May 16, 2008
Is John McCain Bush's Poodle? (Brent Budowsky)
John McCain is a much better man than the low-road campaign he pursues when the worst president in history, George W. Bush, launches a low-road attack on Barack Obama from abroad and John McCain is reduced to saying: Me too.
If Tony Blair was called Bush's poodle, John McCain now aspires to that mantle by giving total support when George Bush does what no other president has ever done, attack a domestic opponent while abroad.
McCain cannot have it both ways, giving a speech claiming he will work with Democrats, then within minutes parroting Bush's low-road attack. McCain apparently forgot his own position about talking to Hamas, which Obama does not support, putting Obama to the right of McCain on Hamas, while Bush and McCain slander Obama with the latest cheap shot.
Want an indefinite commitment in Iraq? Bush and McCain are your men. Oppose stronger assistance to veterans? Bush and McCain are your team. Want tax cuts to the wealthy while not giving strong support to vets? The Bush-McCain pair is for you.
Do you believe in government by laissez-faire that does little when Americans are being foreclosed upon? Then Bush and McCain point the way together.
Should America engage in torture? McCain used to disagree, but now joins the Bush team with one of the worst flip-flops of his career in a shameful and outrageous vote.
But above all, what has earned McCain the right to the mantle of Bush's poodle is this:
Bush twists, distorts and misrepresents history and is the only president in our history to make low-road attacks on a political opponent while abroad. Reagan didn't do it; Ford didn't do it; George H.W. Bush didn't do it; Roosevelt and Truman didn't do it. Jack Kennedy didn't do it and even Richard Milhous Nixon never did this in his darkest days.
Bush did it, and John McCain was reduced to joining Bush on the low road to demeaning our politics, our democracy and the presidency.
John McCain should have known better, but when George Bush initiated one of the lowest moments of a low road presidency, John McCain could only say, "Me too," which makes him a serious contender for the title of Bush's poodle.
Barack Obama stands tall and presidential leading an army of Democrats firing back, while John McCain looks like another small Bush Republican in an age when America wants nothing more than Bush Republicanism to fade into the dustbin of history.
Permalink TrackBack EMail This Post
Share this post
What's This 31 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Brent is a like a robot programmed to implement the Democratic agenda. Command: paint McCain as Bush. Result: this column.
Comment by Igor R. — May 16, 2008 @ 12:18 pm
Igor I listed a series of facts about where
McCain and Bush share the same low road and
wrong policies. I notice you did not disagree
with any one of them. Can I assume you agree
with my specific points? If not why don't you
let us know which point I raised that you dont
agree with and which facts I stated that you
believe are wrong? Name calling wont work
for you, for Bush, or for McCain. If you are
agreeing with the specific points I raised,
great, and I thank you for that. Otherwise
feel free instead of name calling to challenge
anything I wrote because that is a debate
between you and the facts. Brent
Comment by Brent — May 16, 2008 @ 12:36 pm
It would be more logical to ask if Barack Obama is Jeremiah Wright's attack dog. John McCain has little to do with Bush, conservative principles or about 34% of the Republican party. If he loses that will be why? Anyone who states the debate on Global Warming is over is a complete lunatic, since there never was a debate.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 16, 2008 @ 1:03 pm
I am waiting for Lester to say: "Wright on, Brent. Great articles, as always".
Comment by Misha — May 16, 2008 @ 1:04 pm
Brent, you want low-road attacks on foreign soil by US President? Try Jimmy Carter from Plains, GA. That clown is doing whatever he can to put down USA and its current President, starting from his acceptance speech in Oslo for Nobel "Peace" Prize, and leading up to his meetings with Hamas murderers against strong recommendation from US State Department. And speaking of lap poodles, your predictable posts that precisely reflect Obama's daily talking points are a great way for you to become s lapdog in Obama's administration. Looks like paper training has started…
Comment by Misha — May 16, 2008 @ 1:09 pm
Brent, anybody could claim to read anybody else's mind, but Bush did not refer to Obama, while McCain did.
