NEWS FLASH! McCain Campaign Embraces Terrorist-Sympathizer Endorsement

[The implied "facts" contained in the following editorial essay have not been verified by Fact-Check.Org, for obvious reasons. Caveat lector.]

In an Odd Twist in a Presidential Campaign Redolent with Odd Twists, military hero and former prisoner of war and Republican presidential candidate Arizona Senator John McCain today publicly accepted the political endorsement of an American citizen widely renowned as a “terrorist sympathizer” of the unrepentant co-founder and former member of the “Weathermen” branch of the Students for a Democratic Society [SDS], William Charles “Bill” Ayers.

John McCain Publicly Embracing
a Terrorist-Sympathizer's Endorsement?

Could This Mean That John McCain
Associates with Terrorists?

What Kind of Human Being, Totally Unfit for the Office of United States President, would associate with, and even sympathize with, such an unrepentant terrorist? This was a man who bombed the Pentagon–—just as Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda suicide airplane pilots did when they hijacked a commercial American airline flight and flew the plane, passengers and all, into the side of the Pentagon, the nerve center of the American military services.

This Was a Man Responsible for the Deaths of Innocent Americans. This was a man who, on the day of the greatest tragedy ever to befall the United States, September 11, 2001, said that “I only wish we had bombed more.”

The Unrepentant Marxist-Communist Many Years Ago infiltrated the public-education system of one of the nation’s largest cities, secretly working as part of an undisclosed Communist “cell,” to brainwash the minds of that city's innocent children, “many of whom were just in Kindergarten, being taught sex education,” an occasionally reliable source told this reporter.

In Semi-Public Meetings, Using the Facilities of a Chicago-Area Church of Christ, these blatant enemies of the American way of life met weekly, for more than twenty years, during which meetings their cell leader shouted venomous messages of hate, even going so far as to curse America, rather than to “bless” America.

Meanwhile, Chicago Police Have Been Able to Do Nothing against this insidious group of terrorists and terrorist sympathizers and radical organizers, and others....one sympathizer of whom now openly endorses the Republican presidential nominee.

....And John McCain Embraces
this Terrorist-Sympathizer's Endorsement!

Police Hands Have Been Tied by the Liberal Plot to guarantee the “civil rights” of terrorists and community organizers, while depriving the rest of America the same civil rights. We have even heard talk, in some quarters, that some fellow occupants of al Qaeda-occupied Iraq seek the power to arrest and try innocent American citizens, situated in Iraq in relation to the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, for alleged crimes committed against people situated in Iraq....who may themselves be actual al Qaeda terrorists.

John McCain Accepting a Terrorist-Sympathizer's Endorsement?

Will the Outrages Never End?

Not on Our Watch. Not until the night of November 4th.

The Ad Itself presents the videotaped image and voice of this terrorist-sympathizer saying, “I want to thank.....John McCain” for his “outstanding leadership” in a bill that “establishes limits for greenhouse-gas emissions.” This effort seeks to destabilize the anti-environmental economy by reducing those so-called “greenhouse gases” necessary to preserving the American way of life.

The Terrorist-Sympathizer Endorsement Ad Ends with the Voice of John McCain Saying:

“I'm John McCain. And I approve this message.”

Watch the Actual Ad Here:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Multimedia/Player.aspx?guid=e9396871-471d-42e5-a907-3dea3b313681

Renowned Illegal Alien and Presumed al Qaeda-Sympathizer, Kal-El, was not immediately available for comment.

Questioning Basic Assumptions

How Is it That Conservatives Seem Blind to Facts that are so obvious to the rest of us? Here are some examples:


Item One: Trickle-Down Economics
If the Consumer Drives the Engine of the Economy, how could a “trickle-down” theory possibly make sense? The wealthy already have more money than they can spend. But this concept has driven Conservative economic theory from Ronald Reagan all the way through to last month’s collapse.


Item Two: The Innate Wisdom of Self-Interest
Writing recently in The New York Times, conservative columnist David Brooks made the following statement:

“Economic models and entire social science disciplines are premised on the assumption that people are mostly engaged in rationally calculating and maximizing their self-interest.”

—David Brook, “The Behavioral Revolution.” The New York Times, 10/27/2008
[Italics Channeling Barack Obama]

Any Non-Conservative Student of Behavior Knows that simplistic reasoning such as this, when applied to a complex organism such as “people,” will err. “Economic models” based on such simplistic reasoning will fail.

And Failed, This One Has.


Item Three: The Self-Regulating Effects of Self-Interest
In Recent Congressional Testimony former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said:

“This crisis, however, has turned out to be much broader than anything I could have imagined. [T]hose of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder’s equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief. ”

—Dr. Alan Greenspan, “Testimony Before the Committee of Government Oversight and Reform,” 10/23/2008

Any Non-Conservative Student of Human Behavior Knows, predicated on the flaw in Item Two, that “self-interest” has many competing claims put against it. The example of the Marine who throws himself on a grenade to save his comrade exemplifies that in a most basic form.

Chairman Greenspan’s Illusions About the Relationship between greed and self-interest seem too-naive even to consider: If such a relationship existed, then America’s initial need for regulation and oversight would not have arisen. It did not take the current crisis to make this clear.


Item Four: Vetting Sarah Palin
Over the Course of a Month, Kathleen Parker wrote several related essays, beginning with this one published on September 03, 2008:

Would anyone ever ask whether a male candidate was qualified for office because his daughter was pregnant?....[W]hat’s perfectly clear is that feminism today is not about advancing women, but only a certain kind of woman....There may yet be reasons to find Palin an unacceptable vice presidential choice, but making pro-life decisions shouldn’t be among them.

—Kathleen Parker, “Who needs feminists?” Washington Post Writer’s Group, 09/03/2008

But Then on 09/26/2008, Ms. Parker Wrote:

[I]t is increasingly clear that Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn’t know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions warrant her promotion.

The Most-Interesting Thing About the Belated Discovery of what for many had been immediately apparent is that Ms. Parker’s announcement of her discovery did not include an apology to those who could tell, from the nomination acceptance speech itself, that Governor Palin had these deficiencies:

Some of the passionately feminist critics of Palin who attacked her personally deserved some of the backlash they received. But circumstances have changed since Palin was introduced as just a hockey mom with lipstick.....and a more complicated picture has emerged.

—Kathleen Parker, “Sarah Palin should bow out.” Washington Post Writer’s Group, 09/26/2008
[Italics Channeling Barack Obama]

It Does Not Seem to Occur to Ms. Parker that the earlier critics might merely have seen more clearly than Ms. Parker managed to see. The changing circumstances may just have been the veil lifted from some Conservative eyes.


What Is Notable About the Conservative Failures and Epiphanies here is that the errors of reason which preceded each “Aha!” moment seem so clear to those of us not blinded by the folly of Conservative thinking for the past twenty-eight years. But how would one go about explaining the limitations of Conservative vision to self-confident Conservatives themselves? To those who generally (as in the example of Ms. Parker’s essays) seem content to decide first, and think later?

We Began With the Question, “How is it that Conservatives Seem Blind to Facts that are so obvious to the rest of us?” No ready answer arrives to clear the confusion. However, if the Obama-Biden ticket should prevail on Tuesday, thoughtful Conservatives of the Republican Party should have at least the next four years in which to figure out what has kept them so blind to many of the economic and political realities of life.