually going towards a need.
September 9, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
You really only have to say one thing to get people's attention about infrastructure and how the GOP has destroyed it:
Katrina.
September 9, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
totally OT - but the ad is in the right margin - is Donnie Wahlberg Mark Wahlberg's brother or not? I've been told that he is and that he isn't.
September 9, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, he is. Former member of New Kids on the Block, too.
September 9, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you!
I was just sure he was - they look a bit alike. But I've had arguments with people who were utterly convinced that they aren't brothers.
September 9, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you probably know this already, but Mark Wahlberg is The Artist Formerly Known As Marky Mark. :)
September 9, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course I know that. :)
"Back when Mark Wahlberg was still Marky Mark,
let me tell you how we used to get the party started..."
Eminem -
I am the world's biggest hip hop fan. I could probably single=handedly kill hip hop because of it - I'm a white woman in my 50s.
;)
September 9, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing about eliminating the Departament of Energy looks for me as a powerful weapon for Obama.
September 9, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm cheered less by the ad itself than what it signals. I've been waiting for the Obama campaign to start mining McCain's record, which has more than its fair share of craziness. Does this signal a fall where Obama will paint McCain as a doctrinaire right winger? I sure hope so.
September 9, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, that was my sense too. Maybe this is the first step in an effort to go on the offensive and set the terms of the larger conversation - in other words, to finally start acting and stop reacting.
September 9, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm wondering if the bloom is sufficiently off the rose for some intrepid interviewer to simply ask the till-recently open to the press McCain why his campaign keeps repeating the lie that Obama would raise taxes across the board when the Obama Campaign is only too happy to explain the true facts , why McCain's Campaign won't allow their star candidate to ask basic gettin-know-you questions and what it is about the truth that so offends the paleo-petroleo mentality.
Oh right, he got shot down once a Loooong time ago , so just give him the keys and stop being so rude.
I think at this point the Republicans could have ended up with Pee-Wee Herman as the nominee and still elevate him to near godlike proportions. Not for any of his accomplishments, just because he's theirs.
September 9, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Both of them - I don't think either one of them is going to be popular when it's all said and done. He's Pee Wee and she's the Indian Princess from Howdy Doody.
And yes, the GOP will fight for the two of them like they loved them. That's what the GOP does that we don't do.
September 9, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow....
Wouldn't his willingness to abolish the Department of Energy signal a lack of regard for assuring America's energy independence???
September 9, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
C'mon,Lynch, Murkins can get in the horse and buggy and trundle down to the docks and get thier crude oil off the boats themselves, in gallon cans...take it back to the family farm and refine it themselves!Who needs any "overseer" to you know, complicate the whole thing with "standards"?
My Mom got her milk stright from the cow and only a few dozen students ever dropped dead from food poisoning in her neck o the woods...kids today!
Regulate Atomic Power? Phaaa, those good people in the Nuclear Industries KNOW how Poison and dangerous that stuff is , do you think THEY want to blow up? Show a little faith in the workin man!
Regulating education !? Give the kid a slate and a bit of chalk and teach him the words that matter , Guns, God and Guts , that built Murka.Lets Keep all 3!....Dammit.
September 9, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right!!! Get government out of the way....that should lower the costs of energy by 50% alone! What's the use of the Energy Department anyway if there's a good chance they'd put the head of an Arabian Horse Association in charge?
September 9, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd hate to think all we've got to hit McCain over the head with is something he said 14 years ago. He's lying his ass off today, with Palin lying her ass off right by his side. We don't need ancient history -- or if we do, we're screwed.
September 9, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why not use his record against him?
Doing so doesn't mean we're not calling him a liar today. We can do both.
McCain's record is a target-rich environment if ever there was one. Find every wingnutty thing he's ever said or proposed and pin it to him.
September 9, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly right. It's the primary reason why you don't see long-time Senators becoming President. Their records are long and the deals they have to make put them on every side of every issue.
Fourteen years ago wasn't that long ago to most voters.
September 9, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
edwards pointed out cheney voted against the department of education during their debate. can't remember anyone running with it then...
http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004b.html
"He voted against the Department of Education. He voted against funding for Meals on Wheels for seniors. He voted against a holiday for Martin Luther King. He voted against a resolution calling for the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa."
September 9, 2008 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Drill here! Drill Now!" but first get rid of that pesky Dept of Energy. WTF??? This quote should be in every ad from now to Nov 4.
While your at it, get rid of the DFH Welfare Dept of Ed. God knows the good old US of A don't need no stinking education!