Let me quote from NYT:
"President Bush used a speech to the Israeli Parliament on Thursday to liken those who would negotiate with “terrorists and radicals” to appeasers of the Nazis — a remark widely interpreted as a rebuke to Senator Barack Obama, who has advocated greater engagement with countries like Iran and Syria.
Mr. Bush did not mention Mr. Obama by name, and White House officials said he was not taking aim at the senator…"
So Bush in a speech in Israel that's surrounded by radicals and terrorists shooting missiles even as he spoke denounces something that is advocated by a lot of world leaders much more directly than by Obama, some even in Israel, and something that Carter had just done, and Obama explodes in self-righteous indignations, making himself looks silly from my perspective because he was very quick to recognize himself in this remark, McCain then attacks Obama, domestically, because he's got an opening, and that somehow proves that McCain is Bush?
All of this is happening while the Democrats are trying to paint McCain as a direct continuation of Bush for obvious reasons, and McCain is doing whatever he can to distance himself from Bush. That is the background for why I wrote what I wrote.
The point about indefinite commitment in Iraq is fair, although I would obviously frame it very differently. The vet comment is unfair in my opinion, because McCain simply doesn't want to gut the armed forces. I have no comment at the moment on the torture situation because I don't know about the vote, but to frame anyone as Bush for not wanting an even bigger taxpayer bailout of the lenders and mortgage holders who voluntarily got to where they are, which is the default position of any fiscal conservative seems like a stretch.
Comment by Igor R. — May 16, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
Contrary to popular myth, domestic politics in America do not "stop at the water's edge." They begin there.
Every aspiring American president makes the obligatory pilgrimage to Israel to kiss some hirsute Hebrew hindquarters in search of kosher votes and campaign contributions in America. If Senator Brack Obama hasn't made his own feudal genuflection to the "eternal" crusader kingdom yet, he soon will. It surprises me that Brent Budowski hasn't picked up on this pathetic pattern by now.
In the present instance, Deputy Dubya Bush — Dick Cheney's propaganda catapulting pooch-screwer par excellence — at least offered the required and humiliating American supplication in person. Senator Obama, for his pandering part, hasn't even left the continental united states in trying to prove himself equally, if not more, subservient to our "stalwart ally" than Deputy Dubya, Senator You-Know-Her, and the foreign-born Senator "Panama John" McBomb.
It apparently has escaped Senator Obama and Brent Budowski that America has no treaty of allicance whatsoever with the aparthied Zionist entity. This one-way state of affairs means that Israel has no reciprocal treaty obligations towards America — just a self-serving vampire baby's leeching fangs embedded in America's national jugular. Bankrupt and browbeaten Amerians should not hold their breath waiting for Senator Obama to demand that this "stalwart ally" of ours begin deploying a few troops (and dollars) to Iraq or Afghanistan. We American poodles could really use some help with the Muslim-bashing that Israel so loudly and obnoxiously orders us to carry out in Israel's, but not America's, intrest.
Israel owns Senator Obama as easily and completely as it owns Deputy Dubya Bush, Senator You-Know-Her, and Panama-John McBomb. If we must engage in doggie metaphors about poodles, it would at least seem more equitable to point out that Israel has a black as well as several white ones (of both genders) in its American kennel.
Personally, I long for the bygone days of American semi-independence when former President George H. W. Bush's secretary of state, James Baker III, would say of Israel and its AIPAC lobby: "F*ck em'. They didn't vote for us." At least America had a few dogs that could wag their own tails back then.
Comment by Michael Murry — May 16, 2008 @ 2:05 pm
Brent–let me offer you some support. I think your post was spot on. McCain 2000 is no McCain 2008 and he should be taken to task for it.
Incidentally-
This was McCain position on Hamas two years ago:
Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"
McCain answered: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."
The indefinite war has now become the six year war (we win in 2013)
He has flip flopped on so many issues, it would require several more posts to list them all.
Poodle?—a cacophonous parrot is prob more appropriate.
Comment by Theard — May 16, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
You nailed it again Brent. It is obvious you nailed it because you got Timothy McVeigh (Misha) and the leader of the third riech (Igor) all worked up in to a tizzy with your spot on prose. These 2 intellectual midget are clowns that have thier panties in a wad. Afterall, they voted for President 27%, twice. I got the feeling from these two neocon goofballs that the GOP is becoming a bit concerned about a possible President Obama.
