Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Broder: How Well Do Voters Know Obama?

If it's not already, David Broder's Sunday column in the Post should be required reading for anyone who calls himself a political junkie. The Dean of the political press corps, Broder has been setting conventional wisdom in campaigns for longer than The Fix has been on earth.

So, we read David's latest piece -- "Getting to Know Obama" -- with great interest.

In it, he argues that two decisions by Barack Obama in the last week -- to reject John McCain's proposal for 10 joint town halls and to opt out of public financing -- will put to the test the question of how well voters know the Illinois senator and how far they are willing to trust him.

"McCain benefits from a long-established reputation as a man who says what he believes," writes Broder. "His shifts in position that have occurred in this campaign seem not to have damaged that aura. Obama is much newer to most voters, less familiar and more dependent on the impressions he is only now creating."

To Broder's mind, Obama is pushing the boundaries he established with voters during the primary and, in so doing, is running the risk of damaging his brand before the general electorate even gets familiar with it.

He calls Obama's decisions on town halls and public financing "troublesome" and adds: "By refusing to join McCain in these initiatives in order to protect his own interests, Obama raises an important question: Has he built sufficient trust so that his motives will be accepted by the voters who are only now starting to figure out what makes him tick?"

Do you agree with the Broder? Why or why not?

By Chris Cillizza  |  June 22, 2008; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Hagel for (Democratic) Veep?
Next: FixCam Week in Preview: Obama and Clinton Unite

Comments

The truth is this: the Obama campaign is lying.

The Obama campaign is pretending this is a smear.


1) There is a Catholic school in Indonesia which lists all its students and identifies each by his religion - Obama attended this school as a child - this Catholic school in its records lists Obama as a Muslim

2) Obama attended a different school while in Indonesia as well. This was a Muslim school, a madrasssa. The Obama campaign on its smears websites states that Obama did not go to a "radical Muslim school." However the Obama campaign does not ADMIT that Obama went to a "regular Muslim school." Does this sound clintonesque or what?

3) Obama has a half brother, who you may not have heard about too much for reasons which will become obvious during your reading of this posting. Obama's half brother has made public statements stating that Obama is a Muslim.


OK so those are the facts.


You know, dragnet, the facts, just the facts.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | June 30, 2008 7:42 AM | Report abuse

The truth is this: the Obama campaign is lying.

The Obama campaign is pretending this is a smear.


1) There is a Catholic school in Indonesia which lists all its students and identifies each by his religion - Obama attended this school as a child - this Catholic school in its records lists Obama as a Muslim

2) Obama attended a different school while in Indonesia as well. This was a Muslim school, a madrasssa. The Obama campaign on its smears websites states that Obama did not go to a "radical Muslim school." However the Obama campaign does not ADMIT that Obama went to a "regular Muslim school." Does this sound clintonesque or what?

3) Obama has a half brother, who you may not have heard about too much for reasons which will become obvious during your reading of this posting. Obama's half brother has made public statements stating that Obama is a Muslim.


OK so those are the facts.


You know, dragnet, the facts, just the facts.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | June 30, 2008 7:42 AM | Report abuse

Chris, I agree with David Broder's basic premise, although WP has already lost its journalistic "bearing." As an Independent voter, I do not care about journalistic integrity or morality anymore; I do not care about the Iraq War anymore, either. I am just sick of all issues that are silly-and-stupid.

I am a MA resident, and most of my friends and colleagues are not interested in the election--we are sick of phony discourses from both Campaigns. If Senator Obama thinks that he can carry MA, then he misses the point again.

MA is a conservative Dem State, but they picked a Republican Governor because "issues" and "character" matter in the election--regardless of race, gender, age, or religion: Whose policy positions are consistent and logical; how such policies are fairly executed in the rule of Law. As you know, MA is the first State that legalized gay marriage, although MA is conservative with many Catholics. Gay marriage issue is not about violation of any religious values; it is about constitutionality of the civil union--equal protection of civil liberties before the Law.

That's why Mitt Romney, regardless of party affiliation, was-and-is very popular among MA Democrats because of his governing skills. His life represents his family values, commitment, and Love for his wife!--more importantly, his sound judgment to know when to withdraw from the presidential campaign. That's why we love him so much.

What I want to hear from Senator McCain's Campaign, although I am a critic of the war, is that why he thinks that staying in Iraq does matter to stabilize Middle East thus how it helps the U.S.'s fight against the war-on-terror, what moral issues are involved, and what obligation the United States has as the world leader...If he can explain such logical connection between Iraq War and security issues, then the nation will understand: McCain has a better position than Senator Obama because of his free trade policy. Without free trade, what do you do? Close the border? Close off American factories in China? What a silly-plus-stupid policy position!

I also think that McCain's Campaign Manager does not get the point yet: "experience" or "resume" does not matter in the election. Such cards are already proved ineffective. "Personal attacks" do not work either: People are sick. Why do you spend so much money on phony advertisements or stupid analogy of Sean Connery? Why do you spend money attacking Obama? What for?

It is useless and waste of time, money, and reputation of McCain. What his Campaign has to do, instead of portraying him with different cool-images, tell-us-his-stories-in-his-own-term while refraining from attacking Obama: Phony discourses or labeling him as "an-intern," "a-black-man," "a-smart-graduate-student," "arrogant," will never work. It will only turn off many Independents who are mostly highly-educated.

What voters want is "nuts-and-bolts" that make sense, instead of arguing one's position without any principles--how to pay gas price (McCain's gas-holiday-tax & gas-drilling issues are phony) during the summer, or how to get health insurance, something "domestic" issues that matter to voters' daily lives.

My advice to the McCain Campaign is to pick Romney as VP and hit hard on health care issue--his MA Healthcare System is the best in the Untied States. I do not think that Obama will pick Hillary as VP (they hired Solis Doyle) so go figure. Mitt Romney's religion does not matter: What matters are his principles, governing skills, characters, family values, and Love.

If McCain's Campaign is smart enough to know what is happening in the Democratic Party, all the Republicans have to do is just relax. People do not care about the Party: Issues, stupid. If McCain keeps quite and is consistent, logical, and makes sense, the election is over. The-guy-wearing-jean-with-navy-hat is McCain we know. Do not change it or do not spend any money to create new ones, which is STUPID.

It is hot summer, so wearing "flip-flops" is a fashion--yet do not open your Closet. What McCain's Campaign and GOPs have to keep in their Closet is pastors, pastors, and pastors. It is hot summer, so do not engage in a silly-ping-pong game with Obama, either. Mr. Karl Rove? I think he is way out of touch with this digital era--time to retire, but I will give him some credit: Bush is not currently popular, yet his principle-based campaigns worked twice.

I am tired of your WP editorials, but will buy the premise: McCain is genuine. I like your logical reasoning skills here as well.

Posted by: peace4world | June 26, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Caroltate2 wrote:

Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between "December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986?


My Comment:
Sheer lunacy. If you are born in the United States EVEN IF BOTH OF YOUR PARENTS ARE NOT CITIZENS you are a citizen of the United States. Barrack Obama was born IN THE UNITED STATES (Specifically Hawaii). By the time he was born in Hawaii, it was a State (it became a State in 1959). The rest of your tests only apply if you are looking at the McCain situation.

Carol Tate wrote:
Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama's birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn't matter *after* . In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship.

My Comment:
No. Barrack Obama's mother was born in Kansas. She is a Natural Born Citizen. The test that you are looking at is for "naturalized" citizens.


Caroltate wrote:
\Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had, rather than living in Indonesia.

My comment:
"Protect his citizenship"? A natural born American Citizen has very strong citizenship rights. It is actually pretty hard to lose them and to lose them requires a pretty specific set of volitional acts. If a baby is born in the United States and the parents take the baby to another country until the Baby is 18, that does not matter. The Baby is still a full United States citizen with full rights and privileges.

Posted by: Insane Claims | June 24, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Caroltate2 wrote:

Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between "December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986?


My Comment:
Sheer lunacy. If you are born in the United States EVEN IF BOTH OF YOUR PARENTS ARE NOT CITIZENS you are a citizen of the United States. Barrack Obama was born IN THE UNITED STATES (Specifically Hawaii). By the time he was born in Hawaii, it was a State (it became a State in 1959). The rest of your tests only apply if you are looking at the McCain situation.

Carol Tate wrote:
Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama's birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn't matter *after* . In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship.

My Comment:
No. Barrack Obama's mother was born in Kansas. She is a Natural Born Citizen. The test that you are looking at is for "naturalized" citizens.


Caroltate wrote:
\Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had, rather than living in Indonesia.

My comment:
"Protect his citizenship"? A natural born American Citizen has very strong citizenship rights. It is actually pretty hard to lose them and to lose them requires a pretty specific set of volitional acts. If a baby is born in the United States and the parents take the baby to another country until the Baby is 18, that does not matter. The Baby is still a full United States citizen with full rights and privileges.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 24, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Not to be rude, but I don't bother to read David Broder anymore. He seems totally out of touch with today's electorate. And if I remember correctly he totally called the 2006 election wrong on the Senate side. It is time for the Washington Post to put him out to pasture.Posted by: JR | June 22, 2008 7:23 AM ********* Then why are you here posting nothings?????????

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 23, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

I don't trust Obama on anything, yet I have to vote for him. This is the first time since I have been voting that I could not trust the person I vote for.
Go figure that out..... Posted by: bake201 | June 22, 2008 11:06 AM ***** What a bunch of toiletsubstance; and you bamabots call us non-bama supporters, stupid, biased & racists??????? Not hard to figure out at all, & bamabots are supposed to be so educated & highly intellegent?

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 23, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Few people know that they'd get more under Democrats
According to the Tax Policy Center's analysis of the two candidates' tax plans, 80% of taxpayers would get more from Obama's cuts than from McCain's. About 95% of taxpayers would pay less under Obama than under current law (which ends many of the tax breaks passed in the past decade).

McCain's proposed tax cuts would give the top 0.1% of taxpayers (those earning more than $2.8 million a year) a tax break averaging $678,000. Obama, by contrast, would raise taxes on that group by an average of $300,100. For the bottom 20% of taxpayers who make less than $19,740 a year, McCain would cut taxes by an average of $101, while Obama would cut their taxes by an average of $698.

But Obama can't cut taxes too much, because there are many jobs he wants Washington to accomplish, such as universal health care, affordable college, and research on promising new energy sources.Posted by: | June 23, 2008 1:30 AM
*** Obviously you haven't read the "Global Poverty Act" that bama sponsored & is pushing through Congress as we speak???? Read it and then tell me whose tax plans are for the U.S. people or people of other countries???????

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 23, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

HOW WELL DO VOTERS KNOW OBAMA...DO YOU KNOW? *** "CAN OBAMA BE PRESIDENT?
It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president after all for the following reason:

Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between "December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986?

Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal US Law very clearly stipulates: ".If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16."

Barack Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen and Obama's mother was only 18 when Obama was born, which means though she had been a U.S. citizen for 10 years, (or citizen perhaps because of Hawaii being a territory) the mother fails the test for being so for at least 5 years **prior to** Barack Obama's birth, but *after* age 16. It doesn't matter *after* . In essence, she was not old enough to qualify her son for automatic U.S. citizenship.

At most, there were only 2 years elapsed since his mother turned 16 at the time of Barack Obama's birth when she was 18 in Hawaii. His mother would have needed to have been 16+5= 21 years old, at the time of Barack Obama's birth for him to have been a natural-born citizen. As aforementioned, she was a young college student at the time and was not. Barack Obama was already 3 years old at that time his mother would have needed to have waited to have him as the only U.S. Citizen parent. Obama instead should have been naturalized, but even then, that would still disqualify him from holding the office.

*** Naturalized citizens are ineligible to hold the office of President. *** Though Barack Obama was sent back to Hawaii at age 10, all the other info does not matter because his mother is the one who needed to have been a U.S. citizen for 10 years prior to his birth on August 4, 1961, with 5 of those years being after age 16. Further, Obama may have had to have remained in the country for some time to protect any citizenship he would have had, rather than living in Indonesia.

Now you can see why Obama's aides stopped his speech about how we technically have more than 50 states, because it would have led to this discovery. This is very clear cut and a blaring violation of U.S. election law. I think the Gov. of California would be very interested in knowing this if Obama were elected President without being a natural-born U.S. citizen, and it would set precedence.

Stay tuned to your TV sets because I suspect some of this information will be leaking through over the next several days."
-------------------------------------------
Thomas Sowell
Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow
The Hoover Institution
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305

Posted by: CarolTate2 | June 23, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Chris, if you read www.mediamatters.org You will find a piece by Jamison Foser about John McCain getting a free pass from the media while they devour Barack Obama. I agree with it totally. Please peruse the article because it is food for thought. This is how many Democrats feel About the MSM.

Posted by: Mark | June 23, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

MORE ON GETTING TO KNOW OBAMA: Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the BLACK Value System written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by Vallmer Jordan in 1981. They believe in the following 12 precepts and covenantal statements. These BLACK Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever BLACKS are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the BLACK Community
3. Commitment to the BLACK Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the BLACK Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the BLACK Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting BLACK Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all BLACK leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the BLACK Value System.

Please read the "BLACK Value System" again -- only this time, substitute the word "White" for "BLACK."

If your church had such a "White Value System" Jesse and Al and the NAACP would have 10,000 demonstrators out front in a heartbeat.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Oh, you mean the same David Broder who takes money from special interests while claiming to have journalistic integrity and then lies about it? That David Broder?

Posted by: Chris | June 23, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

I support Barack Obama for President because I do not want to see eight more years of Republicans being above the law & not playing fair. This is something the MSM does not get, that President Bush & his cronies are above the law & no one can stop them. Barack Obama is more in line with what I am feeling now. This country needs a drastic change from the last 8 years. I do enjoy watching you on TV & occasionally reading your column online. However, Chris, you are not correct about David Broder & his so-called wisdom.

Posted by: Mark | June 23, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Capt Howard wrote:
"It looks like no one is going to find out who Senator Obama really is unless he actually gets elected President."

The man has written two books. Read them! They are both best sellers. Obama has a lot of supporters for a reason!

Capt Howard wrote:
"Let's hope the voters are smart enough not to buy an unseen product."

Well, we know Republicans were dumb enough to elect the unseen product known as G.W. Bush in 2000!

Posted by: Capt Williams | June 23, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

How well do Washington Post readers know David Broder (author of this article)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_S._Broder#David_Broder_and_Karl_Rove

Posted by: Joe Dumars | June 23, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

You think Broder has a must read column? The man who tried to predict a Bush bounce right in the midst of a free-fall in popularity? Still waiting for the Bush bounce.

Posted by: jill | June 23, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

How about McCain trustworthiness? He sells himself as a fiscal conservative but ran his campaign into the red, he called Robertson and Falwell out for their bigotry, then saluted them, voted against the Bush tax cuts now wants them made permanent. I'm not saying Obama is perfect
but MCain has presented himself as a maverick but now he is a gelding that is a tame pony.
He is accepting public financing at least in part because he has no option of not doing it. Obama said he would discuss public financing he never made a promise and he also gets criticized for not being tough. It seems he is ready, right or wrong to run his race on his terms not what McCain says he should. McCain aternates between wanting a civil debate and the old a vote for a Democrat is a vote for surrender.

Posted by: Stlouisarchangel | June 23, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

It looks like no one is going to find out who Senator Obama really is unless he actually gets elected President. He and his handlers will keep him insulated from the real scrutiny of town hall debates.

Obama does very well in scripted, controlled situations, but the office of the President is neither scripted or controlled. The American people need to see the real Barack Obama. Unfortunately they won't get that opportunity until it's too late. Let's hope the voters are smart enough not to buy an unseen product.

Posted by: Capt. Howard | June 23, 2008 1:54 PM
------------------
This post is funny on so many levels. As if the people see the 'real' canidate in any setting. McCain only does the Town Hall meetings because like when Bush did them, they get to hand pick the crowd and who gets to ask questions.

As for the office of the president not being scripted or controlled, what country have you been living in? Bush and Cheney run the office tighter than any other presidency in history.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | June 23, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

It looks like no one is going to find out who Senator Obama really is unless he actually gets elected President. He and his handlers will keep him insulated from the real scrutiny of town hall debates.

Obama does very well in scripted, controlled situations, but the office of the President is neither scripted or controlled. The American people need to see the real Barack Obama. Unfortunately they won't get that opportunity until it's too late. Let's hope the voters are smart enough not to buy an unseen product.

Posted by: Capt. Howard | June 23, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

With Obama deciding against public financing, it will make it difficult to scrutinize funders and from what countries they are from. This opens up the U.S. elections to the world...with less voices heard from Americans. How scary is that?

Posted by: orlando | June 23, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Look this "outrage" over Obama choosing not to take public financing is over the top. It was a conditional statement based upon an agreement between McCain and Obama.
Who could blame Obama for wanting to have all the resources possible to combat the smears being lobbed at him and his wife.

Second, this notion that Obama refused to participate in town hall meetings with McCain is false. Obama's surrogates said that he would agree between 3 and 5 meetings, he felt 10 was a bit much.

It's funny how pundits and columnists, the whole Fox News Network and now ABC for that matter are relentless on Obama but they continue to give McCain a free pass with his frequent gaffes and flip-flopping.

Posted by: Jennifer | June 23, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Unite Us

"...Those opposed to Obama should be happy that there $3 will not be going to Obama.

Obama has chosen real public financing where he is relying on those in the general public that support his candidacy."

What sir prevents Obama from receiving foreign funds through American citizens for his campaign, just as he did for the purchase of the sideyard to his home...financed by Nadhmi Auchi, the Iraqi billionaire through Tony Rezko? If he was in the public system, he couldn't spend it...NOW HE CAN...I'm not happy...I'm sure you are...for now.

Posted by: scott | June 23, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Obama's strategy shows he is a realist, and (in my opinion) that makes him eminently more trustworthy than a naive idealist. It also shows that he and his team are willing to look at a problem, in this case the public financing system, and find creative solutions. Team Obama's "alternative method of public financing" has created a system accountable to small donors with a unified, candidate-driven, candidate-responsible message in all 50 states.

Add to that a bonus: that Obama was willing to brave initial negative response to his decision in order to embark on something new.

I think his decision on public financing move shows brains. I think it shows strength. I think it shows an understanding of the political landscape of this country, of where we are and where we ought to go with the Public Financing system.

Does Obama's decision make me question whether he is trustworthy? No. It shows me that he and his people can deal with an issue creatively. It helps me to understand that this candidate will make the best decision, even when it is a hard decision. Obama's decision on public financing, I believe, will be something that builds, not tears down, trust in his leadership. And for those voters who wanted "a fighter" and who viewed themselves, during the primary, as needing someone who was grounded and dedicated to work hard for them in the White House, I think the decision will resonate even more.

http://ilfamilypolitics.blogspot.com

Posted by: Midwest Mom | June 23, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

"I would vote for Colin Powell or Michael Steele"

Mind telling me what Michael Steele has done other than Lieutenant Governor of Maryland? I know he's gotten a whole bunch of Republican accolades and leadership roles, but other than Lt. Gov, has he had any roles that didn't have the word "Republican" in it?

Posted by: DDAWD | June 23, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Broder is a typical republican rovian pundit. He attacks the points that his candidate represents before they are out in a preemptive strike. mcsame is an empty suit. He has no real stance on any subject except what he thinks people want to hear. He is "for" something before he is "against" it. Please ask your self if this is what you want for a president/decider. Women voters ask yourself if a man who calls his wife a "trollop" or worst is a man you would want in the whitehouse. Men, a man who has a temper as one you would want to have a beer with. A "HERO" who signs a confession that he bombed innocent civilian as one to be admired. Before you say you know mcbush, ask yourself what do you really know?

Posted by: chazzman444 | June 23, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Regarding the earlier posting, "From those to whom much is given, much is expected"

wrong headed because nothing was GIVEN. It was done the hard way, with work!

Obama is about "giving" money to those who have not earned it.

It's called "Socialism"

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

From those to whom much is given, much is expected

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Also on the 31st, Obama said he would pay for his proposed new programs, including mandatory health insurance, by imposing higher taxes on "the wealthy" and raising the tax on Social Security wages. He added, "What we have had right now is a situation where we've cut taxes for people who don't need them."

According to recent Gallup data, "The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income, but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab.

Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent -- those below the median income level -- now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes.

Should government determine how much money people "need"?

This is Marxism: "from each according to his ability; to each according to his need."

Posted by: OBAMA'S SOCIALISM | June 23, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

2007 At the Apollo Theater fundraiser, Obama was introduced by the radical Marxist professor and self-styled rapper, Cornell West, as "my comrade."

Posted by: "my comrade" | June 23, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Obama entered Occidental College in California in 1979.

In his first memoir, "Dreams," Obama included a description of black student life at Occidental College in Los Angeles.

