When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
36 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hannah Stevens
15 years ago
You know, I want the president of my country to exude confidence, knowing that he can do the job. I remember george bush and how he cowered the day of the 9-11 attack, in fact went off and hid for a whole day. Everybody had to keep building him up saying how presidential he looked when in reality, he looked like an empty suit all of the time and he still does. Now McCain is the one who I think is arrogant; he has o substance to him, hasn’t come forth with any ideas of his own on how to fix this mess that the empty suit got us into. Obama is the man who will lead us out of this abyss.
Gina
15 years ago
After Obama’s whirlwind overseas trip … he said:
“In terms of me governing, being an effective president, that that trip was helpful, because I think I’ve established relationships and a certain bond of trust with key leaders around the world who have taken measure of my positions and how I operate and I think can come away with some confidence that this is somebody I can deal with.”
And … here is what he actually did on his trip … you decide if these 9 days of photo ops were enough to establish Obama as a trusted world leader …
John McCain’s time has passed, and his ideas are rooted in a bygone era of thinking; America needs a young, robust, intellectually vibrant, patriotic, technologically savvy, confident, and ambitious president to rid us of the country’s current state, and that president should be Harvard graduate Senator Barack Obama.
The McCain I Know:
The White House is not a retirement villa, and John McCain is a little too old and much too forgetful to be president of the United States. I will surmise one advantage for McCain, he doesn’t have to work that hard to forget the atrocious Bush policies of the last seven years, it comes naturally for him. Of course, he will have to be reminded constantly, that for some reason, most of his policies are lock-step with the Bush policies; McCain might forget this fact, but Americans should not!
Now on McCain specifically, the media needs to focus on McCain (given a free pass so far), and look through his past and find out why he’s such a nasty, unintelligent and fouled-mouth individual
.
Also, please look and see why McCain graduated in the bottom one percent of his college class? We need a confident and smart president this time, but of course, the Republican leaning media and the McCain campaign couldn’t care less about cognitive abilities.
McCain is not fit to be president of America, and reeks of the old aged bitterness and ideology of the past. The media continues to wrap this incompetent and intellectually impotent man in patriotism (recondite), when in essence, McCain is nothing more than a bitter old Republican warmonger whose time has passed. Let’s invade Iran while we are bogged down in the useless war of Iraq, and while we are missing the legitimate target in Afghanistan; McCain the war hero, give me a break!
Hannah: Your assesment of President Bush in the wake of 9/11 is typical of your kind. You’re still so invested with hate for the man that you cannot even acknowledge his evident and determined leadership. The same leadership that’s kept you and your family safe these past seven years.
Obama could be Satan himself and it wouldn’t matter to you. That’s why this election isn’t about you and your neosocialist brown shirts.
If style over substance is what voters are looking for Obama would be their man. But he’s the emptiest of all suits and we all know that in the #1 job we need someone who understands the riks and consequences of a policy that is all about feeling good and looking good.
Leadership in difficult times demands more than that.
Gregory Dittman
15 years ago
Maybe he should watch The Last Emperor on what happens to leaders in bubbles. Every president that one was on the cocky side. People vote for John Waynes and not Don Knottses. Just look at Ronald Reagan vs Carter in the debates. Generally though those people have something to fall back on while Obama has nothing. He is spending $40 million a month looking pretty, but only leads 2.3%.
M
15 years ago
“Obama is the man who will lead us out of this abyss.” Sure would be nice if he’d specify how instead of hammering a synthetic concept of “change” and “unity” down the throat of the American people.
Mr. Gerald M. Millner“America needs a young, robust, intellectually vibrant, patriotic, technologically savvy, confident, and ambitious president to rid us of the country’s current state, and that president should be Harvard graduate Senator Barack Obama.”
What a load of horseshit! I’m surprised you didn’t die laughing while typing that load of crap!
Sure, if we WANT our countrty governed by a neoMarxist product of left wing & academic elites we could pick Obama and sit and watch as the economy and our freedom disintegrates.
But, we could also pick the safe choice: McCain.
The agism that Milner directs at Obama is on par with the worst kind of racism and sexism.
I’ll bet you said the same thing about Reagan. You were wrong then and you are even more wrong now.
You’re problem is that you leftie neoMarxist loons never learn from your mistakes!
Gerald Millner #3… unless you have a time machine, I find it highly unlikely you “know” John McCain at all. In fact, I suspect your university lifestyle at VA Tech negates you as either a peer of a military man, nor an intimate contact of the GOP candidate.
Not fit to be President? You demonstrate every inch of the self-absorbed university brat. And your ability to be so, you owe to men like John Sidney McCain… a man who’s boots you aren’t fit to wipe with your finest frat muffler.
Since you suffer from an obvious lack of retention of American History, I’ll remind you that this country has run quite well without tech savvy POTUS in the past… mostly because President’s delegate much of their work. They spend far more time in advisory meetings than they do staring at a monitor, dear boy. But you think it’s important they know how to surf e-Bay or monitor Facebook and MySpace.
Our President’s primary job is to be a Commander in Chief of our military… not a scholastic elistist.
Get a grip… finish your PhD, go get a job and spend some time as an adult instead of a pompous, spoiled child with little to no responsibility in life. With your mentality, I’m sure some Ivy league liberal college will let you spend the rest of your days in the university bubble of never never land. But I hope you never get your hands on my granddaughter’s mind.
Until you get some life and reality under your belt, I think I’ll pass on giving you the simple respect of the title “mister”.
BTW, had to dig your sorry cyber butt out of the spam filter… should have left you there. It certainly pegged you correctly.
Susan
15 years ago
Wake up America!
Obama is a nightmare that will leave us shaking if elected for many years to come. He isn’t a leader but a trader to America. He hates America and our way of life. He will welcome the terrorist with open arms and tell them that we deserve what ever crap they do to us. We need a man of honor and someone we can trust in the White house, not some slick charming sales man that could charm a monkey out of a tree. I’ll grant you this, Obama has the knack for smooth talking and he knows it, but that doesn’t fool me one percent. I can’t understand why so many people can’t see thru this guy. The news media is in his hip pocket along with every newspaper and we can’t see that no one will dare stand up to this guy and ask him what he truly believes. He just smiles and waves and thinks he is the ruler of the world and we haven’t even put this idiot in office yet. Come on America you can’t be that dumb to vote for someone you don’t even know what he truly believes in. Please wake up and start asking the hard questions and stop being charmed..