Comment by Lester — May 16, 2008 @ 2:36 pm
There's Lester in his Code Pink wardrobe again.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 16, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
I'm beginning to wonder if McCain is seriously trying to lose to avoid facing the disastor he'll be inheriting. All of America knows that if Bush was to ever stop short, McCains head would go straight up his ass. It's getting uglier by the day.
Comment by andy42302 — May 16, 2008 @ 3:23 pm
Lester, I already took care of a praise for Brent in my post #4 above. Every post he makes, he just nails all of us real good! Yes, I worry about President Obama because at his very first meeting with Iran's tyrant Ahmadinejad there would be instant chemistry, mutual admiration and desire to "work together" for the common good (Islamic causes). Just read some history about WWII and fellows like Hitler and Chamberlain, you undereducated follower.
Comment by Misha — May 16, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
Brent, you are spot on, as our British friends would say. Maybe this answers the curious question as to why McCain has called for a regular British-style joint Congressional meeting. Maybe not a bad idea, but your article puts it in a different perspective.
So far as those who are defending Bush (and McCain) for
his despicable comparison, I answered Ron Christie's apololgetics:
Was the President in a foreign country? Did his remarks, even though vague, insinuate that anyone who would use dialogue instead of war as first tool is guilty of "appeasement" and worse?
Is there anyone more prominent
than Senator Obama in calling for a return to dialogue first and war last? Perhaps…
President Carter has consistently used the approach to save countless lives in the world; Bush's methods have resulted in 4000 plus American deaths, as many as a million Iraqi deaths, with additional millions displaced from their homes. Bush has held thousands in prison camps without hope of due process or even acknowledgement of their incarceration.
To imply that Obama and/or Carter should be compared to those who sought to appease Hitler would be laughable if it wasn't for the tragically real Hitler comparison that should be made here.
Out of respect for the office, but certainly not for the man,
I won't state the obvious.
So far
Was the President in a foreign country? Did his remarks, even though vague, insinuate that anyone who would use dialogue instead of war as first tool is guilty of "appeasement" and worse?
Is there anyone more prominent
than Senator Obama in calling for a return to dialogue first and war last? Perhaps…
President Carter has consistently used the approach to save countless lives in the world; Bush's methods have resulted in 4000 plus American deaths, as many as a million Iraqi deaths, with additional millions displaced from their homes. Bush has held thousands in prison camps without hope of due process or even acknowledgement of their incarceration.
To imply that Obama and/or Carter should be compared to those who sought to appease Hitler would be laughable if it wasn't for the tragically real Hitler comparison that should be made here.
Out of respect for the office, but certainly not for the man,
I won't state the obvious.
Comment by smilinjack — May 16, 2008 @ 5:41 pm
Sorry (but not very) for the duplicate paragraphs ….
Comment by smilinjack — May 16, 2008 @ 5:43 pm
Andy, McCain's campaign was at death's door last summer, and he resurrected it by taking out a personal bank loan. The guy has been running since 2000 at least. It seems like a strange pattern for someone who is trying to lose and avoid "the disaster".
Comment by Igor R. — May 16, 2008 @ 6:46 pm
Brent, I must say that the dustbin of history is the last place for this crew. That and the first fourteen words are my only disagreements. Heaven help us we would be doomed to repeat the last decade. Prison first and then an annual burning in effigy along the line of Guy Fawkes.
Comment by M. Richard — May 16, 2008 @ 9:39 pm
The stunt that Bush pulled in Israel and McCain followed up on could not happen to Obama. He is just head and shoulders above both Republicans. Obama has a very sharp brain. Unlike Bush/McCain, he actually can and does think! He is also an achiever - unlike Bush/McCain. Take a look at Obama's incredibly well-organized campaign. Here on Vancouver Island in Canada, one of the last things American visitors see on leaving the island are big billboards urging them to vote for Obama. Since most Canadians - like the rest of the non-American world - are praying for an Obama victory, nobody would object to Obama signs. This is, however, the very first time that American election signs have shown up in Canada. Obama leaves no stones unturned in anything he does. He is simply one of the most capable and upstanding politicians that the USA has ever produced. Another sign of Obama's superiority is that Brent Budowsky supports him 100%. What more does anyone need or want?