September 9, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course he wants to abolish DOE...as proof didn't he graduate from the Naval Academy the bottom 4th or 5th of the class? How did this man get this far is beyond me...
PS: This is 1st or 2nd time posting comment so bare w/me. I have enjoyed reading everyones articles and comments. You guys are great writers!
September 9, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great comment, love.
Stick around!!!
September 9, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain was just a few spots shy of graduating in the elite top 99% of his class. And I'm not making that up.
September 9, 2008 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know Repubs hate public education and anything having to do with welfare, so wanting to ban the Depts of Ed and HUD are fairly predictable and expected.
But what the heck was the beef with the Department of Energy?
September 9, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
OT: Where is Andrew Sullivan?!
September 9, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weird. Switching websites maybe?
September 9, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to Ambinder he's taking some days off.
September 9, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting.
Usually he announces that and has an assistant take over.
September 9, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've been wondering the same thing. On the Ambinder page it said that he was fine - he's just taking a couple of days off. ?????
September 9, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
More importantly, this is Obama on the offensive.
In the past, Obama has repeatedly talked about improving eduction in order to make the country more economically competitive. He's branded himself as the pro-education candidate, and he's positioned himself to be able to attack McCain for his positions on education. McCain probably isn't anti-eduction, but he doesn't really give a shit about education in particular, or domestic policies in general. Now he'll have to waste time defending his record, explain why he opposed the Dept of Education, etc. Hockey Mommy probably won't be able to help him much on this one. What's she gonna do, attack public schools for not teaching abstinence-only sex education?
September 9, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh Zing! Nicely said...seems more and more guys like Davis et al running McCain's show recite the line to themselves , think it sounds peppy, let it roll, then get asked about it by someone clueless yet not actually fully indoctrinated ( C. Brown, tower of leftist intellect) and realise the spin is chock full of holes, have no actual answer like Norm Coleman re the GW decade, and whip the curtains closed like the 4th Reich Motor Company in the Simpsons " ZIS EXHIBIT IS CLOSED!" or stand there quietly peeing themselves they've been found out . Palin didn't go like they thought , they are obviously flippin out about it backstage all over the country and relying on yesterdays boosters to keep the cause buoyed...this news and I suspect this week will be the Obama people quietly and surely tearing brick after brick of this wall down and leaving us a clear ugly picture of McCain babbling in contradictory circles.
That really seems the easiest route,just let these boneheads sink themselves in their own words.
September 9, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really liked the way the ad finished. For twenty seconds we see the superimposed image of John McCain grinning like the doofus who doesn't quite get the joke. At the very end, it's revealed that McCain is standing next to his BFF, George Bush. Bush looks he's giving McCain a lesson on how to be a doofus, and McCain looks like a fast learner. Caption: "O.K. John, now say HEE-HAW".
September 9, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting to see the Maverick McCain using the unmaverick Gingrichian expression "Democrat administrations."
September 9, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey guys, Sully:
September 9, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want to preface my remarks by saying that I am NOT a McCain supporter and would never dream of supporting his policies. But, I worked on the Hill and very closely with the Dept. of Education during the period when McCain made these statements and, at the time, there were SERIOUS problems there. Problems that meant it should be abolished? Well, that may be strong, but there were definitely remnants of the people who got "stuck" there when Health, Education and Welfare became two separate departments during the Carter Administration. When the split occurred, everyone wanted to go with HHS (don't know why) and so those with seniority got those placements while those lower on the totem pole got shipped to Education. They were younger, a little less experienced and not where they wanted to be. I remember reading an article in the Post in the mid-90s about a career staffer who had been at Education since the split. He was making $120K a year and all he did was stack styrofoam cups all day long. He had seniority and couldn't really be fired. He didn't want to leave because he was a few months shy of his 25 years, and they really couldn't find anything for him to do. It was seriously flawed then. I think Bill Clinton did a lot to clean out some of those staffers, but the reality was that in the 90s it wasn't a monument to efficiency or efficacy. So I would be interested to know if McCain changed his tune BEFORE Bush took office.
September 9, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Education is a key issues, especially for married couples/women - which typically lean GOP.
Showing how "radical" McCain is on this issue could be very effective if pushed hard, used in ads.
McCain is clearly a loose cannon who we can't predict. Look at his gamiick of a VP choice. Can America afford to gamble on McCain?
September 9, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Veeery interesting. I wonder what my sister who is a Bush II appointee as Undersecretary in the Dept. of Education thinks about this...
