The Tuesday ‘BushWhack’ing

Another day, another edition of the ‘Daily’

• Not long after he promised to balance the budget, Sen. McCain avows that spending is out of control… (well duhhhh. And whom do we have to thank for that Mr. McCain? You’re ‘good friend’ the president, whose policies you want to maintain… the fact you, and your backers, don’t see that is what makes you the wrong candidate…)
• It’s STILL the economy stupid… and both candidates realize that. Though Obama sees it more so than McCain, though that could be McCain’s eyes…
• The Senate begins debate today on the bill that would give telecommunication companies immunity for participating in the Bush(whacked) Administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. While there is small but vocal strong bipartisan opposition, a final vote is planned for Wednesday and is expected to pass… (of course it will. Why should the Senate show any balls towards a lame-duck president… I just don’t get it…)
• CNN continues to claim they have the “best political team on TV”, and it’s no wonder when you have commentaries such as “Candidates wise to court Hispanic vote” (It’s so hard to express sarcasm in the written form)
• 500 tons of low-grade uranium were shipped out of Iraq recently… count down to conservatives claiming this proves Saddam had WMD’s in five, four, three…
• Two respected former secretaries of state, James Baker III and Warren Christopher, say the next time a US president goes to war; Congress should be required to say whether it agrees. The duo, co-chairmen of a bipartisan study group, are proposing legislation that would require just that; the president has to consult lawmakers before initiating any combat that would last longer than a week, then giving Congress 30 days to approve or deny the action. (good idea, but considering how gutless Congress is with this lame-duck of a president, I’m not optimistic that it will pass… are you?)
• And have we mentioned? That Sen. McCain is senile? How else could you explain his ludicrous claim that his administration would pay off the enormous deficit with “savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations.” (first of all, victory in Afghanistan is NOT certain, as the recent upswing in violence is indicative of. Second, what exactly is victory in Iraq? Third, how exactly would victories in either or both nations pay off the national debt? I want to know how… well Mr. McCain; we’re waiting…)