Comment by B. Blogman — May 17, 2008 @ 12:43 am
I find it funny that the nay-sayers in here think McCain is nothing like Bush, or his own party - HYSTERICAL! Especially since McCain has voted in favor of Bush and his party nearly 90% of the time in the last few years. PLUS, as Brent points out, McBush has flip-flopped on just about every single issue that earned him his "maverick" status - a total facade perpetuated by the media these days.
Yep, McBush agreeing with Bush's misunderstanding of what appeasement actually means is the clincher (FYI appeasement isn't diplomatic talks, it's actually giving in to the enemy's desires, exactly like Bush immediately gave into Osama's desire after 9/11 to remove the US base off his holy land). They are both excellent examples of ineptitude!!!
Comment by Heather — May 17, 2008 @ 12:53 am
Hillary Clinton looks strong and presidential as well, and she didn't cheat in the caucus votes and didn't publicly complain about Barack Obama cheating in the caucus states.
Comment by Alessandro Machi — May 17, 2008 @ 1:00 am
By the way, Mr. Bush has never had even an inkling of an idea about history. He seems to have learned everything he knows from "My Pet Goat" or a Hollywood film or two. For him to compare Obama to Prime Minister Chamberlain as an appeaser is yet another example of the gaping enormity of Dubya's ignorance, vacuity, and conceit.
A far more accurate comparison would be between Bush and Hitler. Both launched "preemptive", unjustifiable wars of aggression. Both bankrupted their nations. Both used torture and "rendition" (i.e. put prisoners into concentration camps without charges or trials). Both came to power through crude manipulation of the democratic process. The big difference between Hitler and Bush is obvious: the former was the product and leader of a corporate and undemocratic plutocracy. The latter turned the leading democracy of the free world into a rogue nation, a corporate plutocracy and an economic basket case. And Grandpa McCain is playing Goering to Bush's Hitler. McCain as succesor? Give me a break! Give the world a break.
Comment by B. Blogman — May 17, 2008 @ 1:11 am
Well, since Tony Blair is gone Bush needs a new poodle. And who could be better qualified than flip flop king John McCain.
Gee, Obama will make toast out of this wannabe maverick in Novembe.
Comment by Jimbo — May 17, 2008 @ 10:20 am
The way the neocons on this blog go out of their way to belittle Budowsky and Obama discloses how badly they fear the inevitable, which is Obama as our next President.
They prefer an administration that lies to its people, tramples our Constitution, engages in torture, eliminates Habeus Corpus, exposes CIA operatives for political gain, innundates the citizenry with fear, lines the wallets of defense contractors with our tax dollars, bankrupts our treasury, sends our young people to die so they and their cronies can become richer and on and on and on ad nauseum……
It's so obvious you neocons are running scared and it's pitiful the way you parrot Bush by trying to fear monger on a blog the way Bush peddles fear to Americans.
Go away neocons. You have nearly destroyed the greatest nation history has ever known and you need to just wither away forever for the sake of humanity.
Comment by E Jack Hewlitt — May 17, 2008 @ 1:21 pm
Besides being a flip-flopper Supreme, and not knowing who's allied with who in Iraq-"Iran trains al-Qaeda"-all anyone needs to know about "milk crate" McCain is that he kissed up to the same slimy GOP operatives who said, during the 2000 South Carolina, that McCain's adopted daughter was actually his out of wedlock daughter.
Someone who won't even do right by their own family-for an actual decent act, adopting a child to give them a better life-and instead fervently embraces those same knuckledraggers who smeared him and his daughter, does NOT have the moral or ethical character to be President, or do what's right.
Comment by KingCranky — May 18, 2008 @ 12:30 pm
It would be most appropriate to say Bush is Cheney's poodle, therefore, McCain is Cheney's little chihuahua. Great post as always Brent. Your fan in Key West.