"There were enough of us on campus to constitute a tribe, and when it came to hanging out many of us chose to function like a tribe, staying close together, traveling in packs," he wrote. "It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names."

He added: "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists."

Posted by: READ THE LAST SENTENCE | June 23, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

I wonder how much money David Broder was paid for the "opinions" in his "column."

Posted by: David Broder is a paid Stooge | June 23, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

I wonder when the racist will get tired of the Rev Wright story. It's getting rather old. If you look at race relations in this country it's hard to compare with men in sheets hanging black men from trees. I guess I missed it when it was white men that were hanging there.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the Black Value System written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by Vallmer Jordan in 1981. They believe in the following 12 precepts and covenantal statements. These Black Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Blacks are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:

1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

Please read the "Black Value System" again -- only this time, substitute the word "White" for "Black."

If your church had such a "White Value System" Jesse and Al and the NAACP would have 10,000 demonstrators out front in a heartbeat.

Posted by: Getting to know the real Obama | June 23, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Broder is exactly right. Obama sold himself throughout the primary season as a different kind of politician who would stick to the high ground. Yet his actions continually belied his words. Until the last couple of weeks in the Democratic campaign, Obama and his surrogates regularly savaged and smeared Clinton (and then denied doing so) rather than talk about the small but still significant differences in their positions. These recent decisions to forego government financing and any meaningful effort actually to inform the voters through joint town hall meetings are simply more of the same. The campaign financing issue is a slam dunk, since Obama previously suggested he would play by those rules and now has reneged for purely selfish political reasons. The town hall issue isn't quite as clear, because the format probably does favor MCCain. But at first Obama's campaign acknowledged the value of that approach or something similar to it. Maybe the format could have been tweaked or changed -- but Obama didn't even try to offer a meaningful alternative. The more he takes these "what's in it for me" positions, the more he looks like a standard-issue political hack. The more that happens, the more he erases the most compelling reason for his candidacy.

Posted by: Daniel Gerard | June 23, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Don't agree with Broder at all. It's very early in the game and most voters are not that interested in money or how many face-offs the candidates will have. It may have a tiny effect on the margings but not in the main.
Broder reflects the old CW-- which has been wrong consistently from 2004 to now. I don't think he has his finger on the pulse of the mainstream this time around.

Posted by: DB | June 23, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Obama Junkie, Are you referiing to George Soros's Movie on dot Org's Baby Alex, who doesn't want to serve as a peacekeeper, campaign? Should we immediately pull all forces out of Germany too?

"special-interest money finds its way into the political process via 527s to create mischief and distraction. "

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

The fact is that Broder made a number of key points. The fact is that we do not know who or what Obama is.

We do know who McCain is.

Being the unknown it is important that he is avoiding a real dialogue on the issues and has shunned the campaign finance issue.

So really, what is so new about him?

In reality he is looking more and more like an old style machine politician, simply packaged very nicely.

This can be a bit frightening.

Reverend Wright is germaine to the issue of who he is, his reversal on campaign funds are germaine to who he is. Until he develops a track record to frame the picture, it is all a work in progress and everything matters.

Broder is right on the money.

Posted by: Chris Hunt | June 23, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Not changing direction, no matter what, is what George W. Bush has been doing. Senator Obama is trying to win an election. Money, and access to voters is vital. The Republicans have built a solid reputation for self serving, tricks and subterfuge, and they win elections. That's where Bush and company excel. If true and effective finance reform existed, then the method of raising money would not be an issue. The voters of America, and the world, expect a change in the performance of America. Try as he might, Senator McCain must "hug" G. W., either overtly, or covertly. The Republicans have done America too much damage.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

David Broder? Is that your required reading for political junkies, a column from a 79 year-old Karl Rove and GW Bush cheerleader?

Obama would have to be a little-more than stupid to give up any advantage to McCain. As Obama witnessed first-hand in the primaries, special-interest money finds its way into the political process via 527s to create mischief and distraction.

Secondly, McCain's suggestion of 10-town hall meetings would be okay if we could trust the town-hall to ask important and pertinent national concern questions. I could see an un-moderated town-hall meeting being like (or worse than) the ABC debate between Clinton and Obama moderated by George Stephanopolous. Dumb a$$ questions were permitted from the American public that ranged from why doesn't Obama wear a flag-pin to does Rev. Wright love this country as much as Obama does?

Sorry, I can do without any tabloid-like town-hall debates when much more important issues like the economy, Iraq, health care, Afghanistan, and etc. exist out there!!!

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | June 23, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

Gee, David Broder doesn't like Obama, what a shock.

Truth is most people are tired from the 18 month primary and are in summer mode. They will start to pick up interest after the Olympics and Labor Day is past, giving the media two months to sell the race to them.

With the lack of funds McCain will be on the losing end.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | June 23, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Unite Us

"...Those opposed to Obama should be happy that there $3 will not be going to Obama.

Obama has chosen real public financing where he is relying on those in the general public that support his candidacy."

What sir prevents Obama from receiving foreign funds through American citizens for his campaign, just as he did for the purchase of the sideyard to his home...financed by Nadhmi Auchi, the Iraqi billionaire through Tony Rezko? If he was in the public system, he couldn't spend it...NOW HE CAN...I'm not happy...I'm sure you are...for now.

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Unite Us

"...Those opposed to Obama should be happy that there $3 will not be going to Obama.

Obama has chosen real public financing where he is relying on those in the general public that support his candidacy."

What sir prevents Obama from receiving foreign funds through American citizens for his campaign, just as he did for the purchase of the sideyard to his home...financed by Nadhmi Auchi, the Iraqi billionaire through Tony Rezko? If was in the public system, he couldn't spend it...NOW HE CAN...I'm not happy,,,I'm sure you are...for now.

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Part of the problem is the media.
They have a nasty habit of cropping,
pictures, quotes, and stories.

McCain said he wanted ten townhall
meetings between now and the Democratic convention. Obama agreed to 5. That was not reported. McCain turned down the counter offer to have 5 town hall meetings.

Regarding campaign financing McCain has been gaming the system and is under investigation for legal violations by the Federal Election System. Not mentioned in this article.

McCain refused to commit to public financing for the general election for months after becoming the nominee. He only said that he would AFTER Obama made his announcement.

The media falsley reported that Obama broke his pleged.

Obama like any other Presidential has the option to accept public funds just as the public has the option to check off the $3 on the tax form. Obama just saved taxpayers $84.1 million. Those opposed to Obama should be happy that there $3 will not be going to Obama.

Obama has chosen real public financing where he is relying on those in the general public that support his candidacy.

Be nice if the media shared candidates legislative record with the candidates record.


Posted by: Mr. Unite Us | June 23, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

The problem with talking down from on high, is that, one day or the next, you are likely to fall and get nasty bruises followed by a whopping for having been up in the celestial clouds in the first place. That is why, if by some miracle Obama is elected, he will be a one-term Prez. We supporters of Hillary tried to present that rationale--and we almost had it accepted.

Posted by: James Angus Linney | June 23, 2008 8:40 AM | Report abuse

So Dopey David Broder asks "How Well Do
Voters Know Obama?" Okay our answer here is
"Too Well!" and "Well Enough To Know We
Damn Well Will Not Vote For That Lying
Barack Hussein Obama for any elective office from small town dog catcher on up
to President of the USA and No Way Do We
Want Racist Michelle Obama as First Lady.
So did that answer your idiotic stupid
question here David Broder you phony
WAPO Obama Shill? No Way Obama! NOBAMA!

Posted by: Claudine 1000 | June 23, 2008 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Obama Camp Closely Linked With Ethanol
from Today's NY Times


Published: June 23, 2008
(Page 2 of 2)

"Many economists, consumer advocates, environmental experts and tax groups have been critical of corn ethanol programs as a boondoggle that benefits agribusiness conglomerates more than small farmers. Those complaints have intensified recently as corn prices have risen sharply in tandem with oil prices and corn normally used for food stock has been diverted to ethanol production."

---Another example of Obama's typical political activity...a campaign full of Ethanol industry reps...starting with his cochair Tom EDaschle, who's on the board of 3 ethanol companies...as the price of corn goes through the roof and we get less than 2 units of energy out for every one put in (some claim we put more in than we get out) we put heavy teariffs on cheaper much more efficient (8:1 energy reatio...HEY IT'S THE SAME PLANET...IT'S Called GLOBAL Warming!) sugar cane ethanol because Obama's from Illinois and is cozy with the Ethanol industry....tha's Not the Change America deserves.

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 8:25 AM | Report abuse

Interestingly enough. as one who reads most all the major news outlets. It is almost impossible to even find a mention of John Mccain either positive or negative. He is like the non candidate that although we know he is there no one really cares. Every story in every outlet is Obama related.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 8:23 AM | Report abuse

I disagree because McCain has continued his run from the center to the far right and is now marching lockstep with a President with an approval rating less than 30%. Broder has been in the tank for McCain for the duration of the primary.

Posted by: Rubbish | June 23, 2008 8:22 AM | Report abuse

This would be a good time to fix registration at the WaPo.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | June 23, 2008 8:05 AM | Report abuse

I ate some Thai curry the other night and what spewed out the other end was just like Broders' "conventional wisdom".

Posted by: Van | June 23, 2008 7:22 AM | Report abuse

These are two non issues.
One is about going for the big money that was explained in a backwards manner. The other is about not letting McCain set the agenda. Its almost a waist of time giving too much thought to the candidates until VPs are selected.

Posted by: vcsmith | June 23, 2008 6:52 AM | Report abuse


Few people are judging Obama by his skin color - it is the FACT THAT HE IS NOT EXPERIENCED. I would vote for Colin Powell or Michael Steele, Obama is just a horrible candidate who has done nothing with all the affirmative action programs pushing him ahead his whole life.


Next time you go to the doctor for surgery, make sure you pick the most inexperienced guy


I believe you are motivated by a reverse-racism - you are so caught up with the idea of helping race relations - that you will not give the white guy a fair evaluation that he is the BEST CANDIDATE FOR THE JOB.


You are being motivated by racism because you have one standard for one guy and another for the other.

You have a Constitutional Responsibility to pick the best candidate - not to throw away your vote by your personal desire to make some crazy social statement - You are being irresponsible to the nation if you do that - in addition Obama is NOT helping race relations in this country - his campaign tactics are causing race relations to go backwards.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 6:31 AM | Report abuse

Obama would be the THIRD NIXON ADMINISTRATION


- Weak foreign policy pulling out of wars

- Weak misguided economic politics.

- Social unrest, liberals running wild

Please do not support Obama.


Obama is a HIGH RISK TO THIS NATION.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 6:16 AM | Report abuse

Wow - what a wierd collection of comments on this site.

It figures, given the subject matter.

Broder is the epitome of phoney 'objective' commentary. He's discredited himself so many times, and his comments are entirely predictable regardless of the facts of any story.

It looks like Clive has his eye on Broder's age, and his job.

Posted by: al75 | June 23, 2008 6:02 AM | Report abuse

The signs are really really bad Obama really did it last Friday when he FALSELY ACCUSED the Republican party of racism BEFORE THEY SAY ANYTHING - Obama does not have an actual quote or instance of racism - so he went with the "Republicans are GOING TO BE RACIST" line instead.


The Constitution states one is innocent until proven guilty - Obama's new version of the Bill of Rights is "one is a racist before one says or does anything."


Obama's new version is "One is a racist until you vote for Obama."


Is this Obama's version of a post-racial campaign ? Obama IS RUNNING A RACIAL CAMPAIGN. THERE IS NO DOUBT. THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN THAT IS POST-RACIAL EXCEPT THE HYPOCRISY.


Give the country a break.


Obama is a disgrace to the Bill of Rights.


This is actually a new version of twisting someone's words around and "FALSELY PRETENDING TO BE OFFENDED." Or the FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF "OFFENSIVE COMMENTS."


This time, Obama has nothing to go on. He has nothing.


So Obama says the Republicans are "GOING TO SAY SOMETHING WHICH MIGHT BE TWISTED INTO SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED RACIST IF ONE REALLY REALLY REALLY TRIED." THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"


.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 4:56 AM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"


.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 4:54 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA=DISINGENUOUSNESS PERSONIFIED

Posted by: ARRABBIATO | June 23, 2008 4:43 AM | Report abuse

As a dyed in the wool Dem., I would NEVER vote for Obama, he has no experience---in anything, and he doesn't want the public to find that out-which they would, if he had to talk in a town hall setting-he'd get caught out saying things like "typical white person" and "president of Canada"-in other words, showing the true IGNORANT Obama, who doesn't have the experience of a mid-level office manager in leadership-of anything!

No, the kiddies just "like" him, that's all, because he can give a speech. But Obama is dangerous, because he doesn't stand for anything, anything at all, and he also doesn't really want to work at anything that's too difficult-it's not difficult to run for President, you just have to have a really good political strategy machine, be somewhat charismatic, have a campaign slogan ("change-yes we can" oooooh so ORIGINAL THAT!)AND THEN, JUST SHOW UP, 99% OF LIFE IS SHOWING UP. But as far as SUBSTANCE? KNOWLEDGE OF THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES THAT FACE THIS COUNTRY? INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE? Why, Obama has none, none at all, he'll just rely on other people for that-that's not too difficult.

And people? HE DOESN'T LIKE PEOPLE THAT MUCH, CAN'T YOU ALL SEE THAT? HE'S HARDLY A POLITICIAN TYPE-WHEN HE GETS CHALLENGED ON SOMETHING, WHEN HE FLIP-FLOPS ON AN ISSUE, HE GETS OFFENDED AND ANGRY, AS IF THE PUBLIC HAS NO RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT HE THINKS AND WHAT HE IS ABOUT-SO HE RETREATS-YOU CAN'T DO THAT AS A POLITICIAN.


WHICH IS WHY I SAY, HE IS A RICHARD M. NIXON IN THE MAKING-AND HE OUGHT NEVER TO BE ALLOWED NEAR THE WHITE HOUSE

Posted by: farfalle | June 23, 2008 4:42 AM | Report abuse

I guess you can't say those seven dirty words on this blog either.

I don't know about you, but I'll miss George Carlin.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 23, 2008 3:50 AM | Report abuse

Oh no! David Broder clucks disapprovingly at Barack Obama. And Broder himself has such high standards, as we have seen recently.

When is his buyout effective? It can't come soon enough.

Anyway, Chris, look at the racist filth that has commented on this thread, and you'll note the sewer you and your Dean are swimming in.

As for Obama opting out, thank you Senator, for not making US taxpayers pay $80 million to finance your campaign. Sen. McCain, pay for it yourself, or use your wealthy wife. So annoyed this uber-welathy guy with his 9 houses expects American taxpayers to pay for his campaign---and that those "fiscal conservative" Republicans support this and condemn Obama for saving us $80 million! Absolutely crazy.

Obama is clearly a threat to the corporate ownership of our politics, of which David Broder is a prime example

Posted by: JoshA | June 23, 2008 2:06 AM | Report abuse

Few people know that they'd get more under Democrats
According to the Tax Policy Center's analysis of the two candidates' tax plans, 80% of taxpayers would get more from Obama's cuts than from McCain's. About 95% of taxpayers would pay less under Obama than under current law (which ends many of the tax breaks passed in the past decade).

McCain's proposed tax cuts would give the top 0.1% of taxpayers (those earning more than $2.8 million a year) a tax break averaging $678,000. Obama, by contrast, would raise taxes on that group by an average of $300,100. For the bottom 20% of taxpayers who make less than $19,740 a year, McCain would cut taxes by an average of $101, while Obama would cut their taxes by an average of $698.

But Obama can't cut taxes too much, because there are many jobs he wants Washington to accomplish, such as universal health care, affordable college, and research on promising new energy sources.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 1:30 AM | Report abuse

In 3 recent actions--rejecting McCain's town hall proposal, opting out of public financing, and putting forth that vulgar, faux-Presidential seal, Obama has clearly displayed a presumptuousness, shallowness and hubris that the American public will remember...and that will bite him come Nov.

His actions show that he considers the presidency a done deal, and has no intention of fighting for it. The voters will prove him wrong.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 12:58 AM | Report abuse

Bomb 'em if you got 'em Johnny is so twisted with changed positions that it makes his face look straight. Broder is a rumor mongering grandstander trying to drum up false controversy on Obama to sell some stories.

Posted by: Robby 10001 | June 23, 2008 12:52 AM | Report abuse

MEMO TO OBAMA: THE DEM CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP
IS SELLING OUT THE CONSTITUTION:
WILL YOU?

The pathetic capitulation of the spineless Dem leadership on constitutional issues -- from warantless surveillance to the refusal to conduct hearings on other possible constitutional rights abuses -- begs the question: Et tu, Barack Obama?

The headlines rightly focus on telco immunity from lawsuits challenging government surveillance programs. But there are other constitutional rights issues that endanger our democracy, such as:

* The impact of electronic voting machines and the lack of a paper trail on the integrity of elections; and

* Possible Administration aid and support for KKK-style vigilante groups known as "GANG STALKERS" or "COMMUNITY STALKERS."

Read the following link and sublinks:

http://www.usenet-replayer.com/faq/alt.abuse.recovery.html

For info on the dangers posed by electronic voting:

http://www.wheresthepaper.org

While the media focus on the horse race, democracy is being threatened by suspect election apparatus and grassroots quasi-military vigilante squads that mete out "extra-legal" vigilante "justice" that makes a mockery of the rule of law.

Where is the national media on stories about our threatened democracy?

Yes, Fix readers, this has much to do with politics. Because the politics of fear and vigilantism is destroying our democratic freedoms at the grassroots, while the pundits play the "Who Won the Week" game.

Where are today's Woodwards and Bernsteins?

Posted by: scrivener | June 23, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

I am the typical Born Again Idiot Con so I have only the same old bile to repeat everyday just like our new leader Old McBush. I cannot think of new things to say so I repeat them day after day. I cannot think of anything new to do like Old McBush so I agree with him and the stupid Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Mass Murderer Serial Killer in Chief War Criminal. We should stay in Iraq forever and send them all the American dollars possible from American taxpayers. I am a stupid boring Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Fraud Con who voted in the stupid killer Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Mass Murderer Serial Killer in Chief War Criminal twice, I am guilty of rapes and murders in Iraq but I am Born Again and Again and Again, and now want another killer, the Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Lying Hypocrite Fraud Traitor McBush to win. I cannot really defend our killers and torturers but I hate anyone other than a white man to win. I am a racist bigot. I have no facts to bring just a lot of stupidity like all Born Again Racist Bigot Hypocrite Cons. We are all products of Satan, but we are Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Frauds and we all say we love Jesus but we really don't know what Jesue is all about. We just say that because all the other Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Frauds believe us. I am a patriot, I love America, I love God, I love Guns, I love Flag Pins, I love SUVs, I love Big Oil, I only buy American, I love to Shoot God's creatures just for fun, I love the Military because we get to kill more living things just for fun and sometimes we get to rape for fun too, women love to be raped every Born Again Hypocrite Con knows that especially Old McBush, I love to build a fence around the entire USA to keep all the Mexicans out I love to hate any one other than a White Man but I am not gay I hate gays. I always say Support Our Killer in Iraq. I always repeat the same old junk because we Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Fraud Cons are not that smart just look at our leaders now, we Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Fraud Cons but even we know how lousy and stupid they are but we are stupid so we still support them. I know all the same old cliches that we Born Again Hypocrite Cons always repeat because we are too stupid to think on our own and all the other ignorant Born Again Hypocrite Cons eat all of our Born Again Hypocrite Con Dung everyday, so we keep feeding it to them and they so fat on it. We are Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Cons in every way possible, and we know we are stupid and that we will all go straight to Hades so we continue to Hate anyone that is not like me.

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

Google McCain Traitor and McCain Songbird to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

Did you every wonder how this guy became a "war hero"? He did nothing heroic, but to be shotdown by small arms in his high tech heavy shielded heavy armored attack aircraft by a much inferior enemy. Then, the mighty industrial military complex gave this loser some medals for being stupid enough to be shotdown and captured. See, in America, you can be stupid and become a hero, too.

Google these to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

McCain Songbird
McCain Hero
McCain Adultery
McCain Arizona Mob
McCain Fortune

He killed 167 of his own because he was being stupid again, but his father was a 4 Star Admiral so they just transferred him to another ship.

http://www.picassodreams.com/picasso_dreams/2008/06/editorial-john.html
McCain's most horrendous loss occurred in 1967 on the USS Forrestal. Well, not horrendous for him. The starter motor switch on the A4E Skyhawk allowed fuel to pool in the engine. When the aircraft was "wet-started," an impressive flame would shoot from the tail. It was one of the ways young hot-shots got their jollies. Investigators and survivors took the position that McCain deliberately wet-started to harass the F4 pilot directly behind him. The cook off launched an M34 Zuni rocket that tore through the Skyhawk's fuel tank, released a thousand pound bomb, and ignited a fire that killed the pilot plus 167 men. Before the tally of dead and dying was complete, the son and grandson of admirals had been transferred to the USS Oriskany.

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Scott, can you stop being such an idiot? Public financing is not better than private donations. Who are you for? Do you know anything about politics? You seem like a high school kid. How old are you?

Posted by: Joseph Burk | June 23, 2008 12:14 AM | Report abuse

Old Songbird McBush has ties to the Mafia and he was a Traitor.


Google

McCain Keating Five
McCain Womanizing
McCain Traitor
McCain Temper
McCain Arizona Mob

Founding Member of the Keating Five
Back in the old days, defendants in famous trials got numbers -- the Chicago Eight, the Gang of Four, the Dave Clark Five, the Daytona 500. 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."

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 12:11 AM | Report abuse

Only PUBLIC campaign financing protects us from:

Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi...
a million $5 donations?

Posted by: songbird | June 23, 2008 12:09 AM | Report abuse

Google these

McCain Adultery
McCain Womanizing
McCain Temper

Clayton Williams stirred controversy during his 1990 campaign for governor of Texas with a botched attempt at humor in which he compared rape to weather. Within earshot of a reporter, Williams said: "As long as it's inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it."

His Democratic opponent at the time, the late Ann Richards -- who, coincidentally, would lose the governor's mansion to George W. Bush in 1994 -- highlighted the comments in a TV ad during that 1990 campaign. (see above)

McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers said the Monday event was being cancelled, given the offensive comments. He said he could not yet say what McCain would do with donations brought into the campaign by Williams.

"These were obviously incredibly offensive remarks that the campaign was unaware of at the time this event was scheduled," Rogers said. He added that Williams apologized for the comments back in 1990, but he said that does not excuse them.

Williams told the Midland Reporter-Telegram recently that he had already raised more than $300,000 for McCain and the fundraiser to be held at his home in Midland. Williams said that he needed to help McCain raise money to stop an Obama campaign that would enact "socialist" policies if elected to office.

Here's an idea, McCain: Why don't you RETURN the money from such a sexist, hateful and ignorant swine? Or is this a new demographic you're hoping to capture? The Back Forty:

A man who has such a disgustingly cavalier attitude towards something as horrific, violating and criminal as the rape of a woman has no place in politics, let alone polite society. This is a man who should be shunned by anyone with a conscience. That includes Senator McCain.

It's not enough that Senator McCain cancels an event because the media got wind of it.

It's not enough.

Senator McCain should publicly reject and denounce this man.

He should donate every single dirty dollar that this man has raised for him - all $300,000 - to an organization working to combat rape in our society - like RAINN or RVA.

And he should apologize immediately and completely to his female supporters for daring to entertain the thought of keeping company with this despicable, disgusting individual.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY3mWJ1Cd0Y

McCain does not care about your wife, daughter, niece, mother or any other Women. Don't let the Dirty Old Lecher be alone with any of them. McCain Approves of Rape.

http://www.usvetdsp.com/feb08/mccain_trust.htm

Ethics complaint over attacking a grieving woman
In 1984, as a Member of the House of Representatives, John McCain gave a speech in Congressman Duncan Hunter's San Diego district.

At the end of the speech a woman approached Representative McCain and introduced herself as the wife of a Marine pilot shot down and still missing in Southeast Asia. She asked Congressman McCain if he could help her find information on her husband's case.

Eyeing the attractive woman, the married McCain replied, Why don't you ride with us and have dinner?

Congressman Hunter and an aide sat in the front seat of the car; McCain and this woman in the back as they drove to Hunter's house. Not long into the short ride, McCain ran his hand up the woman's skirt. Stunned, she pushed him away and resisted his advances. He continued trying to grab her, even after she moved as far away from him as possible.

As this time, McCain's wife, Cindy, was pregnant.

Disgusted over his behavior she left as soon as they arrived at Duncan Hunter's place. She promptly told the two Vietnam veterans who had originally encouraged her to try to see McCain about her missing husband's case that night.

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

jfowler, you are right, this guy might put America's national security at risk, he is on a lot of drugs now. His wife, Cindy McCain was a drug addict, too.

What the media has carelessly refused to acknowledge is that the camp's senior ranking U.S. POW (SRO) had issued unquestionable orders that if a POW was to be released, "it would be the longest held prisoner" Because McCain was not the longest held POW, he would have faced a military court-marshal if he had accepted the offer.

It is incumbent upon McCain to prove to the American people that the 5 1/2 years he spent at the mercy of communist interrogators did not leave him with mental health issues that could hinder him in making snap decisions "if the White House phone rang at 3 a.m."

Is McCain taking any kind of pain or "nerve" medicines? If so, do the medicines cause emotional and physical reactions?

McCain was once treated for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which is said to get worse over time for former POWs, what is the status of his treatment?

Does McCain still harbor stress triggered suicidal tendencies?

Where was McCain and what was happening to him during the months he was missing from the POW camp?

McCain implies that he made only one propaganda broadcast for the communists, but Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers say he made over 30. How many did he make and what did he get in return?

Why does McCain still deny that the Soviets were involved in the interrogation of U.S. POWs in Vietnam?

Does McCain's former interrogators, the communist Vietnamese, Russians, Chinese and Cubans have anything in their secret intelligence files about his behavior as a prisoner with which they could blackmail a President John McCain?

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi...
a million $5 donations?

Posted by: songbird | June 23, 2008 12:04 AM | Report abuse

Old Songbird McBush was brainwashed, America cannot trust this guy.

McCain was subjected to 5 ½ years of Soviet driven "brain perversion techniques."
Is he fit to be President and Commander in Chief of the military?
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
By Ted Sampley
March, 2008

For years, the mainstream news media has refused to stop idolizing the so-called straight talking maverick John McCain long enough to question the mental health consequences of the years he spent as a "special" prisoner of the communists in North Vietnam.

McCain, the presumptive Republican candidate for President, who could one day have his finger on the "red button," claims the communists subjected him to 5 ½ years of nonstop indoctrination sessions so intense that he attempted suicide.

Unfortunately for McCain, after his bomber was hit by anti-aircraft fire near Hanoi on October 26, 1967, he parachuted into the hands of an evil communist enemy who 7 years earlier had adopted Soviet methods of prisoner interrogation.

At that time, the Soviets were perfecting techniques designed "to put a man's mind into a fog so that he will mistake what is true for what is untrue, what is right for what is wrong, and come to believe what did not happen actually had happened."

Psychiatric Journals are flush with reports concluding that former POWs may remain entangled in "harsh psychological battles" with themselves for decades after returning home including difficulty in controlling intense emotions such as anger and stress.

In political circles, McCain, sometimes referred to as "insane McCain," is well known for having a "volcanic" temper which his colleagues say often erupts into vulgar language and personal insults.

Democrat Paul Johnson, the former mayor of Phoenix, experienced McCain's in your face temperament up close. "His volatility borders in the area of being unstable," Johnson said. "Before I let this guy put his finger on the button, I would have to give considerable pause."

The Journal of America Medicine reported in an 1996 article that being a former POW is associated with "increased cumulative incidence rates of chronic disorders of the peripheral nervous system, joints, and back and an increased hazard rate of peptic ulcer."

The 71 year-old McCain most certainly suffers pain and the weakening effects of chronic arthritis. He broke both arms when he was forced to eject after his bomber was hit. He says the Vietnamese periodically re-fractured his bones during years of interrogation and torture which rendered him permanently incapable of raising his arms above his head.

McCain has never been publicly vetted about what and how much medications he is taking. Aside from his anger and arthritic pain issues, McCain has had reoccurring bouts of malignant melanoma, a deadly form of cancer that can spread quickly throughout the body.

These facts alone beg the question on how a President McCain, in the absence of his campaign staff handlers, would deal with a snap decision that had to be made "if the White House phone rang at 3 a.m."

McCain's POW experience is unique. His communist captors considered him the "crown prince" of U.S. POWs because his father, Adm. John McCain, was commander of all U.S. forces fighting in Vietnam. Because the communists believed he was from a "royal family" and would when finally released return to the United States to an important military or government job, they held him for two years in "solitary confinement."

In February, Reuters news reported that McCain's former captors are expressing delight in the news of his nomination as Republican party Presidential candidate. "In the past Senator McCain has conducted activities that had a positive impact in bringing the two nations [Vietnam/United States] closer. That is a point that Vietnamese people who follow the current affairs do recognize," said retired North Vietnamese Colonel Nguyen Van Phuong, representing retired and present members of the Vietnamese communist military.

Posted by: Joseph Burk | June 23, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Jfowler- This Obamania knows no boundaries...these bloggers are as bad as the bigots who are circulating lies about Obama's religion and those who circulated lies about McCain's adopted Bangladeshi daughter in South Carolina in 2000...it's as low as low goes. One can only hope that the silent majority is taking notes.

Posted by: Scott | June 23, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Founding Member of the Keating Five
Back in the old days, defendants in famous trials got numbers -- the Chicago Eight, the Gang of Four, the Dave Clark Five, the Daytona 500. 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."

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a adulterer and I won't vote for him, none of my friends will vote for him. He has no respect for women.

As a woman I will never vote for this Pig.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html

McCain temper boiled over in '92 tirade, called wife a 'c^nt'

Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain's intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain's hair and said, "You're getting a little thin up there." McCain's face reddened, and he responded, "At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you c^nt." McCain's excuse was that it had been a long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long days.

Posted by: Obama White Conservative Woman | June 22, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA = DISINGENUOUSNESS PERSONIFIED

Posted by: arrabbiato | June 22, 2008 11:43 PM | Report abuse

The discussion here is going to the level of the New York Post - I am outtta here !

Posted by: Jack Barker | June 22, 2008 11:42 PM | Report abuse

As a dyed in the wool Dem., I would NEVER vote for Obama, he has no experience---in anything, and he doesn't want the public to find that out-which they would, if he had to talk in a town hall setting-he'd get caught out saying things like "typical white person" and "president of Canada"-in other words, showing the true IGNORANT Obama, who doesn't have the experience of a mid-level office manager in leadership-of anything!

No, the kiddies just "like" him, that's all, because he can give a speech. But Obama is dangerous, because he doesn't stand for anything, anything at all, and he also doesn't really want to work at anything that's too difficult-it's not difficult to run for President, you just have to have a really good political strategy machine, be somewhat charismatic, have a campaign slogan ("change-yes we can" oooooh so ORIGINAL THAT!)AND THEN, JUST SHOW UP, 99% OF LIFE IS SHOWING UP. But as far as SUBSTANCE? KNOWLEDGE OF THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES THAT FACE THIS COUNTRY? INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE? Why, Obama has none, none at all, he'll just rely on other people for that-that's not too difficult.

And people? HE DOESN'T LIKE PEOPLE THAT MUCH, CAN'T YOU ALL SEE THAT? HE'S HARDLY A POLITICIAN TYPE-WHEN HE GETS CHALLENGED ON SOMETHING, WHEN HE FLIP-FLOPS ON AN ISSUE, HE GETS OFFENDED AND ANGRY, AS IF THE PUBLIC HAS NO RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT HE THINKS AND WHAT HE IS ABOUT-SO HE RETREATS-YOU CAN'T DO THAT AS A POLITICIAN.


WHICH IS WHY I SAY, HE IS A RICHARD M. NIXON IN THE MAKING-AND HE OUGHT NEVER TO BE ALLOWED NEAR THE WHITE HOUSE.

Posted by: farfalle | June 22, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Pure drivel.

Posted by: Kelly | June 22, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

You are right, Clyde, Snott and Lucille, the Old Traitor McBush is a War Criminal just like the Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Lying Coward WMD Mass Murderer Serial Killer War Criminal we voted twice for. I feel guilty about all the Rapes and hundreds of thousands of Innocent Women and Children. Our Killers not only kill them but were Raping little girls. I think Jesus is not going to forgive us. We are all going to Hades. We are Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Frauds but we know it all for show just like our stupid leaders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFhhvaIXA9A

Google these

McCain War Criminal

McCain Songbird

In a 1997 interview on the CBS news program "60 Minutes," McCain frankly acknowledged, "I am a war criminal; I bombed innocent women and children." It was an honest statement, though hardly a convincing argument for making him president.

The fact that he was a war criminal reflected not merely his own personal actions, which in terms of slaughter were no doubt every bit as devastating as a My Lai massacre, albeit inflicted from a longer distance. Rather it was a matter of the objective character of the war itself. Clearly there were many in the top echelons of the government, its military and intelligence agencies and in both major parties who bore far greater responsibility for the waging of a criminal and counterrevolutionary war of aggression in Vietnam.

The American ruling establishment has spent more than three decades attempting to revise the history of the Vietnam War in order to conceal its own responsibility for the greatest war crimes since the fall of the Nazis and to erase the political memory of US imperialism's defeat under conditions of mass opposition and social struggles at home.

Posted by: Joseph Burk | June 22, 2008 11:32 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute, I am no McCain fan, but he is being swift-boated ?
What is with you guys? The only war heroes are the ones who meet your criteria ? Kerry and McCain are not but Bush the college cheerleader who dodged service was ?

Posted by: Jack Barker | June 22, 2008 11:28 PM | Report abuse

Snotty, you are right, Old Songbird McBush supports Rape

Google these

McCain Adultery
McCain Womanizing
McCain Temper

Clayton Williams stirred controversy during his 1990 campaign for governor of Texas with a botched attempt at humor in which he compared rape to weather. Within earshot of a reporter, Williams said: "As long as it's inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it."

His Democratic opponent at the time, the late Ann Richards -- who, coincidentally, would lose the governor's mansion to George W. Bush in 1994 -- highlighted the comments in a TV ad during that 1990 campaign. (see above)

McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers said the Monday event was being cancelled, given the offensive comments. He said he could not yet say what McCain would do with donations brought into the campaign by Williams.

"These were obviously incredibly offensive remarks that the campaign was unaware of at the time this event was scheduled," Rogers said. He added that Williams apologized for the comments back in 1990, but he said that does not excuse them.

Williams told the Midland Reporter-Telegram recently that he had already raised more than $300,000 for McCain and the fundraiser to be held at his home in Midland. Williams said that he needed to help McCain raise money to stop an Obama campaign that would enact "socialist" policies if elected to office.

Here's an idea, McCain: Why don't you RETURN the money from such a sexist, hateful and ignorant swine? Or is this a new demographic you're hoping to capture? The Back Forty:

A man who has such a disgustingly cavalier attitude towards something as horrific, violating and criminal as the rape of a woman has no place in politics, let alone polite society. This is a man who should be shunned by anyone with a conscience. That includes Senator McCain.

It's not enough that Senator McCain cancels an event because the media got wind of it.

It's not enough.

Senator McCain should publicly reject and denounce this man.

He should donate every single dirty dollar that this man has raised for him - all $300,000 - to an organization working to combat rape in our society - like RAINN or RVA.

And he should apologize immediately and completely to his female supporters for daring to entertain the thought of keeping company with this despicable, disgusting individual.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY3mWJ1Cd0Y

McCain does not care about your wife, daughter, niece, mother or any other Women. Don't let the Dirty Old Lecher be alone with any of them. McCain Approves of Rape.

http://www.usvetdsp.com/feb08/mccain_trust.htm

Ethics complaint over attacking a grieving woman
In 1984, as a Member of the House of Representatives, John McCain gave a speech in Congressman Duncan Hunter's San Diego district.

At the end of the speech a woman approached Representative McCain and introduced herself as the wife of a Marine pilot shot down and still missing in Southeast Asia. She asked Congressman McCain if he could help her find information on her husband's case.

Eyeing the attractive woman, the married McCain replied, Why don't you ride with us and have dinner?

Congressman Hunter and an aide sat in the front seat of the car; McCain and this woman in the back as they drove to Hunter's house. Not long into the short ride, McCain ran his hand up the woman's skirt. Stunned, she pushed him away and resisted his advances. He continued trying to grab her, even after she moved as far away from him as possible.

As this time, McCain's wife, Cindy, was pregnant.

Disgusted over his behavior she left as soon as they arrived at Duncan Hunter's place. She promptly told the two Vietnam veterans who had originally encouraged her to try to see McCain about her missing husband's case that night.

Posted by: Lucille Nugget | June 22, 2008 11:25 PM | Report abuse

For crying out loud, Broder, Woodward and the rest of these clowns have zero journalistic credibility - they are consumate insiders who report what they are told to report by political party insiders.
Broder is a mouthpiece for Washington political insiders, why, why. why. why do we take him seriously ?

Posted by: jack Barker | June 22, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

Broder was great with the Obamopaths while he relentlessly went after the Clintons- but challenge the inconsistencies of St. Barak and he should be thrown to the dogs

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 11:24 PM | Report abuse

Snott, if you are a Christian how can you Kill someone?

Google these and find out

McCain Adultery
McCain Keating Five
McCain Songbird

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFM1xqqTX_g&feature=related

Top Cop Says McCain Was Never Tortured
Former Vietnam vet with top secret clearance - Republican frontrunner is "a lying skunk"

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Thursday, February 7th, 2008

A former Vietnam veteran with top secret clearance says he has personally spoken to numerous POW's who dispute John McCain's claim that he refused to provide information after he was captured and tortured in Hanoi, saying that in fact McCain's code-name was "Songbird" because of his willingness to tell all to avoid torture.

Jack McLamb served nine years in secret operations in Cambodia and other nations before going on to become one of the most highly decorated police officer's in Phoenix history, winning police officer of the year twice before taking a role as a hostage negotiator for the FBI.

"I know a lot of Vietnam veterans and a few POW's and all the POW's that I've talked to over the years say that John McCain is a lying skunk," McLamb told the Alex Jones Show. "He never was tortured - they were there in the camp with him and then when he came in....he immediately started spilling his guts about everything because he didn't want to get tortured," said McLamb, contradicting the official story that McCain only offered his name, rank, serial number, and date of birth.

"The Vietnamese Communists called him the Songbird, that's his code name, Songbird McCain, because he just came into the camp singing and telling them everything they wanted to know," said McLamb.

McLamb said the POW's told him that McCain had sustained two broken arms and a leg injury from not pulling his arms in when he bailed out of his A-4 Skyhawk that was shot down over the Truc Bach Lake in Hanoi.

The POW's said that McCain made 32 propaganda videos for the communist North Vietnamese in which he denounced America for what they were doing in Vietnam.

"They have these sealed now, our government has these sealed, we can't get to it, they have it classified," said McLamb, adding that in truth "the POW's hate John McCain."

It is commonly accepted that McCain was treated better than other POW's and afforded medical care immediately after the North Vietnamese discovered that his father was a top admiral.

Several Vietnam veterans groups do solely exist to expose McCain's abandonment of veteran's interests as well as his lies about being tortured, including Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain and U.S. Veteran Dispatch.
Doubts over McCain's alleged war hero status and his support to curtail efforts to look for missing POW's contributed to torpedoing his presidential campaign in 2000 and those same questions will undoubtedly surface again should the Senator win the Republican nomination.

Posted by: Joseph Burk | June 22, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

David Broder? Is that your required reading for political junkies, a column from a 79 year-old Karl Rove and GW Bush cheerleader?

Obama would have to be a little-more than stupid to give up any advantage to McCain. As Obama witnessed first-hand in the primaries, special-interest money finds its way into the political process via 527s to create mischief and distraction.

Secondly, McCain's suggestion of 10-town hall meetings would be okay if we could trust the town-hall to ask important and pertinent national concern questions. I could see an un-moderated town-hall meeting being like (or worse than) the ABC debate between Clinton and Obama moderated by George Stephanopolous. Dumb a$$ questions were permitted from the American public that ranged from why doesn't Obama wear a flag-pin to does Rev. Wright love this country as much as Obama does?

Sorry, I can do without any tabloid-like town-hall debates when much more important issues like the economy, Iraq, health care, Afghanistan, and etc. exist out there!!!

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | June 22, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Hey Cestfini (for Hussein, you mean?)
"Here's another piece of conventional wisdom: Adultery is an unforgivable lapse of conduct, punishable with impeachement. But, taking money from organizations with political agendas when you are a political reporter is perfectly excusable."
-------
Well excuse me, WISDOM you say? Is it a crime to take money from an Iraqi money launderer through a now convicted felon to purchase one's home and land? Who is this Nadhmi Auchi? Ask your candidate what he did in return to pay back Rezko and Auchi! Wisdom indeed...the "emperor" is undressed.

Posted by: songbird | June 22, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

First, Obama has not rejected McCain's Town Hall meetings. He is eager to have such debates, but details are yet to be worked out.

Second, many of us appreciate the fact that Obama is different rather than pulling the same old sh*t that we have seen for the last 8+ years. Obama's message is all about change. Any voter who wants to get to know Obama better should read his books!

