Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Seeking to Lower Debate Expectations, McCain Praises Obama's 'Eloquence'

By Robert Barnes
BEREA, Ohio -- Republican presidential nominee John McCain began playing down expectations for Friday night's first general election debate, saying Democratic rival Barack Obama is "very, very good."

As he met with voters and campaign volunteers at Baldwin Wallace College, McCain played up the importance of Ohio and noted Obama's "eloquence."

"All of you know the history lesson that the last person who succeeded in becoming president of the United States without winning the state of Ohio was Jack Kennedy,'' McCain said. "And that's been a long time."

He said the debate would be a major event in the campaign.

"Look, have no doubt about it, the capabilities of Senator Obama to a debate -- I mean, he's very, very good," McCain said. "He was able to beat Sen. Hillary Clinton who, as we all know, is very accomplished, very accomplished."

McCain said that Obama "was able to, I think, with his eloquence inspire a great number of Americans. So, these are going to be tough debates."

"But I believe that on the substance, on the substance, I can convince the American people that I can reform government, restore prosperity and keep the peace," he said.

While Obama has decamped to Tampa to prepare for the debate, McCain has kept up his regular schedule, with a reduced number of events. In between appearances and on weekends, he has prepared for the debate.

For more than a week, his senior advisers have been traveling with him on the campaign plane, and parts of the afternoons have been set aside for debate practice.

McCain aides have steadfastly refused to say whether they have chosen a stand-in for Obama for the practice sessions.

The Arizona senator is scheduled to leave for Mississippi, the site of Friday night's debate, on Thursday.

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 23, 2008; 3:30 PM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , John McCain , The Debates  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Palm Beach Ballots Down for the Count
Next: Tepid Public Approval for Fed Action

Comments

hey chinga, the first sign of dementia is repeating yourself

Posted by: jim | September 24, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old! He's a demented old bat!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: chinga tu madre 101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old! He's a demented old bat!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: chinga tu madre 101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old! He's a demented old bat!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: chinga tu madre 101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old! He's a demented old bat!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: chinga101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old! He's a demented old bat!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: chinga tu madre 101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old! He's a demented old bat!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: chinga101 | September 24, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Have you actually had debates? I don't think so. VP Palin and the dude will hide untill all you sorry folk vote for the same.

Posted by: justada55+ | September 24, 2008 4:17 AM | Report abuse

Look at these pictures to see all the "good" Mr. Obama did for Chicago slums(I mean developer buddies) as "Community Organizer"....

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/07/photo-gallery-results-of-obamas.html

"Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama’s close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama’s constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/

Hey, maybe he can do the SAME TO G*D D*MN AMERICA WHILE HE'S AT IT!!

REZKO/WRIGHT/AYERS/KILPATRICK/??? NO THANKS!!

Posted by: Kevin | September 23, 2008 10:03 PM

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Only a lo-life piece of garbage would try to blame Obama for those buildings. Those are the people he was trying to help. If he worked with government officials or other people that turned out to be criminals, that's not his fault. Unless you can prove that he took money or did anything else, get lost. This looks like something that Hillary Clinton whipped up to make Obama look bad.

Posted by: Hemi | September 23, 2008 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Excerpted from page 2 ]
And it's more than substance that's changed in McCain. It's the tone and style of his campaign.

Remember the "Straight Talk Express"? That was the old John McCain's rolling, roiling, nonstop, no-holds-barred news conference, held constantly aboard his campaign bus or plane. McCain was proud of his willingness to take every question reporters could throw at him; he reveled in the give-and-take. He pledged that's the way he'd always campaign.

And in these sessions, McCain often startled reporters by his willingness to criticize himself, to take responsibility for what he frankly admitted were mistakes.

"For instance, I asked him aboard his bus last year how he felt about the scandal in the treatment of veterans at Walter Reed Hospital. "Ashamed," he said. "I should have known ... and voters might fairly think a little less of me for it." "

But that was then. Now, McCain diligently avoids the reporters who cover him. Gone are the rolling news conferences; gone is that startling frankness. McCain has not held a news conference since Aug. 13. Traveling with him, many reporters simply never see him from any distance closer than 100 feet or more, and the press is penned in from the podium during his public events. Earlier this year, when McCain outfitted his campaign plane for the general election, there were special facilities put in for his news conferences. They have been used once.

Posted by: Joe | September 23, 2008 10:05 PM

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

McCain even lied about the Walter Reed scandal. Just look at his voting record. He votes against health care for our Troops with a passion.

John "Maverick" McCain. The guy that puts country first by voting against health care for our troops, and their needs.

August 2001: McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000.

April 2003: McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.

October 2003: McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq and to reduce the amount provided for reconstruction in Iraq by $322,000,000.

March 2004: McCain once again voted for abusive tax loopholes over veterans when he voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in Veterans' medical care by $1.8 billion by eliminating abusive tax loopholes. Jeez, McCain really loves those tax loopholes for corporations, since he voted for them over our veterans' needs

March 2006: McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes

April 2006: McCain was one of only 13 Senators to vote against $430,000,000 for the Department of Veteran Affairs for Medical Services for outpatient care and treatment for veterans.

May 2006: McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities

September 2007: McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments. At the time, nearly 65% of people polled in a CNN poll indicted that "things are going either moderately badly or very badly in Iraq.

So there it is. John McCain is yet another republican former military veteran who likes to talk a big game when it comes to having the support of the military. Yet, time and time again, he has gone out of his way to vote against the needs of those who are serving in our military. If he can't even see his way to actually doing what the troops want, or what the veterans need, and he doesn't have the support of veterans, then how can he be a credible commander in chief?

Posted by: Hemi | September 23, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Mod: Now that the Bush administration has begun negotiations with the Iraqi government for a timetable for withdrawal, do you still insist on not having a timetable for withdrawal?
McCain: FIVE AND A HALF YEARS!

Posted by: Herunar | September 23, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Look at these pictures to see all the "good" Mr. Obama did for Chicago slums(I mean developer buddies) as "Community Organizer"....

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/07/photo-gallery-results-of-obamas.html

"Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama’s close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama’s constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/

Hey, maybe he can do the SAME TO G*D D*MN AMERICA WHILE HE'S AT IT!!

REZKO/WRIGHT/AYERS/KILPATRICK/??? NO THANKS!!

Posted by: Kevin | September 23, 2008 10:03 PM

)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Yeah, Keep trying to blame him for other people's doings. You know where the court house is. Go file charges. Tell them that Obama was an 8 year old bomber. Or maybe we should vote for this guy.

Obama unleashed a tough new TV ad that charged McCain had protected tax breaks for insurance companies that hide profits offshore.

Without mentioning dates or the companies involved, the commercial implies McCain went to the Atlantic Ocean island of Bermuda with corporate executives and, while there, "pledged to protect tax breaks for American corporations that hide their profits offshore. And grateful insurance company executives and their lobbyists who benefit from the tax scheme, gave McCain $50,000."

There was no immediate response from the McCain campaign. The attack on the Arizona senator was the latest in a series of increasingly negative television spots by both sides in the historic and close contest for the White

Do you know why Tucker Bigmouth didn't have anything to say. Because McCain loves his corporate tax loopholes that rip off the United States. Now pedal along and find us some real criminal activity against Obama. You know, like the stuff McCain does.

Posted by: Hemi | September 23, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Part of the expectations game is this flood of blog posters all saying "Obama's good with a teleprompter but terrible at ad-libbing." They're trying to frame Obama's laid-back, thoughtful style as flummoxed stammering. For my part, and this isn't just somebody's talking point, I love a guy who thinks about what he's saying.

Posted by: Andrew | September 23, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

> Perhaps you can quote where McCain confessed to any "lies", constant or otherwise?

Frankly, I _WISH_ he'd confess that he lied, repent, and move past this nonsense! But only the former McCain would do things like that. Here, read this:

-------------------------

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=5833277

[ Excerpted from page 2 ]

And it's more than substance that's changed in McCain. It's the tone and style of his campaign.

Remember the "Straight Talk Express"? That was the old John McCain's rolling, roiling, nonstop, no-holds-barred news conference, held constantly aboard his campaign bus or plane. McCain was proud of his willingness to take every question reporters could throw at him; he reveled in the give-and-take. He pledged that's the way he'd always campaign.

And in these sessions, McCain often startled reporters by his willingness to criticize himself, to take responsibility for what he frankly admitted were mistakes.

"For instance, I asked him aboard his bus last year how he felt about the scandal in the treatment of veterans at Walter Reed Hospital. "Ashamed," he said. "I should have known ... and voters might fairly think a little less of me for it." "

But that was then. Now, McCain diligently avoids the reporters who cover him. Gone are the rolling news conferences; gone is that startling frankness. McCain has not held a news conference since Aug. 13. Traveling with him, many reporters simply never see him from any distance closer than 100 feet or more, and the press is penned in from the podium during his public events. Earlier this year, when McCain outfitted his campaign plane for the general election, there were special facilities put in for his news conferences. They have been used once.

Posted by: Joe | September 23, 2008 10:05 PM | Report abuse

Look at these pictures to see all the "good" Mr. Obama did for Chicago slums(I mean developer buddies) as "Community Organizer"....

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/07/photo-gallery-results-of-obamas.html

"Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama’s close friends and political supporters. Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama’s constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/

Hey, maybe he can do the SAME TO G*D D*MN AMERICA WHILE HE'S AT IT!!

REZKO/WRIGHT/AYERS/KILPATRICK/??? NO THANKS!!

Posted by: Kevin | September 23, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

wow...

Freddie’s Friend

Freddie Mac continued checks to McCain campaign chief's firm.
By Michael Isikoff | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Sep 23, 2008 | Updated: 7:39 p.m. ET Sep 23, 2008

http://www.newsweek.com/id/160561

Posted by: George W. McLiar | September 23, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Supposedly, Colorado is a swing state. So, I walked down my block and talked to everyone about their voting. 1 out of 8 are voting for Obama. No, I don't live on the nice side of town. I think people really have been offended by the press lately, that's my impression. I think this election is going to be a huge surprise for everyone. I don't think it is even close, and most of all, the people aren't listening to media opinions. I think the media has more damage from this election than ever.

Posted by: Swing-stater | September 23, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

the question is, as a christian, do you want these people to be safe, or do you want them and their unborn children dying in the streets from illegal procedures?
========================================
L.O.L, if you think Christians care about anything but their own agenda, just step into any of these thousands of churches across America. They only act like they care. The bible is a shield for their hate, and they attempt to recruit more simpletons every day..."spread the word"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama does well in with a teleprompter in front of him and spouting a speech written by someone else, but he "isn't" very good in debates. His lack of experience will shine through and I predict that he will start to lose points in the polls as soon as the first debate is over. He just doesn't have the ability to answer unrehearsed questions ... which is why he has refused John McCain's challenge to meet him in Town Halls across the country. I only hope the entire country tunes in for the the debate !!!
===================================
I'll tell you what, If McCain answers one question without using part of his stump speech I'll vote for him. Sadly McCain only answers question with predetermined lines and gives no thought what so ever. He used to be good, now he is just old.

Posted by: Palin is not going to be my president. | September 23, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

No rights even when the fetus is BORN, according to Obama.

Posted by: JakeD

True look at poor Hillary, she had no rights to the ticket and she is all grown up.

Posted by: dottydo | September 23, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Don:

Neither of us are lying.

Jim:

Good points.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

the idea that a person who can debate better then someone else can be a better president is stupid.vote for whoever you think will be a better president. think of it in these terms, in 1858 stephen douglass was a better debater then abraham lincoln, and was elected senator from illinois over lincoln. 2 years later he was still a better debater, and ran against lincoln for president. thankfully, lincoln won this time. otherwise, had douglass been elected, there would be no USA today, he would have let the southern states seceed, slavery would have gone on for another 30-40 years, germany, france, russia or england would be ruling not only the world but north america as well. thank god, the best debater was not elected. voting for the best debater is like voting for the best dresser, or best looking, it just makes no sense. besides, both candidates would sell their family into bondage if they thought it would help them win. you see, lincoln, [and douglass] had character and integrity, and that does not exist in america anymore.

Posted by: jim | September 23, 2008 9:07 PM | Report abuse

Who lies more, JakeD or John McCain?

Posted by: Don | September 23, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Quite right jake. We don't have much to talk about anyway.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Obama does well in with a teleprompter in front of him and spouting a speech written by someone else, but he "isn't" very good in debates. His lack of experience will shine through and I predict that he will start to lose points in the polls as soon as the first debate is over. He just doesn't have the ability to answer unrehearsed questions ... which is why he has refused John McCain's challenge to meet him in Town Halls across the country. I only hope the entire country tunes in for the the debate !!!

Posted by: kaye1966 | September 23, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

toritto:

Too bad you declined to answer my question to you on that other thread. I am under no obligation to answer yours now.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Oh Jake you still spouting that trash?

The Illinois law is and was clear and needed no modification.

Where do you stand on birth control? On morning after pills? On rape or incest?

All gifts from god I presume?

Do you feed the hungry? Cloth the naked?
Care for the sick? Stand for peace? Oppose capital punishment? Defend the defenseless?

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

No rights even when the fetus is BORN, according to Obama.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Pro-Life + Pro-war=?
Please justify.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Why do I think an unborn human being is just as valuable as a cat?

Firstly my point about my cat is that, biologically, we are both animals. My brain may be more developed (some would argue that cats are superior) but we probably share 90%+ of our DNA.

I don't believe that humans are "in the image of god". There isn't one.

I don't worry about what you believe anymore than I worry about what Hindus believe, so long as you don't try to make me conform to your beliefs.

As for fetuses, unborn is unborn. It is not a "person" and shouldn't be given the rights of a person.

If a fetus is given "person" rights then it is given the same identical, some might argue superior rights as the woman carrying it. The woman is reduced from a person to a uterus - a thermos bottle so to speak.

A woman is a person and a fetus is not until it is born and becomes a person entitled to rights.

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

When do we start questioning McCain???


Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman being a notable exception (5/4/08)—raised concerns about G. Gordon Liddy, a donor and fundraiser for McCain.

On his radio talk-show (11/8/07), Liddy featured his “old friend” McCain, who declared: “I’m proud of you. . . . Congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great.”

Liddy’s criminal past during Watergate never bothered McCain, nor did his 1994 comments (8/26/94; Extra! 7–8/95) that his radio listeners should murder federal agents: “Go for a head shot.”

Posted by: Sick and Tired of it all | September 23, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Waiting also risks a "hardened heart" : (

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Yes "ANONYMOUS" if you keep saying he is a Muslim then he will become one! Go right ahead...repeat it at least 60 times per hour and post it on all blogs! Take out an Ad in the paper!

If it makes you feel better and helps you sleep at night call him a Muslim (againa nothing WRONG with being a Muslim).

If it helps you feel better about not voting for him call him an extremist. It's all about how you fool yourself so you can look at yourself in the mirror and live with yourself.

WE CANNOT STOP CHANGE
*One day a WOMAN will be POTUS
*One day a person who is not a wasp will be POTUS
*one day a Non-Christian will be POTUS.

It might take hundreds of years but no one will stop it.

India, Chile, Great Britain, Israel, Pakistan (that Muslim country if you know your geography) all have had Women as leaders. It's about time that this great country shows the world that it not only talks the talk but will also walk the walk.
A woman as POTUS, a non WASP as POTUS are long over due!

Posted by: Your Ignorance Shows! | September 23, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Jake D, I was just trying to demonstrate the grace, power and forgiveness of God.

You are right. I am not encouraging anyone to wait, just that if you do, and have the chance, you are still IN.

Posted by: DRG | September 23, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Good luck torrito, I'll pray for you in spite of your views (whether you want it or not).

God may do something to get your attention someday and I hope you can open your mind and heart for just a moment to let Him speak to you.

Posted by: DRG | September 23, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

toritto:

No shocker then why you think an unborn human being is just a valuable as a cat too ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

I guess I am kid of disappointed in the Washington Post for not moderating this forum and deleting inappropriate commentary.
While the disclaimer says "User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. " obviously that is not hte case, and I am amazed at the personal insults and attacks posted here. If all of you can't be civil in your discussions with each other why would you expect our politicians to be any better than they are? For the most part the comments here are just nasty drivel.

Posted by: Mugsy | September 23, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

DRG:

God is great indeed. Waiting until your deathbed, however, risks those deaths via sudden causes ...

Dennis:

Thanks for the excerpt (I hadn't read that yet ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

"Religion" iss all claptrap. There is no god out there..never was..never has been.

After you die it will be like before you were born....tens of billions of years of nothingness.

I am little different from my cat. The only difference is that I know I am going to die and she doesn't.

Its really nice to think about how its gonna be on that beautiful shore when we see mom and dad again - its a fable just like Santa Clause is to kids.

If there was a god it is certainly not in the image of a King who demands that we "worship" and "obey" it or suffer eternal punishment. That's ancient king worship. Its all nonsense.

Half this country thinks the world is 7,000 years old and the other half thinks you can say some mumbojumbo over a cup of wine and it will transform into the blood of a long dead jew - while still appearing to be wine of course.

We will not progress to the stars until we put aside such nonsense.

This is why atheists keep their mouths shut.

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

torrito, do yourself a favor and, someday when you really need help that is beyond you, make sure you call out to Jesus and not Pharoah!

I agree, they may seem like fables to those who do not understand.

To some of us they are a way of life!

Posted by: DRG | September 23, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

PROFITS are PRIVATE for the CEO's and Shareholders.

LOSSES are Socialized! We the taxpayers pay for it all!

While everyone is worried about Obama raising taxes and being a Muslim, your money your taxes are being used to rebuild Iraq (did I mention that was a country that might have Muslims) and to bail out people who have been IRRESPONSIBLE managing a business. In the meantime all the CEOS CFO and other C EXECUTIVES will have their GOLDEN parachutes paid by you.

BUT NO ONE is BAILING OUT THE HOMEOWNERS, the people still homeless from Katrina, Ike, forest fires, jobs that have been outsourced. NO one is BAILING OUT the millions who have no HEALTHCARE...but people think SOCIALIZED MEDICINE IS BAD>>>>>SOCIALIZED BAIL OUTS OF RICH SPOILT BANKERS IS GOOD!

WAKE UP!!

Posted by: Z | September 23, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

How many are your deeds,
46 though hidden from sight.
47 O sole God without equal !
48 You made the Earth as You desired, You alone.
49 With people, cattle, and all creatures.
50 With everything upon Earth that walks on legs,
51 and all that is on high and flies with its wings.

Any of you good christians recognize this verse?

Bible verse? Psalms perhaps?

Nope.

The Great Hymn of Aten - Pharoah Amenhotep
1350 B. C.

We've been "worshiping" the god/king for 4,000 years - since the time we did'nt know what made the sun come up in the morning. All nice fables.


Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Who ever is spreading that Keating 5 propaghanda get your facts check you blind loving Obama supporter.

Keating 5: In 1991 a bipartisan panel rendered its judgement of McCain: not guilty of any illegal activity.

Out of the so called Keating 5 there were 3, all Democrats, who the committee found culpable.

They said Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle's "conduct constituted substantial interference with the FHLBB's enforcement efforts and that they had done so at the behest of Charles Keating."


McCain / Palin 08

For the experience we need, not just empty rhetoric.

Posted by: Alex | September 23, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

He is only setting up the expectations of the left for him not to do well. Then the right can say see he did as expected!

Posted by: Scott | September 23, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

The cool thing toritto is that you don't have to believe now or for your entire life. On your deathbed you can welcome God into your life, repent of your sins, He'll wash away your sins (yes, every single one), and welcome you into heaven.

That is exactly what happend with one of the men hanging from a cross next to Jesus.

He was moments from death and is now up in heaven.

You have to admit it is pretty amazing!

How great is our God!

Posted by: DRG | September 23, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

> I would rather bite into substance than eloquence.

Personally I'd prefer to bite into a nice, juicy steak. But that's just me.

Posted by: Joe | September 23, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

There are many people whom I have encountered that have expressed their disgust of the two-party system, especially how the leaders of the two parties place party before nation, and the perception that they are beholden only to large donors, rather than the citizens they ostensibly serve. Those of us who support third-party candidates have been pushed out to the fringes by these two incumbent parties, who have used their money, power and virtually unlimited access to the major media to perpetuate the two-party system. The Republicans and the Democrats, however, can only marginalize us up to a point. When there are enough of us, they will have no choice but to listen. We need more people to have the courage to say that the emperor has no clothes.

Take as an example what has happened to the presidential debates. Ever since Perot's appearance against Clinton and the first President Bush in the 1992 debates, no other candidate outside the Republican and Democratic parties
has been allowed to take part in a national debate alongside the Democratic and Republican candidates. Conveniently, the allegedly non-partisan Commission for Presidential Debates (CPD) is co-chaired by the former heads of the RNC and DNC. I will leave it to you to guess which masters they serve.

In fact, outside the second debate four years ago, two legitimate candidates (Michael Badnarik of the Libertarians and David Cobb of the Greens) were arrested while attempting to serve a show cause order on the CPD as to why a
debate at a public facility, paid for at least in part by taxpayer dollars, excludes legitimate candidates. The CPD was created by the Republicans and Democrats specifically to wrest the debates away from the League of Women
Voters because the LWV had the nerve to say that there were more than two parties who should be heard in the debates.

If candidates were thrown in jail during the campaign in any other country, We would be (rightfully) screaming about this attack upon the democratic process. This story did not make it to ANY mainstream news source, to the
best of my knowledge. I would wager that a large percentage of people who knew about these arrests (and I would be willing to surmise that this was a tiny percentage of the overall population) learned about it on a popular blog known as fark.com, better known for its irreverent takes on current events.

Here's a perfect example of the collusion between the Republicans and Democrats. This is taken verbatim from the 32-page "Memorandum of Understanding" agreed to by the Bush and Kerry camps in 2004:

(Source: www.c-span.org/pdf/memounderstanding.pdf)

(d) The parties agree that they will not
(1) issue any challenges for additional debates,
(2) appear at any other debate or adversarial forum with any other presidential or vice presidential candidate, or
(3) accept any television or radio air time offers that involve a debate format or otherwise involve the simultaneous appearance of more than one candidate.

Unsurprisingly, there has been no release of the terms and conditions of this year's debates (as of the time this piece is being written).

Since many in the media are intricately connected to the same people who control the Republicans and Democrats, all of this gets buried. Of course, while the populace is polarized along left/right lines, I believe that the parties are using this divide and conquer strategy to serve their own interests, harming our nation even further. If one believes that the Democrats or Republicans have our interests at heart, I have some swampland in Nebraska for sale.

In 2000, I actually had one person threaten to bring me up on treason charges for voting third-party. There are actually people that believe that third parties are (or should be) against the law, and there are many others
who may not even know that other parties exist. Another contributing problem is the ongoing combined effort of the Big Two to deny ballot access to other parties.

Those of us who support candidates other than those of the Republican and Democratic parties (and in the interest of full disclosure, I am not a member of any party and voted for the aforementioned Mr. Badnarik in 2004) believe
we have a right to be heard on an equal footing with the "big two". Elections, especially federal elections, are too important not to have our citizens be informed of ALL possible choices. We do not ask for special treatment;
rather, we ask for equal treatment. We ask only that other legitimate candidates have the opportunity to state their case to ALL of the American people. Let the American people -- not the Democratic/Republican cartel and
their fellow travelers -- decide which candidates and views they wish to accept or reject as they see fit.

I am aware that there are some people who have been on the ballot in one state or another, who can at best be called crackpots. The tragedy of this is that legitimate, serious candidates become lumped into this group by many
people. My proposal is as follows: If a candidate is on the ballot in enough states holding enough electoral votes to mathematically win the Presidency, that candidate should be a part of the national debates. In this election, there are six candidates meeting this requirement: Sens. Obama (Democrat) and McCain (Republican), former Reps. Bob Barr (Libertarian) and Cynthia McKinney (Green), Ralph Nader (independent), and Chuck Baldwin (Constitution).

