PDA

View Full Version : Elections Sullivan: John McCain is morally unfit to be President


jAZ
09-10-2008, 11:06 AM
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/mccains-integri.html

McCain's Integrity
10 Sep 2008 12:40 pm

For me, this surreal moment - like the entire surrealism of the past ten days - is not really about Sarah Palin or Barack Obama or pigs or fish or lipstick. It's about John McCain. The one thing I always thought I knew about him is that he is a decent and honest person. When he knows, as every sane person must, that Obama did not in any conceivable sense mean that Sarah Palin is a pig, what did he do? Did he come out and say so and end this charade? Or did he acquiesce in and thereby enable the mindless Rovianism that is now the core feature of his campaign?

So far, he has let us all down. My guess is he will continue to do so. And that decision, for my part, ends whatever respect I once had for him. On core moral issues, where this man knew what the right thing was, and had to pick between good and evil, he chose evil. When he knew that George W. Bush's war in Iraq was a fiasco and catastrophe, and before Donald Rumsfeld quit, McCain endorsed George W. Bush against his fellow Vietnam vet, John McCain in 2004. By that decision, McCain lost any credibility that he can ever put country first. He put party first and his own career first ahead of what he knew was best for the country.

And when the Senate and House voted overwhelmingly to condemn and end the torture regime of Bush and Cheney in 2006, McCain again had a clear choice between good and evil, and chose evil.

He capitulated and enshrined torture as the policy of the United States, by allowing the CIA to use techniques as bad as and worse than the torture inflicted on him in Vietnam. He gave the war criminals in the White House retroactive immunity against the prosecution they so richly deserve. The enormity of this moral betrayal, this betrayal of his country's honor, has yet to sink in. But for my part, it now makes much more sense. He is not the man I thought he was.

And when he had the chance to engage in a real and substantive debate against the most talented politician of the next generation in a fall campaign where vital issues are at stake, what did McCain do? He began his general campaign with a series of grotesque, trivial and absurd MTV-style attacks on Obama's virtues and implied disgusting things about his opponent's patriotism.

And then, because he could see he was going to lose, ten days ago, he threw caution to the wind and with no vetting whatsoever, picked a woman who, by her decision to endure her own eight-month pregnancy of a Down Syndrome child in public, that he was going to reignite the culture war as a last stand against Obama. That's all that is happening right now: a massive bump in the enthusiasm of the Christianist base. This is pure Rove.

Yes, McCain made a decision that revealed many appalling things about him. In the end, his final concern is not national security. No one who cares about national security would pick as vice-president someone who knows nothing about it as his replacement. No one who cares about this country's safety would gamble the security of the world on a total unknown because she polled well with the Christianist base. No person who truly believed that the surge was integral to this country's national security would pick as his veep candidate a woman who, so far as we can tell anything, opposed it at the time.

McCain has demonstrated in the last two months that he does not have the character to be president of the United States. And that is why it is more important than ever to ensure that Barack Obama is the next president. The alternative is now unthinkable. And McCain - no one else - has proved it.

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 11:08 AM
Oh I get it. Because McCain is pro-Christian he hasn't the character to be the next President. Well, LA-DE-DAAA! We all can't be muslim lovers!

Donger
09-10-2008, 11:10 AM
"picked a woman who, by her decision to endure her own eight-month pregnancy of a Down Syndrome child in public"

That's pretty revolting.

mlyonsd
09-10-2008, 11:10 AM
Sounds like the liberals are getting worried.

jAZ
09-10-2008, 11:13 AM
Sounds like the liberals are getting worried.

Sounds like you don't know who you are talking about...

http://images.barnesandnoble.com/images/13900000/13909912.JPG

mlyonsd
09-10-2008, 11:15 AM
Sounds like you don't know who you are talking about...

http://images.barnesandnoble.com/images/13900000/13909912.JPG

ROFL You're right. I didn't.

Advantage jAZ.

patteeu
09-10-2008, 11:16 AM
:deevee:

Donger
09-10-2008, 11:17 AM
Isn't Sullivan a homosexual?

Mr. Laz
09-10-2008, 11:19 AM
Sullivan: John McCain is morally unfit to be President (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/mccains-integri.html)

aren't most republicans morally unfit?

McCain seems a natural fit to lead them

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 11:19 AM
Isn't Sullivan a homosexual?

Aaaaaahh. That's whats going on here.

patteeu
09-10-2008, 11:20 AM
Sounds like you don't know who you are talking about...

Andrew Sullivan is torn between his understanding that conservative economics make more sense than what the liberals offer and the personal pain he feels because one of the key factions in the right wing alliance doesn't endorse his lifestyle. He's one of the liberals' favorite conservative these days.

Programmer
09-10-2008, 11:20 AM
Oh I get it. Because McCain is pro-Christian he hasn't the character to be the next President. Well, LA-DE-DAAA! We all can't be muslim lovers!

We can be, but we don't HAVE to be.

I guess I missed the part where Bush approved breaking bones and sticking bamboo splinters under the fingernails.

What bothers me most is Obama NOT being pro-Christian. He is totally avoiding any link to Christianity, even after spending over 20 years at the Christian Church he is a member of. Does anyone else have a problem with this lack of comment?

Last I heard a Christian was tasked with sharing the good news.

Programmer
09-10-2008, 11:22 AM
aren't most republicans morally unfit?

McCain seems a natural fit to lead them

Morally unfit is the definition of Bill Clinton, JFK, FDR, etc. And you feel most republicans are morally unfit?

I"m still waiting for Obama's past to catch up with the media.

penchief
09-10-2008, 11:24 AM
Oh I get it. Because McCain is pro-Christian he hasn't the character to be the next President. Well, LA-DE-DAAA! We all can't be muslim lovers!

No, he doesn't deserve to be president because he's behaved in a manner that is unworthy of being president and because the choices he has made have been purely political without regard to what is best for the country.

At least that's what I thought the article said. But of course it is the republican strategy to turn everything into an attack on Christians. Good job keeping up with gameplan.

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 11:25 AM
We can be, but we don't HAVE to be.

I guess I missed the part where Bush approved breaking bones and sticking bamboo splinters under the fingernails.

What bothers me most is Obama NOT being pro-Christian. He is totally avoiding any link to Christianity, even after spending over 20 years at the Christian Church he is a member of. Does anyone else have a problem with this lack of comment?

Last I heard a Christian was tasked with sharing the good news.

Amen brother. The left wing nutjobs declare McCain as pro-Christian and therefore he can't run for office! God spoke to GW Bush, so I guess we've been doing something right!

penchief
09-10-2008, 11:26 AM
Andrew Sullivan is torn between his understanding that conservative economics make more sense than what the liberals offer and the personal pain he feels because one of the key factions in the right wing alliance doesn't endorse his lifestyle. He's one of the liberals' favorite conservative these days.

Too bad republicans aren't offering conservative economics. Modern history shows that democrats have been more economically conservative than republicans and that their policies have led to more prosperity.

patteeu
09-10-2008, 11:27 AM
Too bad republicans aren't offering conservative economics. Modern history shows that democrats have been more economically conservative than republicans and that their policies have led to more prosperity.

Do you get your history from comic books?

BucEyedPea
09-10-2008, 11:28 AM
Do you get your history from comic books?

In some sense, he's right.

penchief
09-10-2008, 11:29 AM
Morally unfit is the definition of Bill Clinton, JFK, FDR, etc. And you feel most republicans are morally unfit?

I"m still waiting for Obama's past to catch up with the media.

Morally unfit = Nixon (abuses of power), Reagan (Iran-Contra), and Bush (torture, unjustified military aggression). Those who have so little regard for their duty and for their fellow man are the ones who are morally unfit, IMO.

penchief
09-10-2008, 11:31 AM
Do you get your history from comic books?

Starting with Carter, there is no doubt that democrats have been more fiscally responsible. Starting with Hoover, there is no doubt that democrats have presided over more prosperity.

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 11:32 AM
Morally unfit = Nixon (abuses of power), Reagan (Iran-Contra), and Bush (torture, unjustified military aggression). Those who have so little regard for their duty and for their fellow man are the ones who are morally unfit, IMO.

WTF. Clinton committed adultery which is right there in the 10 commandments.

I don't see "Thou shant commit Iran-Contra" in the bible.

penchief
09-10-2008, 11:39 AM
WTF. Clinton committed adultery which is right there in the 10 commandments.

I don't see "Thou shant commit Iran-Contra" in the bible.

Heh. The degree of deception and outright lies, the spreading of weapons of murder, the support for death squads and the suppression of free will, the betrayal of trust........

Naw, you're right. I don't see anything wrong with embezzlement, bearing false witness, or the murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, to name just a few.

Lust is a sin but greed, hubris, and murder is not? More importantly, that blow job was vital to the integrity of the country and the people's business. While cheating, lying, killing, starting wars, and thieving in the name of the people is not. I get it.

jAZ
09-10-2008, 11:50 AM
More of McCain's "base" seems to agree...

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/apology_not_accepted.html

September 10, 2008 9:03
Apology Not Accepted
Posted by Joe Klein

Back in 2000, after John McCain lost his mostly honorable campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, he went about apologizing to journalists--including me--for his most obvious mis-step: his support for keeping the confederate flag on the state house.

Now he is responsible for one of the sleaziest ads I've ever seen in presidential politics, so sleazy that I won't abet its spread by linking to it, but here's the McClatchy fact check.

I just can't wait for the moment when John McCain--contrite and suddenly honorable again in victory or defeat--talks about how things got a little out of control in the passion of the moment. Talk about putting lipstick on a pig.

Programmer
09-10-2008, 11:54 AM
Heh. The degree of deception and outright lies, the spreading of weapons of murder, the support for death squads and the suppression of free will, the betrayal of trust........

Naw, you're right. I don't see anything wrong with embezzlement, bearing false witness, or the murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, to name just a few.

Lust is a sin but greed, hubris, and murder is not? More importantly, that blow job was vital to the integrity of the country and the people's business. While cheating, lying, killing, starting wars, and thieving in the name of the people is not. I get it.

You seem to be forgetting all of the other women Bill Clinton screwed, raped, and coerced to have sex While he was married and in the whitehouse or in the governors mansion.

If the issues you brought up are indeed law breakers why have we only seen one president impeached out of the group?

Carlota69
09-10-2008, 12:02 PM
You seem to be forgetting all of the other women Bill Clinton screwed, raped, and coerced to have sex While he was married and in the whitehouse or in the governors mansion.

If the issues you brought up are indeed law breakers why have we only seen one president impeached out of the group?

Nixon?

irishjayhawk
09-10-2008, 12:03 PM
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/mccains-integri.html

McCain's Integrity
10 Sep 2008 12:40 pm

For me, this surreal moment - like the entire surrealism of the past ten days - is not really about Sarah Palin or Barack Obama or pigs or fish or lipstick. It's about John McCain. The one thing I always thought I knew about him is that he is a decent and honest person. When he knows, as every sane person must, that Obama did not in any conceivable sense mean that Sarah Palin is a pig, what did he do? Did he come out and say so and end this charade? Or did he acquiesce in and thereby enable the mindless Rovianism that is now the core feature of his campaign?

So far, he has let us all down. My guess is he will continue to do so. And that decision, for my part, ends whatever respect I once had for him. On core moral issues, where this man knew what the right thing was, and had to pick between good and evil, he chose evil. When he knew that George W. Bush's war in Iraq was a fiasco and catastrophe, and before Donald Rumsfeld quit, McCain endorsed George W. Bush against his fellow Vietnam vet, John McCain in 2004. By that decision, McCain lost any credibility that he can ever put country first. He put party first and his own career first ahead of what he knew was best for the country.

And when the Senate and House voted overwhelmingly to condemn and end the torture regime of Bush and Cheney in 2006, McCain again had a clear choice between good and evil, and chose evil.

He capitulated and enshrined torture as the policy of the United States, by allowing the CIA to use techniques as bad as and worse than the torture inflicted on him in Vietnam. He gave the war criminals in the White House retroactive immunity against the prosecution they so richly deserve. The enormity of this moral betrayal, this betrayal of his country's honor, has yet to sink in. But for my part, it now makes much more sense. He is not the man I thought he was.

And when he had the chance to engage in a real and substantive debate against the most talented politician of the next generation in a fall campaign where vital issues are at stake, what did McCain do? He began his general campaign with a series of grotesque, trivial and absurd MTV-style attacks on Obama's virtues and implied disgusting things about his opponent's patriotism.

And then, because he could see he was going to lose, ten days ago, he threw caution to the wind and with no vetting whatsoever, picked a woman who, by her decision to endure her own eight-month pregnancy of a Down Syndrome child in public, that he was going to reignite the culture war as a last stand against Obama. That's all that is happening right now: a massive bump in the enthusiasm of the Christianist base. This is pure Rove.

Yes, McCain made a decision that revealed many appalling things about him. In the end, his final concern is not national security. No one who cares about national security would pick as vice-president someone who knows nothing about it as his replacement. No one who cares about this country's safety would gamble the security of the world on a total unknown because she polled well with the Christianist base. No person who truly believed that the surge was integral to this country's national security would pick as his veep candidate a woman who, so far as we can tell anything, opposed it at the time.

McCain has demonstrated in the last two months that he does not have the character to be president of the United States. And that is why it is more important than ever to ensure that Barack Obama is the next president. The alternative is now unthinkable. And McCain - no one else - has proved it.

Kerry?

J Diddy
09-10-2008, 12:04 PM
You seem to be forgetting all of the other women Bill Clinton screwed, raped, and coerced to have sex While he was married and in the whitehouse or in the governors mansion.

If the issues you brought up are indeed law breakers why have we only seen one president impeached out of the group?



because clinton is the only one out of all those people that a woman would ****?

says something about your party

patteeu
09-10-2008, 12:12 PM
In some sense, he's right.

Not his second sentence. That's his bong talking.

patteeu
09-10-2008, 12:13 PM
Starting with Carter, there is no doubt that democrats have been more fiscally responsible. Starting with Hoover, there is no doubt that democrats have presided over more prosperity.

There is complete doubt about both.

irishjayhawk
09-10-2008, 12:25 PM
Sullivan did catch that typo.

Cave Johnson
09-10-2008, 12:35 PM
"picked a woman who, by her decision to endure her own eight-month pregnancy of a Down Syndrome child in public"

That's pretty revolting.

He's actually written at length on the topic. If you can squeeze it in your busy schedule of mentioning the fact that he's gay and questioning whether there are in fact any racists on CP, it's a pretty good read.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/why-trig-matter.html#more

Donger
09-10-2008, 12:44 PM
He's actually written at length on the topic. If you can squeeze it in your busy schedule of mentioning the fact that he's gay and questioning whether there are in fact any racists on CP, it's a pretty good read.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/why-trig-matter.html#more

Fair enough. I completely misread what he was saying.

Alphaman
09-10-2008, 01:27 PM
Morally unfit is the definition of Bill Clinton, JFK, FDR, etc. And you feel most republicans are morally unfit?

I"m still waiting for Obama's past to catch up with the media.

So then McCain qualifies as Morally Unfit!!!!

http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/08/13/edwards-the-confessor-vs-mccain%E2%80%99s-ongoing-philandering/

Edwards The Confessor vs. McCain’s Ongoing Philandering
August 13, 2008
by Charley James —

Frankly, for decades my view is that if someone wants to fool around on their spouse, it’s their business and we should all butt out. Even presidential candidates are entitled to a sliver of privacy. But we live in an age that craves mixing its puritanical attitude about sex with a voyeuristic demand for celebrity gossip: Don’t have sex but if you do, we want all the gory details.

So it’s not surprising that cable news outlets were obsessed on Thursday and Friday with a two year old story about John Edwards’ affair with a campaign staffer. It should have ended with Edwards’ heart-felt confession Friday night that he had, indeed, slept with Rielle Hunter, who directed video production for Edwards’ political action committee. Sadly – but not surprisingly – the story lingered into the weekend with cable’s talking heads musing like the idiots they are, dithering over how the news would affect Obama’s candidacy.

Needless to say, given much of the media’s gentle handholding of John McCain, no major media outlet ever linked the Edwards story to John McCain’s long-time habit of sleeping around on his various wives. After all, he began an affair with Cindy while still married to his former wife; knowing his proclivities may explain why Cindy barely lets him out of her sight since he began running for president.

Even still, in February, new stories of his on-going philandering appeared when reports showed up in The New York Times and elsewhere about McCain sleeping around on Cindy with lobbyist-cum-campaign staffer Vicki Iserman.

Now, new information indicates that Iserman is not the only fling McCain has indulged in while married to Cindy, including at least one that he had since locking up the Republican nomination months ago.

“It happens when Cindy returns to Phoenix for a few days,” a well-placed former McCain campaign advisor told me by phone on Aug. 10. “I know for certain he spent at least two different nights with a 30-something campaign worker because I saw the Secret Service trying to hide the woman when she left McCain’s suite around five one morning and they hustled her back to her own room.”

The Secret Service said it does not comment on security arrangements.

But the man’s account is supported by at least one additional, knowledgeable person who confirmed the incident by e-mail.

“It’s the fighter pilot mentality,” this person wrote in explaining McCain’s attitude about sleeping around. “They think they’re invincible and can get away with anything.”

Both sources requested and were given promises of anonymity in exchange for being interviewed.

During reporting for this post, it was impossible to verify numerous other accounts of McCain’s one night stands over the past two years. Reportedly, some of the travelling press corps on the Straight Talk Express jet knew of at least two other incidents.

The point is why do journalists feel that the sexual peccadilloes of Democrats – Bill Clinton comes first to mind – are fair game are waiting for McCain to be caught with a prostitute before giving equal time to his romps between the sheets?

Alphaman
09-10-2008, 01:32 PM
WTF. Clinton committed adultery which is right there in the 10 commandments.

I don't see "Thou shant commit Iran-Contra" in the bible.

So you are saying one who commits adultery is morally unfit to be president? Please see below.

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 03:39 PM
So you are saying one who commits adultery is morally unfit to be president? Please see below.

But he hasn't been caught yet. Big difference.

J Diddy
09-10-2008, 03:41 PM
But he hasn't been caught yet. Big difference.

I don't know about you, but if I came home and my wife was reading an article discussing my cheating. I would consider myself to be busted.

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 03:42 PM
I don't know about you, but if I came home and my wife was reading an article discussing my cheating. I would consider myself to be busted.

Maybe she's cool with it.
Why are you people so invasive in their private lives? Look at the issues, not who's sleping around on who.

penchief
09-10-2008, 03:46 PM
Maybe she's cool with it.
Why are you people so invasive in their private lives? Look at the issues, not who's sleping around on who.

I agree with you, dude. Now if you could just get the holier-than-thou self-righteous hypocritical republican party to agree with you, we might be cooking with gas.

Direckshun
09-10-2008, 05:16 PM
Great OP, but man, some of the replies...

We should burn this thread down and pretend it never happened.

VAChief
09-10-2008, 07:02 PM
Other than the Palin pregnancy mention (which seemed slightly hypocritical considering what he was writing about) he hit on pretty much why I have lost respect for McCain. Starting back in 04 when he stuck in Kerry even though his own ahole was still sore from the SC raping at the hands of Rove. He pretty much sold out. I know they all do to some extent, but he basically gave up and screw it I'm 72 WTF!

Programmer
09-10-2008, 07:12 PM
Nixon?

Nixon resigned from office. He was not impeached.

Ford pardoned him before anything else happened.

You might need to revisit U.S. History 101.

Baby Lee
09-10-2008, 07:20 PM
Isn't Sullivan a homosexual?

And, while I agree with a lot of his posts, he can turn into a true queen when an issue pushes his buttons. I swear sometimes I read his blogs and get the mental picture of Nathan Lane gasping and sweeping the back of his hand across his brow in The Birdcage.

memyselfI
09-10-2008, 07:25 PM
Sounds like you don't know who you are talking about...

http://images.barnesandnoble.com/images/13900000/13909912.JPG

jAZ, jAZ, jAZ, you know as well as anyone that Andrew Sulllivan is about as conservative as Mr. Kotter is Democrat. :doh!:

Baby Lee
09-10-2008, 07:28 PM
jAZ, jAZ, jAZ, you know as well as anyone that Andrew Sulllivan is about as conservative as Mr. Kotter is Democrat. :doh!:

I actually see him as a conservative like Taco is, reasonable in his analysis of generalities, but so fire and brimstone against slights to personal dogma in day to day specifics, that you have to roll your eyes on occasion.

No offense TJ, it's just that "I'm conservative to the core, but if Dubya makes that dumbass smirk one more time, I'll dedicate my life to putting John Kerry in office!!!!!"

orange
09-10-2008, 08:51 PM
"McCain endorsed George W. Bush against his fellow Vietnam vet, [John Kerry] in 2004. By that decision, McCain lost any credibility that he can ever put country first. He put party first and his own career first ahead of what he knew was best for the country."

A Pro-Kerry Conservative. RIIIGHT.

Logical
09-10-2008, 09:18 PM
Isn't Sullivan a homosexual?
Is he and does that make his opinion less valuable

jAZ
09-10-2008, 09:38 PM
But he hasn't been caught yet. Big difference.

You don't know that he was screwing Cindy he was still married to his first wife? The one who lost her beauty in a car accident so he was cheating on?

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 09:40 PM
You don't know that he was screwing Cindy he was still married to his first wife? The one who lost her beauty in a car accident so he was cheating on?

Technicalities. Hussien OSama has the hots for kindergartners, did you know that?

J Diddy
09-10-2008, 09:43 PM
Technicalities. Hussien OSama has the hots for kindergartners, did you know that?

thats the stupidest comment ever made

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2008, 09:47 PM
thats the stupidest comment ever made

Your opinion is just not terribly important to me

orange
09-10-2008, 10:27 PM
McCain-Palin Derangement Syndrome
Posted by johnmcquaid under 2008 campaign | Tags: 2008 campaign, Barack Obama, John McCain, Sarah Palin |


Scanning various blogs today, I’m amazed at the seething outrage at the McCain campaign’s plethora of dishonest tactics, from Sarah Palin’s lie about rejecting the Bridge to Nowhere to the ad charging Obama with promoting sex. Josh Marshall, who normally reads political events pretty coolly, has joined Andrew Sullivan in all-out high-dudgeon mode:

[McCain and Palin have] both embraced a level of dishonesty that disqualifies them for high office. Democrats owe it to the country to make clear who these people are. No apologies or excuses. If Democrats can say at the end of this campaign that they made clear exactly how and why these two are unfit for high office they can be satisfied they served their country.

Rather, I’m amazed not at the outrage itself so much as the fact that it seems to have obliterated all sense of proportion. Call it McCain-Palin Derangement Syndrome. Step back a moment: McCain is running for president. Both his place in history and the future of the country are on the line. In the words of George H.W. Bush, he’s going to do “what it takes” to become president. John McCain may have once had a reputation as a straight-talking, unconventional politician, and maybe that McCain could have made a go of it - we’ll never know. But now, for obviously well-thought-out strategic reasons, we’ve got a different McCain.

Certainly, McCain has made moral compromises here, will doubtless make more, and that will undermine if not destroy his stated quest to heal the divisions in Washington. This augers poorly for a McCain presidency, especially following on eight years of George W. Bush.

But do dishonest-but-effective campaign tactics really render McCain “unfit to lead”? No. Voters obviously don’t think it disqualifies him either, at least not in great numbers. Maybe they see the lies, but they also see the aggression. This is a guy who really, really wants to win - and that counts for a lot in a presidential campaign. If McCain wins, most people will quickly forget the campaign’s lies, distortions and negative ads, and his fitness will ultimately be tested by what he does in office.

Meanwhile, the howls over McCain’s lost “honor” and the appeals to America’s sense of fair play are, frankly, ridiculous. The man fights dirty. If you don’t like it, find a way fight back.

http://johnmcquaid.com/blog/

Direckshun
09-10-2008, 11:12 PM
And, while I agree with a lot of his posts, he can turn into a true queen when an issue pushes his buttons. I swear sometimes I read his blogs and get the mental picture of Nathan Lane gasping and sweeping the back of his hand across his brow in The Birdcage.

I wonder if you ever have the same mental image with Krauthammer.

You doth protest too much, BL.

Mr. Kotter
09-10-2008, 11:13 PM
I have no doubt, from the video I've now seen 5-6 times:

Obama did NOT mean to invoke a comparison to Sarah Palin with his comments.

However, the audience, clearly, took them that way; and Obama should have immediately chastised the crowd.

"No. That is precisely the sort of politics I think is despicable. I was NOT talking about Palin's speech last Wednesday. If you were really listening, I was talking about John McCain's policies."

He chose not to clarify it, to remove any misunderstanding. That opened the door to the McCain response. Which, while silly, has diverted the attention of the press and public. Shame on you McCain, for exploiting this silliness; shame on you Obama for not....clarifying in an unequivocal way.

Hopefully, this silliness will pass by tomorrow; but if the last 10 days are any indication....neither side seems to want to really, in a serious way, talk about the issues. Yeah, yeah....both sides claim they do, but neither side seems really serious about it.

Politics as usual; from two "change" candidates. Shame, shame. Surprise, surprise.

:shake:

Mr. Kotter
09-10-2008, 11:16 PM
And, while I agree with a lot of his posts, he can turn into a true queen when an issue pushes his buttons. I swear sometimes I read his blogs and get the mental picture of Nathan Lane gasping and sweeping the back of his hand across his brow in The Birdcage.

Perfect. Absolutely 100% fuggin' perfect. LMAO

:clap:

Alphaman
09-11-2008, 05:50 AM
But he hasn't been caught yet. Big difference.

Since when did morally unfit become defined by whether or not they've been caught?

Alphaman
09-11-2008, 05:54 AM
Maybe she's cool with it.
Why are you people so invasive in their private lives? Look at the issues, not who's sleping around on who.

McCain's campaign has already said that this election is not about the issues (since they don't talk about the issues, they've demonstrated they believe this). They want this election to be about personality and character. An adulterer fails miserably on that criteria.

BTW, I find it interesting that McCain is now running on Palin's personality.

penchief
09-11-2008, 07:02 AM
Obama did NOT mean to invoke a comparison to Sarah Palin with his comments.

However, the audience, clearly, took them that way; and Obama should have immediately chastised the crowd.

Again, if you look some of those clips of McCain using the very same phrase in the past his audiences reacted in the same way.

I don't think you can make that argument with the certainty that you do.