Posted by: Joe | June 22, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

You are right, Snott, but is this McCain a Traitor?

Why do the Vietnam Vets hate him so much?

How did he get 28 medals while in combat for less than 20 hours? Was it because he was stupid enough to be shotdown by small arms and his father was the Admiral heading the Pacific Command?

Why did the grunts on the ground fighting for 7000 hours never received any medals, but Admiral's son gets 28 for being stupid enough to get shotdown, his 5th airplane crash?

How did he become a pilot after graduating 894 out of 899 in his class? Did his Admiral father help him? I thought on the top people get to become pilots not someone at the bottom of his class.

Google McCain Traitor and McCain Songbird to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

Did you every wonder how this guy became a "war hero"? He did nothing heroic, but to be shotdown by small arms in his high tech heavy shielded heavy armored attack aircraft by a much inferior enemy. Then, the mighty industrial military complex gave this loser some medals for being stupid enough to be shotdown and captured. See, in America, you can be stupid and become a hero, too.

Google these to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

McCain Songbird
McCain Hero
McCain Adultery
McCain Arizona Mob
McCain Fortune

He killed 167 of his own because he was being stupid again, but his father was a 4 Star Admiral so they just transferred him to another ship.


McCain's most horrendous loss occurred in 1967 on the USS Forrestal. Well, not horrendous for him. The starter motor switch on the A4E Skyhawk allowed fuel to pool in the engine. When the aircraft was "wet-started," an impressive flame would shoot from the tail. It was one of the ways young hot-shots got their jollies. Investigators and survivors took the position that McCain deliberately wet-started to harass the F4 pilot directly behind him. The cook off launched an M34 Zuni rocket that tore through the Skyhawk's fuel tank, released a thousand pound bomb, and ignited a fire that killed the pilot plus 167 men. Before the tally of dead and dying was complete, the son and grandson of admirals had been transferred to the USS Oriskany.

Posted by: jfowler | June 22, 2008 11:13 PM | Report abuse

IMO, both of these issues are, at least in part, evidence of the MSM's
infatuation with McCain -- or, rather, his phony squeaky-clean,
maverick, straight-talk persona.

On the town halls, Broder talks about how the public would benefit
from the forums, without even addressing McCain's motivation in
proposing them -- which was not, I assure you, to further the public
interest. It was an attempt to bait Obama into ten low-cost "debates"
in McCain's favorite and most effective format, which would give the
cash-strapped McC campaign tons of free air-time and a chance to share
the stage with Obama at a time when he's ahead of McC in the polls.
But, of course, the MSM don't see -- or choose to ignore -- the
obvious fact that this is a political ploy, plain and simple. The
cynics in McCain's campaign were pretty sure it would work, since
they've hypnotized the media, and that it would make Obama look like
the political calculator by turning down the idea -- and what do you
know? It did. Win-win for McCain. If Obama says yes, he gets twenty hours of free air-time. If he says no, he pounds him for being anti-democratic. What a f--king cynic!

Campaign finance is a stickier wicket, but McCain ain't lilly-white on
this one, either. Sure, I wish Obama hadn't signed that stupid pledge
back in September -- before he had any idea that his campaign would be
able to create an internet fund-raising juggernaut of unheard-of
proportions -- and I wish he had fessed up and said, "I didn't expect
to raise this kind of money from all these small donors, etc., etc.,"
-- kind of like what JB said on MTP this morning -- instead of
conjuring up these phantom 527s and blaming it on them. But still,
the reasons McC is taking the public financing are (i) he doesn't
think he can raise that much money, and (ii) because he used the
matching funds as collateral for a $10,000,000 loan last year, most
election-law lawyers say he legally has to stay in the public-
financing system. You can bet if he could raise the money and legally
get out of the system, he'd do it in a heartbeat -- the only
difference being he didn't sign a pledge.

Posted by: jac13 | June 22, 2008 11:12 PM | Report abuse

You young inexperienced mindless kids who have absolutely no life experience and have been supported by parents most of your lives and have never done a damn thing for your country, go ahead and make your rude comments supporting Obama. This goes for all the liberals who think they know so much.

We people who have served our country honorable and with dignity will come out in November and whip your behind.

Posted by: Clyde | June 22, 2008 11:10 PM | Report abuse

Here's another piece of conventional wisdom: Adultery is an unforgivable lapse of conduct, punishable with impeachement. But, taking money from organizations with political agendas when you are a political reporter is perfectly excusable.

Posted by: cestfini | June 22, 2008 11:07 PM | Report abuse

Why is Old McBush called a Songbird?

Did Old Songbird McBush collaborate with the Enemy?

Google

McCain Economics
McCain Temper
McCain Songbird

Not long ago, McCain stated to a journalist that, "Economics isn't my strong suit." But, he added, he is reading Greenspan. That would be Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan who, during his tenure, expanded the money supply more than in all the years since 1913. The Greenspan who kept the printing presses running at warp speed, turning out little pieces of paper called money and backed by the promises of politicians. Alan the Inflator fueled the dotcom bubble, the stock market bubble, and more recently the real estate bubble. It is no wonder that the LONDON ECONOMIST recently pegged 2007 true U.S. inflation at 17%. Just what we need - another president who is an economic illiterate. It's small consolation that McCain admits it, because if elected, he'd appoint the wrong advisors.

Posted by: jfowler | June 22, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Jfowler- This Obamania knows no boundaries...these bloggers are as bad as the bigots who are circulating lies about Obama's religion and those who circulated lies about McCain's adopted Bangladeshi daughter in South Carolina in 2000...it's as low as low goes. One can only hope that the silent majority is taking notes.

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 11:05 PM | Report abuse

If McCain can forgive the Vietcom, he is better for it. If you are a Christian, do you remember "if you cannot forgive, how will God forgive you?" Some of your comments make me embarrassed to live in the same country as your idiots. Are some of your high on dope? You sound like it, or else you have no manners and are very crude.

Posted by: Joseph Burk | June 22, 2008 11:00 PM | Report abuse

The person commenting on McCain's mental health: you really are an ignorant person. McCain became emotionally & mentally strongly during his captivity by the Vietcon.

Question about Obama: what did doing hard drugs as he admitted in his book do to his brain? Also he has a fixation about his father. He was around radical people all during his youth: what did this do to his brain? He lies so often, changes his positions. If you are worried about anyone's mental state, it should be about Obama.

Posted by: Lucille Nugget | June 22, 2008 10:55 PM | Report abuse

Reading through this stuff about McCain and how "small arms" fire shot down his (heavily armored!!??) A-4, and the use of the word "traitor" and "collaborator" merely indicate that these people know absolutely zero and are an insult to those of us who were there. You know nothing. Time to shut up.

Posted by: jfowler | June 22, 2008 10:22 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

Google McCain Traitor and McCain Songbird to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

Did you every wonder how this guy became a "war hero"? He did nothing heroic, but to be shotdown by small arms in his high tech heavy shielded heavy armored attack aircraft by a much inferior enemy. Then, the mighty industrial military complex gave this loser some medals for being stupid enough to be shotdown and captured. See, in America, you can be stupid and become a hero, too.

Google these to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

McCain Songbird
McCain Hero
McCain Adultery
McCain Arizona Mob
McCain Fortune

He killed 167 of his own because he was being stupid again, but his father was a 4 Star Admiral so they just transferred him to another ship.

http://www.picassodreams.com/picasso_dreams/2008/06/editorial-john.html
McCain's most horrendous loss occurred in 1967 on the USS Forrestal. Well, not horrendous for him. The starter motor switch on the A4E Skyhawk allowed fuel to pool in the engine. When the aircraft was "wet-started," an impressive flame would shoot from the tail. It was one of the ways young hot-shots got their jollies. Investigators and survivors took the position that McCain deliberately wet-started to harass the F4 pilot directly behind him. The cook off launched an M34 Zuni rocket that tore through the Skyhawk's fuel tank, released a thousand pound bomb, and ignited a fire that killed the pilot plus 167 men. Before the tally of dead and dying was complete, the son and grandson of admirals had been transferred to the USS Oriskany.

Posted by: jfowler | June 22, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse


Timing is everything in politics. Do all the things that might be held against you in the summer, the time when most people aren't paying much attention. Take the heat, by fall, it will be forgotten, and you can focus on the issues that you believe will win it, "Change", "Iraq" and "the economy".

At this point, it seems to me that partisans will not be affected by these decisions. The "movable" middle probably aren't paying much attention, and may not care by fall.

The campaign finance bailout was inevitable, we could see it coming. So, no surprise there. The town hall meetings were also probably inevitable (first rule of campaigns, don't give free publicity to an opponent who has less money.... okay, fifth or sixth rule, but definitely in the top ten).

Broder's question is a good one. I think one of the things that works in Obama's favor among his supporters is the over-the-top attack style of his opponents (at least as seen on the net, and in the right wing media). Their anger is like a vaccine which may prevent serious discussion of any issues during the campaign.

It would be interesting to see what a serious election would look like.

Posted by: PatrickInBeijing | June 22, 2008 10:51 PM | Report abuse

Why is Old McBush give the code name Songbird?

Google these to learn more

McCain Songbird
McCain Traitor
McCain Temper

PRISONER OR HONORED GUEST?

McCain's 5½-year stay at the Hanoi Hilton (officially Hoa Loa Prison) has ever since been the subject of great controversy. He maintains that he was tortured and otherwise badly mistreated. One of many who disagree is Dennis Johnson, imprisoned at Hanoi and never given treatment for his broken leg. He reports that every time he saw McCain, who was generally kept segregated, the man was clean-shaven, dressed in fresh clothes, and appeared comfortable among North Vietnamese Army officers. He adds that he frequently heard McCain's collaborative statements broadcast over the prison's loud speakers.

On October 26, 1967, McCain's A-4 Skyhawk was shot down over Hanoi. The fractures of 1 leg and both arms were reportedly due to his failure to tuck them in during ejection. According to U.S. News & World Report (May 14, 1973), McCain didn't wait long before offering military information in return for medical care. While an extraordinary patient at Gi Lam Hospital, he was visited by a number of dignitaries, including, to quote McCain himself, General Vo Nguyen Giap, the national hero of Dienbienphu.

Jack McLamb is a highly respected name in law enforcement circles. After 9 years of clandestine operations in Cambodia and unmentionable areas, he returned home to Phoenix where he became one of the most decorated police officers on record. Twice McLamb was named Officer of the Year. He went on to become an FBI hostage negotiator. This man has stated that every one of the many former POWs he has talked with consider McCain a traitor. States McLamb, "He was never tortured...The Vietnamese Communists called him the Songbird, that's his code name, Songbird McCain, because he just came into the camp singing and telling them everything they wanted to know." McLamb further quotes former POWs as saying McCain starred in 32 propaganda videos in which he denounced his country and comrades.

The Glavnoje Razvedyvatel'noje Upravlenije is the Soviet's military intelligence division. Numerous sources confirm that during the Nam Era, the English-speaking Vietnamese who conducted interrogations of American prisoners were always overseen by Russian GRU officers. The ranking GRU officer at the Hanoi Hilton had a multilingual teenage son who was tasked with translating all interrogation reports into Russian. He would become known only as T.

According to T who interpreted all interrogations and notes pertaining to McCain during the latter's stay from December, 1969, to March, 1973, when a well-fed looking McCain's was released, privileges were extended. These included time at a furnished apartment in Hanoi - furnished with 2 prostitutes. McCain would attribute such absences to solitary confinement.

It has been widely reported that following his father's appointment as CINCPAC Commander-in-Chief of all U.S. forces in the Vietnam theater of operations, McCain was offered an immediate parole. McCain insists that he refused such a preference. Others insist that his father refused to allow such a preference. In any event, such an offer would have required the approval of the Soviet masters, and T would have seen documentation. He has no recollection of such an offer.

In 1991 the Soviet Union was in a state of collapse. People and things were up for grabs. During that thaw, a mass document swap took place between the KGB and CIA. All T's translations were included. If these dots are really connected, it is small wonder that McCain had fought consistently to keep all files sealed, block any attempts to retrieve POWs, and establish the friendliest of relations with his former tormentors.

Posted by: Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird McBush? What are you hiding? | June 22, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

Broder is an agent like the rest of the press corps who receive the daily e-mail from both political parties and are reduced to nothing more than echo chambers....so why should I listen to him.


Posted by: Jack Barker | June 22, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Reading through this stuff about McCain and how "small arms" fire shot down his (heavily armored!!??) A-4, and the use of the word "traitor" and "collaborator" merely indicate that these people know absolutely zero and are an insult to those of us who were there. You know nothing. Time to shut up.

Posted by: jfowler | June 22, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Only Public Campaign Finance Reform protects our election from the influence of
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi


Posted by: songbird | June 22, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

Frankly, I can't wait for Obama to get elected. Since there will have to be an increase in payroll taxes for Social Security, Medicare, universal healthcare, all the employed will have to pay much more. I won't have to pay a dime when I retire in a few years. I'll be living in a house that I own outright, while the rest of you pay $8 or more for gas, pay your mortgage, and higher Federal taxes. For that matter, Obama wants to eliminate Federal income taxes for seniors who make less than $50,000 a year. Go Obama!

On the international front, the minute we withdraw from Iraq, Iran will take over. Whether you like it or not, it's too late to change the past. If Iran decides to use nuclear weapons against Israel, Israel will use their nuclear arsenal to obliterate Iran. Any who thinks otherwise is naive. Obama will be too weak to do anything except to try an gain support from a useless organization like the UN. In any case, I want to thank all you Obama supporters in advance for paying more taxes to fund my retirement.

Posted by: Jim | June 22, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

I disagree with Broder in that I believe the winner of the general election will be the candidate who appears to be the most un-Bush. Obama wins that contest hands down, despite the real differences between McCain and the current president.

Posted by: ccarter | June 22, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

How can we take David Broder seriously when he's been lying about giving speeches for cash to partisan groups? Take a look at what Ken Silverstein has to say about Mr. Probity here
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/06/hbc-90003124

Posted by: Alan Vanneman | June 22, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

You are right, Snott, no wonder Old McBush is called a Songbird. He was a Traitor.

McCain has said repeatedly that he was afforded no special treatment while in the "Hanoi Hilton". Yet when he was first interviewed by the North Vietnamese he is shown at a hospital reserved for Vietnamese military and he was seen by Soviet Surgeons. He was drinking coffee and smoking cigarettes while being interviewed. This was a far cry from the way the rest of the POWs were treated.

His wife at the time, was a member of the National League of Families and she fought to make sure that John McCain came home. He rewarded this loyalty by divorcing her after his return.

He was shot down October 26, 1967, and by November 9, 1967 he was giving interviews to foreign correspondents, providing information on his prior command, casualties and tactics, in direct violation of the Code of Conduct. (The U.S. military Code of Conduct is the definitive code specifying the responsibilities of American military personnel while in combat or captivity. Article V of the Code is very specific in ordering U.S. military personnel to avoid answering questions to the utmost of their ability and to make no oral or written statements disloyal to the United States and its allies, or harmful to their cause. Any willful violation of the Code is considered collaborating with the enemy.)

The Communist Vietnamese erected a bust of John McCain beside the lake where he was shot down. His defenders say that this is a tribute to the PAVN gunners that shot him down.

In the interview that he gave on November 9, 1967 to VNA International, he claims when he bailed out and landed in the lake, that locals pulled him out and took him to the hospital. Yet in the U.S. News and World Report - May 14, 1973. McCain is quoted as saying "I think it was on the fourth day (after being shot down) that two guards came in, instead of one. One of them pulled back the blanket to show the other guard my injury. I looked at my knee. It was about the size of a football . . . when I saw it, I said to the guard, Ok, get the officer'...an officer came in after a few minutes. It was the man that we came to know very well as 'The Bug'. He was a psychotic torturer, one of the worst fiends that we had to deal with. I said, Ok, I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital."

While testifying before the Senate Select Committee, the very man McCain claims was responsible for his own torture, his interrogator, "The Bug" was appearing. When the moment of confrontation came, McCain rose from his seat, walked from the podium to the floor and stood face to face with the man who was responsible for torturing him and countless other Prisoners of War...McCain then grabbed the man and embraced him!

He has been a consistent advocate of lenient treatment of Vietnam.

While a member of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs (1991-1993) he referred to POW/MIA Family Members and POW/MIA Activists as whiners, vultures and the lunatic fringe.

Although the Senate Select Committee concluded that we left men behind, McCain crossed party lines to help lift the embargo and normalize relations with Vietnam. "It's very important for us to recognize that the war is over, ... In my view, an improvement in relations between our two countries does a whole of lot things from a practical standpoint, but it also, from a spiritual standpoint indicates that we are ready to close that chapter," McCain said. (Many POWs and families of MIAs would strongly disagree that is time to close this chapter! Improving relations with Vietnam stood to benefit the McCain's family as they hold a large interest in the Budweiser Corporation. Surprise, surprise Bud was among the first large U.S. Corporations to enter Vietnam after relations were normalized.)

He ignored a letter from former POW, Capt. Eugene "Red" McDaniel, co-signed by 50 former POWs which asked that the embargo not be lifted and not to normalize relations and still McCain would not be swayed.

When the Missing Service Personnel Act of 1996 came on the Senate Floor for debate, Senator McCain called this bill "un-necessary" and "burdensome" even though the MSPA was sponsored by the then majority leader and the man who had considered asking John McCain to run with him, Sen. Bob Dole.

McCain managed to get the MSPA amended by removing criminal liability and several articles that were important to POW/MIA Family members.

McCain voted against campaign-finance reform in 1987/1988.. and didn't support the concept until 1990, just after the Keating story broke.

Until McCain began thinking about running for national office he was consistently anti-gay (he even spoke at a fundraiser for Oregon's anti-gay rights initiative) Now he says they are "not inclusive enough".

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Cindy is hot and rich, no wonder McCain dumped his ugly first one and their kids to reel her in with her dad's millions.

Cindy McCain's assets go beyond the family beer company.

She and her children own a minority stake in the Arizona Diamondbacks. The professional baseball team's chief executive, Jeff Moorad, and former majority owner Jerry Colangelo are McCain fundraisers. Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling, a former Diamondback player, appeared in a New Hampshire campaign advertisement for McCain.

Assets held by Cindy McCain alone or with her children also include Anheuser-Busch stock; two condominiums along the California coast worth a total of at least $3 million and Arizona investments in rental medical offices and a parking lot, according to property records and John McCain's latest financial disclosure reports.

John McCain has seven ch1ildren: two stepsons and a daughter from his first marriage, and two sons, a daughter and an adopted daughter from his second. McCain's financial disclosure reports do not identify the children who share assets with Cindy McCain.

Arizona is a community property state, so McCain may share possessions his wife didn't inherit, such as their primary home. Cindy McCain, through a family trust, sold the family mansion in Phoenix for $3.2 million and bought a $4.6 million Phoenix condo in 2006. The couple may also jointly own a condo in Arlington, Va., assessed at $847,800. McCain's campaign and Hensley declined to say whether the couple has communal property.

John McCain held a barbecue recently for reporters at a two-story cabin near Sedona, Ariz., that sits on 15 acres owned by his wife's family trust and a real estate partnership in her name. The property includes four single-family homes and is worth nearly $1.8 million.

Posted by: Scott, not the Fake Coward Snott | June 22, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi AuchiNadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi

Posted by: Songbird | June 22, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

http://journals.aol.com/sazzylilsmartazz/TheConscientiousObjector/entries/2008/02/18/john-mccain-and-adultery-...-can-we-trust-this-man/2290


Dan Nowicki, Bill Muller
The Arizona Republic
Mar. 1, 2007 10:33 AM

CHAPTER V: ARIZONA, THE EARLY YEARS

In 1979, John McCain came face to face with his future.

He was in Hawaii, attending a military reception. While there, he met a young, blond former cheerleader from Phoenix named Cindy Hensley.


McCain was immediately dazzled and spent the event chatting her up.

"She was lovely, intelligent and charming, 17 years my junior but poised and confident," McCain wrote in his 2002 book, Worth the Fighting For. "I monopolized her attention the entire time, taking care to prevent anyone else from intruding on our conversation. When it came time to leave the party, I persuaded her to join me for drinks at the Royal Hawaiian Hotel. By the evening's end, I was in love."

McCain recalls that both he and Cindy initially misled each other about their ages. McCain made himself a little younger, and Cindy made herself a little older. They found out their real ages when the local paper published them. McCain was 43, Cindy 25.

"So our marriage," McCain cracks, "is really based on a tissue of lies."

Early in the courtship, McCain called Cindy from Beijing, where he was traveling with a Senate Foreign Relations Committee contingent. Cindy was in the hospital recuperating from minor knee surgery. She thanked him for the lovely flowers in her room, sent from "John."

What McCain didn't tell Cindy was that he hadn't sent the flowers. They were from another John, who lived in Tucson.

"I never thanked him," Cindy notes with a grin.

After a whirlwind courtship, John asked Cindy to marry him. But there were some details to clear out of the way.

McCain needed a divorce from Carol, his wife of 14 years from whom he was separated. After McCain's dramatic homecoming from Vietnam, the couple grew apart. Their marriage began disintegrating while McCain was stationed in Jacksonville.

McCain has admitted to having extramarital affairs.

"If there was one couple that deserved to make it, it was John and Carol McCain," author Robert Timberg wrote in John McCain: An American Odyssey. "They endured nearly six years of unspeakable trauma with courage and grace. In the end it was not enough. They won the war but lost the peace."

In February 1980, less than a year after he met Cindy, McCain petitioned a Florida court to dissolve his marriage to Carol, calling the union "irretrievably broken."

Bud Day, alawyer and fellow POW, handled the divorce proceedings.

"I thought things were going fairly well, and then it just came apart," Day later recalled. "That happened to quite a few. . . . I don't fault (Carol), and I don't really fault John, either."

In his book Worth the Fighting For, McCain offers his own post-mortem on his failed marriage. He "had not shown the same determination to rebuild (his) personal life" as he had to excel in his naval career.

"Sound marriages can be hard to recover after great time and distance have separated a husband and wife

. We are different people when we reunite," McCain wrote. "But my marriage's collapse was attributable to my own selfishness and immaturity more than it was to Vietnam, and I cannot escape blame by pointing a finger at the war. The blame was entirely mine."

Carol, who remains on good terms with her former husband, generally has avoided reporters interested in hearing her side of the story.

She did briefly address her divorce to Timberg: "The breakup of our marriage was not caused by my accident or Vietnam or any of those things. I don't know that it might not have happened if John had never been gone. I attribute it more to John turning 40 and wanting to be 25 again than I do to anything else."

In the divorce settlement, McCain was generous with Carol, the mother of their daughter Sidney and two sons, whom McCain had adopted. Among other things, McCain gave Carol the rights to houses in Florida and Virginia and agreed to provide insurance or pay for additional treatment she was expected to require.

Except for signing the property settlement, Carol did not participate in the divorce. A court summons and other paperwork sent to her during the proceeding went unanswered.

In April 1980, the judge entered a default judgment and declared the marriage dissolved.

A month later, McCain married Cindy in Phoenix, where the couple would move. The wedding party included a couple of McCain's high-profile friends from Washington. Sen. William Cohen was the best man. Sen. Gary Hart was a groomsman.

Carol went her separate way, finding work as a personal aide to Nancy Reagan during the 1980 presidential primary campaign and later running the White House Visitors Office.

Click on below link to read more about this evil, ambitious primate and how he used his

In- Law's money to gain footage in politics.

Posted by: Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird McBush? What are you hiding? | June 22, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

No wonder why Obama gets so many $5 donations:
"I am a stupid inbred Con, like Cheney, my mother is actually my sister and my dad is my brother, my brother is my sister and my sister used to be my brother, my wife is my daughter and my other sister is married to my other brother we are just like those Born Again Freaks in Texas but more inbred."

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Allah is Great! Allah praise Mr McCain, your 100 years war, very brilliant plan, Please continue to send more your lovely American Trillions to us in Iraq.


Hello Rich American friends, please support Mr McCain, he and Mr Bush help us Iraqis very much with your America Trillions, and they make Oil prices very very nice now for our Islamic Muslim brothers, we in Iraq love your Mr McCain, a smart and rich man, he come visit sometimes, he promise to stay in Iraq for 100 years and more, he will give our people many American Trillion Dollars, Allah praise American Trillions, nsha'Allah it is good for America too, we have new American built Resort and Hotel to enjoy, you come to visit in our new American made Airports, we have new American made Hotels and new American made Roads and Ports for all Rich Americans to come and visit. We love to see nice Rich American lady like Cindy McCain, very nice to look at, Mr Bush and Mr McCain very good send many nice American women here, very nice to look, we Muslims can have 4 wives, Mr McCain can have 2 more wives, maybe 3 more, we don't count his first one, he have many kids like us Muslims, very strong and powerful man, please come and visit our new American made Resorts and Hotels and spend some American Dollars. We in Iraq praise Mr. McCain, his 100 year war in Iraq and send us many American Trillion Dollars, amazing idea, very smart Military leader for America, you must be very proud to have such smart leader. He will help build our nation with your wonderful American Trillions and we praise Mr McCain very much at our new American made Islamic Mosques and new American made Mosjids, I have a new one near my new American made Home, I drive there in my new Benz, I only have 2 new Benz now, American car not so good, I have new good American job paid with nice American Dollars. All young men gather at our new American made Wahabi Islamic Center School for new Islamic Fundamentalist teachings but we don't learn about attacks, no wory Rich American friends, mostly discuss good things like American women, no need to worry. Please vote for your smart Mr McCain, his 100 year plan for Iraq and American Trillions for Iraq will help America very much. He is good rich man. Your Mr Bush, also very smart man, make Oil Prices very, very good for our Islamic Muslim brothers, but not enough, please do not attack our Iranian brothers, they help Iraqi people very much. However, we do have some enemies to the West, they are also causing trouble and we need more of your powerful American weapons and American Trillions to fight back our enemies to the West. SAMI ALLAHU LIMAN HAMIDAH McCain means Allah hears and send praise to Mr McCain. Iraqis love American Trillions! Takbir! means Allah is Great! Praise Allah!

Posted by: Allah loves Mr McCain | June 22, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

The writer of this article is full of crap to say the least. MCCain is desperate so he wants 10 town hall meetings with Obama to attract more people to his meetings. Obama has his own town hall meetings, does not need McCain for that, so his campaign made a counter offer to McCain and they rejected it. What does that say about McCain's ability to negotiate? Zero. It's his way or no way. As far as the public financing, McCain has flip floped on this issue himself and we all know if he were in Obama's shoes he would not take it either. McCain is the biggest hypocrit, he thinks he gets a free pass on everything because of his service to the country. Unfortunately, there are plenty of equaly highly respected veterans who don't think much of him as a leader.

Posted by: Nicky | June 22, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Did you every wonder how this guy became a "war hero"? He did nothing heroic, but to be shotdown by small arms in his high tech heavy shielded heavy armored attack aircraft by a much inferior enemy. Then, the mighty industrial military complex gave this loser some medals for being stupid enough to be shotdown and captured. See, in America, you can be stupid and become a hero, too.

Google these to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

McCain Songbird
McCain Hero
McCain Adultery
McCain Arizona Mob
McCain Fortune

He killed 167 of his own because he was being stupid again, but his father was a 4 Star Admiral so they just transferred him to another ship.

http://www.picassodreams.com/picasso_dreams/2008/06/editorial-john.html
McCain's most horrendous loss occurred in 1967 on the USS Forrestal. Well, not horrendous for him. The starter motor switch on the A4E Skyhawk allowed fuel to pool in the engine. When the aircraft was "wet-started," an impressive flame would shoot from the tail. It was one of the ways young hot-shots got their jollies. Investigators and survivors took the position that McCain deliberately wet-started to harass the F4 pilot directly behind him. The cook off launched an M34 Zuni rocket that tore through the Skyhawk's fuel tank, released a thousand pound bomb, and ignited a fire that killed the pilot plus 167 men. Before the tally of dead and dying was complete, the son and grandson of admirals had been transferred to the USS Oriskany.

Posted by: Why is McCain called Songbird? | June 22, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Re:HE DOESN'T LIKE PEOPLE THAT MUCH, CAN'T YOU ALL SEE THAT?

That's good news, people are stupid and Obama would be well served to avoid them when possible, after all 29% of Americans apparently think Bush is doing a good job. I have 2 brothers, one of whom is dumb as a fencepost, the other one is just regular dumb.And just like America, I love them but there is no question that, like America, they are as dumb as screen doors in submarines.
As far as I can tell Sen. Obama is brilliant and just this once, let's elect the smart guy NOT the we drink beer with.

Posted by: RProulx | June 22, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Obama wants change. Without change, there can be no change. We should not fear change, but embrace it. Obama does not change for the sake of change. He wants change to change America for we need change. There will always be change, even if we don't want it. Obama can be the start of change in a country desperate for change. Wake up America! Change is now.

Posted by: Jim | June 22, 2008 9:45 PM | Report abuse

I am a stupid inbred Con, like Cheney, my mother is actually my sister and my dad is my brother, my brother is my sister and my sister used to be my brother, my wife is my daughter and my other sister is married to my other brother we are just like those Born Again Freaks in Texas but more inbred.

Posted by: Scott, the Real Scott, not the Fake Coward Snott | June 22, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Broder a liberal? Hahahahahahahahahaha!
He is a registered GOPer. The Dean of arse licking of the GOP elite.
Let's talk some sense to these "deans" and get them off on their next GOP-paid for free cruise:
"The Bush coalition is dissolving," pollster John Zogby told AFP.

"We have polling showing one-fifth of conservatives supporting Obama," he said.

As a Conservative Christian I am one of those who not only will not vote for McCain but will donate the maximum (even though I am poor) to see him defeated.
As McCain dissolves the GOP Broder tells us Obama is bad because he doesn't say, "Yes, Master McCain! I will allow you and your racist buddies like Floyd to dictate how I should debate you and how I should finance against the Rovian slime machine!" The days of the Broders are coming to an end. When McCain gets crushed and losses Florida, Ohio, NC, Virginia, Georgia and even Mississippi, Broder and the other NeoNut dinos are gonna be rounded up and set sail on their final GOP-supported cruise.

GOP Street for a New Conservative Majority

Posted by: Crush McLame | June 22, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

I am a stupid inbred Con, like Cheney, my mother is actually my sister and my dad is my brother, my brother is my sister and my sister used to be my brother, my wife is my daughter and my other sister is married to my other brother we are just like those Born Again Freaks in Texas but more inbred.

Posted by: Scott, the Real Scott, not the Fake Coward Snott | June 22, 2008 9:42 PM | Report abuse

The Dean needs to cash that buyout check, go join Brookings or AEI, and hit the lecture circuit. When I was in college in the 80s, my Government professor made his column mandatory reading, along with Jules Witcover and Jack Germond. I must say that during the time of Dutch and Tip, they were relevant, but the politics of today have past him by. The electorate has passed him by, as evidenced by the Bush bounce that we were to expect in 2007. I also think that Broder is indicative of the antipathy that the DC press have towards Obama, he does not play ball with them and does not give them access. Dean, enjoy the retirement,and Chris, stop sucking up

Posted by: Keith | June 22, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi
Nadhmi Auchi

Posted by: songbird | June 22, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

...and now the obamopaths turn on another liberal who dares to say that the emporer has no clothes.

I have said it repeatedly- if you believe in what he is for so strongly than how come the posts here are only a) negative assessments of anyone who disagrees in any way with him or b)rah-rah verbage about how great he is with no specifics about what he is expected to do. I am voting for him now- but who am I voting for? The person who ran to label HRC a "representitive of the old ways" by lying about NAFTA, campaign finance and negative campaigning or the guy who now changed his mind about tax codes, campaign finance, etc.?

Giving him a free pass neither helps the party or the country.

Leon

Posted by: NYC Leon | June 22, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Backing out of public financing (b/c mccain won't stop independent attack groups) and not doing townhalls (grandpa mccain's favorite format). these are the reasons i'm supposed to doubt obama?! c'mon chris, try a little harder.

Posted by: hope you're kidding | June 22, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

David Broder is an honest liberal journalist who has hit the nail on the head:
Barack Obama is a hypocritical opportunist.
Nadhmi Auchi is an Iraqi billionaire, who laundered money in London for Sudam Hussein, who loaned Tony Rezko 3.5 million dollars which was used in part to purchase the land next to Obama's house so that he could underpay for his home...what did Obama do for Rezko??????
Accepting public campaign financing prevents foreigners like Auchi from influencing our election by donating money to our candidates through American citizens, like Rezko...now a 6 time felon.
So, you see, Obama has removed himself from the constraints of the American Election System, allowing him to accept unlimited funding from the people he's running to defend us against: our enemies foreign and domestic.

Posted by: Scott (the real Scott, not the one posted by "Anonymous Coward") | June 22, 2008 8:41 PM

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

As a dyed in the wool Dem., I would NEVER vote for Obama, he has no experience---in anything, and he doesn't want the public to find that out-which they would, if he had to talk in a town hall setting-he'd get caught out saying things like "typical white person" and "president of Canada"-in other words, showing the true IGNORANT Obama, who doesn't have the experience of a mid-level office manager in leadership-of anything!

No, the kiddies just "like" him, that's all, because he can give a speech. But Obama is dangerous, because he doesn't stand for anything, anything at all, and he also doesn't really want to work at anything that's too difficult-it's not difficult to run for President, you just have to have a really good political strategy machine, be somewhat charismatic, have a campaign slogan ("change-yes we can" oooooh so ORIGINAL THAT!)AND THEN, JUST SHOW UP, 99% OF LIFE IS SHOWING UP. But as far as SUBSTANCE? KNOWLEDGE OF THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES THAT FACE THIS COUNTRY? INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE? Why, Obama has none, none at all, he'll just rely on other people for that-that's not too difficult.

And people? HE DOESN'T LIKE PEOPLE THAT MUCH, CAN'T YOU ALL SEE THAT? HE'S HARDLY A POLITICIAN TYPE-WHEN HE GETS CHALLENGED ON SOMETHING, WHEN HE FLIP-FLOPS ON AN ISSUE, HE GETS OFFENDED AND ANGRY, AS IF THE PUBLIC HAS NO RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT HE THINKS AND WHAT HE IS ABOUT-SO HE RETREATS-YOU CAN'T DO THAT AS A POLITICIAN.


WHICH IS WHY I SAY, HE IS A RICHARD M. NIXON IN THE MAKING-AND HE OUGHT NEVER TO BE ALLOWED NEAR THE WHITE HOUSE.

Posted by: farfalle44 | June 22, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Cillizza is a political hack.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

I have only the same old bile to repeat everyday just like our new leader Old McBush. I cannot think of new things to say so I repeat them day after day. I cannot think of anything new to do like Old McBush so I agree with him and the stupid Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Mass Murderer Serial Killer in Chief War Criminal. We should stay in Iraq forever and send them all the American dollars possible from American taxpayers. I am a stupid boring Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Fraud Con who voted in the stupid killer Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Mass Murderer Serial Killer in Chief War Criminal twice, I am guilty of rapes and murders in Iraq but I am Born Again and Again and Again, and now want another killer, the Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Lying Hypocrite Fraud Traitor McBush to win. I cannot really defend our killers and torturers but I hate anyone other than a white man to win. I am a racist bigot. I have no facts to bring just a lot of stupidity like all Born Again Racist Bigot Hypocrite Cons. We are all products of Satan, but we are Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Frauds and we all say we love Jesus but we really don't know what Jesue is all about. We just say that because all the other Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Frauds believe us. I am a patriot, I love America, I love God, I love Guns, I love Flag Pins, I love SUVs, I love Big Oil, I only buy American, I love to Shoot God's creatures just for fun, I love the Military because we get to kill more living things just for fun and sometimes we get to rape for fun too, women love to be raped every Born Again Hypocrite Con knows that especially Old McBush, I love to build a fence around the entire USA to keep all the Mexicans out I love to hate any one other than a White Man but I am not gay I hate gays. I always say Support Our Killer in Iraq. I always repeat the same old junk because we Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Fraud Cons are not that smart just look at our leaders now, we Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Fraud Cons but even we know how lousy and stupid they are but we are stupid so we still support them. I know all the same old cliches that we Born Again Hypocrite Cons always repeat because we are too stupid to think on our own and all the other ignorant Born Again Hypocrite Cons eat all of our Born Again Hypocrite Con Dung everyday, so we keep feeding it to them and they so fat on it. We are Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Cons in every way possible, and we know we are stupid and that we will all go straight to Hades so we continue to Hate anyone that is not like me.

Posted by: Scott, the Real Scott | June 22, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

I think Senator Obama will play the race card throughout his entire presidency. When things don't go his way, the subject of race will be an issue.

Posted by: Sandy | June 22, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Why is Old Songbird McBush sealing his Military Records? Kerry signed the 180 Waiver and release all of his. Yes, you can keep it sealed, but the Cons forced Kerry to release his, but there was nothing bad in his records. Old Songbird McBush refuses to sign the 180 Waiver. Why is Old Songbird McBush hiding his Military Records?

Google "McCain Hero", "McCain Traitor" "McCain Military Career" "McCain Songbird" "McCain Temper"

This website also has some clues for us.

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan08/mccain_military_record.htm

Old Songbird McBush has a lot to hide from the American People unlike Kerry. Old Songbird McBush is no hero, he is a Traitor and a Coward.

Better not to serve, than be a Traitor to your Country and the Military.

Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird "Make it a Hundred" McBush? What are you hiding?

If you love OLD Traitor McBush so much, just donate the maximum allowed to his campaign. He has a chance to win.

Posted by: Why is Old Songbird McBush refusing to release his Military Records? What is Old Songbird McBush hid | June 22, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

who the heck cares what broder and other habituates of DC cocktail party circuits think? broder is part of the problem, not part of the solution!

Posted by: jpsbr2002 | June 22, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

and oh Chris...how is that CW Broder set regarding Clinton voters ability to support Obama work out?

Maybe you should start acting like a journalist and question the CW? You may get something out of it...

Posted by: justmy2 | June 22, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Call me when the Bush Bounce the "Dean" predicted occured and then help me get to know the real Broder who breaks WaPo's ethical standards...

In case you haven't noticed, David Broder is out of touch, and has been for years now...if you stopped kissing up Chris, there could be a position waiting for you...

Posted by: justmy2 | June 22, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Broder's right, but the impact is on a more limited scale than he is implying. Only the opinionmaker class is noticing this backpedaling at the moment (I might add Obama's FISA cave-in to the list), but they eventually will have influence over the perceptions of BHO by the less-engaged.

Posted by: Threedy | June 22, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

David Broder has been against Obama since the day he announced for president. Obama is simply not "old school" enough for Broder, and it drives him crazy. Broder hasn't been relevant since Ford left office.

Posted by: Brad | June 22, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

David Broder is an honest liberal journalist who has hit the nail on the head:
Barack Obama is a hypocritical opportunist.
Nadhmi Auchi is an Iraqui billionaire, who laundered money in London for Suddam Hussein, who loaned Tony Rezko 3.5 million dollars which was used in part to purchase the land next to Obama's house so that he could underpay for his home...what did Obama do for Rezko??????
Accepting public campaign financing prevents foreigners like Auchi from influencing our election by donating money to our candidates through American citizens, like Rezko...now a 6 time felon.
So, you see, Obama has removed himself from the constraints of the American Election System, allowing him to accept unlimited funding from the people he's running to defend us against: our enemies foreign and domestic.

Posted by: Scott (the real Scott, not the one posted by "Anonymous Coward") | June 22, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Obsama may be a liar, and a black liberation subversive, BUT, he gives good teleprompter.

Posted by: Rudy Fondo | June 22, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Shame on you, Chris! You've sunk to a new low!

Posted by: KateLynn | June 22, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

This is all just a game. Everyone knows taht the President is merely a puppet. Poll after poll shows that more than 80 percent of Americans believe Bush should be impeached, yet the final candidates reuse to support impeachment. McCain voted to impeach Bush over the definition of oral sex, and yet lying to start two wars is just a swell idea according to McCain. Obama has no substance. None. the only reason he will win is because he is the only candidate that is talking about getting out of Iraq. He's not the candidate anyone wants (and we will never be allowed are own candidates, for our "choices" have been pre-selected for us), but he is the lesser of two evils.

Instead of debating the pros and cons of Obama and McCain, we should be taking back our country. Unfortunately, most people don't have the courage to stand up to evil. Even our military cannot stand up to George the Traitor Bush! The arm chair pundits are just as bad, wasting all their time on message boards instead of taking action. There are plenty of ways to instigate positive change. Voting for Obama or McCain is not one of them.

Posted by: Kelly | June 22, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I do not agree with Broder or your take on the issue. On the two issues for which Obama is being criticized, for partisan or purist reasons, are not particularly relevant, although that might not stop people from talking about them.

The issue of public financing, Obama could hardly be faulted for a no-brainer decision. Going with public financing would not only have amounted to unilateral surrender on a point of serious advantage, it would have left him handicapped in dealing with the Republican propaganda machine. As for purists arguing about the first candidate to decline etc. - look at what the 529's like swift-boat people are doing. Until you deal with that - there is no basis for someone to accept constraints unless there's no choice. My guess is the previous candidates have accepted it less for their commitment to public financing, and more to public financing being their best funding option.

The town-hall meetings stuff is hardly a big deal. Every presidential election, there's contentious negotiation about how much time the candidates spend debating. McCain makes the proposal, and declining that becomes the basis for criticizing Obama. Why this make you or David Broder question one candidate and not the other is unclear to me. Is there a critical analysis that his proposal is the right way to go about it? No.

Maybe this is where the 'McCain being media favorite' stuff fits in.

Posted by: kavm | June 22, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Just because Broder says it doesn't make it untrue. Obama is indeed a chameleon. His current positions bear no relation to the positions he took before he started running for President. And presumably, once in office, he'd revert to his Weatherman-friendly radical past. Make no mistake about it-America is in danger if this man wins.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies | June 22, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

MEMO TO OBAMA: THE DEM CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP
IS SELLING OUT THE CONSTITUTION:
WILL YOU?

The pathetic capitulation of the spineless Dem leadership on constitutional issues -- from warantless surveillance to the refusal to conduct hearings on other possible constitutional rights abuses -- begs the question: Et tu, Barack Obama?

The headlines rightly focus on telco immunity from lawsuits challenging government surveillance programs. But there are other constitutional rights issues that endanger our democracy, such as:

* The impact of electronic voting machines and the lack of a paper trail on the integrity of elections; and

* Possible Administration aid and support for KKK-style vigilante groups known as "GANG STALKERS" or "COMMUNITY STALKERS."

Read the following link and sublinks:

http://www.usenet-replayer.com/faq/alt.abuse.recovery.html

For info on the dangers posed by electronic voting:

http://www.wheresthepaper.org

While the media focus on the horse race, democracy is being threatened by suspect election apparatus and grassroots quasi-military vigilante squads that mete out "extra-legal" vigilante "justice" that makes a mockery of the rule of law.

Where is the national media on stories about our threatened democracy?

Yes, Fix readers, this has much to do with politics. Because the politics of fear and vigilantism is destroying our democratic freedoms at the grassroots, while the pundits play the "Who Won the Week" game.

Where are today's Woodwards and Bernsteins?

Posted by: scrivener | June 22, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Barry Hussein is what like to refer to as the Pied Piper. He wraps those big purple lips around his flute and plays his suductive tune while all the mindless gutter rats follow him around like he's the incarnation of the second coming. However, you know the conclusion of that little story is that all the little rodents drop off into the sea while dancing to his little tune.

Posted by: Nadeem Zakaria | June 22, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

So how do you know when arrogant liar empty
suit Barack Hussein Obama is Lying to us?
Okay so anytime Obama lips are moving then
you know Barack Hussein Obama is Lying!

Obama = Liar!

Obama = Loser!

Obama = Phony!

Obama = Zero!

Please vote NO on Barack Obama! NOBAMA!

Posted by: Sherry Kay 2004 | June 22, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

I have only the same old bile to repeat everyday just like our new leader Old McBush. I cannot think of new things to say so I repeat them day after day. I cannot think of anything new to do like Old McBush so I agree with him and the stupid Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Mass Murderer Serial Killer in Chief War Criminal. We should stay in Iraq forever and send them all the American dollars possible from American taxpayers. I am a stupid boring Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Fraud Con who voted in the stupid killer Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Mass Murderer Serial Killer in Chief War Criminal twice, I am guilty of rapes and murders in Iraq but I am Born Again and Again and Again, and now want another killer, the Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Lying Hypocrite Fraud Traitor McBush to win. I cannot really defend our killers and torturers but I hate anyone other than a white man to win. I am a racist bigot. I have no facts to bring just a lot of stupidity like all Born Again Racist Bigot Hypocrite Cons. We are all products of Satan, but we are Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Frauds and we all say we love Jesus but we really don't know what Jesue is all about. We just say that because all the other Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Frauds believe us. I am a patriot, I love America, I love God, I love Guns, I love Flag Pins, I love SUVs, I love Big Oil, I only buy American, I love to Shoot God's creatures just for fun, I love the Military because we get to kill more living things just for fun and sometimes we get to rape for fun too, women love to be raped every Born Again Hypocrite Con knows that especially Old McBush, I love to build a fence around the entire USA to keep all the Mexicans out I love to hate any one other than a White Man but I am not gay I hate gays. I always say Support Our Killer in Iraq. I always repeat the same old junk because we Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Fraud Cons are not that smart just look at our leaders now, we Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Fraud Cons but even we know how lousy and stupid they are but we are stupid so we still support them. I know all the same old cliches that we Born Again Hypocrite Cons always repeat because we are too stupid to think on our own and all the other ignorant Born Again Hypocrite Cons eat all of our Born Again Hypocrite Con Dung everyday, so we keep feeding it to them and they so fat on it. We are Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Hypocrite Cons in every way possible, and we know we are stupid and that we will all go straight to Hades so we continue to Hate anyone that is not like us.

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Barry Hussein is what like to refer to as the Pied Piper. He wraps those big purple lips around his flute and plays his suductive tune while all the mindless gutter rats follow him around like he's the incarnation of the second coming. However, you know the conclusion of that little story is that all the little rodents drop off into the sea while dancing to his little tune.

Posted by: Nadeem Zakaria | June 22, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Obama and McCain are on the same page with regard to both 'retroactive FISA immunity' and 'impeachment off the table'.

Posted by: old91A10 | June 22, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

Broder is so utterly predictable! It's conventional thinking like his that has gotten us into the mess we're in now. There's no need to read your blog if you're going to be another Broder.

Posted by: Rick S | June 22, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

The Obama campaign is being financed voluntarily by Us the people. That's public financing at its best. I'm really hoping that the American people are going to be smarter this time around and not rely on journalists to form their opinion.

Obama has demonstrated that while he's bringing change to Washington, he's not stupid. Why in the world would he want to accomodate McCain by debating him in the latter's favorite format? These 2 will debate several times after they are officially nominated by their respective parties. What's the rush? Would McCain want to debate Obama this early in Obama's favorite format if McCain were leading in the polls? How stupid would that be?

Posted by: Veronique | June 22, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse


Jaleh wrote:

"This should be required reading for anyone who wants to get to know Senator Obama:

"Remarks of Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama Against Going to War with Iraq...."

Eight of the ten Democratic members of the Illinois congressional delegation voted against the Iraq war resolution.

The one Democratic senator, Obama's mentor Dick Durbin, also voted against the resolution.

And by your thinking, all of them should be ahead of Obama to become President--more experienced and "wiser."

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

The last time the media and the opposition trotted out "how well do we know you" and "do you have enough experience" was in 1960. In that year the sub-text was John F Kennedy's age and religion. This year its Barack Obama's age and skin color.

Mr. Broder and other pundits need to junk "conventional wisdom" and their old-fashioned telephones, you know the ones with a crank.

Posted by: Peter | June 22, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

This should be required reading for anyone who wants to get to know Senator Obama:

Remarks of Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama Against Going to War with Iraq

Chicago, Illinois – October 2, 2002

Note: this speech was given 5 days before Bush gave his first “War” speech in Cincinnati on 10-7-02.

"I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.

I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.

I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.

I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That's what I'm opposed to. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.

I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear

rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.


Posted by: jaleh | June 22, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Damn, are you Broder's lover?

You sure kiss his ass.

Conventional wisdom?

Dude.

Posted by: Joe Wilson | June 22, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Broder is a has-been, so full of the most jejune observations that it is indeed perplexing why he has not yet been put out to pasture.

Posted by: Oomingmak | June 22, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

David Broder has gone off the deep end.

A note to Mr. Broder: AMERICANS UTTERLY DETEST THE WASHINGTON ESTABLISHMENT YOU REPRESENT AND DEFEND!

Mr. Broder is right to be nervous of an Obama presidency; the 'good old boys' would just have to kiss their influence and access goodbye.

Posted by: William J. | June 22, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse


pablo1 posted:

"All Obama has to do is frame it this way: 'I refuse to use your hard earned tax money to run for president."

Brilliant! Except Obama is on record supporting public funding of elections.

Of course he could just say that he was for public funding before he was against it.

Wind surfing time!

Posted by: WylieD | June 22, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

Why is Old Songbird McBush refusing to release his Military Records? What is he hiding?

Did Old Songbird McBush collaborate withe the Enemy?

Old Songbird McBush graduated #894 out of 899, Class of 1958, Astronaut Bruce McCandless, graduated #2, Class of 1958.

Old Songbird McBush's father and grandfather were 4 Star Admirals in the Navy

Old Songbird McBush received 28 medals while putting in only 20 hours of combat, some grunts on the ground fighting 7000 hours got no medals. His father the head of command of Asian operations at that time.

Old Songbird McBush killed 167 US Sailors on the USS Forrestal for 'Wet starting' his A-4 Aircraft (a common practice among young 'hot-dog' pilots). McCain was quickly (they were still counting the Forrestal dead) transferred to the USS Oriskany (the only Forrestal crewman to be immediately transferred) for his own safety because the crew of the USS Forrestal wanted his head.

Old Songbird McBush has a bust installed in his honor by the Vietnamese.


John McCain:
The Manchurian Candidate connection:

McCain was subjected to 5 ½ years of Soviet driven "brain perversion techniques."
Is he fit to be President and Commander in Chief of the military?
U.S. Veteran Dispatch
By Ted Sampley
March, 2008

For years, the mainstream news media has refused to stop idolizing the so-called straight talking maverick John McCain long enough to question the mental health consequences of the years he spent as a "special" prisoner of the communists in North Vietnam.

McCain, the presumptive Republican candidate for President, who could one day have his finger on the "red button," claims the communists subjected him to 5 ½ years of nonstop indoctrination sessions so intense that he attempted suicide.

Unfortunately for McCain, after his bomber was hit by anti-aircraft fire near Hanoi on October 26, 1967, he parachuted into the hands of an evil communist enemy who 7 years earlier had adopted Soviet methods of prisoner interrogation.

At that time, the Soviets were perfecting techniques designed "to put a man's mind into a fog so that he will mistake what is true for what is untrue, what is right for what is wrong, and come to believe what did not happen actually had happened."

Psychiatric Journals are flush with reports concluding that former POWs may remain entangled in "harsh psychological battles" with themselves for decades after returning home including difficulty in controlling intense emotions such as anger and stress.

In political circles, McCain, sometimes referred to as "insane McCain," is well known for having a "volcanic" temper which his colleagues say often erupts into vulgar language and personal insults.

Democrat Paul Johnson, the former mayor of Phoenix, experienced McCain's in your face temperament up close. "His volatility borders in the area of being unstable," Johnson said. "Before I let this guy put his finger on the button, I would have to give considerable pause."

The Journal of America Medicine reported in an 1996 article that being a former POW is associated with "increased cumulative incidence rates of chronic disorders of the peripheral nervous system, joints, and back and an increased hazard rate of peptic ulcer."

The 71 year-old McCain most certainly suffers pain and the weakening effects of chronic arthritis. He broke both arms when he was forced to eject after his bomber was hit. He says the Vietnamese periodically re-fractured his bones during years of interrogation and torture which rendered him permanently incapable of raising his arms above his head.

McCain has never been publicly vetted about what and how much medications he is taking. Aside from his anger and arthritic pain issues, McCain has had reoccurring bouts of malignant melanoma, a deadly form of cancer that can spread quickly throughout the body.

These facts alone beg the question on how a President McCain, in the absence of his campaign staff handlers, would deal with a snap decision that had to be made "if the White House phone rang at 3 a.m."

McCain's POW experience is unique. His communist captors considered him the "crown prince" of U.S. POWs because his father, Adm. John McCain, was commander of all U.S. forces fighting in Vietnam. Because the communists believed he was from a "royal family" and would when finally released return to the United States to an important military or government job, they held him for two years in "solitary confinement."

In February, Reuters news reported that McCain's former captors are expressing delight in the news of his nomination as Republican party Presidential candidate. "In the past Senator McCain has conducted activities that had a positive impact in bringing the two nations [Vietnam/United States] closer. That is a point that Vietnamese people who follow the current affairs do recognize," said retired North Vietnamese Colonel Nguyen Van Phuong, representing retired and present members of the Vietnamese communist military.

Since McCain was first elected to Congress 1982 (and later to the Senate), he and his staff have expended tens of thousands of hours pushing U.S. legislation favoring communist Vietnam. In 1995, McCain stood with Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. to give President Bill Clinton valuable political cover he needed to disregard the issue of missing U.S. POWs in Vietnam and remove the U.S. trade embargo against Vietnam.

No U.S. POW had any communication with McCain or knew where he was being held during at least 8 to 12 months of McCain's first two years of captivity. He has either been unable or unwilling to account for the months he was missing from the POW system.

Within days of McCain's shoot down and after being told the identity of his famous father, the Vietnamese rushed him to Gai Lam military hospital (U.S. government documents), a medical facility normally unavailable to treat U.S. POWs. McCain was kept at Gai Lam for six weeks under the control of Soviet medical specialist anxious to test the use of their "mind and behavior modification" drugs on such an important prisoner.

McCain said the communists were so effective with their interrogation techniques that he broke on the fourth day after being captured and began cooperating. "Demands for military information were accompanied by threats to terminate my medical treatment if I [McCain] did not cooperate. Eventually, I gave them my ship's name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant." Pages 193-194, Faith of My Fathers, by John McCain.

U.S. intelligence agents concluded in the early 1950s that Soviet intelligence (KGB) agents were experimenting on their prisoners with "mind control" techniques and behavior modification drugs

Allen W. Dulles, the newly confirmed CIA director acknowledged the dilemma in April 1953, when he told a gathering of Princeton alumni that "a sinister battle for men's minds" was underway. The Soviets, Dulles explained "have developed brain perversion techniques, some of which are so subtle and so abhorrent to our way of life that we have recoiled from facing up to them."

During the Cold War, the Soviets and the CIA began competing with secret experiments on prisoners aimed at honing the use of "chemical and biological materials capable of producing human behavioral and physiological changes." The experiments included isolation, sleep deprivation, humiliation, alternating with long hours of interrogation.

Since the Russians and Chinese (and our own CIA) have proven they can in a relative short time alter the basic emotional and behavior patterns of captives, it is fair to assume that McCain's unpredictable and often volatile temperament is directly related to his treatment as a 5 ½ prisoner of the communists.

The American public was first exposed to Soviet "brain perversion techniques" during Korean War when the communists launched a propaganda offensive featuring filmed and recorded testimony of captured U.S. servicemen confessing to war crimes including the use of germ warfare.

By the end of the Korean War, "70 percent of the 7,190 U.S. prisoners held in China had either made confessions or signed petitions calling for an end to the American war effort in Asia. Fifteen percent collaborated fully with the Chinese, and only 5 percent steadfastly resisted."

Military officials were especially alarmed when a significant number of the U.S. prisoners refused to recant their confessions as soon as they returned to the United States.

Beginning in 1960, KGB and Chinese agents directed the Vietnamese in establishing Vietnam's original interrogation guidelines for U.S. prisoners. They suggested interrogation techniques and issued specific intelligence requirements to be extracted during prisoner interrogations.

Official American position on POW confessions was that they were false and forced while privately expressing grave concern that the collaborations proved the communists had developed techniques that could "put a man's mind into a fog."

Psychologist have identified behavior in which a former prisoner emotionally bonds with an abuser as the Stockholm Syndrome. McCain was a strong advocate for prosecuting Bosnian, Yugoslavian and Iraqi war criminals and is adamantly opposed to any form of normalized relation with Cuba until it allows "free elections, human right organizations and a free and independent media."

Yet, McCain has resisted any kind of war crimes investigation of his former Vietnamese torturers. Prosecution and subsequent trials could bring to justice the Vietnamese torturers known by the American POWs as the Bug, Slopehead, the Prick, the Soft Soap Fairy, Rabbit, the Cat, Zorba and many others who were responsible for the murder in North Vietnam of at least 55 U.S. POWs and the brutal torture of hundreds of others.

In November 1991, Tracy Usry, chief investigator of the Minority Staff of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, testified before the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, that the Soviets interrogated U.S. prisoners of war in Vietnam. McCain became outraged, interrupting Usry several times, arguing that "none of the returned U.S. prisoners of war released by Vietnam were ever interrogated by the Soviets."

Former KGB Maj. Gen. Oleg Kalugin testified during the hearings that the KGB did interrogate U.S. POWs in Vietnam. Kalugin stated that one of the POWs worked on by the KGB was a "high-ranking naval officer," who, according to Kalugin, agreed to work with the Soviets upon his repatriation to the United States and has frequently appeared on U.S. television.

Col. Bui Tin, a former Senior Colonel in the North Vietnamese Army, testified on the same day, but after Usry, that because of his high position in the Communist Party during the war he had the authority to "read all documents and secret telegrams from the politburo" pertaining to American prisoners of war. He said that not only did the Soviets interrogate some American prisoners of war, but that they treated the Americans very badly.

McCain stunned onlookers at the hearing when he moved to the witness table and physically embraced Col. Tin as if he was a long, lost brother.

In 1949 Dr. Andrew Salter authored Conditioned Reflex Therapy, a pioneering work in the field of psychoanalysis. Ten years later, as Richard Condon was writing The Manchurian Candidate, he asked Dr. Salter to help "design" the brainwashed character for the book and subsequent movie.

More than 40 years later, in 1992, during the C-SPAN broadcasts of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, Dr. Salter watched the hearings from his New York City apartment. Salter became fascinated with McCain's overly aggressive and angry behavior toward witnesses, especially family members of men still missing in action. After a few hours he called a friend telling her, "the signs are all there, I'm afraid Senator John McCain has been brainwashed."

During the Senate Select hearings, McCain opposed all efforts by the POW/MIA families and activists to have the Select Committee expand its investigation to study how successful the Vietnamese, Soviet, Chinese and Cuban interrogation apparatuses were at exploiting American prisoners of war.

News pundants have elevated McCain to "the most popular national political figure in the country" by repeatedly describing him as a "war hero" based on his refusal accept a communist offer of "early release" from captivity.

What the media has carelessly refused to acknowledge is that the camp's senior ranking U.S. POW (SRO) had issued unquestionable orders that if a POW was to be released, "it would be the longest held prisoner" Because McCain was not the longest held POW, he would have faced a military court-marshal if he had accepted the offer.

It is incumbent upon McCain to prove to the American people that the 5 1/2 years he spent at the mercy of communist interrogators did not leave him with mental health issues that could hinder him in making snap decisions "if the White House phone rang at 3 a.m."

Is McCain taking any kind of pain or "nerve" medicines? If so, do the medicines cause emotional and physical reactions?

McCain was once treated for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which is said to get worse over time for former POWs, what is the status of his treatment?

Does McCain still harbor stress triggered suicidal tendencies?

Where was McCain and what was happening to him during the months he was missing from the POW camp?

McCain implies that he made only one propaganda broadcast for the communists, but Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers say he made over 30. How many did he make and what did he get in return?

Why does McCain still deny that the Soviets were involved in the interrogation of U.S. POWs in Vietnam?

Does McCain's former interrogators, the communist Vietnamese, Russians, Chinese and Cubans have anything in their secret intelligence files about his behavior as a prisoner with which they could blackmail a President John McCain?

Posted by: Why is Old Songbird McBush refusing to release his Military Records? What is he hiding? | June 22, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Nice suck-up to Broder, Chris.

What I don't understand is why people are busting Obama's chops over rejecting McCain's "townhall" proposal. This is just typical politiking--McCain wants to exclusively use the forum in which he performs best, Obama wants to use the forums where he will do better. Why is his refusal to fall for this a reflection of anything but good judgment? If he agreed to this and McCain's numbers improved, these same journalists would be taking him to task for being naiive enough to agree to it.

Posted by: Tom S | June 22, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Broder and the Washingpost.com, two peas in a pod. Maybe Senator McCain will even let you bounce on his knee and wipe the BBQ sauce from the corner of your mouths as you tell us again about how McCain is a maverick, whose brand is undamaged by his constant flip-flopping.

Posted by: Frank Booth | June 22, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

I do not trust Senator Obama. He lacks experience. His message of hope and change is empty. This new Utopia never will be implemented.

Posted by: mmarii | June 22, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

if the article is correct, to know even David Broder has joined the bandwagon of
describing the politics of our country
a 'brand' a brand!

That about says it all. The press is admitting that Obama is nothing more than a creature of the press a Max Headroom.

Posted by: JohnAdams1 | June 22, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

David Broder has made his & the WaPo's mark through his shameless double dipping at the trough of Lobbyists and furthering their purchased agendas.
Davis Broder is not; "required reading for anyone who calls himself a political junkie', rather he is a walking, talking infomercial that has been given free air time by the WaPo.
David Broder & the WaPo demonstrate why it is the print media has fallen behind even the Hannity's & O'Reilly's at Fox.
After a week in which we heard from leaders in print & TV journalism about the ethics of Tim Russert we learn first hand from the public editor at the WaPo, the total corruption of the political analysis in the print media as exemplified by David Broder.