Janet Myers
Comment by Jan M. — May 18, 2008 @ 11:18 pm
B. Blogman, your crude comparisons of Bush to Hitler, who caused the deaths of over fifty million people, and who had a clear half-implemented plan to eliminate several ethnic groups, are over the top. Yet they are so common on leftist "sources of information" that to you they seem completely natural.
However when Bush speaks out against appeasement in Israel, that's just a stupid stunt.
The left in this country knows deep inside that they are gulty of appeasement for over forty years, and some go back a lot earlier. For those who think that Barack Obama is something new, read the history of Alger Hiss or any number of other exciting fellow travelers. What's new about Obama are his closeness to the highest office in the land based on vague promises of "change" (something that should send shivers down any thinking person's spine) and his Islamic and terrorist connections.
Comment by Igor R. — May 19, 2008 @ 2:51 pm
Igor;
You have surely forgotton that Bush's grandfather Prescott was Hitler's banker. Look it up if you want too. That means that Bush has a special relationship with an appeaser, his grandfather.
Comment by Mike Coleman — May 19, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
Igor, if you don't like the comparison of Dubya with Hitler, you can substitute Kaiser Wilhelm II for Hitler. Both Dubya and the Kaiser came to power only through their family connections. Both were born with a silver foot in their mouth. Before taking over the highest office in their lands, both had been failures in everything they tried. Both were obsessed with showing their families how great they were. Both conducted wars of aggression. Both were responsible for the deaths of countless of their own fellow-citizens and hundreds of thousands of others. Both had bombastically imperialistic ambitions for their countries. Both got their countries bogged down in unwinnable wars that were catastrophic in every way - politically, economically, and morally.
Igor, you may be right that the comparison of Bush with Hitler is not an exact fit. You've got to admit, though, that the shrub is a dead ringer for the Kaiser. Dubya's codpiece-attired "Mission-Accomplished" theatrics on the aircraft carrier would have been right up Wilhelm II's alley. Fess up: I'm right and you know it, you wingy appeaser, you.
Comment by B. Blogman — May 20, 2008 @ 1:11 am
B. Blogman, I'm not one of Bush's greatest fan and don't know enough about the Kaiser to argue one way or another about your analogy, but the Iraq war was an important, positive war screwed up by over three years of bad strategy, and yes many of Bush's personality flaws contributed to that. It will yet bring extremely positive results unless a Democrat implements a withdrawal not tied to the conditions on the ground.
Comment by Igor R. — May 20, 2008 @ 2:19 pm
Igor, you are too one of Bush's biggest fans, if not his BIGGEST fan. Come on. You've parrotted and fallen for about every single talking point his office has put out for at least the 15 months I've been visiting this site. Are you running from President 27% now? Does his unpopularity (27%) embarrass you to the point that you now claim to not be "one of his biggest fans" of his. You're flip-flopping Igor, and it's so fun to watch.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Oh Igor, you are so funny. I'm trying to catch my breath.
Comment by Lester — May 20, 2008 @ 3:30 pm
Lester, I have always supported the surge and low taxes. I have always criticized Bush on improper conduct of the war for the first 3+ years, his lack of communications ability, and especially his illegal immigration policy. To the "Bush is Hitler" crowd anything positive seems like being the biggest fan, but that's just them (you).
Comment by Igor R. — May 20, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
[…] John McCain legt weer eens uit dat hij - anders dan Barack Obama keer op keer beweert - geen George Bush is. Grote vraag: wat moet McCain doen om zijn Bush-imago af te schudden? Grote spandoeken meenemen op campagne waarop staat: "I'm not John McBush!"? Vlaggetjes uitdelen waarop staat: "Vote for John McCain, not George Bush III"? Elk interview beginnen met de zin: "First, I'm not George Bush"…? Moeilijk hoor! McCains grootste opponent zit gek genoeg in het Witte Huis. Zie hier en hier en hier en hier. Barrack Obama, John McCain, Politiek, Verenigde Staten, Verkiezingen Terug naar het blog […]
Pingback by Quote du Jour: McCain = Bush - Sargasso — June 6, 2008 @ 4:01 am