Leah
15 years ago
“The demagogue appeals to ‘the momentary and whimsical popular mood, the transitory or popular passion,’ whereas the leader appeals to ‘true’ and durable majority sentiment. The demagogue is motivated by the desire to augment personal power, whereas the leader is more interested in fostering the permanent interests of the community.” – Jeffrey K. Tulis, The Rhetorical Presidency
Now, doesn’t that sound like someone we all know?
And MH, you took the words right from my fingertips.
B. Hussein X
15 years ago
I agree with Leah. That sounds exactly like someone we all know.
It sounds like Bush, Cheney, McSame, and every other neocon f*ck that has wiped his ass on the Constitution and tried to terrorize the country into believing that the LIB-RHULS want to kill us, and should be tried for treason, imprisoned, or killed.
yeah, it sounds like your guys. Like Oldy McNasty. The country and the world is laughing at you, and laughing at your candidate. Get ready to rehearse that scene from Blazing Saddles: “Th’ Prezidint is a n–” Ding ding, ding ding–What’d he say?–The Prezdint is a-near!
yeh, right. Say it again, say it loud and say it proud. Get used to it: PRESIDENT OBAMA.
Patricia
15 years ago
I want an intelligent president who can keep up with technology for communication. The world is changing FAST because of high tech, and we need someone who UNDERSTANDS THAT.
McCain told Obama he needed to go to Iraq. So he did. He learned much, listened much and looked presidential. Is that so wrong? I trust his worldview much more than McCain’s. But I know many people will play it safe and go for McCain, which you all know means much of the same; you are just afraid to really admit that. Did you not notice that Obama saw the concern in Afghanistan before McCain did? That we needed to have talks with Iran, that we should not have gone to war in Iraq for the reason we did, and McCain did not get the big picture? Yes, he was a POW, but that does not make him a Commander-In-Chief who can make wise decisions. He was a victim, not a leader.
Obama is no more arrogant than McCain. The media has gone overboard on its comments and misscomments about Obama’s trip abroad.
Each candidate has to be forward thinking. McCain has shown repeatedly that he does not even understand his own campaign message. That scares the heck out of me and I am Republican,for now anyway.
Patricia said: “McCain told Obama he needed to go to Iraq. So he did. He learned much, listened much and looked presidential. Is that so wrong?”
What is “so wrong” Patricia is that the man cannot admit he was WRONG in opposing the surge.
If he cannot face the fact that he was WRONG on the most important national security issue our nation faced in the last 5 years he is unfit to be Commander in Chief.
What did Obama “learn” and who did he “listen” to if he can’t face the reality that the surge was a good idea?
Leah
15 years ago
Brush the gnat off my shoulder that’s named B. Hussein X…
Let it go…he’s just another uneducated, immature dumbass…
As for Patricia: It’s been repeated here many times, but I’ll say it again – it’s thanks to Bush we haven’t had another terrorist attack on our soil. It’s thanks to the war and the surge that AQ has been weakened. It’s thanks to this war that Iraq is free from the rule of a dictator. You really think we could have accomplished this for those people and ourselves with “talks”?
And yes, each candidate has to be “forward-thinking”. Candidate Hussein isn’t that candidate.
I want an intelligent president who can keep up with technology for communication. The world is changing FAST because of high tech, and we need someone who UNDERSTANDS THAT.
Perhaps Patricia thinks McCain incapable of inter office emails? Or maybe she think he’ll need to carry on diplomatic policy discussions with Pakistan via emails or chat rooms?
Just what is Patricia’s point on a Presidential need for skills that allow him to be e-Bay proficient?? Is the next President supposed to be Bill Gates or Steve Jobs? Is the use of a Blackberry now a candidate requirement for a POTUS and CIC???
Pathetic show of a graduate of our recent decades of public education – meaning after they dumped Civics classes in favor of “tolerance” or “sex ed”… That anyone thinks a POTUS has time, or that the job entails they to sit in front of a computer screen all day to run the country, shows a real disconnect to the job and it’s demands.
Did you not notice that Obama saw the concern in Afghanistan before McCain did?
Woof.. not only challenged in Civics, but has reading disabilities too. BHO has such a dangerous lack of understanding of Afghanistan, it’s frightening. Yet the same who oppose troops in Iraq are happier than a clam to send ’em to Afghanistan… like that will help. Amazing dual standards here.
For the history deficient – ahem Patricia – both candidates… as well as most of the world… recognized Afghanistan… under complete NATO command for security since mid-2006… has been requesting anywhere from 3000 to 10000 troops from other NATO members for about a year and a half.
McCain would send US troops at last resort, but knew it was more important for those troops to be from the NATO members. He recognized the perception of an even bigger US footprint in Afghanistan made it look like another US unilateral bit on the int’l stage.
Obama completely missed that point. Mr. I can Unite the World doesn’t think about uniting NATO members enough to get them to live up to their obligations. He just gives ‘me a pass, and wants to fill the void with US troops.
Duh…
Then of course, there’s his complete lack of the Afghanistan strategy and problems… more troops in Afghanistan won’t do whit unless they are of a specific warfare, like special forces. Terrorists go thru the revolving door of Pakistan/Afghanistan borders. Add more troops, they come out like cockroaches, do a battle, then run back to Pakistan. It’s a never ending cycle.
Pakistan is key. Yet Obama is bound and determined to unilaterally invade them with troops with “actionable intelligence”. That’ll go a long way in getting allied help in controlling Afghanistan… uh huh.
Pathetic thought processes going in the too many voters minds here. The phrase “too stupid to vote” comes to mind. But the right to vote doesn’t carry a mandate that the person pulling the lever has a clue.
Arthurstone
15 years ago
Yawn.
Obama is ‘arrogant’. Golly!
Picture a Presidential candidate with a great deal of self-confidence. Who’d imagine such a thing? Never noticed McCain or the current President lacking in self-regard.
Truth is ‘arrogant’, repeated ad infinitum is RNC/Rove-speak for ‘uppity’.
“Even if you never met him, you know this guy,” Rove said…. “He’s the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.”
Boy I wish folks had been nicer to Karl in high school.
DW 5000
15 years ago
it’s thanks to Bush we haven’t had another terrorist attack on our soil
Yeah; there was enough damage done on his watch back on September 11. With friends like him, who needs enemies?
Leah
15 years ago
Thanks for that diversion, DimWit. That was brilliant. But what you quoted me on is undeniable.