"Required reading"?
Far from it.
What David Broder has become is a walking case study for journalism students and indeed the population at large in what happens when the institution of the free press has been corrupted by the influence of private interest money.

Posted by: paul94611 | June 22, 2008 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Only a stupid Con would say using taxpayers funds to finance a campaign is good when their losing candidate is going to be outraised by a couple of hundred million. Don't worry so much, Old McBush's wife has a couple of hundred million in the bank, too bad you losers won't get any of it.

Posted by: Obama White Born Again Man | June 22, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

If he opted into the public finance reform, many would have called him stupid. "How well do we know Obama"... give me a break Broder. It's this kind of journalism, that will propagate the mystery aspect. How well do we know any politician, until they have to make a decision. John McCain decided to vote for the war. Obama decided to against the war. What else do you need to know Broder? Boxers or briefs??!!!

Posted by: AB68 | June 22, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

David Broder
Liberal journalist, National Political Correspondent for the Washington Post.
Indymedia.com
Sorry guys, Brooks IS slightly to the right of center since he left the Weekly standard for the NY Times, but there's no getting around it- BRODER IS A LIBERAL...even one of your own sees the whorish hypocrisy of taking BIG MONEY- over 55% of Obama's campaign cash comes from Large donors and without the constraints of public financing, and claiming "the system is broken"...now it's on life support... who knows how much might come from Foreign sources, like our old friend London-based Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi, who financed Obama's house....Even a liberal can smell the stench...

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

As a woman I will never vote for this Pig.

McCain temper boiled over in '92 tirade, called wife a 'c^nt'

Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain's intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain's hair and said, "You're getting a little thin up there." McCain's face reddened, and he responded, "At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you c^nt." McCain's excuse was that it had been a long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long days.

Posted by: Obama White Conservative Woman | June 22, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama's father Barack Sr. married Obama's white mother while he was a student here from Kenya. Trouble was Obama's father already had several wives back in Kenya, which makes his marriage to Obama's mother a sham and illegal by US law. So what does that make Obama?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

The Broder column focuses on the most important character trait we look for in our presidents. Is this a person I can identify with and, more importantly, trust. Unfortunately, the primary season has brought out some very disturbing character traits in Senator Obama. He has shown himself to be a person who's essential character trait is: "The ends justify the means." I will not list all the character flaws because those who oppose him will agree; those who do not will parse and dismiss Obama's lapses in character. As humans we do not remember all we should, however, can anyone reading this honestly say they are not troubled that they do not know him well enough to identify with him and trust him?

Posted by: nobody | June 22, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

All Obama has to do is frame it this way: "I refuse to use your hard earned tax money to run for president."
Most people don't care about Nov. yet, and aren't paying attention.
The only reason McCain wants Town Hall's is that he thinks it is his strong suit. Not. No form of public speaking is his strong suit.
Obama just wants to share a stage with him.and people will see McCain age before their eyes!

Posted by: pablo1 | June 22, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

RWinLA: None of this is that surprising here on the Right coast. Broder and the Post and I suppose the Fix are in the tank for Hillary, the other war candidate. If they really want Obama to win it isn't apparent yet. The good news is the Democrats have an excellent candidate and the Republicans are stuck with the equivalent of Bush III.

Posted by: maxfli | June 22, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

I have only the same bile to repeat everyday on every blog. I cannot think of anything new to do like McBush so I agree with him and the stupid War Criminal, we should stay in Iraq forever and send them all the American dollars possible from American taxpayers. I am a stupid boring hypocrite Con who voted in the stupid killer War Criminal twice, I am guilty of rapes and murders in Iraq but I am born again and agian and again, and now want another killer, McBush to win. I cannot really defend our killers and torturers but I hate anyone other than a white man to win, I am a racist bigot, I have no facts to bring just a lot of stupidity like all born again Cons, we are all products of Satan, but we are born again and we all say we love Jesus but we really don't know what Jesue is all about, we just say that because all the other hypocrite Cons believe us. I am a patriot I love America I love God I love Guns I love Flag Pins I love SUVs I love Big Oil I only usually buy American I love to Shoot God's creatures just for fun, I love the Military because we get to kill more living things just for fun and sometimes we get to rape for fun too women love to be raped every Con knows that I love to build a fence around the entire USA to keep all the enemies out, I always repeat the same old junk because we Cons are not that smart just look at our leaders now, I know all the same old cliches that we born again Cons always repeat because we are too stupid to think on our own and all the other ignorant Cons eat all of our dung everyday and every time we say these same stupid things so we keep feeding it to them and they so fat on it. We are hypocrite Cons in every way possible, but we are born again Cons.

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/03/cindy-mccains-fortune-pro_n_94833.html

Now it is clear why he loves Tax Cuts for the Rich.

The Old McBush fortune has ties to the Mob as well. It is all inherited.

Google "McCain Fortune" "McCain Arizona Mob"

In government records, McCain is permitted to describe his wife's salary at Hensley as simply "more than $1,000" and, when listing her major assets, say only that they are worth "more than $1 million."

The reports show Cindy McCain has at least $9 million in assets on her own and at least $15 million with the McCain children. But those figures are virtually meaningless; her stake in Hensley & Co. alone almost certainly exceeds them by tens of millions of dollars.

Beverage industry analysts estimate Hensley's value at more than $250 million and its annual sales at $300 million or more. Hensley describes itself as the third-largest Anheuser-Bush wholesaler in the United States. It sold more than 23 million cases of beer last year and is among the nation's biggest beer distributors regardless of brand.

Cindy McCain's assets go beyond the family beer company.

She and her children own a minority stake in the Arizona Diamondbacks. The professional baseball team's chief executive, Jeff Moorad, and former majority owner Jerry Colangelo are McCain fundraisers. Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling, a former Diamondback player, appeared in a New Hampshire campaign advertisement for McCain.

Assets held by Cindy McCain alone or with her children also include Anheuser-Busch stock; two condominiums along the California coast worth a total of at least $3 million and Arizona investments in rental medical offices and a parking lot, according to property records and John McCain's latest financial disclosure reports.

John McCain has seven ch1ildren: two stepsons and a daughter from his first marriage, and two sons, a daughter and an adopted daughter from his second. McCain's financial disclosure reports do not identify the children who share assets with Cindy McCain.

Arizona is a community property state, so McCain may share possessions his wife didn't inherit, such as their primary home. Cindy McCain, through a family trust, sold the family mansion in Phoenix for $3.2 million and bought a $4.6 million Phoenix condo in 2006. The couple may also jointly own a condo in Arlington, Va., assessed at $847,800. McCain's campaign and Hensley declined to say whether the couple has communal property.

John McCain held a barbecue recently for reporters at a two-story cabin near Sedona, Ariz., that sits on 15 acres owned by his wife's family trust and a real estate partnership in her name. The property includes four single-family homes and is worth nearly $1.8 million.

It's clear the rustic retreat is considered family property. The cabin features artwork by the McCain children and editorial cartoons depicting McCain. A doormat reads: "GEEZER (formerly known as `Stud Muffin') Lives Here." The amenities include a soda fountain and, of course, a Budweiser beer tap.

Posted by: Obama White Conservative Man | June 22, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

I think it is disingenuous of Broder, The Fix and the rest of the co-called punditry to now question Mr. Obama's campaign tactics AFTER he has all but won the Democratic Party's nomination.

Where were all of these questions in January and February? Where was the commentary about Obama's relatively weak position among the American electorate during the primaries? You guys have done Obama, the Democratic Party and the country a disservice by giving the Obama campaign a pass until now.

It seems to me like we have been set-up to fail in November. Somehow the party has nominated a novice who is now in danger of 'damaging' his brand. And, although Mr. McCain has morphed himself into McBush he 'benefits from a long-established reputation as a man who says what he believes.' What a bunch of puke! It seems the Post is now in the business of rallying the faithful for the dinosaur's campaign.

Broder, the Post and The Fix should all be ashamed. Apparently the fruits of all the advertising mega-bucks you are receiving from Republican leaning corporations and interests is actually favorable coverage for the GOP in the so-called newsroom.

Get out of the political campaign business and back into journalism! That is if you haven't sold the news pages permanently to the corporations.

Posted by: RWinLA | June 22, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama may need to compromise on some issues. There is political reality here. However, if Obama does not make it into the White House, then no real reform will occur. Political Science 101 must be revisited for all who would fault Obama for non-character related decisions that he must make to win the prize. Without Obama in the White House, we will get an apparent Bush clone. McCain's flip flops are particularly disturbing because they involve the man's political compass.

Posted by: Earl C | June 22, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Did you every wonder how this guy became a "war hero"? He did nothing heroic, but to be shotdown by small arms in his high tech heavy shielded heavy armored attack aircraft by a much inferior enemy. Then, the mighty industrial military complex gave this loser some medals for being stupid enough to be shotdown and captured. See, in America, you can be stupid and become a hero, too.

Google these to learn more about Old Songbird McBush

McCain Songbird
McCain Hero
McCain Adultery
McCain Arizona Mob
McCain Fortune

He killed 167 of his own because he was being stupid again, but his father is a 4 Star Admiral so they just transferred him to another ship.

http://www.picassodreams.com/picasso_dreams/2008/06/editorial-john.html

McCain's most horrendous loss occurred in 1967 on the USS Forrestal. Well, not horrendous for him. The starter motor switch on the A4E Skyhawk allowed fuel to pool in the engine. When the aircraft was "wet-started," an impressive flame would shoot from the tail. It was one of the ways young hot-shots got their jollies. Investigators and survivors took the position that McCain deliberately wet-started to harass the F4 pilot directly behind him. The cook off launched an M34 Zuni rocket that tore through the Skyhawk's fuel tank, released a thousand pound bomb, and ignited a fire that killed the pilot plus 167 men. Before the tally of dead and dying was complete, the son and grandson of admirals had been transferred to the USS Oriskany.

Posted by: Why are you hiding your Military Records, OLD Songbird Traitor McBush? | June 22, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

David Broder
Liberal journalist, National Political Correspondent for the Washington Post.
Indymedia.com
Sorry guys, Brooks is slightly to the RIGHT of center since he left the Weekly standard for the NY Times, but there's no getting around it- BRODER IS A LIBERAL...even one of your own sees the whorish hypocrisy of taking BIG MONEY- over 55% of Obama's campaign cash comes from Large donors and without the constraints of public financing and claiming "the system is broken"...now it's on life support... who knows how much might come from foreign sources, like our old friend London-based Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi, who financed Obama's house....Even a liberal can smell the stench...

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

We know we are on the correct track with Old Songbird McBush. This guy killed 167 sailors on the USS Forrestal. Another Killer like the Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Lying Mass Murderer Serial Killer in Chief War Criminal

Google these to learn more about our Old Songbird McBush

McCain Traitor
McCain Hero
McCain USS Forrestal
McCain Flip Flops
McCain Temper

Posted by: Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird McBush? What are you hiding? | June 22, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Why wasn't this question asked LONG before now? We don't know him at all -- let alone trust him? Forget it! He was afraid to debate Hillary Clinton and he is afraid to take on John McCain. He is afraid he will show what an inexperienced jackass he really is!

Posted by: bevvyjean | June 22, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

If Obama had accepted public funds, Broder would have been crowing about how NAIVE Obama is and how stupid it was. Obama is a realist. He has to work within the system we have which is broken and accepting these funds when he already has more money than that would be idiocy. He is a tough, realist and we Dems need somebody tough to fight the Republican smear machine which we all know is considerable. it is what they do best.

Posted by: Lynne | June 22, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

The two decisions referenced in the Broder column do not mean much to me in terms of trust for Obama as a thinking man's politician. Neither decision affects me. McCain's flip flops on the President's tax cuts, off-shore drilling, and political decision that make him look more like Bush each and every day does affect me.

The fact that Obama is willing to state reasons for his decisions is very important to me. Even without his expressed reasons, the reasons would be very clear to me. Why not let Obama run the largest truly "publicly funded" (not federally funded) campaign ever run in this country. He shows fiscal conservatism by not allowing the Federal deficit to grow. There is also absolutely no need to give McCain a free ride in the townhall meetings. In reality, Obama is doing McCain a big favor. There is no way that McCain can benefit by appearing in townhall meetings with Obama. Obama is a master at townhall meetings. McCain has already shown his vulnerability in such a forum.

Let's face it, Obama's willingness to tackle the tough issues by showing us his thinking process demonstrates the characteristics of a true leader. McCain's bent is to try to find positions that he thinks will resonate with voters outside his small group. He has already admitted that he has little basis on which to deal with economic issues.

It is high time for the press to rise to Obama's standard and address the American electorate as more than elementary school children who are easily swayed by emotions.

Posted by: Earl C | June 22, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFhhvaIXA9A
Comment by Is this true, Old Songbird Traitor? Why are you hiding your Military Records?


Google "McCain Songbird" "McCain Hero" "McCain Traitor" "McCain Adultery" "McCain Temper" "McCain Flip Flops"

http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcainmdl.htm

Navy Awarded McCain Medals For Valor Without Required Eyewitnesses

Presidential candidate John McCain is being hailed by the press as a genuine "American war hero" and says he has the medals to prove it.

For 5 ½ years as a POW (three of which he says were spent in solitary confinement), the U.S. Navy awarded McCain a Silver Star, a Legion of Merit for Valor, a Distinguished Flying Cross, three Bronze Stars, two Commendation medals plus two Purple Hearts and a dozen service medals.

Former POW McCain claims his experience as a prisoner of the communists better qualifies him to be President of the United States. He has forged that experience along with his military record deeply into his campaign.

But, Navy regulations say two eyewitnesses are required for any award of heroism and McCain has none for the valor awards he received.

Are McCain's Awards Heroism Valid?

The following narrative is what the Navy Said McCain did from October 27, 1967 to December 8, 1967 to earn a Silver Star.

Posted by: Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird McBush? What are you hiding? | June 22, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

how well do we know Broder?

the hypocrisy of the msm is staggering ...

Posted by: sjw | June 22, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

S*ck me Scotty

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-stark/the-coming-storm-or-why-m_b_107148.html

Google McCain Womanizing


Several weeks ago, I was clicking through John McCain's presidential campaign website. In the "Events" section I found a listing for a June 13 Townhall Meeting in Pemberton, New Jersey; I decided to attend.

McCain did not pick me out of the crowd to ask a question on live TV, but I was able to speak with him as the event wound down.

This is how it went:

Right after the speech, I knew McCain would work the rope line. Since I was in the front row, it only took me about three steps to get there.


I spoke loudly:

"Senator McCain - I noticed you aren't wearing your flag lapel-pin. May I give you mine?"

McCain: "Yes, sir, you can" (what else was he going to say? - he really wasn't wearing a flag pin.)

now I had him front and center...

"Senator, I spent four years in the Marines"

McCain: "Thank you for your service."

"Oh, no sir, thank you for yours. I have a feeling this is as close as I will ever come to pinning a medal on you." (said as I'm fastening the lapel pin) "Senator - you know our motto is Semper Fidelis - always faithful?"

McCain: "Oh yes, I do"

"Well have you always been faithful to Cindy McCain?"

Deer-in-the-mother-f*cking-headlights.

McCain: "Oh no... that's not what I'm going to talk about."

"Have you been faithful to your wife? You won't answer? C'mon - how 'bout a little of that straight talk?"

(crowd beginning to get angry - hissing)

McCain: "Young man, I will tell you that I have a son serving in Iraq in the Marines."

"Yes - I know. I know a lot about you. Have you cheated on Cindy McCain? Why won't you answer?"

McCain turned away.

Posted by: Obama White Conservative Woman | June 22, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

I'm still trying to figure out why Obama should give McC 10 town meetings. No presidential campaign has ever had more than 3 debates, so why is there even a hint of controversy. McC is just trying to get an audience. He can't pull together more than 200 people to watch him at one time. And that would be on a good day. However, it would be interesting to see how many time McC flip flops on the issues. After voting with Bush 95% of the time, changing his views on taxation and oil drilling, he is becoming the tried and true Neocon we have come to know and hate.

Posted by: Lynne | June 22, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Posted yesterday...and you're still an anonymous coward and a pathetic loser-

Hey Anonymous Coward who posted the McCain songbird blog, I hope you paid your taxes this year...John McCain appreciates your support of his campaign...that's the American way. We all pay our taxes and then support both candidates from the proceeds. Then MOVEON.ORG, etc. gives millions to advertise for the Democrat and Republican 527's place ads for the Republican. Now we have a precedent...America is writing a blank check for Obama. You see he believes in CREATIVE FINANCING...that's how he bought a 2.5 million dollar house and property for half of its value...through an Arab millionaire who loaned it to Rezkos's wife who overpaid for the adjoining property and sold it back to Obama...a "Bonehead Move", according to Obama...sounds like we have to watch every dollar coming in to make sure no more arab money influences our election in another "Bonehead Move."

Let's just say that calling an American Hero, fighting for his country, whose arms were broken and then rebroken, left to die in a pool of his own blood and feces,inorder to obtain a statement a songbird, is the deplorable tactic of a scared little coward who would have folded like a deck of cards at word one...your anonymity speaks volumes loudly!

Posted by: Scott | June 21, 2008 10:37 PM

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 4:42 PM | Report abuse

BHO is a product of Chicago's back room politic's as is surfacing now! It will get worse!

Posted by: HC | June 22, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Google these

McCain Keating Five
McCain Temper
McCain Traitor

McCain's escape from the Keating debacle was nothing short of miraculous, probably the activity for which he most deserves a medal. After all, he took more than $100,000 in campaign contributions from the swindler Keating between 1982 and 1988, while simultaneously log-rolling for Keating on Captitol Hill. In the same period McCain took nine trips to Keating's place in the Bahamas. When the muck began to rise, McCain threw Keating over the side, hastily reimbursed him for the trips and suddenly developed a profound interest in campaign finance reform.

The pundits love McCain because of his grandstanding on soft money's baneful role in politics, thus garnering for himself a reputation for willingness to court the enmity of his colleagues.

In fact colleagues in the Senate regard McCain as a mere grandstander. They know that he already has a big war chest left over from his last senatorial campaign, plus torrents of pac money from the corporations that crave his indulgence, as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee. Communications companies (US West, Bell South, ATT, Bell Atlantic), have been particularly effusive in McCain's treasury, as have banks, military contractors and UPS. They also know he has a rich wife and the certain knowledge that his supposed hopes for an ending to soft money spending will never receive any practical legislative application.

Posted by: Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird McBush? What are you hiding? | June 22, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

I generally have great respect for David Broder's work and, as a politically independent middle-of-the-roader, find his views and analysis helpful and informative. However, in this case I think he has treated John McCain with kid gloves.

By treating McCain's abandonment of his ideals and principles over the past eight years in his quest for approval by the Republican base as being on a par with Obama's rejection of the town hall format and opting out of the public campaign financing program, Mr. Broder has treated a fundamental character flaw in McCain as being on an equal plane as his questioning of two legitimate tactical decisions by Obama.

In other words: Huh?

To be sure, the questions Mr. Broder raises about Obama's campaign financing decision are worthy of reflection, as Obama did state previously that he would renounce private funds in favor of public financing and the attendant spending limits that come as part of the package. But to equate Obama's tactical decision to utilize one of his greatest advantages in his campaign for the highest, most powerful office on the planet with a character flaw is far off the mark. Does anyone believe there is a politician anywhere who would deny himself or herself the benefit of a potentially decisive advantage? Show me such a politician, and I will show you the big November loser.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that there is nothing illegal, unethical, or immoral in opting out of the public campaign financing program. It is an entirely legitimate option. So what's the problem here?

As for the town hall format, where is it etched in stone that EITHER candidate is obligated to agree to whatever format is proposed by his opponent? Using that logic, perhaps Obama (a former editor of the Harvard Law Review) should challenge McCain to an in-depth debate of the constitutionality of secret, warrantless wiretapping. Would McCain's certain rejection of such a proposal be evidence of questionable character? Of course not. It would be a smart tactical decision, just as Obama's refusal to be drawn into the town hall format is a smart tactical decision. No more, no less.

So, again, what is the problem here?

Mr. Broder should know better than to base his analysis on red herrings -- but this time around, that is exactly what he did. His work is usually more sound than that.

Posted by: David | June 22, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Google these

McCain Traitor
McCain Songbird
McCain Adultery


Top Cop Says McCain Was Never Tortured
Former Vietnam vet with top secret clearance - Republican frontrunner is "a lying skunk"

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Thursday, February 7th, 2008

A former Vietnam veteran with top secret clearance says he has personally spoken to numerous POW's who dispute John McCain's claim that he refused to provide information after he was captured and tortured in Hanoi, saying that in fact McCain's code-name was "Songbird" because of his willingness to tell all to avoid torture.