I believe that this is a rather manageable number of candidates for debates that are viewed by tens of millions of people; debates that have the potential of influencing the most important choice that an American citizen has: to choose the person to lead this nation for the next four years.

Michael Trozzo

Posted by: Michael Trozzo | September 23, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Your Ignorance Shows! posted:The is NOTHING wrong in being MUSLIM! if you are one (Obama says he is NOT) and there is nothing wrong in keeping the name your parents gave you.

Its Obama's shameless lie He is the COMMUNIST MUSLIM

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

JakeD, did you read George Will's column today? I found his conclusion particularly profound:

"It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?"

Looking at our current president, who shares McCain's "boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes," I think most people would agree that someone who takes a more reasoned look at events, causes, and effects, would make a better president. We've certainly seen what happens when a president doesn't bother to think before acting, because he knows, by God, what's right.

But you probably don't agree, JakeD. You speak from the same "bottomless reservoir of certitudes" as McCain and Bush. I can understand that: it's a lot easier than actually, you know, thinking.

Posted by: Dennis Berry | September 23, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Bozo4Bush
Please spell the word "you". It's much more effective when it doesn't appear that you are communicating through a pocket calculator.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

I've come to the conclusion that the most oppressed closeted people in the US are atheists.

There are millions of us and we just keep our mouths shut while our heads spin with the religious tripe we listen to day after day.

I'm waiting for a candidate who comes right out and says he's a non-believer.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Well ...I wouldnt call the fegots a bleeding heart.They are more like ass bleeding

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Hey dorito, I am just explaining things.

Since Christians believe in what we do we argue for our point, just like you.

To us there is NO choice to be made. Not for any of us (men or women).

You will never be able to relate until you understand the faith.

Open a Bible, attend a church, talk to a pastor or priest, join a bible study. Something that will enlighten you. Then you'll understand better.

You need a God like perspective on life, not a MAN like perspective to understand.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

The is NOTHING wrong in being MUSLIM! if you are one (Obama says he is NOT) and there is nothing wrong in keeping the name your parents gave you. He was a baby and he did not choose the name. If he had changed it later on you would have said he was hiding something.

Are you going to tell me that people called "Black" as a middle or last name but are Caucasian are hiding the fact that they are White?

Give it a rest already! and go to your Church and be proud of the loving CHRISTIAN that you are!!

Posted by: Your Ignorance Shows! | September 23, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

St. Sarah of the Snows will bring Jesus back to the White House.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Mike
How does me calling Barry O a muslim, make me a racist? I didn't know Muslim was a seperate race. I guess it's like me calling U a bleeding heart, tree hugging, gay lovin' liberal. Is that racist? I never once mentioned any kind of race.
I see, U are just using that fuzzy liberal logic. It's not correct but makes U feel better. More power to ya.

Posted by: Bobo4bush | September 23, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

I don't suppose the candidates will discuss
the United States' suicide, ie, the distruction of the economy and free trade?
Probably won't talk about Individualism and Reason either.
We are pretty much totally collectivist now working our way to tribalism.
With distructive forces of the collectivist left and the religious right
combined we are headed back to the
Dark Ages with a Nuclear Bomb in one hand
and A Rabbit's Foot in the other

Posted by: Louie Carter | September 23, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Obama is no saint! and he never said he was!

But McCain who constantly says how he should be the one to be trusted in no saint either.

If you want to makes lists of what Obama has done wrong, please make another list of what he has done right too.

Make a McCain list not only of his achievements but of his failures too.

Don't forget that we wanted to impeach Clinton for an affair, but McCain got away with his. Obama has been married for 19 years to THE SAME WOMAN!

As for S. Palin she is a chameleon and will change colors as the situation demands. She has a huge skirt which now has two men riding on it. The shadow governor aka First dude/husband and McCain.

If a woman took a 5 million dollar ring then cancelled the wedding we would expect her to return the ring. If she changed her mind about the "BRIDGE to NOWHERE" thats OK just show me how upright you are by returning the money then OR NOW!!!

Why dont we address
* her using personal email for circumvent detection?
* FIRING the chef as she proudly proclaims but giving the chef ANOTHER GOVERNMENT JOB!
* Firing those who DONT OBEY HER EVERY word and giving her buddies jobs. When does liking cows in your youth give you the right to a high paying job in Agriculture?
* Billing Alaska to stay in her house.
* The famous first dude billed Alaska for travel even though he was not a government employee!!

and the list goes on!

Posted by: Blue | September 23, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

All the closeted gays are republican...:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

If you dont want to have an abortion, even for rape, incest or the life of the mother cause you think its god's gift to you - well then - don't have one!

That's choice.......

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Seems all the fagots are
the Liberals....not that I think there's anything wrong with that!

:-)

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

McCain knows all about bailing out rich bankers and screwing over middle class and poor people, he's been doing it for years.


*McCain - Founding Member of the Keating Five:

McCain was one of the "Keating Five," congressmen investigated on ethics charges for strenuously helping convicted racketeer Charles Keating after he gave them large campaign contributions and vacation trips.
Charles Keating was convicted of racketeering and fraud in both state and federal court after his Lincoln Savings & Loan collapsed, costing the taxpayers $3.4 billion. His convictions were overturned on technicalities; for example, the federal conviction was overturned because jurors had heard about his state conviction, and his state charges because Judge Lance Ito (yes, that judge) screwed up jury instructions. Neither court cleared him, and he faces new trials in both courts.)

Though he was not convicted of anything, McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating after Keating gave McCain at least $112,00 in contributions. In the mid-1980s, McCain made at least 9 trips on Keating's airplanes, and 3 of those were to Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas. McCain's wife and father-in-law also were the largest investors (at $350,000) in a Keating shopping center; the Phoenix New Times called it a "sweetheart deal."


*McCain - Mafia Ties:

In 1995, McCain sent birthday regards, and regrets for not attending, to Joseph "Joe Bananas" Bonano, the head of the New York Bonano crime family, who had retired to Arizona. Another politician to send regrets was Governor Fife Symington, who has since been kicked out of office and convicted of 7 felonies relating to fraud and extortion.


Here's some more straight-talk, my friends.

http://www.realchange.org/mccain.htm
.

Posted by: ace mcfunkenstein | September 23, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Seems all the homosexuals are in the GOP....not that I think there's anything wrong with that!

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

> That's fine with me (both Gore and Kerry "won" their debates with our CURRENT President ;)

And look how well THAT turned out!

Posted by: JakeR | September 23, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Bobo da Racist.... Don't let facts get in the way of your lies and emotional rants. People might call you a "librul".

Posted by: Mike | September 23, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

I would rather bite into substance than eloquence.

Posted by: Alex | September 23, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

"AGAIN, WHAT DOES RELIGION REALLY HAVE TO DO WITH ABORTION IF YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT? WHY SHOULD IT?" -- GF7

For us Christians, life begins at conception and is God's creation. It has nothing to do with women's rights. God trumps us and our "rights" in the eye and life of a Christian.

The people who call themselves Christians and still believe in abortion simnply have not searched deeply enough to find the real meaning of scripture. It is quite impossible to do so.

They are, I'm sure, good people but they may believe that Christianity is a religion of convenience where we follow the rules we like to. It is really hard to follow all the rules! Impossible really, but we always try!

Thank God for Jesus and His amazing gift to all of us!

So, because of all this abortion has EVERYTHING to do with religion. It is the law created by MAN that has nothing to do with religion.

Nobody has to believe or understand it but I wish you did and I'll keep trying.

I could no more vote for abortion than I could disown God.

Posted by: DRG | September 23, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Bush was never elected president. He was appointed in 2000 by his friends on the Supreme Court (who stopped counting of votes) after jamming an election, then repeated those same efforts in 2004. Dems had no backbone then, so won't be surprised if continued cheating by the GOP in this election goes unchallenged.

Just when I thought the office of the presidency could be dumbed down no further after eight long horrible years of GWBush.

Posted by: vote | September 23, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Geez! Liberals will say anything!

Fagot bastards.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Eric
Barry O is a Muslim. His wife is a converted muslim. He has 2 little muslim kids. His father was a muslim, his uncles were all muslims. His babysitter and nanny, both muslims.

Muslim Muslim Muslim

Posted by: Bobo4bush | September 23, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Geez! Republicans will say anything!

Fascist bastards.

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

I would rather bite into substance rather than eloquence.

Posted by: Alex | September 23, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

Some moron below thinks that purchasing a 10 foot plot of land from your neighbor Rezko is a criminal offense. So.... what did the background check say that you ran on your realtor before you bought your home say?

Posted by: Mike | September 23, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

I Obama is a foreign policy expert then Most Liberals are not the fagots.Once fagot always fagot .

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

The Myth of Pro-Obama Media Bias
Little evidence for self-proclaimed ‘lovefest’

By John K. Wilson


If there has been one unquestioned assumption of the 2008 election, it is that the media love Barack Obama.

Rush Limbaugh declared that the media were following Obama with “their tongues dragging along the concrete to the floors.” “Lenin, Stalin never got this kind of coverage from their media,” Limbaugh claimed (7/22/08), which he blamed on the “chickification of our culture and the news business” (7/21/08).

Joseph McQuaid, publisher of the conservative New Hampshire Union Leader, wrote an editorial headlined “Obama Orgy” (7/21/08) that denounced “the outrageous imbalance in the major media’s coverage of the candidates.” Such proclamations bolstered a GOP offensive against what the McCain campaign (7/22/08) called media’s “bizarre fascination with Barack Obama. Some may even say it’s a love affair.” A Republican National Committee fundraising letter two days later (7/23/08) decried “the fawning, one-sided coverage Barack Obama and Democrat candidates receive from the mainstream media.”

But it’s not just conservatives complaining about Obama coverage; corporate media have likewise echoed the GOP’s talking points. Many pointed to Obama’s overseas trip in July as an example of this alleged bias. At the start of the trip, CBS Evening News (7/22/08) anchor Katie Couric spoke of the “Obamathon . . . the non-stop coverage this week [that] has stolen most of the limelight from his opponent” and asked, “Will this summer of love last?” “Obama was a media darling,” declared CBS reporter Thalia Assuras at the end of the trip (7/27/08).

CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck compared media coverage of Obama’s trip to a previous one by McCain (CNN.com, 7/24/08): “McCain made a trip to the Middle East in March and didn’t have to worry about finding seats for any network anchors, because none of them wanted to go.”

Reporter James Rainey wrote in the L.A. Times (7/19/08) that “by sending their biggest stars across the globe to interview Obama, ABC, CBS and NBC have reinforced the notion that the Democrat is getting an easy ride. It’s time for a mid-course correction, which should include more airtime for McCain, less for Obama, or both.”

How a myth is made
Unsurprisingly, the public has come to believe these repeated declarations of media bias. A Rasmussen poll (Rasmussen Reports, 7/19/08) found that 49 percent of respondents believe that reporters will try to help Obama win, while 14 percent believe most will try to help McCain. Strikingly, “45 percent say that most reporters would hide information if it hurt the candidate they wanted to win,” while only 30 percent disagree.

Such polls reveal the power of the right-wing media in America. The myth of the pro-Obama media is the same as the myth of the liberal press, and it has been created by a standard strategy: Right-wing pundits declare repeatedly and vociferously that the media are biased in favor of liberals; centrist media pundits, who generally prefer critiques from the right because they don’t make a structural challenge to their work, concede that they have a point; and progressive critics, excluded from both the pro-establishment and the right-wing talkshows that dominate the media, go unheard.

CNN’s July 20, 2008 Reliable Sources show was a typical example of this process in action. Host Howard Kurtz, also the Washington Post media critic, began by asking about the media coverage of Obama, “Is this another lovefest in the making?” David Frum of the right-wing National Review Online declared that pro-Obama bias was obvious and a product of “affirmative action.” Michael Crowley of the centrist New Republic refused to reject the tale of liberal bias, claiming only that Frum “overstates the ideological and partisan bias at work.” And ABC White House correspondent Martha Raddatz wouldn’t address the issue: “That decision is not made by me.” Kurtz, apparently satisfied that the point was settled, concluded by demanding: “How can that imbalance be fair?” (Perhaps the most prominent exponent of the pro-Obama media myth, Kurtz claimed in 2007 that the “walk-on-water coverage” of Obama “ranges from glowing to even gushing”—MSNBC’s Meet the Press, 2/11/07.)

The coverage gap
As with most myths, one part of the “Obama lovefest” story is true: There has been substantially more coverage of Obama than any other candidate. Numerous stories claiming proof of a pro-Obama media bias focused on studies of the network news broadcasts by the Tyndall Report (7/25/08), a news-monitoring service whose numbers reveal that in the first half of 2008, McCain received 52 percent as much network coverage as Obama (203 minutes vs. 389 minutes).

The amount of coverage for both candidates is unprecedented, but the advantage held by Obama in overall coverage is nothing unusual, as shown by figures compiled by the Tyndall Report (7/25/08). Measuring the first six months of each election year, Democratic challenger Michael Dukakis got only 32 percent of the coverage garnered by then-Vice President George H.W. Bush in 1988; incumbent Bill Clinton got only 28 percent of the coverage Republican challenger Bob Dole got in 1996. Incumbent George W. Bush got 85 percent as much coverage as Democratic Sen. John Kerry in 2004—the closest thing to parity in early campaign coverage since Tyndall has been keeping track.

In every year Tyndall studied except 1988, the candidate of the party that didn’t hold the White House has gotten more coverage. It’s logical for the media to give more coverage to a less familiar candidate; having a longer, contested primary campaign also helps. Considering that Obama’s nomination battle continued for a full four months after media commentators pronounced McCain’s primary victory, this year’s coverage gap is in fact surprising for how small it is.

The coverage gap might also reflect greater public interest in Obama. In an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll (7/18–23/08) asking “who are you focusing on?” 51 percent of respondents said Obama; only 27 percent said McCain. (Nor can that lesser interest in McCain be attributed to the lack of media coverage: While he got less coverage than Obama in the first six months of the year, he still got more coverage than any candidate from previous years in Tyndall’s study.) As conservative CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck wrote (CNN.com, 7/24/08), “‘The Media’ aren’t around for their health, they’re around to make money, and if Obama drives sales or ratings, then I can’t really blame them for continuing to tap that well until it runs dry.” Obama is on the cover of magazines because his face sells a lot more magazines than McCain’s picture. That’s a pro-profit bias, not a liberal bias.

Flawed measures
Another study sometimes cited by media to prove pro-Obama bias (Project for Excellence in Journalism and Shorenstein Center, 10/29/07) found that in the first five months of 2007, Obama received 47 percent “positive” coverage and 16 percent “negative,” better than any other candidate. McCain, by contrast, had 12 percent “positive” coverage and 48 percent “negative.”

But such positive/negative studies are a flawed measure of media bias. Not only do they rely on researchers’ interpretations of what is positive and negative, they implicitly assume that reality is neutral, and that fair coverage will produce comparable numbers of “good news” and “bad news” stories.

The majority of the stories in that study (63 percent) were about the game of the campaign: who was winning, who was drawing crowds, who was raising money. For example, fully 15 percent of all stories about Obama focused on his fundraising (more than twice as many as all the other candidates), and, as his fundraising exceeded expectations, these stories were coded as positive.

By contrast, McCain’s fundraising and polling fell far short of expectations in early 2007, leading to much more “negative” horserace coverage—which had nothing to do with journalists’ personal or political leanings. Obama has received “positive” press coverage in the same way that a winning sports team gets “positive” coverage from sportswriters reporting on its victories; without an independent measure of how well a candidate is doing, calculating “positive” or “negative” coverage won’t tell you much about media bias.

Positive or negative?
New York Times columnist David Brooks proclaimed on the PBS News Hour (7/25/08) about the media, “Ninety-two percent of us vote for the Democrat year after year.” Even if that were true (and not even the right-wing Media Research Center makes that claim—see Media Research.org, 6/30/04), the alleged biases of journalists don’t seem to translate into the actual media coverage. Chris Matthews may have embarrassed himself with that “thrill going up my leg” at an Obama speech (MSNBC, 2/12/08), but the truth is no one in the press talks about McCain’s thrilling speeches because he’s a terrible speaker compared to Obama, not because of bias. And Matthews is fond of making oddball positive comments about candidates of both parties, whether it’s comparing John McCain to Martin Luther (Nation, 7/7/08) or pondering the “sex appeal” of Fred Thompson (MSNBC, 6/13/07): “Can you smell the English leather on this guy?”

Obama has gotten frankly positive coverage at times, especially from celebrity-driven media such as People magazine or Access Hollywood, where the young, tall and lean Obama fits the celebrity profile better than his heavy-jowled, septuagenarian opponent. And before he ran for president, Obama rarely encountered negative media. In his book The Audacity of Hope (p. 120), Obama noted that from 2003 to 2005, “I was the beneficiary of unusually—and at times undeservedly—positive press coverage.” But with each step closer to the White House, Obama received much more critical media scrutiny.

The generally upbeat coverage continued as media speculated in 2006 on a possible Obama candidacy, but as FAIR’s Peter Hart argued (Extra!, 3–4/07), it was primarily a reflection of pundits’ centrism and their desire to find a candidate who might “transcend” race and partisanship: “He makes pundits feel good about America—particularly their own overwhelmingly white slice of elite America—and his politics are moderate enough to avoid the type of crude caricature that other candidates might receive.” With each step closer to the White House, though, Obama received much more critical media scrutiny.

As Tom Rosenstiel of the Project for Excellence in Journalism noted (News-Hour, 7/25/08), “More exposure isn’t necessarily always a good thing,” since “not all of the coverage of Obama . . . is glowing.” Andrew Tyndall observed (Tyndall Report, 7/25/08): “Obama gets more positive coverage, more negative coverage and more trivial coverage. Who else has stories filed about them on how he shakes hands with his wife?” Even that particular “trivial” story was often portrayed negatively, such as the description of it as a “terrorist fist jab” on Fox News Channel (6/6/08).

What’s more, Obama’s negative coverage extends far beyond the network news that Tyndall analyzes. There is simply no left-wing equivalent to Rush Limbaugh’s three-hour assaults on Barack Obama every weekday. The few liberal outlets where McCain is critiqued systematically, such as Air America or MSNBC’s Countdown With Keith Olbermann, are vastly outnumbered in airtime and audience by Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Bill O’Reilly and many other right-wing talkshow hosts who use their platforms to launch regular attacks against Obama.

‘A bit of a problem’
One of the central themes in the extensive media coverage of Obama, in fact, has been the accusation of inexperience. “Here’s a 46-year-old African-American with a narrative that is very unusual and that few other Americans can relate to,” pollster Peter Hart told the International Herald Tribune (7/29/08). “Add to that the fact that he has had four years in the United States Senate and very little international experience. That’s a large leap for the American public to make.”

CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider repeated the sentiment (6/4/08), suggesting that “Barack Obama is not an easy candidate to elect, and not primarily because of his race, but because a lot of people say he doesn’t have enough experience. He may be tough to elect.” Before Obama won the Democratic nomination, CNN anchor T.J. Holmes asked (5/16/08):

Doesn’t Obama have a bit of a problem as well? Because we know if he does become the eventual nominee . . . a lot of the general election campaign is going to be about his foreign policy credentials. And to bring this up now, kind of puts in the back of people’s minds, hey wait a minute, he doesn’t have that much experience when it comes to foreign policy. Do we really want to put this country and this war on terror in the hands of this inexperienced guy?


Much like the earlier media tropes about Al Gore (lied about inventing the Internet) or John Kerry (coward and traitor), it scarcely mattered whether the accusation of inexperience was true; the media has made it conventional wisdom by force of repetition. Journalists could just as easily have pointed out that Obama has more years of experience as an elected public official than Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney, or that he has more foreign policy experience than four out of the last five presidents had when they were elected. Curiously, those aren’t popular arguments in the “pro-Obama” media.

Meanwhile, journalists seem to take on faith McCain’s “vast foreign policy expertise and credibility on national security,” as NBC anchor Brian Williams put it in a Democratic primary debate (2/26/07). Or as Newsweek’s Evan Thomas declared (PBS’s Charlie Rose, 2/8/08), McCain “can be pretty out there, using words like ‘surrender,’ because who is really going to question John McCain?” Extra! Update (4/08) cited “the media’s gentle treatment of McCain’s ludicrous claim” that Shiite Iran was backing the militant Sunni group Al-Qaeda in Iraq as an example of how the corporate press “seems eager to advance the idea that McCain’s Vietnam experience gives him sound judgment about foreign policy—never mind his actual record.”

In fact, a closer look at Obama’s supposed coverage advantage reveals a consistent media double standard on scrutiny of the candidates. Obama’s apparently innocuous connection to corrupt fundraiser Tony Rezko received extensive attention, while McCain’s lead role in the Keating Five savings and loan scandal is treated as old news and generally ignored by the press. The coverage of Obama’s former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright went on endlessly, while McCain’s embrace of controversial right-wing preacher John Hagee received far less media attention (Extra! Update, 4/08). Obama’s distant acquaintance with Bill Ayers (whose role in the 1960s’ Weather Underground Obama has condemned) became the basis of absurd accusations of “terrorist” connections, while the press ignored McCain’s trumpeting the endorsement of Oliver North, whose Iranian-financed Contra war killed far more innocents than ’60s radicals ever did.

Nor did many media figures—Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman being a notable exception (5/4/08)—raise concerns about G. Gordon Liddy, a donor and fundraiser for McCain. On his radio talk-show (11/8/07), Liddy featured his “old friend” McCain, who declared: “I’m proud of you. . . . Congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great.” Liddy’s criminal past during Watergate never bothered McCain, nor did his 1994 comments (8/26/94; Extra! 7–8/95) that his radio listeners should murder federal agents: “Go for a head shot.”

The media denounced Obama’s “flip-flop” on public campaign financing almost in unison, while paying much less attention to McCain’s reneging on his legally binding promise to accept public financing for his primary campaign (FAIR Media Advisory, 7/3/08; Extra! Update, 8/08).

As noted by FAIR’s Peter Hart in Extra! (5–6/08) and Eric Alterman and George Zornick in the Nation (7/7/08), it is difficult to find even one subject where the press has truly held McCain’s feet to the fire while giving Obama a break from scrutiny. If corporate media are in love with Obama, they sure are picking a funny way of showing it.

John K. Wilson is the author of Patriotic Correctness: Academic Freedom and Its Enemies (collegefreedom.org) and Barack Obama: This Improbable Quest (obamapolitics.com).


See FAIR's Archives for more on:
Elections/2008

Posted by: Sick and Tired of it all | September 23, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

Already John McCain spoke the best!
Look at him go, he knows the word eloquence.

Again, I ask John McCain to not compare himself to this welfarian abortionist Obama. He's a racist of white people, I think. He's going to just sound better, offer the money of hard-working people to all non-working people. That's basically all he talks about. I swear to God!

Posted by: Amado Castaneda | September 23, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous:

We currently have a criminal in the WH. One of the worst crinimals ever. You really think purchasing a house is comprable to murdering millions? Stealing oil? Spending our money to make himself and his buddy dick richer?

Open your eyes moron!

Posted by: RSV | September 23, 2008 6:17 PM

----------------------------------------

F..k you RSV.We dont need another criminal from south side Chicago.Do your research retard

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

"Sarah is now a foreign policy expert. She will solve all the problems around the world. "

Yep, after her first encounter with somebody from outside of the US, she's READY. Oh, and she can see Russia from her house! I feel safer already.

Posted by: Mike | September 23, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

crazy little McNasty is a little reckless and a little irrational and a lot dishonest.

Posted by: George W. McLiar | September 23, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

McCain =Bush=McCain=Palin=disaster.

Don't tell me things will change under McCain palin administration.

Posted by: brock101 | September 23, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

DON'T CONSIDER YOURSELF A CONSERVATIVE, MY FRIEND. CONSIDER YOURSELF A LIB OR A LIB IN REPUBLICAN'S CLOTHING!

[I THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT MARK BUSE, MCCAIN'S OUT-0F-THE-CLOSET CHIEF OF STAFF OF 17 YEARS]
------------------------
Look fool I don't care if he have a gay chief of staff dude. Goldwater was a true conservative, and he could care less. Stupid homophob

Posted by: brock101 | September 23, 2008 6:35 PM

Posted by: JEAN FROM MAINE | September 23, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Q: "Do we need a criminal in WH?"


Absolutely NOT. Anybody that uses their Senate seat to assist somebody like Keating melt down the economy in the 80's shouldn't be anywhere near the WH.

Neither should his VP who is under investigation for abuse of power for personal vendettas.

I think we've seen MORE than enough of that garbage over the past 8 years.

Time to start fresh. I'll take the bright Harvard leader guy with a plan over the guy who, along with his economics advisor Phil Gramm, nearly succeeded in destroying the US economy on three separate occasions with deregulation -

1. Keating 5/S&L scandal

2. Enron (Phil's wife was rewarded with a board chair spot at Enron for help deregulating the Energy market) and

3. Wall Street/Mortgage crisis and the subsequent $1,000,000,000,000 bailout with OUR taxes. How's that for extreme taxation????

Some people NEVER learn. Speaking of which, I sure hope you people aren't stupid or gullible enough to give this guy a 4th chance to destroy the economy as POTUS, along with his fundy wacko Ignoramoose hunter Ms. Alaska Runner Up VP.

Posted by: John | September 23, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

I've heard some of the racist rants in here and very soon those rants will be treated as hate crimes-a felony-your ip adresses traced and you'll end up in a prison filled with the people you hate...
freedom of speech does not equal freedon to hate....

Posted by: youcan'thandlethetruth | September 23, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

MCCAIN IS A *FAKE CONSERVATIVE* JUST LIKE GEORGE W BUSH. GEORGE BUSH HAS DISCOVERED SOCIALISM AND SEEMS TO LIKE IT.

Posted by: Frikin fake politicians | September 23, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Look fool I don't care if he have a gay chief of staff dude. Goldwater was a true conservative, and he could care less. Stupid homophob

Posted by: brock101 | September 23, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

The other Alex seems ok with war you know where people get killed and all but we cant teach contraception and if Palin gets her way even rape victims will have to go to term. Talk about torture.

Its also about time to put another issue to rest. It's true people came here to get away from religious intolerance and most of that was from the Catholic church which is why Henry the 8th in England took over the church by killing the clergy and establishing 'Common Law' This is the basis of American law along with the constitution now trampled in the dirt by the politicians and the president who swore to protect it.

Lets hear no more from anonymous. Its established that Obama is not a muslim although I might add that the president of Iran who is a Muslim , in his letter sent to Bush did advise Bush that we were running into financial problems and of course everyone laughed.

It time to get rid of BS and concentrate on the real issues which are a balanced federal budget, and to get manufacturing going again.

Posted by: Alex P | September 23, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

MCCAIN IS A SELLOUT TO CONSERVATIVE BELIEFS & INTERESTS

Not only is McCain a sellout for secretly having a chief of staff he new was homosexual for 17 years (Mark Buse), but now even conservative icon George Will is questioning McCain's mental judgement on conservative issues. I'm sick of this guy he promised to serve conservative interests and all he did was pick an empty head with lipstick as his 'action'. Crap!
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Is McCain Fit for the Presidency?

By George Will


Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.

Channeling his inner Queen of Hearts, John McCain furiously, and apparently without even looking around at facts, said Chris Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should be decapitated. This childish reflex provoked the Wall Street Journal to editorialize that "McCain untethered" — disconnected from knowledge and principle — had made a "false and deeply unfair" attack on Cox that was "unpresidential" and demonstrated that McCain "doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does."

To read the Journal's details about the depths of McCain's shallowness on the subject of Cox's chairmanship, see "McCain's Scapegoat" (Sept. 19, Page A22). Then consider McCain's characteristic accusation that Cox "has betrayed the public's trust."

Perhaps an old antagonism is involved in McCain's fact-free slander. His most conspicuous economic adviser is Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who previously headed the Congressional Budget Office. There he was an impediment to conservatives, including then-Rep. Cox, who, as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, persistently tried and generally failed to enlist CBO support for "dynamic scoring" that would estimate the economic growth effects of proposed tax cuts.

In any case, McCain's smear — that Cox "betrayed the public's trust" — is a harbinger of a McCain presidency. For McCain, politics is always operatic, pitting people who agree with him against those who are "corrupt" or "betray the public's trust," two categories that seem to be exhaustive — there are no other people. McCain's Manichaean worldview drove him to his signature legislative achievement, the McCain-Feingold law's restrictions on campaigning. Today, his campaign is creatively finding interstices in laws intended to restrict campaign giving and spending. (For details, see The Post of Sept. 17, Page A4; and the New York Times of Sept. 20, Page One.)

By a Gresham's Law of political discourse, McCain's Queen of Hearts intervention in the opaque financial crisis overshadowed a solid conservative complaint from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, the RSC decried the improvised torrent of bailouts as a "dangerous and unmistakable precedent for the federal government both to be looked to and indeed relied upon to save private sector companies from the consequences of their poor economic decisions." This letter, listing just $650 billion of the perhaps more than $1 trillion in new federal exposures to risk, was sent while McCain's campaign, characteristically substituting vehemence for coherence, was airing an ad warning that Obama favors "massive government, billions in spending increases."

The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of capital. So, is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism. Does McCain have qualms about this, or only quarrels?

On "60 Minutes" Sunday evening, McCain, saying "this may sound a little unusual," said that he would like to replace Cox with Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York who is the son of former governor Mario Cuomo. McCain explained that Cuomo has "respect" and "prestige" and could "lend some bipartisanship." Conservatives have been warned.

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Sarah is now a foreign policy expert. She will solve all the problems around the world.

Posted by: brock101 | September 23, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Sarah is now a foreign policy expert. She will solve all the problems around the world.

Posted by: brock101 | September 23, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Abortion is wrong, but it is a fundamental right. When it was illegal, people were seeking out other desparate methods, and because of that, there were a great deal of women whom got sick or even died from and illegal procedure. You can look at it any way you want, but people will find a way to do it regardless...the question is, as a christian, do you want these people to be safe, or do you want them and their unborn children dying in the streets from illegal procedures?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

I remember Sherri and how we got to where we are.

1962: Abortion mother returns home
An American mother-of-four is on her way home amid a storm of controversy after being given a legal abortion in Sweden.
Sherri Finkbine, a TV presenter from Phoenix in Arizona, was denied an abortion in her home state following intense negative publicity surrounding her case.

The 30-year-old mother decided to terminate her fifth pregnancy after discovering that tranquilizers she had taken in the first few weeks of her pregnancy contained the drug Thalidomide.

In recent months there has been increasing evidence suggesting Thalidomide causes severe foetal deformities including missing limbs, deafness and blindness.

Public condemnation

Mrs Finkbine, host of children's television programme "Romper Room", told her story to the local newspaper, believing it would alert other mothers in the same situation to the dangers of the drug.

But she became the focus of an intense anti-abortion campaign and worldwide public condemnation.

The negative publicity led her local hospital in Phoenix to withdraw a tentative offer of a legal abortion for fear they may be held criminally liable - the current law in Arizona states that abortion can only be carried out to save the mother's life.

Mrs Finkbine and her husband, Robert, a school teacher, took the case to the Arizona State Supreme Court but were unsuccessful.

Despite vilification from anti-abortionists across the United States and the world she flew to Sweden where the operation was carried out.

After the operation it was confirmed that the foetus had no legs and only one arm .

When she returned to Phoenix Mrs Finkbine's local doctor asked her to register with another physician.
She was dismissed from her job, and her husband was suspended from his high school teaching post.

Their children were hounded, anonymous death threats poured in by post and telephone and the press swarmed around their home.

She and her husband went on to have two more children.

Courtesy of the BBC

If you dont want to have an abortion for any reason including rape, incest or the health of the mother...DONT HAVE ONE!

That's choice......

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

McCain will win the debate because he worked the refs hard, and long thats the way sarah like it.

Posted by: insane McCain | September 23, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

GF7,

could you try a larger font perhaps? Bold?

Society automatically relates abortion to religion. I agree with your point, but its a mute point.

Posted by: RSV | September 23, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

ok

Posted by: vmj | September 23, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

vmj

suck a nut

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

Really? Really guys? Is this article about abortion? Is this article about recognizing a democratically elected official's right to govern? No, its about today's election. And to those of you who think it is about the issues, it isn't. Because while today's issues are important, so are tomorrow's, so are yesterday's unsolved ones.

To comment on the article, I think it is funny that McCain cited Jack Kennedy's win. There are a lot of parallels between the Kennedy victory and the race today.
1) Nixon was older, more conservative, and had much more experience in Washington and politics.
2) Kennedy was young, unorthodox (long hair, no hat), and charismatic.
3) If Nixon would have won, no Republican would have taken office for decades to come after that.
and many more...

Nixon, on the other hand, was quite confident that he would win. But what does it really mean? In truth, JakeD, nobody really cares what you think. You would vote for a cow before you would vote for Obama, probably because you have more in common with a stupid, fat, lazy animal, than you do with a person who, on their own, made it through Harvard law school. So, people who hate Obama because they have a natural aversion to confidence, or can't stand the thought of an educated person in office, have already declared McCain the winner of the debates.
What the debates will actually decide is whether or not both candidates can take this kind of heat and keep their own cool, and how hard people will laugh or cry if the country elects another republican.
The best way to support the republicans in this election (and I am doing so as one) is to vote democratic, and show them that calling themselves republicans is not a free ticket from us to do whatever they like.
These debates will be forever recorded in history. If McCain wins, the country will falter, and for generations and generations, your children and grandchildren will ask you, what were you thinking?
Obstinately you will reply, "he was better than the other guy."
Your offspring will reply, "how is that even possible?"
You will reply, while smacking the child for its crime of questioning authority, "Because he thought he was better than the guy I voted for!"

Posted by: H | September 23, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous:

We currently have a criminal in the WH. One of the worst crinimals ever. You really think purchasing a house is comprable to murdering millions? Stealing oil? Spending our money to make himself and his buddy dick richer?

Open your eyes moron!

Posted by: RSV | September 23, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

No wonder the country is in such a state...just read these ridiculous comments. Most of you sound like children! For all I know, you are...grow up.

Posted by: vmj | September 23, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old! He's a demented old bat!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

McCain, whom is continually having senior moments on the campaign trail really doesn't have a chance in the debate. And it doesn't matter how many exadurations or lies his campaign is capable of pulling out of their poopshoots. Or how sexy Palins cameltoe looks in a bikini. Nothing is going to change the fact that he is just too damn old.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

HEY RSV,
AGAIN, WHAT DOES RELIGION REALLY HAVE TO DO WITH ABORTION IF YOU REALLY THINK ABOUT? WHY SHOULD IT? BY THE WAY IM NOT CATHOLIC AND IF IT WOULD MAKE YOU HAPPY i can turn off caps just for a liitle. BUT THATS ABOUT ALL YOUR GONNA GET. JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE STATEMENTS IN THE BIBLE THAT MAKE PEOPLE FEEL GUILTY, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY SHOULD GET ALL UPSET. AFTER ALL IT IS JUST A BOOK TO YOU AND OTHER PEOPLE LIKE YOU, RIGHT?

Posted by: GF7 | September 23, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

everybody know now that Obama broke the law when he bought that house in Chicago together with the criminal REZKO.Do we need a criminal in WH?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Eric, i agree with Anonymous ... you belong on fox news, with the rest of the freaks.

Posted by: SadAmerican | September 23, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse


To all the good liberals here who believe Obama is the sure thing to regular handouts/ Messiah or whaetever. Let me remind you of JFK "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.."

McCain/Palin 08

Posted by: vic | September 23, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

He's counting on the same strategy he used effectively to rattle Romney: just launch a couple of whoppers with complete impunity and watch the well-mannered, college educated guys' jaws just drop in amazement. You watch: that's what will happen at least once on Friday.

Posted by: abqcleve | September 23, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Fred you are the idiot .It not going to stick to McCain cause he is the patriot.Well-Obama is the muslim communist with communist agenda for this country

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Anyone claiming that old Muslim lie, is acting very much like McCain would. Lie, Lie, Lie and more Republican Lies.

Thanks for helping Obama!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

"Obama's head campaign meneger is d.Axelrod-the same crook like Obama"

Yes you blockheaded buffoon...."Meneger" isn't even a position available in his campaign liar.

Learn to type.

Hooked on phonics might help you right wing nut!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse


Who said "separation of Church & state" and why did they say it. ? It was because of all the new immigrants who came to this country in the early part of this century who were looking for religious freedom. They were escaping from the Wanna-Bee Evangelistic Christian hate groups in Europe & other countries. These groups said if you don't believe the way we do we'll punish you. These are the same Religious groups that have arose in this country. They try to influence politics, public opinion & they use any method, including murder of abortion doctors to achieve their goal. They aren't Christians, they're the same as the terrorists in the middle east. They preach hate. The influence these groups have is usually over the poor & un-educated people in this country . They need to be exposed for what they are. McCain is kissing up to these kooks & it wasn't long ago that he said "When Jerry Farwell dies they should drive a silver stake through his heart to make sure he's dead" McCain is brain dead !!

Posted by: SadAmerican | September 23, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Eric kiss my a.. and go to hell.The truth is -Obama is the muslim communist with connection to Chicago mob world

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

mccain is being managed by most all of bushes old managers from01 and 04......mccain is already more of the same....he wouldnt know what change is if it kicked him in the face..........

Posted by: wm musson | September 23, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain is an atheist fascist with a fascist agenda for this country. Do we need a atheist fascist in WH?

Posted by: Fred | September 23, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

HEY CAPS LOCK GF7:

Instead of aborting incestuous and rape baby's, lets bring them to term and have the Catholic church raise them...I'm sure the priests would love to be called 'daddy'. Would that make the world a 'better place?'

Posted by: RSV | September 23, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

What substance?
Last week Mr. McCain said the fundamentals of our economy are strong. Then later in the week he wants to fire the SEC Chairman. How can he reform the economy when he cannot distinguish the difference between a strong economy and a weak economy? During the Republican primary, he said that he doesn't know much about the economy. Well said, Mr. McCain! You can never be eloquent when you don't know the subject.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama's head campaign meneger is d.Axelrod-the same crook like Obama
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/mar2008/db20080314_121054.htm

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

that was sarcasm by the way...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

May my Muslim Brothers Unit in Terror!
a lalalalalalalalalalala!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Can we please stop giving whackos a soap box on these comment blogs?

Anybody who mentions that Obama is a muslim should be removed.

It is a lie.

It is irresponsible to publish these posts.

I believe in free speech, but lies must be eliminated.

A lie is a lie, like a spade is a spade.

Come on American press!

You got us into the Iraq war, don't let it happen again!

Posted by: Eric | September 23, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Alex,
I like where your head is at, but Heart might still be considered 'new age popular music' to McCain. Try a little further back. Maybe Robert Johnson era? Wait, he's black that won't work. Edith Peoff works!

Posted by: RSV | September 23, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

This first debate is suppose to be about National Security issues. It's suppose to be McCain's forte. Why would he be downplaying it?

Posted by: Cindy | September 23, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

I FEEL SORRY FOR YOU ALEX, I REALLY DO WISH YOU THE BEST BUT ITS PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT WILL DESTROY AMERICA. NOT EVERYONE IS A CHRISTIAN JUST BECAUSE THEY SAY THEY ARE AND NOT EVERY EVANGELICAL IS WHAT THEY SAY THEY ARE.

Posted by: GF7 | September 23, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Obama is the muslim communist with communist agenda for this country.Do we need a muslim communist in WH?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Please...who is grandpa McCain fooling? the MSM claims he's some sort of foreign policy expert because he was tortured for six years, but i think he'll be in for a surprise on Friday night.

Posted by: Allen | September 23, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

im sure the only thing bill clinton was good at is....i think you know. he sure has bad aim also, he bombed a medical building instead of the terrorist site. his mind was on aim for monica

Posted by: ANN | September 23, 2008 5:51 PM | Report abuse

GF7, Caps Lock much?

Abortion is not killing a baby its killing a FETUS. So why dont you take religion and bias out of it and say it like it is.

Yeah its gross, but the number of abortions continue to DECREASE, ok. Criminalizing abortion will lead to absolutely horrible consequences. Tons of back-room jobs, doctors being pulled out of the office in cuffs. Fascism in the making.

And you wouldnt have nearly as many abortions if we just promoted CONTRACEPTION!!! What a craaaazy idea. If a girl is on the pill, then she won't get pregnant, and wont have to kill the fetus. But then she'll be having sex, and thats one less child for the evangelical ministers and Mark Foley to abuse... what a shame.

Posted by: alex | September 23, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Like it or not, he's your President -- just like Bill Clinton was my President even though I disagreed with him -- hopefully, McCain will be your President for the next 8 years.

The ONLY thing you can do about it is actually follow through with those threats to move out of the country and renounce your citizenship at the closest Embassy ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 5:46 PM | Report abuse

FOR ANDREW,
I'M NOT SAYING I AGREE WITH BUSH BUT WHAT IF YOUR PRESIDENT DOESN'T MAKE THINGS RIGHT FOR YOU? IS THERE EVER GOING TO BE A PRESIDENT THAT WILL MAKE US HAPPY? I DONT KNOW.

Posted by: GF7 | September 23, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

I don't see it as McCain lowering expectations...seems to me McCain implied Obama had the gift of gab.

Posted by: dan | September 23, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

For Stephen

I agree with those who say that Bush is not my President. This has nothing to do with me trying to "opt out" as you put, and everything to do with Bush "opting out" of representing me. He has done virtually nothing in 8 years that has benefitted me, my family, or any of my friends. I am hard pressed to find anything he has done that has benefitted this country as a whole.

No, Bush is the president only for the right and catered, and not the rest of us that actually work for a living. McCain acknowledges that he agreed with Bush 90% of the time, so please explain to me then, how will McCain be a president for me?

Posted by: Andrew S | September 23, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

HEY MARCUS, TAKE RELIGION OUT OF YOUR COMMENT AND ANSWER THIS QUESTION, IS IT MORALLY CORRECT TO KILL AN UNBORN BABY? THATS WHY OUR COUNTRY IS GETTING WORSE BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE TO IMPLICATE RELIGION IN EVERYTHING. WHY? IF YOU WANT TO KILL A PERSON MARCUS, WELL I THINK THATS PRETTY SICK. JESUS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU IF YOU DECIDE TO KILL A BABY, WHY WOULD HE. YOU BROUGHT HIM UP. ITS LEGAL TO HAVE AN ABORTION SO WHAT ARE STRESSING OUT FOR, GO AHEAD AND MURDER MARCUS IF ITS SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO. ITS AMERICA REMEMBER.....WAKE UP AMERICA, KEEP RELIGION TO OURSELVES.

Posted by: GF7 | September 23, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

I'm taking bets as to McCain's theme song... 5/4 odds on Heart - Barracuda, 2/1 on Metallica - Kill 'em All, 5/1 Warren G - Regulator

Posted by: alex | September 23, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Marcus:

Jesus said to not judge murderers?! How about child molesters, should we not judge them either? I think you are mixing up LEGAL vs. SPIRITUAL consequences.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

I hate seeing stuff like this. I hate seeing both candidates do it. They want to lower our expectations of them so that a merely adequate performance will blow us away (a la Palin's convention speech).

I think that's garbage. They should both step up and say 'I think I will win because I'm right', and then they should go on to try and win. All of this manipulation of the public expectations is campaign baloney and is a sure indicator that the debates will be all about show and not about who has better ideas.

Not that I'm surprised, but it is disappointing anyway.

Posted by: Joe | September 23, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

This comment is to those arrogant christians (if that's what you think you are) that keep posting about abaortion....everywhere....endlessly.
Do you really think that G-d is stupid enough to put a soul into a fetus he knows will never be born?? Why do you think you have the right to tell others what they can and cannot do when you obviously don't trust G-d in the first place? Jesus said to judge not. LISTEN TO YOUR LORD and sit down and shut up.

Posted by: Marcus | September 23, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS THE KIND OF TALK THAT PUTS HATE IN EVERYONE AND ITS FINE THAT WE DISAGREE BUT WE AMERICANS ARE NOT REALLY THINKING ABOUT THE GOOD OF AMERICA. ITS FUNNY HOW WE ARGUE ABOUT MY PARTY IS BETTER THAN YOUR PARTY, BUT DO WE REALLY CONSIDER UNITING AND MAKING OUR COUNTRY BETTER. ANOTHER THING, WHAT DOES RELIGION HAVE TO DO WITH POLITICS OR WITH ANYTHING BUT OURSELVES? LAST TIME I CHECKED IT WAS A PERSONAL BELIEF OR A PERSONAL ISSUE THAT WE ALL SHOULD KEEP TO OURSELVES. WE SHOW OUR HATE TOWARDS OTHER RELIGIONS AND IMPLICATE OUR OPINIONS THAT AFFECT OUR COUNTRY. WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO AMERICA.

Posted by: GF7 | September 23, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Steve posted:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/palin-soft-preparedness-of-lowered.html


Monday, September 22, 2008
Palin: The Soft Preparedness of Lowered Expectations

In all seriousness, expect the following from Palin's "meetings" with leaders on Tuesday and Wednesday:

-A series of serious-sounding quotes, direct from her days of preparation, that cannot possibly indicate her actual knowledge on the issues, data and risks facing each and with regard to each nation. Quotes, not knowledge, happen in days.

-A bevy of positive statements from each leader--after all, that's why they were chosen--all being nations seeking U.S. favor, and having nothing to lose and potentially much to gain by doing so.

-A rush of "surprised" reactions from media at "how seriously she was taken", ready, as so often, to grasp the superfically new.

-An attempt by the McCain camp to drive through her supposed preparedness as a result, as quickly as possible, before the debates.

-Still no in-depth, free-form, extensive challenging interviews from this prospective President.

Don't buy it.

A few days ago, she was ready to invade Russia (which she could see from her border).

Remember, for your security and future: A series of rehearsed quotes does not a President make.

Cite:
Head of State"

I would rather have my VP candidate choose to use prepared statements than whatever you call what Joe Biden does.

Posted by: Mike | September 23, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Superman vs. Uncle Fester

Posted by: alex | September 23, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Isn't it a shame to the American people that they did win their debates. Bush showed himself to be as incompitent a debater as he turned out to be as a President. For some reason I cannot fathom, Republicans continue to vote for whoever seems stupidest. Palin knows nothing about anything and they go crazy. Bush couldn't tie a velcro shoelace iwth a map and his mommys help and they think he's awesome. McCaine knows nothing about the economy, the war, diplomacy and half the country just thinks he's peachy. Could all you Republicans just refrain from voting? At least until we get the country back on its feet again!! let some smart people run the place again.

Posted by: Marcus | September 23, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

I hope thats true, probably is..but I;m not sure it gets Obama elected this is about a 50% racist, ignorant, double wide 3rd generation hillby country- sad but true. Cllosed minded ignorants

Posted by: lux lumina | September 23, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

only person comes to mind that would have been a better candidate for the repub pres other than mccain is michael jackson.jackson palin what a pair now thats a ticket.now tell me he's not white enough

Posted by: frank | September 23, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Debatomania 1:

The Savior vs. The Deregulator

Posted by: alex | September 23, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

1) JakeD is a huge tool

2) Obama is going to make McCain have so many senior moments and circuits go off in his screwy head, its gonna be uncomfortable to watch.

McCain knows what is going to happen, right now he is punching himself in the face so it doesnt hurt as much.

Posted by: alex | September 23, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

http://bornalivetruth.org/
It's not about abortion anymore, it's infanticide. What kind of person leaves defenseless born ALIVE children to die? This exact bill was approved by congress and did not overturn roe vs wade. Do the research, prove me wrong.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Sam:

If you are not an American citizen, then Bush is not your President.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

McCain didn't say he could keep the peace, did he? Is he so out of touch to believe this country is at peace? http://www.saintpeterii.com

Posted by: Saint Peter II | September 23, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

"Our current president"?

Ours?
Perhaps yours,certainly not mine.
And certainly not President in any meaningful sense of the term.
I'll agree with "current".

Sorry, Sam, that ain't the way it works. When the President is elected, he IS "our" President. That's how democracy works. If Obama is elected, he "will" be OUR President, even if I didn't vote for him. Same thing if McCain wins. You don't get to "opt out" of his being our President simply because you don't like him and/or didn't vote for him. We only had one time in our history where there were two Presidents at one time, and I think you'll find that ended pretty badly.

Posted by: Stephen | September 23, 2008 4:46 PM

Well stephen: I agree with the first guy- Im fifty six perent out of american stocks and Currency, ing up the , banks and speed iup the divestment, if McCain and Palin I elected- Im outa here for a while, have my ashes broughr]t back to scattered over the San Bernadinos- Bush has finally wrecked this country- you guys are going to suffer so much here- that you lastt hope will be to try to nuke as much of the rest of the world as possible. The only thing you guys and your republican conservative presidents will have superiority in. And your egotism is so great you, won"t be able to except 3rd rate status and thats where your going.
Lux Lumina

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

I thought McCain had argued that Obama's claim to fame was only fame- that he was as substantial as Ms Hilton. Odd, he now seems to be singing a different tune! However, this should be of little suprise since John has become very good at saying one thing one day and another a day later (or folks finding out he should have said another and not lied)- the economy is going great; I am against government intervention; we don't have time to wait for Obama and other democrats to add their ideas to the Federal bailout, we have to act now; I am against torture; I need Cindy to help me Google or is it McCain helped to invent the Blackberry; if I were president I would fire the SEC chairman (though of course the president has no such powers); SPIC is a regulatory agency; Palin has always been against the bridge to nowhere; critizing Obama OBAMA for saying They say: You know, 'He's not patriotic enough. He's got a funny name.' You know, 'He doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills'"
-the McCain campaign suggested Obama was "playing the race card", accusing the McCain campaign of racism. When in fact, it was the McCain campaign who, in a TV ad last June, showed images of Obama replacing every president on Mt. Rushmore, and replacing the image of Ben Franklin on the $100 bill with the face of Obama. It was this ad that Senator Obama was responding to...
I don't think we can take this anymore

Posted by: arthurW from VA | September 23, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

exactly jp...just like Bush...McCain is 'my rich buddies first...then country'

Posted by: scooter | September 23, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

yea@scott, and Mcain said he also (like most Dems) wants to the salery caps of CEOs. So when asked about Carly of HP getting 40 mil while 20 000 people were laid off he said...'well she was very good.'

Posted by: jp123 | September 23, 2008 5:05 PM | Report abuse

so any no mouse'
you think I will vote for
a president who is not willing
to attack Russia.
Do you understand the concept
of Mutual Defense,
or the reason that NATO was
created?
you palin bashers ought to
go in your closet and put
on your mothers nylons,
and leave the thinking to the
adults.
a nona mouse'

Posted by: usa3 | September 23, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

she recently became a grandmother,give her a break will ya?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama
NBC's "Today"
September 23, 2008

NBC's Matt Lauer: "Three minutes later in an interview with Meredith Vieira, Joe Biden, your running mate was asked the exact same question, 'should the federal government bailout AIG?' And he said, 'No, the federal government should not bailout AIG.'"

Barack Obama: "I think that in that situation, I think Joe should have waited as well."

Lauer: "But it's the kind of thing that drives people crazy about politics. Sounds like you were trying to score some political points against John McCain using his words, when your own running mate had used very similar words."

Posted by: scott | September 23, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

I hope McCain will tell us again what he did in the war 40 years ago, and how we now owe him the presidency. I never get tired of that story. Give him a medal and let him retire already!

Posted by: Jacked | September 23, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton said a few things today,
which made me feel good that I voted
for him.
He is the only Dem who has said a single
thing about Gov.Palin that was not a
backhanded compliment. Obama is a Jackass.
Smug. We dont need this kind of childish
nonsense in our government.
He has the temperance of a 15 year old kid.
No Bama For me...

Posted by: usa3 | September 23, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama
NBC's "Today"
September 23, 2008

NBC's Matt Lauer: "Three minutes later in an interview with Meredith Vieira, Joe Biden, your running mate was asked the exact same question, 'should the federal government bailout AIG?' And he said, 'No, the federal government should not bailout AIG.'"

Barack Obama: "I think that in that situation, I think Joe should have waited as well."

Lauer: "But it's the kind of thing that drives people crazy about politics. Sounds like you were trying to score some political points against John McCain using his words, when your own running mate had used very similar words."

Posted by: Scott | September 23, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

From:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/palin-soft-preparedness-of-lowered.html


Monday, September 22, 2008
Palin: The Soft Preparedness of Lowered Expectations

In all seriousness, expect the following from Palin's "meetings" with leaders on Tuesday and Wednesday:

-A series of serious-sounding quotes, direct from her days of preparation, that cannot possibly indicate her actual knowledge on the issues, data and risks facing each and with regard to each nation. Quotes, not knowledge, happen in days.

-A bevy of positive statements from each leader--after all, that's why they were chosen--all being nations seeking U.S. favor, and having nothing to lose and potentially much to gain by doing so.

-A rush of "surprised" reactions from media at "how seriously she was taken", ready, as so often, to grasp the superfically new.

-An attempt by the McCain camp to drive through her supposed preparedness as a result, as quickly as possible, before the debates.

-Still no in-depth, free-form, extensive challenging interviews from this prospective President.

Don't buy it.

A few days ago, she was ready to invade Russia (which she could see from her border).

Remember, for your security and future: A series of rehearsed quotes does not a President make.

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/09/palin-soft-preparedness-of-lowered.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Ever notice how McCain always either makes excuses for his failings and hides behind others. First he throws up a red herring by picking Sarah Palin for his Vice Presidential running mate .... hoping to God that the media and the American people will be so focused on her that he can hide and not have to discuss real issues (oops ... he probably had a heart attack when the economy was thrown right back up as the most important issue to be discussed).

Now he is trying to warn us that he probably won't be very good at the debates. But ... that's not his fault. It's not his fault he won't be able to clearly discuss the issues .... It's Barack Obama's fault for being "eloquent".

Sounds like the "Maverick" will do anything to avoid accountability and his lack of qualifications to be the President of the United States.

Posted by: Jefferson | September 23, 2008 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Miss Representin' and RT:

I was not the one claiming that McCain was "fessing up" to alleged lies.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

McCain's plan is to aim lower. That ought to strengthen US opinion in world's view.

Posted by: shane | September 23, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Hey CoolPillow...love the name!!
(oops, I leaked again)

Posted by: WarmSheets | September 23, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Would certainly be great to have an an eloquent president for a change. It's part of being a great leader. Roosevelt and Churchill could rally nations in times of crisis.

Posted by: Joe | September 23, 2008 4:49 PM
*********

So could Hitler.

Posted by: Longtime DC Resident | September 23, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

"Eloquent?" Call it what you will, Senator Obama is "gifted", and that cannot be taken away from him especially by someone who come on more like a comedian than a future president.

Posted by: Beautiful11 | September 23, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA YOU ARE A RACIST PIG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBAMA '08 OR YOU ARE A RACIST PIG~!!!!!

Posted by: Truth | September 23, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Would certainly be great to have an an eloquent president for a change. It's part of being a great leader. Roosevelt and Churchill could rally nations in times of crisis.

Posted by: Joe | September 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

1. Obama didnt do that well in the primary debates. Quite dissapointing actually, his strong point are speeches, not answering direct, not soft-ball, questions, and questions he does not expect.

2. If a monkey like W can get elected, then while debates are important, they are not the end-all be-all.

Posted by: No comparison | September 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

By the way, Jake D, do you expect McCain to confess to lies? Not gonna happen. Has G. Bush confessed? has D. Cheney confessed? has Libby confessed? has A. Gonzales confessed? Have any of them confessed, even when their lies are documented? They wont do it. Why? Because they are liars. BUT watch in December how many pardons get handed out...it will be interesting.
PS - umm. there were no WMDs in Iraq, the letter about yellowcake was falsified, Valerie Plame was leaked by Bush/Cheney, the Atty General did hire/fire based on political affiliation and political prosecution, Brownie DID NOT do a Heckuva job, waterboarding IS torture (would you submit yourself to it? I believe McCain has reversed himself on this one), rendition HAS being practiced and most of your, mine and everyone's email and communications are being monitored by our government. We the taxpayers are about to bail out the unregulated Wall Street to the tune of about $2500 for every man woman and child in America. and no one lied about any of this...DID THEY? (Before you answer you might want to check Sen. McCain's positions on each of these. You wont find Palin's she did not even know the "Bush Doctrine", which was the entire reason presented by the leader of the Republican party for placing this country (including her son ultimately) in a war with Iraq. Of course, Bush had several other reasons for going to war before that, but changed those as each proved untrue...oops, another lie.

Posted by: RT | September 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

John McSame is a wily old fox. Sarah McShame is a moose.

Posted by: unclesam | September 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Go watch "Choke" instead! It's a movie based on the best selling book by Chuck Palahniuk.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

JakeD writes:
"Perhaps you can quote where McCain confessed to any "lies", constant or otherwise?"

That's an illogical question and you know it. The liar does not need to CONFESS to a lie in order for it to BE a lie. Moreover, if a known liar confesses to a lie, why would you believe him?

But there are plenty of examples of McCain and his campaign misrepresenting or making false claims about Obama's positions.

For example:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/there_he_goes_again.html

And before you comment:

definition: misrepresent
1 : to give a false or misleading representation of usually with an intent to deceive or be unfair
2 : to serve badly or improperly as a representative of

Posted by: Miss Representin' | September 23, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Sam
""Our current president"?
Ours?
Perhaps yours,certainly not mine.
And certainly not President in any meaningful sense of the term.
I'll agree with "current". " --- It's people like this that I wish had really disappeared from the U.S. Yes, that's mean. But how many people have you heard said "will leave U.S if Bush becomes President" are still in the U.S? MANY!! W/attitude like "your" president and not "our" president... is stupid! Seriously, just leave...


Posted by: Kim | September 23, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Dude don't sweat it. The racists are mostly Republicans (teeth missing,beer-drinkin',NASCAR lovin, barefoot and half-educated,pushing the Bible and lovin war) so they're going to vote for McSame anyway.
P>S> nothin' wrong with the beer drinkin' part

Posted by: Todd Palin | September 23, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"Our current president"?

Ours?
Perhaps yours,certainly not mine.
And certainly not President in any meaningful sense of the term.
I'll agree with "current".

Sorry, Sam, that ain't the way it works. When the President is elected, he IS "our" President. That's how democracy works. If Obama is elected, he "will" be OUR President, even if I didn't vote for him. Same thing if McCain wins. You don't get to "opt out" of his being our President simply because you don't like him and/or didn't vote for him. We only had one time in our history where there were two Presidents at one time, and I think you'll find that ended pretty badly.

Posted by: Stephen | September 23, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"Our current president"?

Ours?
Perhaps yours,certainly not mine.
And certainly not President in any meaningful sense of the term.
I'll agree with "current".

Sorry, Sam, that ain't the way it works. When the President is elected, he IS "our" President. That's how democracy works. If Obama is elected, he "will" be OUR President, even if I didn't vote for him. Same thing if McCain wins. You don't get to "opt out" of his being our President simply because you don't like him and/or didn't vote for him. We only had one time in our history where there were two Presidents at one time, and I think you'll find that ended pretty badly.

Posted by: Stephen | September 23, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA IS FALLING INTO A TRAP.
McCAIN WILL END UP OPPOSING THE BAILOUT
AND BARACK WILL LOOK LIKE THE BIG SPENDER.

With Shelby, Bunning and Newt Gingrich leading the anti-bailout chorus, McCain will soon change his tune -- just as Obama is doing one of his trademark compromises that has him buying into "corporate socialism."

And then McCain can announce that upon careful consideration, the bailout approach seems anti-capitalist and bad for America.

Obama should think about this -- as well as whether there's another agenda at work here:

TARGETING OF U.S. CITIZENS BY GOV'T AGENCIES: A ROOT CAUSE OF FINANCIAL MELTDOWN?

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/targeting-u-s-citizens-govt-agencies-root-cause-wall-street-financial-crisis
OR members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener | September 23, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

CoolPillow:
If anyone knows anything about empty suits and empty heads,it's you.What's your secret for being omniscient and humble at the same time? When are you going to make your run for the White House? The country needs you to keep a long string of airheads leading us.Geez.

Posted by: Sir Realist | September 23, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I guess McCan't can tell the truth!

Posted by: truePatriot | September 23, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

"Seeking to Lower Pants, Obama Goes For the White Woman Vote"

Posted by: SexySadie | September 23, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Good idea by McCain. Obama isn't the best debater and most folks on this website know that. What "substance" is McCain on? I haven't heard him say anything of substance since he grounded the straight talks express.

Posted by: Jake | September 23, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

I can't wait to see how incompetent McCain will be in comparison to Obama! But unfortunately, dominating a debate doesn't guarantee a win this November in a country that elected Bush twice. Let's face it--our electorate is also ragingly incompetent, and parts of it are still very racist (hence the whites toting pins at the RNC saying "if Obama wins, do we still call it the White House?")

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

This is McCain's strongest point.
He will make it with his usual scrappy persona.

The 'surge' you know.
Forget that he originally said that the war in Iraq would be easy and that we would be greeted as liberators and that it would pay for itself. Please forget.

Posted by: M. Tobias | September 23, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

NADER '08

Posted by: YEAH | September 23, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

lol@orange..'tranny running-mate!' She is a shemale isn't she?

Posted by: bebopalula | September 23, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Once again the useless Washington Post allows it self to be an agent of the McCain spin machine. I may have to start digging to see if this rag is indeed on the McCain campaign payroll. Why report on McCain's lies and the truth about Palin when you can take one of the few statements he shares with the press to manipulate public opinion and print that.

Posted by: Here we go again | September 23, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

McSame also said that Obama is 'a very bright boy' and 'a credit to his race', but the media is colluding with his campaign to bury those quotes.

Posted by: Phlogiston | September 23, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

McCain is "lowering expectations" for his debate performance because he's scared -- and should be.

Posted by: Earl | September 23, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

You would be nervous too if you had dementia and you had to debate someone who is younger, smarter and more often correct than yourself!

McCain's too old!

All he's going to do is crap his depends, forget what he has to say, then have a stroke.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

do you think President Obama is the only one to use a teleprompter?? So does McCain and his tranny running mate. So with or without the UMS and stammers it WHAT they say. Obama will speak to you and McSame will change his path to try to tell you what he thinks you want to hear

Posted by: orange | September 23, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

At least he didn't call him articulate.

Posted by: Jonathan | September 23, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Right "L", like any real democrat (which I am sure you are not) would vote to set us back 200 years. Sarah Palin isn't even aacceptable to her own party. Please...real democrats. Blasphemy!

Posted by: SteveSD | September 23, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Truly frightening that Sen. McCain and the no-name Alaskan can actually be within ten points of Obama. Even though McCain is doing his best to distance himself from the GOP, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Delay, Libby, etc. and the myriad of scandals, investigations and lies they have told, he voted and suppoted l that party and its policies for the past 8 years. How can Americans be so quick to forget?
Do we really want more "Bush Doctrine" and Bailouts?

Posted by: RT | September 23, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

....guess who is very nervous about the coming debates. I wonder if he will have one of those mysterious bumps on his back like brother george did in his debates?

I used to be a Republican but now I am just ashamed of the men that have represented my party the last years and I am flabbergasted at the mediocrity that is being put forth by McCain. It is truly a wonder to me that everyone doesn't see through it.

Posted by: ray reyns | September 23, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

September 23rd, 2008 2:28 PM Eastern
McCain lowers debate expectations

Posted by: Fox Noise | September 23, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

McCain knows he's in trouble. Why else choose Failin' Palin?

He knows he's in trouble. Why else spend so much time distracting?

He knows he's in trouble. Why else would this site exist?

Check it out. (no repubs ... could be bad for your hearts)

http://www.mccainpedia.org/index.php/Count_the_Lies

Posted by: Jerry Ulibarri | September 23, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Does eloquence equate to leadership? It is easy to constantly say that one person is a liar, but is is more difficult to have answers. Has anyone seen Obama's answers to the current fiscal crisis? Perhaps as president he will once again vote "Present".

Posted by: Guy Thompto | September 23, 2008 4:17 PM

-------------------------------------------

He gave his answer: GEORGE W BUSH/ JOHN McCAIN/ PHIL GRAMM. Sounds about the truth to me.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Fri night is High School Football in Ohio. So this debate should not count on changing the Ohio vote either way until Sat morning.

Posted by: jp123 | September 23, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a skilled debater.
Barry will be lost without his tele-prompter.
Anybody want to make a wager at how many "UMS" and stammers he'll say?
This is going to be hysterical!
And what's with Joe Biden? Maybe his anurysm IS coming back.
He said that during the 1929 Stock Market Crast, President Roosevelt got on the TV and said "BLa blah."

Roosevelt wasn't President in 1929 and there was NO TV!

Empty Suits- and Empty Heads.

Hey Hillary- ba waiting for that 3 a.m. call!
Right.

McCain -Palin 2008

Posted by: CoolPillow | September 23, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

"Our current president"?

Ours?
Perhaps yours,certainly not mine.
And certainly not President in any meaningful sense of the term.
I'll agree with "current".

Posted by: Sam | September 23, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm going to vote for excellence not mediocrity.

We so desperately need to change the focus in washington, I'm voting for Obama because our future is important and we deserve the best mind.

Posted by: McGreen | September 23, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

peace can only be achieved through WAR.

Posted by: George W. McLiar | September 23, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Why does this paper INSIST on offering commentary in their headlines of candidates(except, of course, for Obama)? Can't you simply state the fact of what happen "McCain Praises Obama's 'Eloquence?'" This article - in NO WAY - provided factual proof that McCain was also "Seeking to Lower Debate Expectations." Is this the state of journalism today? Will we let the press determine our biases for us?

Posted by: gaypastor | September 23, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Anytime McCain gives a speech, no matter what he says, he always looks about 10 seconds away from saying... "Aw, ---- it, I quit."

Posted by: Tom | September 23, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

It's two birds with one stone. McCain is also trying to raise expectations high for Obama, the better to be disappointed.

Posted by: Felix | September 23, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Janet T:

I'm saying that John McCain has not "lied" and that you haven't answered my question (here it is one last time):

"Perhaps you can quote where McCain confessed to any "lies", constant or otherwise?"

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

JakeD: you should find something better to do with your time than sit on these blogs all day spitting out your GOP rhetoric. it's clear you that you are a die-hard republican conservative; we get it. you will consistently vote with the GOP no matter who the candidates are, so why does your opinion matter?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

...McCain then peed his pants. The nurse in charge of changing his adult diaper assured him things will be okay Friday as long as he calls everyone 'my friends'.

Posted by: jp123 | September 23, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

It is the issues stupid. It just so happens to include the biggest government bailout in history.

Both these guys deserve to have their bop-o-meters spinning.

http://www.bop-o-meter.com

I am adding my bops to both the candidate's totals and it feels good!

Posted by: issues win not debates! | September 23, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

I used to like McCain.

But man its becoming lets lie here, lets trick them there, lets distract them here.

Either he is losing it or he needs to fire the people running his campaign.

Posted by: Morris | September 23, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain's Lie Counter: http://www.mccainpedia.org/index.php/Count_the_Lies

McCain knows a high score must be better.

Posted by: McCain Lies Here | September 23, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Does eloquence equate to leadership? It is easy to constantly say that one person is a liar, but is is more difficult to have answers. Has anyone seen Obama's answers to the current fiscal crisis? Perhaps as president he will once again vote "Present".

Posted by: Guy Thompto | September 23, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain is also lowering expectations of a McCain/Palin administration. Don't expect press access, truth, oversight, diplomacy, troops to come home...ever, climate change action (what's climate change anyway?), economic turn around and on and on. COUNTRY FIRST!

Posted by: PJ | September 23, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD,

Are you saying McCain hasn't been honest to us about his lying marathon?

Posted by: Janet T | September 23, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

so, we're supposed to elect an idiot? "I'm not good at debates, so penalize the other one."

Posted by: ago_43 | September 23, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Sun City is keeping a spot open for the old geezer. He can sit around with with rest of us wearing our funny hats and being generally cranky.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 23, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

-----------------

So never mind the bunk John McCain.

Why would America REWARD complete Republican failure ?

We wont.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

McCain is an idiot and a liar, he'd already be down about 20% in the polls if his friends in the corporate media hadn't been carrying water for him for the last six months.


Money for Wall Street Means No Money for Main Street...period, end of story.


Just in case you think that what happens on Wall Street stays on Wall Street, Barack Obama is already breaking the news. Bailing out irresponsible CEOs who have pocketed billions in bonuses over the last eight years, is going to mean making do without the things that the nation needs:

"Democrat Barack Obama said Tuesday the deepening American financial crisis and prospect of a massive government bailout meant he likely would have to delay expansive spending programs outlined during his campaign for the White House. In an interview with NBC television, Obama said he would have to study what happens to the United States' tax revenues before making decisions on budgeting for his promised initiatives on national health care, education, energy and other concerns."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26851737/


Expanded health care? Sorry, that's going to help Goldman Sachs. Education improvements? Call Bank of America. Getting out of our problems with oil? We'll get back to you on that when Morgan Stanley says they have what they need.


Someone might want to point out that when John McCain and the cult of deregulation handed Wall Street everything they wanted, the last thing they were doing was putting their country first.

Posted by: former Republican | September 23, 2008 4:03 PM | Report abuse

What a wanker! Obama is more eloquent and more substantive. So was Kerry in 2004 and look what his three time beating of George Bush in each debate got him, though. As the late great George Washington Duke said, "only in America!"

Posted by: b | September 23, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

visit

RealDemocratsUSA.org

Taking back our party, one neighborhood at a time.

Join us!

Posted by: L | September 23, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

These comments by McCain are the most truthful statements he's made in a while! Sad that he only speaks this way in order to lower expectations for himself. He must realize that his communication skills are not up to snuff any more, whereas Obama is very skilled at bringing his points across. I'm sick of people criticizing Obama for giving detailed, thoughtful, nuanced answers instead of quick sound bites. It's such a sad commentary on the public that this is what they demand! Gosh, the problems we face are NOT simple, cannot be solved with band-aids or quick fixes, and we need leaders who understand this and can handle it. Obama and Biden are those leaders. Their opponents are woefully inadequate to the task. Maybe the complexity of the current financial crisis will bring this point home to those who were more focused on lipstick and other nonsense.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Were you guys also critical of the message McCain had CONGRATULATING Obama on his historical moment in accepting the Democratic Party's nomination for President?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Janet T:

Perhaps you can quote where McCain confessed to any "lies", constant or otherwise?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

And my memory is fading away, fading away...

Posted by: Neuron Counter | September 23, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I guess lies just arn't speaking with 'Eloquence' anymore.

Good for McCain fessing up to his tickets constant lies.

Posted by: Janet T | September 23, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

That's fine with me (both Gore and Kerry "won" their debates with our CURRENT President ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company