|

Noted scribe turns against his hero — and how!

 richard_moonbat_cohen.gif

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen had always been a great admirer of John McCain, whom he saw as a man of courage, honor and integrity.

Cohen includes himself among what he calls “the journalists accused over the years of being in the tank for McCain.” And then he says, “Guilty.”

But now Cohen is out of that tank, as he explains HERE

Share:

6 Comments

  1. Uncle Bouncy

    And where does he work again?

    Nice try Pat

  2. Uncle Bouncy: You’re another one of those people who think the Washington Post is a wildly liberal paper and obviously never read it. WaPo, for your information, has been a staunch supporter of Bush’s glorious war. The only strongly ideological paper in Washington is the conservative Times, which is published by the Moonies (perfect fit). The fact remains that Cohen was forever a big fan of McCain, but no longer. Tell me, Bouncy, how come you can find no fault with McCain’s repeated lies? Really, tell me. Don’t change the subject to Obama or something else. Tell me why McCain’s lies don’t bother you. I’m interesting in knowing. (Cue the crickets.)

  3. Uncle Bouncy

    The WAPO, like you, doesn’t even try to be bipartisan

    Speaking of lies…what about this one…you are silent on this whopper of a lie by Barry uncovered by Jake Tapper at ABC

    Obama Inflates Role in Creation of Stimulus Package

    September 16, 2008 7:04 PM

    In Golden, Colo., today, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., took credit for the stimulus package that passed earlier this year.

    “In January, I outlined a plan to help revive our faltering economy,” Obama said, “which formed the basis for a bipartisan stimulus package that passed the Congress.”

    Is that true?

    Democrats on Capitol Hill who support Obama say no.

    Wanting Obama to win, however, none will say so on the record.

    But media accounts from the time make it clear that even though Obama, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., all offered legislation to provide stimulus to the economy, congressional leaders looped them and their legislation out of negotiations.

    Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson worked with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kent.

    “Pelosi and Reid seemed to be ignoring the detailed policy solutions being put out by her party’s White House hopefuls,” wrote the Washington Post on January 23.

    “Among Reid’s toughest tasks will be keeping Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and Barack Obama, D-Ill. who are on the campaign trail touting proposals laden with ideas Republicans detest sidelined in the talks while Democrats seek broader agreement with the GOP,” wrote the Associated Press the same day.

    The bill passed 81-16 on February 7, 2008.

    The Obama campaign argues that in January 2008, Obama “was the only candidate to propose a fiscal stimulus plan centered on tax rebate checks for the broad majority of Americans. The bipartisan bill that passed less than a month later was centered on rebate checks to the broad middle class along the lines of what Obama proposed.”

    That is true.

    Obama proposed a tax rebate aimed at middle class families. Clinton’s approach, conversely, focused on specific programs targeted at individuak problems, such as home-heating and mortgage subsidies.

    But though the bill that eventually passed more closely resembled Obama’s than either Clinton’s or McCain’s, those involved in the drafting of the legislation say it was more a matter of agreeing on a good idea and was not a matter of, as Obama claimed, his proposal having “formed the basis for a bipartisan stimulus package that passed the Congress.”

    In Vienna, Ohio, this afternoon, McCain said that Obama today “claimed that the Congressional stimulus package was his idea. That’s news to those of us in Congress who supported it. Senator Obama didn’t even show up to vote.”

    That’s true. (McCain was there, and he voted for it.)

    Moreover, Obama today was guilty of inflating his role in the creation of that bill.

    — jpt

  4. Yeah, Jeez, if Obama had shown up, the bill would have passed by a margin of 66 votes rather than just 65. And who cares if it was basically Obama’s idea more than McCain’s or Clinton’s. This is a big scandal you’ve uncovered here, Bouncy boy. This is a real game-changer in this campaign — much more important than the countless flat-out lies McCain is telling. The pundits will be talking about this for weeks. I guess we can just call off the election, right?

  5. Milton Waddams

    Pat said: Tell me, Bouncy, how come you can find no fault with McCain’s repeated lies? Really, tell me. Don’t change the subject to Obama or something else. Tell me why McCain’s lies don’t bother you. I’m interesting in knowing. (Cue the crickets.)

    So what did you do? You changed the subject to something Obama said. That’s all you guys do. Why am I not surprised. I wouldn’t want to have to defend McCain’s lies either…

  6. Milton: I’m putting you on the Applesauce payroll as our designated enforcer. You can pick up your uniform and weapons in the office.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA

*