And you want to talk about the 9/11 attack? Fine. The terrorist threat was there BEFORE Bush stepped into office, during Clinton’s administration. Nothing much was done back then when the Hart-Rudman Commission released it’s report back in 1999 saying that international terrorism posed a threat for us. It wasn’t until 2000 that a Republican Rep. Tillie Fowler proposed to set up an office to deal with this in the federal government, but this legislation was stopped by the Democratic Senate. After that, many Republican Reps. tried their hand at coming up with some response to possible terrorist attacks, including the legislation to create a Homeland Security agency by Thornberry. It was in May 2001 that Bush announced that an agency would be set up to respond to terrorist attacks. 9/11 came and lit a fire under everyone’s ass to stop stalling and to create the homeland security agency.
Here:
On October 2001, President Bush announced the creation of an Office of Homeland Security within the Executive Office of the President, perhaps hoping to preempt legislative action by Congress.
– David E. Lewis
Yeah, it was Bush being lazy. It was Bush not doing anything. I agree.
Next thing I know, you’re going to tell me you believe the WTC conspiracy theories.
DW 5000
15 years ago
And you want to talk about the 9/11 attack? Fine. The terrorist threat was there BEFORE Bush stepped into office, during Clinton’s administration. Nothing much was done back then when the Hart-Rudman Commission released it’s report back in 1999 saying that international terrorism posed a threat for us. It wasn’t until 2000 that a Republican Rep. Tillie Fowler proposed to set up an office to deal with this in the federal government, but this legislation was stopped by the Democratic Senate. After that, many Republican Reps. tried their hand at coming up with some response to possible terrorist attacks, including the legislation to create a Homeland Security agency by Thornberry. It was in May 2001 that Bush announced that an agency would be set up to respond to terrorist attacks. 9/11 came and lit a fire under everyone’s ass to stop stalling and to create the homeland security agency.
I pasted the whole thing so I couldn’t be accused of “cherrypicking quotes.”
I fully understand that this spin has always found really good traction with you wingnuts. More power to you–I’m glad you have your own private happy place to go to. You always give Clinton responsibility for every bad thing that happened during the Bush administration; you’ll forgive us, then, when every bad thing that happens during the Obama administration is laid at 43’s doorstep.
If Obama is as bad as you people pretend he’ll be, George W. will be stomping out metaphorical bags of burning dog crap for many, many years. It’ll be unfortunate if he has that stuff all over his shoes when he’s standing in the dock at the Hague.
Leah
15 years ago
Nah, you got it wrong, DW. You mostly get blamed for twisting and misunderstanding comments. You know, your natural talent.
I fully understand that this spin has always found really good traction with you wingnuts. More power to you–I’m glad you have your own private happy place to go to. You always give Clinton responsibility for every bad thing that happened during the Bush administration;
Oh, I see. So now you’re calling what’s actual fact a “wingnut spin”? You’re trying to tell me that those experts, who have studied these events of political and presidential history much longer and more in-depth than you have are nothing more than Republican-loving liars who only want to make the Democrats look bad?
Bravo.
You can’t argue what’s fact. And this isn’t an attempt to blame Clinton for what happened during the Bush administration – this is fact.
That comment by Dim Wit about Bush “standing in the dock at the Hague” just shows how totally out to lunch he is.
What a shame that even idiots can vote.
doug
15 years ago
“The big question now is will Obama be able to rein in enough of his monstrously oversized ego to fool enough people into thinking he’s a humble down to earth guy just like them?”
Gee, I think that’s a ‘trick question’.
Let me try it, too (but with some added reality nuggets): Many voters wonder about McCain, he would be our oldest elected president, his questionable health, being a cancer surviver, former POW. Yet what would happen if the Obama campaign ran an add that McCain may suffer from PTSD …from his years of captivity, torture, including three years in solitary and abuse …so extreme that, as he himself put it, “broke” him to the point he attempted suicide several times.
Therefore, The big question may become, can a man that certainly was traumatized, and submitted a 1400 page medical history –to only a few “media doctors” in just several hours without access to paper, pen, and electronic gadgets, for examination– be said to be properly medically and psychologically vetted of PTSD?
Doug: If I were in your shoes I might try and change the subject too. But in doing so, you merely highlight the attitude problem that your candidate has.
doug
15 years ago
Mike,
It’s really not a matter of changing the subject, although I’m sure that’s what you would like everyone to think that’s my goal; it’s a negative media forecast, based on a run of McCain’s weak points, found in surveys, and hence, it’s simply whether or not it will be used.
If you couple that with PTSD and want to go negative, there is a formula available to do significant damage.
Milbank’s piece that sparked all this ‘ego-talk’ is a thin morning subjective mist, and as such it will evaporate quickly in the hot summer sun while the public is listening to their kids play in the front yard. But come fall, when the folks are camping around the tv, and Obama wants to poke a stick in McCain’s life past, he’ll have many things to hit, with many people to verify it.
As far as Obama’s arrogance goes, in today’s media-presidency you have to be an egomaniac and delusionally self-absorbed personality; such an excessive self-love is a requirement and is even apparent in their willingness to forgo meaningful ties of family and friends and live and dine with vampires and Ubermachs. To say McCain is above all that is absurd.
You all here seem to have no idea of what’s in store for McCain.
Dang I love it when you go into political-palm-reader mode, Doug… “you all here seem to have no idea of what’s in store for McCain” And you do? Puleeeze! Do give me some stock tips, guy… BTW, are keeping tabs on all your predictions so we can go over them together and assess your accuracy rate? But I gotta hand it to you… few are so willing to go out on a limb and predict the future with some finality.
Personally, I didn’t need Dana Milbank to point out BHO’s arrogance. It became evident, and steadily grew, starting in the primary debates when he saw he was giving HRC a run for the Clinton’s big money and fan base.
So your claim, “as such it will evaporate quickly in the hot summer sun” – while a deliciously visual constructed phrase – totally depends upon BHO acquiring some humility. That, my friend, ain’t going to happen. Right now, he’s on arrogant-autopilot, buying into his own press hook, line and sinker. I suspect it will get worse before better…. unless something comes around to genuinely humble him.
in today’s media-presidency you have to be an egomaniac and delusionally self-absorbed; such an excessive self-love is apparent in their willingness to forgo meaningful ties of family and friends and live and dine with vampires and Ubermachs.
Mercy, even you describe him as “an egomaniac and delusionally self-absorbed. The difference between you and me is that’s okay with you, and very *not* with me.
Funny… GWB was far from that, instead projecting the good ol’ country boy with whom you would expect would be relaxed at a 91 year old’s birthday party in the back yard. Oh yeah… he did that, eh?
Arthurstone
15 years ago
Mike typed:
‘What a shame that even idiots can vote.’
Amen. Jill certainly votes AND she knows who Jesus would pull the lever for!
‘Maybe he should watch The Last Emperor on what happens to leaders in bubbles.’
Certainly you’re aware Bernardo Beertolucci is a notorious Marixist & avowed communist. Be careful watching his films.
Commie agitprop at its best.
DW 5000
15 years ago
And you do? Puleeeze! Do give me some stock tips, guy… BTW, are keeping tabs on all your predictions so we can go over them together and assess your accuracy rate? But I gotta hand it to you… few are so willing to go out on a limb and predict the future with some finality.
Holy crap! I can’t even believe you’re going here! All you guys do is explain in detail everything that will happen with an Obama presidency, precisely as if it had already happened: all the missteps he’ll make with economics, foreign policy, and so on and so on. Many people here have predicted the literal downfall of the American system and its replacement with a Communist dictatorship on the Stalinist model. Have you taken a single one of those persons to task in the same way?
In his 2002 book, “Worth the Fighting For,” John McCain offered this confession — an acknowledgment of a restless mind: “Although I seem to tolerate introspection better the older I am, there are still too many claims on my attention to permit more than the briefest excursions down the path of self-awareness. When I am no longer busy with politics, and with my own ambitions, I hope to have more time to examine what I have done and failed to do with my career, and why.”
A telling observation, or so it seems, and refreshingly candid for a public figure. But the words are not John McCain’s. They were written by his longtime aide Mark Salter, McCain’s literary alter ego. “Worth the Fighting For,” like McCain’s other four books, is by “John McCain With Mark Salter,” as they all say on their covers. This comment on McCain’s disinclination to commit introspection was “my surmise,” Salter said in a recent interview in his windowless office at McCain headquarters in Crystal City. He explained his technique:
“It’s his voice, but I’m going inside his head to speak some psychological truth about him. I’m drawing a conclusion based on my observation of him. I always show him: ‘This is what I’ve written. This is what I think about you. Is this fair?’ ” No one is closer to McCain than Salter, who has been with him since 1989. Their associates describe a “mind meld” that has created an extraordinarily close partnership. But even Salter sometimes has to guess what McCain might be thinking, particularly on sensitive subjects. “Things go on inside McCain’s head that rarely or never come out,” Salter explained.
Never mind about the things going in, what about the things coming out (as the piece describes):
McCain can be impatient with complicated answers to questions he considers straightforward, with gray when he sees black and white. For example, he sees no gray outcome possible in Iraq: “In war,” he has said, “there is no such thing as compromise; you either win or you lose.” But he has not defined victory in Iraq, and many wars have ended ambiguously.
McCain’s commentary on Iraq often echoes his descriptions of the Vietnam War. He can make both sound like classical military confrontations and rarely mentions their political complexities. Asked about this in the interview, McCain said the North Vietnamese won with a tank-led invasion of South Vietnam at a time when President Richard Nixon, hobbled by the Watergate scandal, could not respond by using American air power. “We lost in Vietnam because we lost the will to fight, because we did not understand the nature of the war we were fighting, and because we limited the tools at our disposal,” McCain has said, implying that the war could have been won — again without defining victory.
Is it possible that in both Vietnam and Iraq, “victory” was and is beyond the reach of the United States, because in both cases only locals — Vietnamese and Iraqis — could ensure a satisfactory outcome to the conflict by finding a political resolution? McCain is impatient with this argument. In recent days, he has all but declared victory in Iraq: “This conflict has succeeded,” he said in the interview. “All I can say is they [the Iraqis] are establishing the rule of law, they’re going to be having elections, and I think they’re becoming an effective government, which is what our strategy was, thanks to the genius of a guy named David Petraeus.”
McCain has repeatedly lambasted Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) for failing to understand the Iraq war. McCain was asked about Obama’s warnings in 2002 that a war against Iraq was a bad idea that would require a U.S. “occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.” Wasn’t Obama more prescient than McCain, who gave repeated prewar assurances such as “the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators” and “we will win it easily”? McCain replied: “I think that’s a legitimate question.”
Then he added: “But the fact is, we did win easily. It was terribly mismanaged.”
What the heck… got a few spare minutes and a modicum of tolerance… Per DW’s retort about my bud, Doug’s political fortune telling career:
Holy crap! I can’t even believe you’re going here! All you guys do is explain in detail everything that will happen with an Obama presidency, precisely as if it had already happened: all the missteps he’ll make with economics, foreign policy, and so on and so on. Many people here have predicted the literal downfall of the American system and its replacement with a Communist dictatorship on the Stalinist model. Have you taken a single one of those persons to task in the same way?
Shining light on the obvious to the oblivious… Predictions on an Obama presidency, and the financial and policy repercussions, are all based on campaign promises of what the candidate intends to do, given full cooperation with Congress. Ample scrutiny of the ballooned tax expenses from the proposed policy semi-specifics provided by BHO himself isn’t fortune telling.
The only thing that can change predictable economic and foreign policy fallout is if the candidate is a lying sack o sheeeet…. which is entirely possible, and would be welcomed by most of us.
By contrast, Doug is merely a citizen, predicting the future based on polls or what he thinks foreign leaders will do. He is not running for office, is not making campaign promises to act on, not in a position to formulate domestic or foreign policy. But, I do find him always entertaining and pleasurable with which to deal.
But Doug’s projected outrage from Maliki INRE the death of a relative of a raid? Didn’t happen. The SOFA predictions of failure? Clock hasn’t run out of those, and Iraq still insists they want an agreement. Thus all parties are still at the table and in negotiations. Even if a SOFA happens under the next POTUS, there will still be a SOFA or some agreement for US presence. His predictions for what’s upcoming in the Nov election? Way premature.
Thus, the batting average so far ain’t looking too good… and I think I’ll place more credibility in “Madam Rue”
****************
Doug, quote per your WaPo piece…
“In war,” he has said, “there is no such thing as compromise; you either win or you lose.” But he has not defined victory in Iraq, and many wars have ended ambiguously.
Quite frankly, most of these excerpts seem to revolve around Kaiser’s inability to comprehend what victory is. That seems to be a personal problem.
Only the most narrow minded of biased idiots can repeat the mantra today – “define success” – and expect the majority of the world to buy into that nonsense.
Fact is, the world has been told the definition of “victory” over and over, but it’s politically inconvenient to acknowledge the definition…. and for the anal retentive that may be present, I’ll say it yet again. Victory in Iraq is a nation with a freely elected govt that can sustain and protect itself, be a partner in intel and engage with the world in trade as a free nation.
Even liberal media who banked on failure are seeing the results of a nation emerging. To suggest any war is a failure because the country went askew after liberation is absurd. War cannot insure a rosy path for anyone, including our own nation. Had we ended up with a different form of government than we have now, would the American Revolution be a failure?
War and and successful liberation from tyranny can only provide opportunity for the benefiting nation to proceed – sans despotic rule. How people handle their freedoms is not controllable. However wars are fought because leaving them under oppression is not an option.
Boy, Mike… we might be waiting a long time to post something on McCain. No one in the MSM writes anything about him anymore…. He’s officially an “also ran”, nothing more. Or, for many of us, “not Obama”. Not exactly a glowing stamp of approval, I know. But we goes to the polls with the candidates we have.. not the ones we wish we had.
Arthurstone
15 years ago
Mike wondered:
‘Why not wait until someone here actually does a post where the principle topic is McCain?’
Then he attempted irony, a mistake:
‘Or do you just have all these attack lines itching at you to use them?’
Uh. That’s what you do Mike.
Mataharley answered:
‘Boy, Mike… we might be waiting a long time to post something on McCain. No one in the MSM writes anything about him anymore…. He’s officially an “also ran”, nothing more.’
But actually Mike was asking about ‘someone here’ posting about McCain.
And the answer is simple.
This crowd has little to say about the man or his candidacy. And I can’t say as how I blame them.
One of the most cynical politicians ever who will grovel as needed to try and achieve what he most wants. A lousy congressional record and a man who brings nothing to the dance.
Nice going, Arthur… Link to a five day old piece from a second tier print media with a story all about how Obama is dominating the media coverage….
You made my point. Few stories we can post because there are few informative stories offered. As I pointed out in my Obama talks with Pakistan PM kept under wraps” post, I had to go to foreign media to find out if a conversation between JSM and Gilani even took place.
This crowd has little to say about the man or his candidacy. And I can’t say as how I blame them.
Many here have plenty to say about JSM. And most of us, while less than thrilled, support him because he’s not the Marxist Obama.
But at least he *has* a congressional record to look at… talk about bringing nothing to the dance. That’s His Messiahship in a nutshell.
Arthurstone
15 years ago
Mataharley gloated:
‘Nice going, Arthur… Link to a five day old piece from a second tier print media with a story all about how Obama is dominating the media coverage….’
Pretty much at random Mata.
Illustrates there is no shortage of trivia and useless information on each candidate.
Not quite as you put it, ‘No one in the MSM writes anything about him anymore…. He’s officially an “also ran”, nothing more.’
Put less delicately, that’s a lie.
And I’m certain you read the last sentence of the piece then. I know it filled me with dread…
“And to think, as the campaign tit-for-tat goes full bore, this is still only July, with weeks and weeks of the campaign left to tread.”
The story wasn’t about McCain. It was about OBAMA and McCain. Couldn’t you even dig up something recent dedicated only to JSM and his policies alone that perhaps had today’s date??
But at last we have a brief fleeting moment of harmony, Arthur. It’s going to be a very long rest of the campaign season… I share the dread.
You know, I want the president of my country to exude confidence, knowing that he can do the job. I remember george bush and how he cowered the day of the 9-11 attack, in fact went off and hid for a whole day. Everybody had to keep building him up saying how presidential he looked when in reality, he looked like an empty suit all of the time and he still does. Now McCain is the one who I think is arrogant; he has o substance to him, hasn’t come forth with any ideas of his own on how to fix this mess that the empty suit got us into. Obama is the man who will lead us out of this abyss.
After Obama’s whirlwind overseas trip … he said:
“In terms of me governing, being an effective president, that that trip was helpful, because I think I’ve established relationships and a certain bond of trust with key leaders around the world who have taken measure of my positions and how I operate and I think can come away with some confidence that this is somebody I can deal with.”
And … here is what he actually did on his trip … you decide if these 9 days of photo ops were enough to establish Obama as a trusted world leader …
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,390741,00.html
John McCain’s time has passed, and his ideas are rooted in a bygone era of thinking; America needs a young, robust, intellectually vibrant, patriotic, technologically savvy, confident, and ambitious president to rid us of the country’s current state, and that president should be Harvard graduate Senator Barack Obama.
The McCain I Know:
The White House is not a retirement villa, and John McCain is a little too old and much too forgetful to be president of the United States. I will surmise one advantage for McCain, he doesn’t have to work that hard to forget the atrocious Bush policies of the last seven years, it comes naturally for him. Of course, he will have to be reminded constantly, that for some reason, most of his policies are lock-step with the Bush policies; McCain might forget this fact, but Americans should not!
Now on McCain specifically, the media needs to focus on McCain (given a free pass so far), and look through his past and find out why he’s such a nasty, unintelligent and fouled-mouth individual
.
Also, please look and see why McCain graduated in the bottom one percent of his college class? We need a confident and smart president this time, but of course, the Republican leaning media and the McCain campaign couldn’t care less about cognitive abilities.
McCain is not fit to be president of America, and reeks of the old aged bitterness and ideology of the past. The media continues to wrap this incompetent and intellectually impotent man in patriotism (recondite), when in essence, McCain is nothing more than a bitter old Republican warmonger whose time has passed. Let’s invade Iran while we are bogged down in the useless war of Iraq, and while we are missing the legitimate target in Afghanistan; McCain the war hero, give me a break!
Hannah: Your assesment of President Bush in the wake of 9/11 is typical of your kind. You’re still so invested with hate for the man that you cannot even acknowledge his evident and determined leadership. The same leadership that’s kept you and your family safe these past seven years.
Obama could be Satan himself and it wouldn’t matter to you. That’s why this election isn’t about you and your neosocialist brown shirts.
Now, don’t you have a book burning to go to?
Gina, that was a good story:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,390741,00.html
If style over substance is what voters are looking for Obama would be their man. But he’s the emptiest of all suits and we all know that in the #1 job we need someone who understands the riks and consequences of a policy that is all about feeling good and looking good.
Leadership in difficult times demands more than that.
Maybe he should watch The Last Emperor on what happens to leaders in bubbles. Every president that one was on the cocky side. People vote for John Waynes and not Don Knottses. Just look at Ronald Reagan vs Carter in the debates. Generally though those people have something to fall back on while Obama has nothing. He is spending $40 million a month looking pretty, but only leads 2.3%.
“Obama is the man who will lead us out of this abyss.” Sure would be nice if he’d specify how instead of hammering a synthetic concept of “change” and “unity” down the throat of the American people.
Mr. Gerald M. Millner“America needs a young, robust, intellectually vibrant, patriotic, technologically savvy, confident, and ambitious president to rid us of the country’s current state, and that president should be Harvard graduate Senator Barack Obama.”
What a load of horseshit! I’m surprised you didn’t die laughing while typing that load of crap!
Sure, if we WANT our countrty governed by a neoMarxist product of left wing & academic elites we could pick Obama and sit and watch as the economy and our freedom disintegrates.
But, we could also pick the safe choice: McCain.
The agism that Milner directs at Obama is on par with the worst kind of racism and sexism.
I’ll bet you said the same thing about Reagan. You were wrong then and you are even more wrong now.
You’re problem is that you leftie neoMarxist loons never learn from your mistakes!
Gerald Millner #3… unless you have a time machine, I find it highly unlikely you “know” John McCain at all. In fact, I suspect your university lifestyle at VA Tech negates you as either a peer of a military man, nor an intimate contact of the GOP candidate.
Not fit to be President? You demonstrate every inch of the self-absorbed university brat. And your ability to be so, you owe to men like John Sidney McCain… a man who’s boots you aren’t fit to wipe with your finest frat muffler.
Since you suffer from an obvious lack of retention of American History, I’ll remind you that this country has run quite well without tech savvy POTUS in the past… mostly because President’s delegate much of their work. They spend far more time in advisory meetings than they do staring at a monitor, dear boy. But you think it’s important they know how to surf e-Bay or monitor Facebook and MySpace.
Our President’s primary job is to be a Commander in Chief of our military… not a scholastic elistist.
Get a grip… finish your PhD, go get a job and spend some time as an adult instead of a pompous, spoiled child with little to no responsibility in life. With your mentality, I’m sure some Ivy league liberal college will let you spend the rest of your days in the university bubble of never never land. But I hope you never get your hands on my granddaughter’s mind.
Until you get some life and reality under your belt, I think I’ll pass on giving you the simple respect of the title “mister”.
BTW, had to dig your sorry cyber butt out of the spam filter… should have left you there. It certainly pegged you correctly.
Wake up America!
Obama is a nightmare that will leave us shaking if elected for many years to come. He isn’t a leader but a trader to America. He hates America and our way of life. He will welcome the terrorist with open arms and tell them that we deserve what ever crap they do to us. We need a man of honor and someone we can trust in the White house, not some slick charming sales man that could charm a monkey out of a tree. I’ll grant you this, Obama has the knack for smooth talking and he knows it, but that doesn’t fool me one percent. I can’t understand why so many people can’t see thru this guy. The news media is in his hip pocket along with every newspaper and we can’t see that no one will dare stand up to this guy and ask him what he truly believes. He just smiles and waves and thinks he is the ruler of the world and we haven’t even put this idiot in office yet. Come on America you can’t be that dumb to vote for someone you don’t even know what he truly believes in. Please wake up and start asking the hard questions and stop being charmed..
Now, doesn’t that sound like someone we all know?
And MH, you took the words right from my fingertips.
I agree with Leah. That sounds exactly like someone we all know.
It sounds like Bush, Cheney, McSame, and every other neocon f*ck that has wiped his ass on the Constitution and tried to terrorize the country into believing that the LIB-RHULS want to kill us, and should be tried for treason, imprisoned, or killed.
yeah, it sounds like your guys. Like Oldy McNasty. The country and the world is laughing at you, and laughing at your candidate. Get ready to rehearse that scene from Blazing Saddles: “Th’ Prezidint is a n–” Ding ding, ding ding–What’d he say?–The Prezdint is a-near!
yeh, right. Say it again, say it loud and say it proud. Get used to it: PRESIDENT OBAMA.
I want an intelligent president who can keep up with technology for communication. The world is changing FAST because of high tech, and we need someone who UNDERSTANDS THAT.
McCain told Obama he needed to go to Iraq. So he did. He learned much, listened much and looked presidential. Is that so wrong? I trust his worldview much more than McCain’s. But I know many people will play it safe and go for McCain, which you all know means much of the same; you are just afraid to really admit that. Did you not notice that Obama saw the concern in Afghanistan before McCain did? That we needed to have talks with Iran, that we should not have gone to war in Iraq for the reason we did, and McCain did not get the big picture? Yes, he was a POW, but that does not make him a Commander-In-Chief who can make wise decisions. He was a victim, not a leader.
Obama is no more arrogant than McCain. The media has gone overboard on its comments and misscomments about Obama’s trip abroad.
Each candidate has to be forward thinking. McCain has shown repeatedly that he does not even understand his own campaign message. That scares the heck out of me and I am Republican,for now anyway.
Patricia said: “McCain told Obama he needed to go to Iraq. So he did. He learned much, listened much and looked presidential. Is that so wrong?”
What is “so wrong” Patricia is that the man cannot admit he was WRONG in opposing the surge.
If he cannot face the fact that he was WRONG on the most important national security issue our nation faced in the last 5 years he is unfit to be Commander in Chief.
What did Obama “learn” and who did he “listen” to if he can’t face the reality that the surge was a good idea?
Brush the gnat off my shoulder that’s named B. Hussein X…
Let it go…he’s just another uneducated, immature dumbass…
As for Patricia: It’s been repeated here many times, but I’ll say it again – it’s thanks to Bush we haven’t had another terrorist attack on our soil. It’s thanks to the war and the surge that AQ has been weakened. It’s thanks to this war that Iraq is free from the rule of a dictator. You really think we could have accomplished this for those people and ourselves with “talks”?
And yes, each candidate has to be “forward-thinking”. Candidate Hussein isn’t that candidate.
Perhaps Patricia thinks McCain incapable of inter office emails? Or maybe she think he’ll need to carry on diplomatic policy discussions with Pakistan via emails or chat rooms?
Just what is Patricia’s point on a Presidential need for skills that allow him to be e-Bay proficient?? Is the next President supposed to be Bill Gates or Steve Jobs? Is the use of a Blackberry now a candidate requirement for a POTUS and CIC???
Pathetic show of a graduate of our recent decades of public education – meaning after they dumped Civics classes in favor of “tolerance” or “sex ed”… That anyone thinks a POTUS has time, or that the job entails they to sit in front of a computer screen all day to run the country, shows a real disconnect to the job and it’s demands.
Woof.. not only challenged in Civics, but has reading disabilities too. BHO has such a dangerous lack of understanding of Afghanistan, it’s frightening. Yet the same who oppose troops in Iraq are happier than a clam to send ’em to Afghanistan… like that will help. Amazing dual standards here.
For the history deficient – ahem Patricia – both candidates… as well as most of the world… recognized Afghanistan… under complete NATO command for security since mid-2006… has been requesting anywhere from 3000 to 10000 troops from other NATO members for about a year and a half.
McCain would send US troops at last resort, but knew it was more important for those troops to be from the NATO members. He recognized the perception of an even bigger US footprint in Afghanistan made it look like another US unilateral bit on the int’l stage.
Obama completely missed that point. Mr. I can Unite the World doesn’t think about uniting NATO members enough to get them to live up to their obligations. He just gives ‘me a pass, and wants to fill the void with US troops.
Duh…
Then of course, there’s his complete lack of the Afghanistan strategy and problems… more troops in Afghanistan won’t do whit unless they are of a specific warfare, like special forces. Terrorists go thru the revolving door of Pakistan/Afghanistan borders. Add more troops, they come out like cockroaches, do a battle, then run back to Pakistan. It’s a never ending cycle.
Pakistan is key. Yet Obama is bound and determined to unilaterally invade them with troops with “actionable intelligence”. That’ll go a long way in getting allied help in controlling Afghanistan… uh huh.
Pathetic thought processes going in the too many voters minds here. The phrase “too stupid to vote” comes to mind. But the right to vote doesn’t carry a mandate that the person pulling the lever has a clue.
Yawn.
Obama is ‘arrogant’. Golly!
Picture a Presidential candidate with a great deal of self-confidence. Who’d imagine such a thing? Never noticed McCain or the current President lacking in self-regard.
Truth is ‘arrogant’, repeated ad infinitum is RNC/Rove-speak for ‘uppity’.
“Even if you never met him, you know this guy,” Rove said…. “He’s the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.”
Boy I wish folks had been nicer to Karl in high school.
Yeah; there was enough damage done on his watch back on September 11. With friends like him, who needs enemies?
Thanks for that diversion, DimWit. That was brilliant. But what you quoted me on is undeniable.
And you want to talk about the 9/11 attack? Fine. The terrorist threat was there BEFORE Bush stepped into office, during Clinton’s administration. Nothing much was done back then when the Hart-Rudman Commission released it’s report back in 1999 saying that international terrorism posed a threat for us. It wasn’t until 2000 that a Republican Rep. Tillie Fowler proposed to set up an office to deal with this in the federal government, but this legislation was stopped by the Democratic Senate. After that, many Republican Reps. tried their hand at coming up with some response to possible terrorist attacks, including the legislation to create a Homeland Security agency by Thornberry. It was in May 2001 that Bush announced that an agency would be set up to respond to terrorist attacks. 9/11 came and lit a fire under everyone’s ass to stop stalling and to create the homeland security agency.
Here:
– David E. Lewis
Yeah, it was Bush being lazy. It was Bush not doing anything. I agree.
Next thing I know, you’re going to tell me you believe the WTC conspiracy theories.
I pasted the whole thing so I couldn’t be accused of “cherrypicking quotes.”
I fully understand that this spin has always found really good traction with you wingnuts. More power to you–I’m glad you have your own private happy place to go to. You always give Clinton responsibility for every bad thing that happened during the Bush administration; you’ll forgive us, then, when every bad thing that happens during the Obama administration is laid at 43’s doorstep.
If Obama is as bad as you people pretend he’ll be, George W. will be stomping out metaphorical bags of burning dog crap for many, many years. It’ll be unfortunate if he has that stuff all over his shoes when he’s standing in the dock at the Hague.
Nah, you got it wrong, DW. You mostly get blamed for twisting and misunderstanding comments. You know, your natural talent.
Oh, I see. So now you’re calling what’s actual fact a “wingnut spin”? You’re trying to tell me that those experts, who have studied these events of political and presidential history much longer and more in-depth than you have are nothing more than Republican-loving liars who only want to make the Democrats look bad?
Bravo.
You can’t argue what’s fact. And this isn’t an attempt to blame Clinton for what happened during the Bush administration – this is fact.
That comment by Dim Wit about Bush “standing in the dock at the Hague” just shows how totally out to lunch he is.
What a shame that even idiots can vote.
“The big question now is will Obama be able to rein in enough of his monstrously oversized ego to fool enough people into thinking he’s a humble down to earth guy just like them?”
Gee, I think that’s a ‘trick question’.
Let me try it, too (but with some added reality nuggets): Many voters wonder about McCain, he would be our oldest elected president, his questionable health, being a cancer surviver, former POW. Yet what would happen if the Obama campaign ran an add that McCain may suffer from PTSD …from his years of captivity, torture, including three years in solitary and abuse …so extreme that, as he himself put it, “broke” him to the point he attempted suicide several times.
Therefore, The big question may become, can a man that certainly was traumatized, and submitted a 1400 page medical history –to only a few “media doctors” in just several hours without access to paper, pen, and electronic gadgets, for examination– be said to be properly medically and psychologically vetted of PTSD?
This lays in the wings for McCain.
Doug: If I were in your shoes I might try and change the subject too. But in doing so, you merely highlight the attitude problem that your candidate has.
Mike,
It’s really not a matter of changing the subject, although I’m sure that’s what you would like everyone to think that’s my goal; it’s a negative media forecast, based on a run of McCain’s weak points, found in surveys, and hence, it’s simply whether or not it will be used.
23% of the public, near a quarter of those surveyed, find McCain’s age a problem.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108712/McCains-Age-Seen-More-Problem-Than-Obamas-Race.aspx
If you couple that with PTSD and want to go negative, there is a formula available to do significant damage.
Milbank’s piece that sparked all this ‘ego-talk’ is a thin morning subjective mist, and as such it will evaporate quickly in the hot summer sun while the public is listening to their kids play in the front yard. But come fall, when the folks are camping around the tv, and Obama wants to poke a stick in McCain’s life past, he’ll have many things to hit, with many people to verify it.
As far as Obama’s arrogance goes, in today’s media-presidency you have to be an egomaniac and delusionally self-absorbed personality; such an excessive self-love is a requirement and is even apparent in their willingness to forgo meaningful ties of family and friends and live and dine with vampires and Ubermachs. To say McCain is above all that is absurd.
You all here seem to have no idea of what’s in store for McCain.
Dang I love it when you go into political-palm-reader mode, Doug… “you all here seem to have no idea of what’s in store for McCain” And you do? Puleeeze! Do give me some stock tips, guy… BTW, are keeping tabs on all your predictions so we can go over them together and assess your accuracy rate? But I gotta hand it to you… few are so willing to go out on a limb and predict the future with some finality.
Personally, I didn’t need Dana Milbank to point out BHO’s arrogance. It became evident, and steadily grew, starting in the primary debates when he saw he was giving HRC a run for the Clinton’s big money and fan base.
So your claim, “as such it will evaporate quickly in the hot summer sun” – while a deliciously visual constructed phrase – totally depends upon BHO acquiring some humility. That, my friend, ain’t going to happen. Right now, he’s on arrogant-autopilot, buying into his own press hook, line and sinker. I suspect it will get worse before better…. unless something comes around to genuinely humble him.
Mercy, even you describe him as “an egomaniac and delusionally self-absorbed. The difference between you and me is that’s okay with you, and very *not* with me.
Funny… GWB was far from that, instead projecting the good ol’ country boy with whom you would expect would be relaxed at a 91 year old’s birthday party in the back yard. Oh yeah… he did that, eh?
Mike typed:
‘What a shame that even idiots can vote.’
Amen. Jill certainly votes AND she knows who Jesus would pull the lever for!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51121
Gregory Dittman offered:
‘Maybe he should watch The Last Emperor on what happens to leaders in bubbles.’
Certainly you’re aware Bernardo Beertolucci is a notorious Marixist & avowed communist. Be careful watching his films.
Commie agitprop at its best.
Holy crap! I can’t even believe you’re going here! All you guys do is explain in detail everything that will happen with an Obama presidency, precisely as if it had already happened: all the missteps he’ll make with economics, foreign policy, and so on and so on. Many people here have predicted the literal downfall of the American system and its replacement with a Communist dictatorship on the Stalinist model. Have you taken a single one of those persons to task in the same way?
Today’s WP front page psycho-political McCain head-check is a peach!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080103032_pf.html
Never mind about the things going in, what about the things coming out (as the piece describes):
A perfect example of pretzel logic.
“Unfettered capitalism leads to corruption”
I knew I liked McCain for a reason.
What the heck… got a few spare minutes and a modicum of tolerance… Per DW’s retort about my bud, Doug’s political fortune telling career:
Shining light on the obvious to the oblivious… Predictions on an Obama presidency, and the financial and policy repercussions, are all based on campaign promises of what the candidate intends to do, given full cooperation with Congress. Ample scrutiny of the ballooned tax expenses from the proposed policy semi-specifics provided by BHO himself isn’t fortune telling.
The only thing that can change predictable economic and foreign policy fallout is if the candidate is a lying sack o sheeeet…. which is entirely possible, and would be welcomed by most of us.
By contrast, Doug is merely a citizen, predicting the future based on polls or what he thinks foreign leaders will do. He is not running for office, is not making campaign promises to act on, not in a position to formulate domestic or foreign policy. But, I do find him always entertaining and pleasurable with which to deal.
But Doug’s projected outrage from Maliki INRE the death of a relative of a raid? Didn’t happen. The SOFA predictions of failure? Clock hasn’t run out of those, and Iraq still insists they want an agreement. Thus all parties are still at the table and in negotiations. Even if a SOFA happens under the next POTUS, there will still be a SOFA or some agreement for US presence. His predictions for what’s upcoming in the Nov election? Way premature.
Thus, the batting average so far ain’t looking too good… and I think I’ll place more credibility in “Madam Rue”
****************
Doug, quote per your WaPo piece…
Quite frankly, most of these excerpts seem to revolve around Kaiser’s inability to comprehend what victory is. That seems to be a personal problem.
Only the most narrow minded of biased idiots can repeat the mantra today – “define success” – and expect the majority of the world to buy into that nonsense.
Fact is, the world has been told the definition of “victory” over and over, but it’s politically inconvenient to acknowledge the definition…. and for the anal retentive that may be present, I’ll say it yet again. Victory in Iraq is a nation with a freely elected govt that can sustain and protect itself, be a partner in intel and engage with the world in trade as a free nation.
Even liberal media who banked on failure are seeing the results of a nation emerging. To suggest any war is a failure because the country went askew after liberation is absurd. War cannot insure a rosy path for anyone, including our own nation. Had we ended up with a different form of government than we have now, would the American Revolution be a failure?
War and and successful liberation from tyranny can only provide opportunity for the benefiting nation to proceed – sans despotic rule. How people handle their freedoms is not controllable. However wars are fought because leaving them under oppression is not an option.
Doug: Again you want to ignore the topic of this post in order to launch another ageist attack on McCain.
Why not wait until someone here actually does a post where the principle topic is McCain?
Or do you just have all these attack lines itching at you to use them?
Boy, Mike… we might be waiting a long time to post something on McCain. No one in the MSM writes anything about him anymore…. He’s officially an “also ran”, nothing more. Or, for many of us, “not Obama”. Not exactly a glowing stamp of approval, I know. But we goes to the polls with the candidates we have.. not the ones we wish we had.
Mike wondered:
‘Why not wait until someone here actually does a post where the principle topic is McCain?’
Then he attempted irony, a mistake:
‘Or do you just have all these attack lines itching at you to use them?’
Uh. That’s what you do Mike.
Mataharley answered:
‘Boy, Mike… we might be waiting a long time to post something on McCain. No one in the MSM writes anything about him anymore…. He’s officially an “also ran”, nothing more.’
Not quite.
http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/1110636.html
But actually Mike was asking about ‘someone here’ posting about McCain.
And the answer is simple.
This crowd has little to say about the man or his candidacy. And I can’t say as how I blame them.
One of the most cynical politicians ever who will grovel as needed to try and achieve what he most wants. A lousy congressional record and a man who brings nothing to the dance.
Wes Clark is right.
Nice going, Arthur… Link to a five day old piece from a second tier print media with a story all about how Obama is dominating the media coverage….
You made my point. Few stories we can post because there are few informative stories offered. As I pointed out in my Obama talks with Pakistan PM kept under wraps” post, I had to go to foreign media to find out if a conversation between JSM and Gilani even took place.
Many here have plenty to say about JSM. And most of us, while less than thrilled, support him because he’s not the Marxist Obama.
But at least he *has* a congressional record to look at… talk about bringing nothing to the dance. That’s His Messiahship in a nutshell.
Mataharley gloated:
‘Nice going, Arthur… Link to a five day old piece from a second tier print media with a story all about how Obama is dominating the media coverage….’
Pretty much at random Mata.
Illustrates there is no shortage of trivia and useless information on each candidate.
Not quite as you put it, ‘No one in the MSM writes anything about him anymore…. He’s officially an “also ran”, nothing more.’
Put less delicately, that’s a lie.
And I’m certain you read the last sentence of the piece then. I know it filled me with dread…
“And to think, as the campaign tit-for-tat goes full bore, this is still only July, with weeks and weeks of the campaign left to tread.”
The story wasn’t about McCain. It was about OBAMA and McCain. Couldn’t you even dig up something recent dedicated only to JSM and his policies alone that perhaps had today’s date??
But at last we have a brief fleeting moment of harmony, Arthur. It’s going to be a very long rest of the campaign season… I share the dread.