September 9, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like someone to ask Palin: if she gets to the VP residence, where will her kids go to school? D.C. public schools? Private school? Charter school? Dad will be homeschooling them?
September 9, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
94'?...I was 11 yrs old then and i can recall that time where teachers taught foundation education and not the from the test book.
ahhh...1994 a year of great music. Bill Clinton President, our parents had money in the bank and there was peace and prosperity.
September 9, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Abolish it and then what? let me guess. Privatize it. Is that all these putzes can think of when it comes to policy? Get rid of it. Now that change we can believe in.
September 9, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo!
We have a Winna!
The name of the game is Privatize and you just took the Grand Prize.
September 9, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain was just a few spots shy of graduating in the elite top 99% of his class. And I'm not making that up.
September 9, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Abolishing the Department of Education was the first thing Lynn Westmoreland could think of when Colbert asked him what he would cut to balance the budget. This has been a longtime right-wing goal.
Westmoreland also wanted the 10 commandments posted in every public building but couldn't name more than 3 commandments when asked.
September 9, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, let's see McCain-Palin try to pick off Hillary voters with this new screw-the-children platform. Obama might also want to mention how McCain voted against SCHIP...
McCain's VP selection process: http://tinyurl.com/5zr47h
September 9, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
More good news for Obama:
Ed Koch has formally endorsed Obama and says he'll campaign if asked.
I wonder if Mr. Koch would consider an autumn "vacation" in Florida? ;o)
September 9, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, let's see McCain-Palin try to pick off Hillary voters with this new screw-the-children platform. Obama might also want to mention how McCain voted against SCHIP...
McCain's VP selection process: http://tinyurl.com/5zr47h
September 9, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read David Brooks in today's NYT. He's only half kidding and he has a point. Dems get their butts kicked talking about some shit McCain said 14 years ago that never happened anyway (DOE is still standing).
September 9, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
David Brooks has one point: the one on top of his head.
Bobo is the most idiotic fucking bobo out there next to B. Kristol.
September 9, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
David Brooks has one point: the one on top of his head.
Bobo is the most idiotic fucking bobo out there next to B. Kristol.
September 9, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read David Brooks in today's NYT. He's only half kidding and he has a point. Dems get their butts kicked talking about some shit McCain said 14 years ago that never happened anyway (DOE is still standing).
September 9, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um ... okay
but, McCain in this quote says he would support the DOEs abolition "given the origins"
Now, I'm not too strong on my knowledge of 1867, but apparently, under Andrew Johnson the est. of the DoEdu can be read as a broadening of the powers of Congress which have been so curtailed under Bush etal.
It also seems to speak to a division between State and Federal governments as well as to the gathering and use of statistics, esp. vis a vis discrimination after the Civil War in addressing what was framed as an inadequacy of education in the South.
We could also read individual rights here re: government control more generally, esp re: the standardization of education ...
But, as I said ... I am no historian and there are probably more aspects to the origins of what you rightly ask us to consider: was McCain displaying his characteristic opportunism here?
To which I would also add: What does he know about the origins of the Department of Education? and What, specifically, does he find objectionable in that history?
September 9, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't even think they nor the media would dispute that. Of course, she is going to draw much bigger crowds than him and, of course, that is going to diminish him in many ways. The upshot for us on this is it's less time for her to debate prep/interview prep.
September 9, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's nice to see Obama finally bringing up education -- an area where he clearly excels over McCain.
September 9, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um ... okay
but, McCain in this quote says he would support the DOEs abolition "given the origins"
Now, I'm not too strong on my knowledge of 1867, but apparently, under Andrew Johnson the est. of the DoEdu can be read as a broadening of the powers of Congress which have been so curtailed under Bush etal.
It also seems to speak to a division between State and Federal governments as well as to the gathering and use of statistics, esp. vis a vis discrimination after the Civil War in addressing what was framed as an inadequacy of education in the South.
We could also read individual rights here re: government control more generally, esp re: the standardization of education ...
But, as I said ... I am no historian and there are probably more aspects to the origins of what you rightly ask us to consider: was McCain displaying his characteristic opportunism here?
To which I would also add: What does he know about the origins of the Department of Education? and What, specifically, does he find objectionable in that history?
September 9, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are ver' ver' funny man. Please to haz yur sence of huumor and righteous indignation. It's working. Ha ha.
I am teh convinced! Republicans are aaiight!
September 9, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry Sarge, if I were looking for a pedophile to babysit, I'd be talking to some former members of the Republican Congressional delegation.
September 9, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink