Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

'West Wing' Actors Confirm Account of McCain Vote


Actor Bradley Whitford films part of an episode of the television series "The West Wing" on Sydenham Road in Dundas, Ont., Canada, Dec . 4, 2004. (Associated Press)

By Juliet Eilperin
Two Hollywood actors who dined with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in early 2001 at actress Candice Bergen's home confirmed Thursday that he told the assembled group he did not vote for George W. Bush in the 2000 election.

In separate phone interviews, Bradley Whitford and Richard Schiff -- both of whom starred in the television political drama "The West Wing" -- said the senator made the remarks after he spoke at length about his reservations about Bush becoming president. Liberal blogger Arianna Huffington first wrote about the incident Monday, asserting neither McCain nor his wife Cindy backed Bush in his first presidential bid, and the Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday that a woman who was also at the dinner confirmed Huffington's account, though she declined to give her name.

McCain's aides, who could not be reached last night, denied the allegations Tuesday.

Whitford and Schiff said they did not hear Cindy McCain describe her vote, but both recalled how McCain had conveyed his opposition to Bush just a few days before Bush was inaugurated.

"He was going on and on about how horribly unqualified and untested Bush was, how the campaign had attacked his family," said Whitford, a registered Democrat. "Someone said, 'If he's so terrible, why did you support him?'"

McCain replied that as a member of the GOP, Whitford added, he always intended to back the party's nominee. Then, the actor said, someone asked McCain whether he had cast a vote in favor of Bush.

"He put his finger up to his lips, shook his head and mouthed, 'No way,'" Whitford said.

Schiff remembered the conversation the same way. "My memory was he said pretty clearly, no, he did not vote for him," he said. "I discussed it with others afterwards. It was clear to everyone he said no. Did he shout it from the rooftops? No."

Schiff, a registered independent, said he was only discussing the exchange because Huffington had made it public.

"I've thought about that dinner often since then," he said. "In my mind it was private and off the record. That doesn't mean it's permissible to say anything but the truth under those circumstances."

Both men said they were struck by McCain's openness at the dinner, which was -- in Whitford's words -- "deep in the belly of the Hollywood liberal beast." But they added they were disappointed at his subsequent embrace of President Bush.

"It's clear what he's doing; he needs the Republican Party in order to get elected," Whitford said. "The only thing is, that's just being a politician, not being a straight talker."

By Web Politics Editor  |  May 9, 2008; 6:01 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Clinton's End Game
Next: Union, 3 Superdelegates Endorse Obama

Comments

DrSteveB:

A third possibility is that McCain did NOT tell Huffington, et al., that he failed to vote for Bush.

Vance McDaniel:

We will have to agree to disagree for now.

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Bush and his people tried and succeeded in putting McCain out in the 2000 election and they did so in a dirty way. If McCain did vote for him he was wrong, if he kissed and made up with Bush after the way he attacked him and his family then went around for 7 years claiming he voted for the nitwit, he was wrong. Sounds like the McCain I know. The guy has not only lost his bearings, he has sold his soul to highest bidder so many times he doesn't know who he is. Do we really want someone like that leading our country?

Posted by: cathy | May 10, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

The bad thing about hope is that when it meets reality, hope loses. For example, I am from Denver, last year the Rockies went to the World Series. All of Denver hoped that our team would win. The reality was that the Red Soxs had more experience than the Rockies and hope, no matter how great, did nothing to combat that experience.
- Jerry

Sorry, but baseball is a bad analogy. I'm from Miami and I still remember watching the Marlins win the 7th game in 1997 against the Indians, this after being an expansion team for only a few years. Then they come back again in 2003 and wipe the floor with the Yankees, the wealthiest and most experienced post-season team in baseball. Unfortunatelly for you, a real cause with real support will always triumph.

Posted by: Sean | May 10, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

It is not unlikely that McCain was lying to them and madam Huff. back then, in order to appear a Maverick and a moderate.

Or he is lying now.

Either way his overall record shows he is very very conservative (5th most conservative in Senate overall), more conservative then Obama is a liberal (15th most livberal overall).

And that McCain is just a corrupt lying poseur.

Posted by: DrSteveB | May 10, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

It is not unlikely that McCain was lying to them and madam Huff. back then, in order to appear a Maverick and a moderate.

Or he is lying now.

Either way his overall record shows he is very very conservative (5th most conservative in Senate overall), more conservative then Obama is a liberal (15th most livberal overall).

And that McCain is just a corrupt lying poseur.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 10, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

I've watched men age as they served as CIC. It takes a toll on the individual.

Sorry, but the White House is no pace for a Man or Woman in there 70's. Sorry, I just don't see it.

Posted by: Vance McDaniel | May 10, 2008 5:51 AM | Report abuse

Jake D wrote..
I'm 76, so I appreciate what you are saying, but there's no doubt that "lost his bearings" in this context in agism -- what else could it mean besides "becoming confused and disoriented for some reason" -- I don't buy that it means "ethically-challenged".

Jake, it means that he went back on his word... He said he would run an honorable campaign. Then he flipped and went the other way.. LOST HIS BEARING...

Posted by: Vance McDaniel | May 10, 2008 5:45 AM | Report abuse

Old men smell funny.

Posted by: hammerdown | May 10, 2008 2:40 AM | Report abuse

Gary - I thought it was common knowledge that the reason McCain was " . . responsible for a successful bill that stopped any further investigations of VietNam POW experiences" was that Cindy's beer distributing company wanted to open operations in Vietnam and in fact did so immediately after that bill was killed. McCain is not a maverick, he's a loose cannon, and a hypocrite of the highest order.

Posted by: Delilah | May 9, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

Nobody has commented on the fact that McCain was responsible for a successful bill that stopped any further investigations of VietNam POW experiences. Articles I've read imply that he may not be terribly proud of his role as prisoner; otherwise, why would he have pushed this bill through? Any other information in this regard? He's run on being a POW hero. What if he's not?

Posted by: Gary | May 9, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter who John McCain voted for in 2000. He's the only qualified candidate in 2008.

Posted by: J Baustian | May 9, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

vote for me for president of earth


http://globalinternetgovernment.com


.


Posted by: charles webster baer | May 9, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

djw3505:

Or, was he lying neither time?

Walt:

I'm 76, so I appreciate what you are saying, but there's no doubt that "lost his bearings" in this context in agism -- what else could it mean besides "becoming confused and disoriented for some reason" -- I don't buy that it means "ethically-challenged".

Posted by: JakeD | May 9, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama did not refer to McCain's age. It is just another attempt on the part of Republicans to misrepresent what Obama said. Of course, we'll hear a lot of that from Republicans in this campaign. Winning at any cost is their strategy just as it was with Bush.

Age does need to be considered. I'm 74. While I'm opposed to age discrimination, which I believe to be huge in America for anyone over 55,nevertheless, it is important to consider McCain's age relative to his quest for the presidency.

I believe I'm in much better shape than McCain with my vegetarian diet and exercise routine of six days a week which includes swimming, the treadmill, light weights and stretching of which appears to do none of these. But my mental faculties are not as sharp as they used to be nor my memory. And I know I could not possibly handle physically the work load, the demands, nor the stress of serving as President of our country and the free world. If McCain thinks so at age 72, he is in denial which he probably thinks is a river in Egypt. Like McCain, I find myself commiting gaffes and not always remembering things nor my brain functioning like it did at 60. So I've stopped teaching formal classes for a University. I'm not at my best.

Of course, he can't remember things (e.g. Paxson case) even when he is reminded of them. Plus, on his trip to Israel, he looked like he couldn't make the next step as Lieberman and Graham stood right beside him looking like they were ready to catch him in case he fell.

While those of us in our 70's can function well and for a long time, we're no longer capable of sering in such an incredible demanding job as President of the United States even if we once were competent for the job.

Posted by: Walt | May 9, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

It's the later embrace of Bush that bothers me. It's no big deal to NOT VOTE for a particular member of your party, but it's a whole different thing to do that and then act like you're cool with the guy.

Sorry, Mr. McCain, but I detect no Straight Talk there whatsoever.

Posted by: MT Guy | May 9, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

I would have been surprised if McCain had voted for Bush after the way he was treated by the Bush campaign in South Carolina.

Posted by: Danton | May 9, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

was he lying to impress hollywod then or is he lying now

Posted by: djw3505 | May 9, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Obviously, Mcbush will say and do anything to claim the presidency. I can't wait for the general election and see Obama tear into him and his past behavior and remarks.

Posted by: neil | May 9, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I'm 19 and forget why I walk into a room sometimes. It doesn't matter how old you are.
McCain will be a great president, once he's elected he'll stop pandering to the Republican "base" and be the independent politcian he is.
I'm a republican and I wouldn't have voted for Bush in 2000 or 2004.
The brief Bush-era of Republicanism is over, it's time for the McCain-Snowe type Republican era.

Posted by: PaulWall | May 9, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

here mccain goes! a perfect example of him losing his bearings! he's come undone! off the tracks! i really really really wanna see him snap at the national press, or at a debate moderator when obama gets under his skin....

Posted by: baatin | May 9, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

McCain certainly isn't the "straight-talker" he once claimed to be. I used to like him, hoping he'd switch parties, but ever since he started kissing up to Bush I've decided I'll never support him. Now Cindy refuses to disclose her tax returns when it was her money and connections that started his political career. Obama is right: we can't stand for another Third Bush Term!

Posted by: Jude | May 9, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Who are you going to trust?
As a legacy admission (admitted because of his father), Senator McCain finished number 894 out of 899 in his graduating class from the Naval Academy in Annapolis. 5th from the bottom of his class, and he admittedly didn't care! He was a rebellious hard-drinking hell raiser. This should remind you of Bush, except that Bush doesn't have a volatile temper like McCain does. Bush, as a pilot, never crashed three different military jets like McCain did, two of which were stateside, including one in Corpus Christi bay! He comes back and abandons his invalid wife (who to this day refuses to support his presidential aspirations). He cheats on his wife, marries an incredibly rich woman, with a drug problem, successfully gets elected as Senator as a POW/war hero, supports Keating, reforms by then repeatedly alienates and distances himself from his republican senate colleagues, ingratiates himself with the liberal press because of the latter, abandons his position, actively solicits support from the religious right, and now expects us to make him our second stupid president in a row? In the middle of two wars and a recession?

Good luck with that.

Posted by: Doug | May 9, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

So fun to read this stuff. Just one more example of why the libs have no chance this election year. Once again the libs are wasting their time with stories like this one, instead of worry about person they have voted to run for their party. Obama is running on "hope and change" not experience. The bad thing about hope is that when it meets reality, hope loses. For example, I am from Denver, last year the Rockies went to the World Series. All of Denver hoped that our team would win. The reality was that the Red Soxs had more experience than the Rockies and hope, no matter how great, did nothing to combat that experience. Score another four for the Republicans, the libs hope is about to be crushed and their "change" will have to wait till 2012.

Posted by: Jerry | May 9, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

So just who is John McCain? A double-talk express that voted against George Bush in 2000 and 2004, or a straight talking conservative has stood shoulder to shoulder with President George Bush since 2000?

Posted by: john | May 9, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

"I voted, campaigned for, worked as hard as I could for President Bush's election in 2000 and 2004," McCain said.

Thanks, Arbiter, but that's not exactly: "I voted for Bush in 2000." Hear me out. It could also possibly mean:

a) "I voted in 2000 and 2004" (just not for Bush);

b) "I campaigned for President Bush's election in 2000 and 2004"; and

c) "I worked as hard as I could for President Bush's election in 2000 and 2004."

Posted by: JakeD | May 9, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

HAHAHAHA! What a loser. He just can't keep his trap shut long enough to get through a campaign. "I'm a liberal (oops, I mean) conservative Republican".

Poor guy doesn't know who the heck he is.

Posted by: Blues | May 9, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

JakeD - Here's your link.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/09/mccain_touts_environmental_rec.html


I found it - Directly next to this article in the left hand nav bar. Jeez man!

Posted by: Arbiter | May 9, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

McCain is too old and he is a liar.
I am 10 years older than he is and I know that age 72 you just don't get it any more . My friends are the same. Not so much the age as it is his temperment, out of control to the extent of mental illness. Go to the library (we have one here and it is free) and look up some of McCains records , facts, not some spin, and if you still want him for president, God Help my Grandchildren.

Posted by: Westexacan | May 9, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

I have not seen / heard McCain say "I voted for Bush in 2000." Do you have a link?

Posted by: JakeD | May 9, 2008 2:46 PM | Report abuse

The issue here is not that McCain did not vote for Bush - as one would expect.

The real issue is that he lied to the press by saying he DID vote for Bush.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 9, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I'm 76, so I'm just me and that's just you, Mary (discounted completely, of course, by the fact that no modern day U.S. President needs a set of keys and his every minute is scheduled weeks in advance -- otherwise, good points -- keep the not-so-subtle-agism claims up ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 9, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

I can only speak for my 66 year old white female self - I have a large knowledge base and have a lot of life experience in a variety of areas. I also have skills which I can do quite well.
However, I do forget where my car keys are and frequently walk in a room forgetting exactly what caused me to do that. Perfectly normal folks, at my age. BUT, I would not want to be President with these minor but real deficiences. Ask me for good advice and wise counsel, not to lead. But,....... that's just me.
GO OBAMA!!!!!

Posted by: Mary | May 9, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

McCain, privately, decided to vote against Bush?

Sounds like he showed better judgment than most Americans, including millions of Democrats. McCain has now won my vote.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | May 9, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

iconoblaster
Right on with your post!!!
Go Obama!

Posted by: Mary | May 9, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

ManUnitdFan:

I will be shocked, shocked I tell you, if there are any signs of racism from McCain (now, from 527s, that's already happened -- in North Carolina, for example, McCain has rejected and denounced such ads ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 9, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

You can look for signs of agism from Obama if we can look for signs of racism from McCain.

To be honest, I don't really care who he voted for in 2000. Although if I were him, after the smear job in South Carolina, I sure wouldn't have voted for Bush. Bush was just an unknown (kind of dim) candidate in 2000. The more important election was 2004, after Bush had four years to screw everything up. And I bet McCain voted for him then.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 9, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Betty Krambs - you make me pround to be an American! I am a 61 year old woman and have been a precinct captain for Obama for a year. It's not about age - it's about leadership and integrity. And telling the truth to the American people.
I think the folks who say "if it isn't Hillary, I'll vote for McCain" will come to their senses once the Dems have a chance to expose him for all his flip flopping and distortion of the truth. Plus, he has his own crazy preachers to deal with (Parsley, Haage, Jerry Falwell.)

It's a matter of getting used to new things, people. It feels funny but just keep practicing saying "Presidet...Obama...President Obama...President Barack Obama. And yeah, if you want to throw in the middle name, go for it. We are SO tired of all these liars and thieves who have taken over our country!

Posted by: sheridan1 | May 9, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Fine, ManUnitdFan -- I will be watching Obama very carefully for any signs of agism, but this thread is about whether John SIDNEY McCain voted for Bush or not -- do you agree with greyparrot and dpj1?

Posted by: JakeD | May 9, 2008 1:06 PM | Report abuse

"It's offensive and I think it's disappointing," ... "For him to toss out comments like that is an example of him losing his bearings."

Hey, Barack, you're too hard on old Grumps. He just lost his train of thought...and maybe his moorings.

At least he didn't lose his temper (this time, at least).

Posted by: Anonymous | May 9, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Karl Rove and the Bushies attacked McCain and destroyed his campaign in 2000, not unlike what Clinton has tried to do to Obama. Who could blame McCain for not voting for Dubya? But I agree, there's no reason to think he voted for Gore. When I was trying to decide what to do if Clinton is our nominee, voting for McCain didn't really seem like an option. Maybe he wrote in himself!

Posted by: greyparrot | May 9, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

You also have to note that, even if the Huffington/Schiff/Whitford account is correct, McCain did NOT say he voted for Gore in 2000. And he certainly did not vote for Nader. He anything, he probably just did not cast a vote for President in 2000. No sin in that.
And in any event, no one is saying he refused to vote for Bush/Cheney in 2004, when the real test was on. The only things that had not happened in 2004 were Terri Schiavo and Katrina, otherwise all the Bush/Cheney "sins" were on the table in 2004 and McCain still supported the ticket.
This is a non-story. After what the Bush campaign did to him and his family in South Carolina in 2000, who could blame him for being severly bent out of shape?

Posted by: dpj1 | May 9, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Senator McCain was an honorable U.S. Navy aviator, and served well, according to his lights, in the U.S. Senate. Unfortunately, ambition has led him to compromise previous principled positions on torture, the rule of law, and corrupt influences on public officials. In the course of making this moral compromise, unsurprisingly, he has spoken out of both sides of his mouth.

Thats only one reason not to support a man who claims so strenuously to be a straight-talker. A better one is that his Viet Nam experience, however laudable, seems to have taught him perverse lessons about the relative importance of obtaining tactical victory in war, versus having a coherent strategy and sound moral basis for fighting it... especially starting it... in the first place. He thinks that whether we "win" in Iraq is MORE important than why we are there. He's wrong. Like Viet Nam, an inherent conflict between our stated goals (ie, "liberation, democracy") and the reality of what we are doing (trying to impose our will on those we claim to have "liberated" by force of arms) dooms any effort we make to failure.

Posted by: Iconoblaster | May 9, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

I think not voting for Bush is one of the few Positives Senator McCain can claim after selling his soul for the nomination.

Posted by: Muddy | May 9, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"Losing his bearings" could refer to, oh, I don't know, his claim that he will not run a negative campaign, followed by claims that Obama is the candidate of Hamas. That sounds like lost ethical bearings to me.

Posted by: ManUnitdFan | May 9, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Billeedee:

This thread is about whether John SIDNEY McCain voted for Bush or not. But, since you want to discuss Obama, you are correct -- he made no mention of McCain's age directly -- what do you think Obama was referring to McCain as "losing his bearings" if not a veiled mention of being "senile, he can't remember what he had for breakfast"?

Posted by: JakeD | May 9, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

"Who am I? Why am I here?"

Posted by: edwcorey | May 9, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

RABarker at 11:17 -

I couldn't agree more. Are we getting the McCain of 2000 or the McCain of 2008?

And Obama is a complete blank slate.

Its a leap of faith either way.

PS to Obama supporters please do not tell me to go to his website - been there, done that. I can write a position paper for pete's sake. He's still a blank slate with no national experience/record. Since most of his US Senate years have been spent on the presidential campaign trail, even thats a blank slate for the most part.

Posted by: Echo2 | May 9, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Juan McAmnesty needs to be ditched and FAST!

He is a RINO.

He is a Traitor to what the Voters overwhelmingly made clear(NO AMNESTY-FINE EMPLOYERS! & SEND THEM PACKING!).

And He CANNOT WIN!

Posted by: RAT-The | May 9, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

The WaPo has its get McCain desk up and ready. Meanwhile, its Obamanuts journalists are doing what David Axelrod tells them to do. I wonder how bad the circulation and advertiser decline will be this year for the in the tank DNC WaPo -- 20%? I can't wait to see the list of laid off journalists. Liberals who don't know how to do anything on the unemployment line. Love it.

Posted by: Ken | May 9, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

The real question is whether we are going to get the pre-2000 McCain, who was principled, independent,and wanted campaign finance reform, or the post-2000 McCain who has groveled before the Christian Right, kissed Bush's ring, and will accept all the 527-financed gutter attack ads that arrive at his headquarters in the next five months. I would have voted for him in 2000. Now, I think not.

Posted by: rabarker | May 9, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Inexperience is also a risk

Posted by: Echo2 | May 9, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Inexperience is also a risk

Posted by: Echo2 | May 9, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Whether Obama said it or not, 72 is too old to be president. Out of politeness are we supposed to ignore the danger of senility putting the world in even more danger than Bush's ignorance?

Posted by: Peter Byrne | May 9, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Whether Obama said it or not, 72 is too old to be president. Out of politeness are we supposed to ignore the danger of senility putting the world in even more danger than Bush's ignorance?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 9, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

I guarantee, before this election is over, John McCain will have said "I don't recall" more times than Alberto Gonzales.

I knew he was lying as soon as he denied it.

Whenever McCain denies something, he's always caught lying.

McCain also didn't recall meeting Paxson's lobbyists. In fact he gave a detailed alibi explaining how the meeting couldn't possibly have taken place.

'McCain Disputed On 1999 Meeting
Broadcaster Recalls Urging FCC Contact

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/22/AR2008022202634_pf.html

Broadcaster Lowell "Bud" Paxson yesterday contradicted statements from Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign that the senator did not meet with Paxson or his lobbyist before sending two controversial letters to the Federal Communications Commission on Paxson's behalf.

Paxson said he talked with McCain in his Washington office several weeks before the Arizona Republican wrote the letters in 1999 to the FCC urging a rapid decision on Paxson's quest to acquire a Pittsburgh television station.

The recollection of the now-retired Paxson conflicted with the account provided by the McCain campaign about the two letters ...

The McCain campaign said Thursday that the senator had not met with Paxson or Iseman on the matter. "No representative of Paxson or Alcalde and Fay personally asked Senator McCain to send a letter to the FCC regarding this proceeding," the campaign said in a statement.

But Paxson said yesterday, "I remember going there to meet with him."

McCain attorney Robert S. Bennett played down the contradiction between the campaign's written answer and Paxson's recollection.

"We understood that he [McCain] did not speak directly with him [Paxson]. Now it appears he did speak to him. What is the difference?" Bennett said.'

What is the difference, says McCain's campaign, in their best So-what Dick Cheney tone. The difference is the difference between telling the truth, and being caught in a lie.

Posted by: OD | May 9, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Obama didn't bring up his age directly - but then he never does. Its all implied and staged. Just like BHO's speeches where he says "You know what's wrong with McCain?" and some doting supporter yells out "He's old!!!" Everyone laughs, and Obama says "No, no we all admire his service to the country . . .its old politics . . . ". His talk is peppered with words that refer to age, insinuate age, but Obama nimbly backs away from any direct hit.
I think it could very well backfire. I am younger than Obama, and I prickle when I hear this 'game' he's playing. Its a sham, and its disrespectful.

Posted by: Echo2 | May 9, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

This is no surprise to me. All McCain wants to do is go to the Whitehouse and push the red button for another war.

He is an idiot just like the one in there now!

Posted by: TEEDA | May 9, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Righ Wing newspaper, the WAPO, reports confirmation that McCain is a liar.

Posted by: ratcityreprobate | May 9, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

So McCain is "old"....I am a healthy 79 year old who publishes a monthly newspaper, am a delegate to the Nevada Democratic Convention, active in every way, and certainly interested in the way our country is going, and thinking we should hold another "tea party" against our so-called "representatives". Forget McCain's age. Consider his credentials. That's why I'm voting OBAMA in the coming election.

Posted by: Betty Krambs | May 9, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Is the media finally vetting our "my friends' defacto neocon nominee or do we hide everything under the table because McCain is this 'hands off' ex prisoner of war and my G-d, if we offend McCain we offend the troops in Iraq?

Between the shady land deals in AZ for his buddies and his association with Hagee the media should be jumping all over this and bringing it up as frequently as Pastor Wright was thrown into the face of Obama.

Posted by: thecp29 | May 9, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Obama made no mention of McCain's age. It is apparent that the McCain camp is concerned about the age factor and therefore took a couple of words from the statement to use to their benefit. I hope someone posts the entire statement on You Tube for everyone to see and judge for themselves. Faux news is repeating what the McCain rep said.

Posted by: Billeedee | May 9, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

I sure McCain would have rather been a ground pounder involved in combat rather than a sitting duck as POW being tortured and abused every day. If you don't call that combat, give it a try Vidal What an absolute moron. Has to be a liberal democrat who probably believes hillary came under sniper fire. Also probably another one happy to let others defend the country. Bring back the draft.

Posted by: LTCSTAN | May 9, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

I didn't interpret Obama's comment about McWorse "losing his bearings" as a slam on his age - I interpreted it as a slam on is lack of conviction to his principles. The problem with McWorse is - does he honestly even have any principles? Or has he just surrendered to the far right? He's no maverick - he's a puppet just like bush. If you can't support and stand by your principles, you're nothing, and McCain has just pulled too many "Romneys" - and the campaigning has barely begun. The McWorse camp is going to have to come up with better responses than trying to call it an age issue - they just exposed their hand, they're going to jump on everything with the intelligence of a 7 year old - but I really don't think that kind of crap is going to work this election. They'll try to avoid the issues with snarky irrelevant comments, but folks want answers this time around, so McWorse better buckle up, it's gonna be a bumpy ride.

Posted by: Julie | May 9, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

I'm a Republican and this knowledge actually makes me like him more. He was right; Bush was unqualified to be president (as we've all since learned). I'm just sorry that he had to embrace W. in order to make himself viable to the core of the party.

Posted by: Howard B., NY | May 9, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Obama did NOT refer to McCain's age. Salter took a snip-it from the segment with Wolf Blitzer and used it to say he was talking about McCain's age. It is apparent the McCain camp is concerned about the age factor themselves. I hope someone puts the entire statement on You Tube for everyone to see.

Posted by: Billeedee | May 9, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

After what Bush and Rove did to McCain in 2000, no one would blame him for not voting for Bush. Still, it's pretty stupid to admit that to a room full of liberal actor types, notwithstanding that they all held their water for over 8 years.

Just another example of McCain not being able to control his temper.

Posted by: ched | May 9, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Bradley Whitford and Richard Schiff: COMMENTS MADE KNOWING IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO BACK THEM UP SEEM TO BE AS A WAISTE OF TIME AS THIS ARTICLE WRITTEN By Juliet Eilperin IS. Even if he did, Do you really believe Hillary is going to vote for Obama this fall????

Posted by: TAIT THE GREAT | May 9, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

There is nothing senile about McCain you ageist homers. Things are going to change after this election one way or the other. One candidate offers government health care, protectionist trade policy, tax increases, and an impossible promise to remove troops from Iraq in 16 months. And there is still a lot to find out. The other candidate offers an assault on pork barrell spending, a committment to our allies, expanded trade and political friendship with Latin/South America and India, and a counterweight to an ineffective Congress. Lets leave the hate at home.

Posted by: Wait for the first debate | May 9, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

In the words of Bruce Springsteen, "He's going down, down , down..."

Posted by: braultrl | May 9, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

I am curious about Vidals comment. How do you become a prisoner of war without seeing combat? Even more curious is how your airplane is shot down by an enemy missile in a non cobat situation.

Posted by: Marcus | May 9, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Despite this one qualification, he is still PRO-AMNESTY, and hence-UNWANTED!

The US cannot afford, absorb, or tolerate 4 more Years of the invasion without becoming a Third World Slum identical to the corrupt hell-holes the Invasarios are flooding us from.

We rallied when Bushie, Kennedy, and THIS Traitor tried to force the Bone-Headed Amnesty II on us before. Now this IDIOT thinks he can resurrect it after lying to us during the Primaries(Which are still going on-Thank God), and now change his word when he thinks he can get away with it. Hasta la Vista McAmnesty!

We said No Way Jose, and we meant it!

Besides, we really do not need a War Monger, we need an Economist/ Businessman/ Capitalist, Executive!

Enter, Venture Capitalist, REAL Washington Outsider, Governor Mitt Romney!

Posted by: RAT-The | May 9, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Senator "Jack S. McCain", like most of his ilk will do what ever is politic to reach his goal. Senator Obama's "bearings" comment has been interpeted as a reflection on McCain's age rather than his "Straight Talk" mantra. What is the spin on McCain's Hammas slur?

Posted by: grammamil | May 9, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

At least McCain started out with the right idea...Dubya was incompetent, unknowing, and uncaring. What a pig in a poke the Supreme Court made us buy!

A shame that you still have to pander for the lunatic 28%. That is why any Democrat will win in November.

Posted by: CLG | May 9, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

And the Obama campaign is off! Ageism abounds. Careful with this one guys, might bite you in the hind end come general election time.

Posted by: Echo2 | May 9, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

BEING A PRISSONER OF WAR IS NOT A CAKE WALK BUT ANOTHER THING IS THE URBAN LEGEND MEDIA CREATED AROUND MCCAIN. HE WAS IN PRISON THE WHOLE DURATION OF THE THE VIETNAM WAR, NEVER SEEN COMBAT, NEVER KILLED A ENEMY OR SAVE A FELLOW SOLDIER LIVE BUT HE WAS AND STILL PRESENTED AS A SUPPER HERO, BIGGER THAN PATTON. IT IS TIME TO REVIEW THE REALITY AND GIVE HIS STORY A SENSE OF PROPPORCIONALITY

Posted by: vidal | May 9, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Isn't this going to help McCain? Unless he lied about it.
I loved Obama's dig at McCain's age last night in response the McCain's Hamas smear of Obama. It was such a neat double use of the words "losing his bearings", it made me crack up big.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 9, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

I do so miss that show. Some of the best dialogue on TV since M*A*S*H.

Posted by: Hajji | May 9, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Probably not senile. Just a liar.

Posted by: walkswillhaunt | May 9, 2008 9:06 AM | Report abuse

If you've ever run for public office -- on any level -- you would understand McCain's reluctance to use his secret ballot to support the guy who used despicable tactics against him.

Posted by: Wifeofapol | May 9, 2008 8:01 AM | Report abuse

He's senile, he can't remember what he had for breakfast let alone who he voted for seven years ago. He probably can't remember who was even running for office in 2000. Ask him tomorrow and he'll say he voted for Reagan in 2000. Old folks are funny that way.

Posted by: hammerdown | May 9, 2008 7:00 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company