Jack McLamb served nine years in secret operations in Cambodia and other nations before going on to become one of the most highly decorated police officer's in Phoenix history, winning police officer of the year twice before taking a role as a hostage negotiator for the FBI.

"I know a lot of Vietnam veterans and a few POW's and all the POW's that I've talked to over the years say that John McCain is a lying skunk," McLamb told the Alex Jones Show. "He never was tortured - they were there in the camp with him and then when he came in....he immediately started spilling his guts about everything because he didn't want to get tortured," said McLamb, contradicting the official story that McCain only offered his name, rank, serial number, and date of birth.

"The Vietnamese Communists called him the Songbird, that's his code name, Songbird McCain, because he just came into the camp singing and telling them everything they wanted to know," said McLamb.

McLamb said the POW's told him that McCain had sustained two broken arms and a leg injury from not pulling his arms in when he bailed out of his A-4 Skyhawk that was shot down over the Truc Bach Lake in Hanoi.

The POW's said that McCain made 32 propaganda videos for the communist North Vietnamese in which he denounced America for what they were doing in Vietnam.

"They have these sealed now, our government has these sealed, we can't get to it, they have it classified," said McLamb, adding that in truth "the POW's hate John McCain."

It is commonly accepted that McCain was treated better than other POW's and afforded medical care immediately after the North Vietnamese discovered that his father was a top admiral.

Several Vietnam veterans groups do solely exist to expose McCain's abandonment of veteran's interests as well as his lies about being tortured, including Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain and U.S. Veteran Dispatch.
Doubts over McCain's alleged war hero status and his support to curtail efforts to look for missing POW's contributed to torpedoing his presidential campaign in 2000 and those same questions will undoubtedly surface again should the Senator win the Republican nomination.

Posted by: Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird McBush? What are you hiding? | June 22, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Google McCain Adultery


http://www.usvetdsp.com/feb08/mccain_trust.htm

Ethics complaint over attacking a grieving woman
In 1984, as a Member of the House of Representatives, John McCain gave a speech in Congressman Duncan Hunter's San Diego district.

At the end of the speech a woman approached Representative McCain and introduced herself as the wife of a Marine pilot shot down and still missing in Southeast Asia. She asked Congressman McCain if he could help her find information on her husband's case.

Eyeing the attractive woman, the married McCain replied, Why don't you ride with us and have dinner?

Congressman Hunter and an aide sat in the front seat of the car; McCain and this woman in the back as they drove to Hunter's house. Not long into the short ride, McCain ran his hand up the woman's skirt. Stunned, she pushed him away and resisted his advances. He continued trying to grab her, even after she moved as far away from him as possible.

As this time, McCain's wife, Cindy, was pregnant.

Disgusted over his behavior she left as soon as they arrived at Duncan Hunter's place. She promptly told the two Vietnam veterans who had originally encouraged her to try to see McCain about her missing husband's case that night.

Posted by: Obama White Conservative Woman | June 22, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

McCain Abandons Concerns Over Bush Tax Cuts To Get 2008 Nomination

"I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief."-John McCain, May 2001

"He voted against tax cuts in 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2005, and this year he's for the tax cuts in the reconciliation bill. It looks like he did it for political reasons."
-Grover Norquist, on McCain's conversion, now

If you need further evidence that John McCain will do anything to get elected president, note his conversion to the right wing orthodoxy on Bush's tax cuts. McCain opposed the tax cuts previously, but with a need to convince the base that he is one of them, McCain has tossed aside his previous concerns about who benefits from the tax cuts, and is now appearing to endorse making these tax cuts permanent, at a time when the gap between rich and poor is wide, and at a time of incredible deficits.

McCain's reading evidently led him in an unexpected direction, to a position opposite the one he'd held a few months earlier. By the time the 2000 campaign began in earnest, McCain had abandoned the flat tax in favor of a "deficit-reduction" plan that provided small tax breaks to middle-income taxpayers but otherwise left untouched the increases in marginal rates that had been imposed under Clinton and Bush the Elder. "In fact," he said in another interview in 2000, "the program that I have gives them [rich folk] a slight tax increase." From this revised position it was a short hop to what free marketers and tax cutters consider his most unforgivable act of deviationism: his vote against President George W. Bush's tax-rate cuts on capital and income in 2001 and 2003. He was one of two Republican senators to defy Bush in 2001, and one of three in 2003.

Posted by: Obama White Conservative Man | June 22, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Why is denying McShame any gifts (staying in public financing or town hall meetings) make Obama a bad person?

Broder may have been something... before electricity but I don't get the fanfare for everything he says nowadays. Broder == Novak

Posted by: Roofelstoon | June 22, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama has been endorsed by Nation of Islam leader and white and America-hater Louis Farrakhan. Obama has been endorsed by the terrorist group Hamas openly and Al Qaeda is rooting for him to win. Obama has been endorsed by Irans terrorists, Mullahs and their president who wants to destroy the 'big satan' the USA and the 'little satan' Israel. Obama has been endorsed by the New Black Panther Party that hates all whites and America. Obama has been endorsed by the white and America-haters Jerimiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, and US terrorist Weather Underground leader Michael Ayers. Now why would some American voters be dumb enough to vote for a US Prsidential candidate that's loved by Americas enemies? Why would white voters be dumb enough to vote for a presidential candidate that has shown he hates white people by being a 20 year member of the black version of the KKK?

Posted by: madhatter | June 22, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Allah is Great! Allah loves you Mr McCain, your 100 years war, very brilliant plan, Please continue to send more your lovely American Trillions to us in Iraq.

Hello Rich American friends, please support Mr McCain, he and Mr Bush help us Iraqis very much with your America Trillions, and they make Oil prices very very nice now for our Islamic Muslim brothers, we in Iraq love your Mr McCain, a smart and rich man, he come visit sometimes, he promise to stay in Iraq for 100 years and more, he will give our people many American Trillion Dollars, Allah praise American Trillions, nsha'Allah it is good for America too, we have new American built Resort and Hotel to enjoy, you come to visit in our new American made Airports, we have new American made Hotels and new American made Roads and Ports for all Rich Americans to come and visit. We love to see nice Rich American lady like Cindy McCain, very nice to look at, Mr Bush and Mr McCain very good send many nice American women here, very nice to look, we Muslims can have 4 wives, Mr McCain can have 2 more wives, maybe 3 more, we don't count his first one, he have many kids like us Muslims, very strong and powerful man, please come and visit our new American made Resorts and Hotels and spend some American Dollars. We in Iraq praise Mr. McCain, his 100 year war in Iraq and send us many American Trillion Dollars, amazing idea, very smart Military leader for America, you must be very proud to have such smart leader. He will help build our nation with your wonderful American Trillions and we praise Mr McCain very much at our new American made Islamic Mosques and new American made Mosjids, I have a new one near my new American made Home, I drive there in my new Benz, I only have 2 new Benz now, American car not so good, I have new good American job paid with nice American Dollars. All young men gather at our new American made Wahabi Islamic Center School for new Islamic Fundamentalist teachings but we don't learn about attacks, no wory Rich American friends, mostly discuss good things like American women, no need to worry. Please vote for your smart Mr McCain, his 100 year plan for Iraq and American Trillions for Iraq will help America very much. He is good rich man. Your Mr Bush, also very smart man, make Oil Prices very, very good for our Islamic Muslim brothers, but not enough, please do not attack our Iranian brothers, they help Iraqi people very much. However, we do have some enemies to the West, they are also causing trouble and we need more of your powerful American weapons and American Trillions to fight back our enemies to the West. SAMI ALLAHU LIMAN HAMIDAH McCain means Allah hears and send praise to Mr McCain. Iraqis love American Trillions! Takbir! means Allah is Great! Praise Allah!

Posted by: Allah is Great, Allah loves you Mr McCain, your 100 years war, very brilliant plan, Please continue | June 22, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Too bad, Old Songbird "Make it a Hundred" McBush is done.

:-) He has over 1.5 million donors, not counting Hillary's. He can easily raise $300 million. How much can Old McBush raise?


Gas Was $1.47, then the Born Again Faith Based Pro Life Lying Bigot Big Oil Coward WMD Anti-Science Mass Murderer War Criminal Serial Killer in Chief Took Office

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

As a recovering Obamaphile (donor and weary canvasser), I am unfortunately not surprised by the BIG LIE on accepting public financing. The truth for those whose liberal bias hasn't addled their judgment completely is that Barack got many of us longing for real political reform to back him (despite his thin resume) by brave talk of political reform (remember televising the health care debate on C-Span? among other suggestions).

His public financing stand (the sine qua non of true political reform) was a core commitment for any candidate who wants to maintain a shred of credibility on removing the obscene amount of money that drives all politics. Not only does he (probably) fatally injure the cause of public financing for a generation or more, but adds the insult to our intelligence that he is doing it all FOR THE SAKE OF THAT VERY REFORM. Now if that isn't a Clintonesque notion, then I don't believe the spot on the dress was really ever there.

It was clear even before the public financing decision that Obama had been avoiding any real honesty about the difficult choices we will face on energy, health care, Iraq among others. Instead he gave us traditional liberal pablum - no real sacrifice except for just a few of the very rich.

Obama's disingenuousness on this occasion underlines an ugly pattern as David Brooks pointed out in his NY Times piece this weekend. He went from throwing over his pastor (who he could "no more disown than my own grandmother") to throwing over even his church (because he didn't want to be an inconvenience to fellow congregants, right?). Really now, don't we all know that Obama knew perfectly well the kinds of things his pastor was saying (whehter or not he was in the pew on specific Sundays)? He got away with any flat out lies on the subject because NO ONE, not even the few conservative media types who he gave interviews to, asked him the key questions - didn't he HEAR ABOUT the sermons, and what did he ever DO ABOUT them -- as in trying to talk his pastor out of such outrageous notions.

Which raises the whole issue of whether Obama ever really had a personal commitment to the church in the first place; or was it just a stepping stone in a carefully orchestrated political strategy to get known and find friends in Chicago's south side to launch a political career?

For some of us who jumped on the Obama bandwagon, heartened by his rhetoric and looking for the anti-Bush and un-Hillary, this is a time for some soul-searching. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice... We've been down that road before with the Clintons. I guess Barack is counting on us having nowhere else to go. Except back to the politics of win at all costs because winning is prerequisite to all the good things I claim I will do -- even if maybe I can't do them at all since I never really campaigned on them (since I wanted to play it safe to get elected) and I can't be too controversial once elected (because then I might not get re-elected). And of course my election and re-election are paramount because otherwise that other guy (who's even worse than me) would get elected. Such is the sorry state of our politics today. It's almost enought to make you vote for Nader. But probably not this time.

The least that Obamaphiles should tell his campaign is that it would be nice if he didn't completely sell out in order to get elected since he probably doesn't have to. Maybe he could stop at this one BIG sell out. After all he's won the bank. Maybe he would draw the line at becoming even more politically abject.

Posted by: fjwas | June 22, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

McCain Abandons Concerns Over Bush Tax Cuts To Get 2008 Nomination

"I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief."--John McCain, May 2001

"He voted against tax cuts in 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2005, and this year he's for the tax cuts in the reconciliation bill. It looks like he did it for political reasons."
--Grover Norquist, on McCain's conversion, now

If you need further evidence that John McCain will do anything to get elected president, note his conversion to the right wing orthodoxy on Bush's tax cuts. McCain opposed the tax cuts previously, but with a need to convince the base that he is one of them, McCain has tossed aside his previous concerns about who benefits from the tax cuts, and is now appearing to endorse making these tax cuts permanent, at a time when the gap between rich and poor is wide, and at a time of incredible deficits.

McCain's reading evidently led him in an unexpected direction, to a position opposite the one he'd held a few months earlier. By the time the 2000 campaign began in earnest, McCain had abandoned the flat tax in favor of a "deficit-reduction" plan that provided small tax breaks to middle-income taxpayers but otherwise left untouched the increases in marginal rates that had been imposed under Clinton and Bush the Elder. "In fact," he said in another interview in 2000, "the program that I have gives them [rich folk] a slight tax increase." From this revised position it was a short hop to what free marketers and tax cutters consider his most unforgivable act of deviationism: his vote against President George W. Bush's tax-rate cuts on capital and income in 2001 and 2003. He was one of two Republican senators to defy Bush in 2001, and one of three in 2003.

Today McCain explains those votes in terms that would please Pete Peterson's school of balanced-budgets-first. The Bush tax cuts were unacceptable, he says in hindsight, because the revenue lost wasn't matched by reductions in federal spending. Even Kemp, the happy supply-sider who considers federal deficits a mere annoyance, agrees that this line of reasoning has a long and honorable pedigree in traditional Republican economics. But in 2001 and 2003, McCain scarcely mentioned the budget deficit in interviews explaining his votes. Back then he said he opposed the cuts in marginal tax rates because they were "regressive" and "unfair," redistributing income from the poor and middle-class to the rich.

This was the reason nearly all Democrats gave for opposing Bush's tax cuts, of course, and at times it seemed as though McCain was simply reaching for the rationale nearest at hand, which happened to be the Democrats' rationale--though in his case it was framed, in typical McCain style, as a matter of his own scrupulosity: "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief."

His public reasoning surprised even some of McCain's budget-balancing allies. Peterson's Concord Coalition opposed the Bush tax cuts, too, but not because they "benefited the rich." "Our argument was never about the distributional aspects," says Concord's executive director, Robert Bixby. McCain's opposition was particularly perplexing from someone who only two years before had advocated a flat tax--which entails a sharp cut in rates at the top of the income scale to encourage the flow of capital into private investment.

For that reason if no other, McCain's opposition blindsided his fellow Republicans. Bush's accountants, after all, had designed the tax cuts precisely to foreclose the fairness argument that McCain pulled off the shelf. Their reasoning was identical to the reasoning used by proponents of the flat tax. The income tax cut, they pointed out, was across the board: Most people got their income tax rates cut by the same number of percentage points. Any across-the-board cut in income tax rates means that in dollar terms rich people will get to keep more of their money than poor people will get to keep of theirs. This is because rich people have more money than poor people. Cut Bill Gates's income tax rate by two percentage points, and he gets to keep a few extra hundred million. Cut my income tax rate by two percentage points, and--peanuts.

But we got the same tax cut. That doesn't make the cut unfair, unless of course you consider it unfair that rich people have more money than poor people. And in that case your argument isn't with tax cuts but with capitalism.

There's no indication that McCain has ever thought his economic positions through this far. In economics, as in much else, he appears to operate on instinct. His professional experience--he's had a single job outside the government and military, working briefly for his father-in-law's beer distributorship in 1981--is unlikely to yield ideas about how the economy works in the way that a life spent, say, running a business or even practicing law would. He comes from money himself. His mother was heiress to an oil wildcatter, and his wife is wealthy, too. His most recent Senate financial disclosure form places his assets at between $20 million and $32 million, making him the seventh richest man in the Senate. Like a lot of rich people who've come into money rather than earned it--the heirs to the Kennedy and Rockefeller fortunes are the most famous examples--McCain seems less interested in how wealth is created than how it can be used, wherever it comes from.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad tht now Obama has the nomination the media finally start to see him as the phoney he is. Great job guys looking forward to four more years of repub control.

Posted by: mountain man | June 22, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

John McCain,The Manchurian Candidate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFhhvaIXA9A

Google these

McCain War Criminal

McCain Songbird

In a 1997 interview on the CBS news program "60 Minutes," McCain frankly acknowledged, "I am a war criminal; I bombed innocent women and children." It was an honest statement, though hardly a convincing argument for making him president.

The fact that he was a war criminal reflected not merely his own personal actions, which in terms of slaughter were no doubt every bit as devastating as a My Lai massacre, albeit inflicted from a longer distance. Rather it was a matter of the objective character of the war itself. Clearly there were many in the top echelons of the government, its military and intelligence agencies and in both major parties who bore far greater responsibility for the waging of a criminal and counterrevolutionary war of aggression in Vietnam.

The American ruling establishment has spent more than three decades attempting to revise the history of the Vietnam War in order to conceal its own responsibility for the greatest war crimes since the fall of the Nazis and to erase the political memory of US imperialism's defeat under conditions of mass opposition and social struggles at home.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain's calls for town meetings are phony. His last one was billed as open to the public, but only his supporters and cheerleaders were given tickets. Why would Obama want to taint himself with a farce like that?

Posted by: Sammy | June 22, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Broder is assuming a lot about what Americans "know" and "do not know." Who is Broder to assume that all Americans know who John McCain is? Until a year ago, I had no idea who John McCain was - and I'm getting to be middle-aged. Broder assumes too much about Politics. Most Americans don't know every single senator from the 50 states. Do you personally know the senators from Alaska or Alabama or Wyoming? I didn't know them until I recently got *very interested*

As for Broder's statement that Obama's decisions are "troublesome" - I have to disagree with Broder. He's again assuming that Politics can only be done "the McCain-way" and that's not right. Obama responded to McCain with his own proposal oin town-halls - and McCain declined because McCain has that same DUMB logic as Bush - which is - IT'S MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY. McCain won't compromise - and that's a serious problem. He needs to compromise if he wants these town-halls. McCain needs to wake up and realize that Americans are sick of Bush's way of doing things. McCain will not succeed by acting like a tyrant because that's what Bush has been doing, and Bush is going to be viewed as a dictator in years to come. It's sad but true. McCain needs to distance himself from Bush's ridiculous tactics.

Posted by: Allen | June 22, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

"Conservatives have always made stupid arguments (supply side economics comes to mind) but in the last few years, as the new wave of conservatives who were whelped during the post Reagan period took over, the arguments have really gotten idiotic.

During a radio interview on Wednesday, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) attempted to argue that drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR) would be beneficial for Arctic wildlife. Bachmann claimed that drilling would cause not only an "enhancement of wildlife expansion," but that the area around oil pipelines would also "become a meeting ground and 'coffee klatch' for caribou":

"Some suggestions are that perhaps we would see an enhancement of wildlife expansion because of the warmth of the pipeline," she said. [...] The pipeline has now become a meeting ground and "coffee klatch" for the caribou, she said.

Bachmann is not alone among conservatives in pushing this narrative of drilling being good for caribou. Rush Limbaugh said on his radio show last week that "the caribou have multiplied 'cause they like the warmth that surrounds the pipeline." On Tuesday night, National Review's Jonah Goldberg made a similar argument on Fox News:

GOLDBERG: People don't realize that at Prudhoe Bay, where they have been drilling for 30 years, the central Arctic caribou herd has increased fivefold since they started drilling up there. Some people say it's because they get to hide from the bugs. It's a little easier for them. But people say it's because of the lack of hunting. But it is not dangerous to the caribou up there."

But of course, the truth is, facts have a liberal bias:

Far from becoming a meeting ground, surveys have shown that the Central Arctic "caribou reduced their use of the more heavily developed Prudhoe Bay oil fields by 78 percent, and their east-west movements declined by 90 percent." "As surface development continues, the caribou are effectively crowded out of these areas," said Ray Cameron, a wildlife biologist who studied caribou for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. "They've decided it's not the place to be."

Studies have also found that pipeline construction near caribou calving and summering areas can lead to "greater calf mortality" and the "reduction of the population."

Posted by: alternate reality | June 22, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

McCAin is just trying to score political points. Anything, that he tries to set-up or control always ends up going wrong. Especially the country. Debates that I will only watch or those moderated by a moderate news cast. Nothing too liberal, nothing too conservative. Scratch FOX news off the list.

Posted by: MIKE d | June 22, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Broder's an insider. McCain's an insider. Obama works outside the conventional Beltway. Obama becomes president, the Broders of this world lose some of their access to power.

And that's what it's all about for these hack journalists who perform so badly they let a President who lost an election lead the country into a war against Iraq by saying Iraq was responsible for 9/11 and if we didn't invade they would drop WMDs on us.

Where was the press during this build up to war against Iraq? Putting on their stupid flag pins.

McCain flip-flops all the time. Look at the neocons he's surrounding himself with. Look at the lobbyists in his campaign. His inexperience on foreign policy is so bad he routinely mixes up Sunnis and Shias, has no clue as to how many troops we have, and makes stupid comments about how we have troops in Korea and Japan and Germany so therefore we can have them in Iraq.

The press doesn't challenge this. Any idiot who reads a newspaper can understand that a troop presence in a Middle Eastern country is different than a troop presence in Europe.

Nor do hacks like Broder bring up the fact that part of Al-Qaeda's rallying cry against the US was our troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Yet, McCain thinks we can have troops in Iraq as we do in Germany?

McCain has no clue about foreign policy. Wait until the debates. Yet, the press fawn all over McCain because of one reason: he gives the press access. And that's what it's all about for hacks like Broder.

Posted by: edzo2 | June 22, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Google these

McCain Bush War Crimes
McCain "I am a war criminal"
Bush War Crimes
McCain: Bush Is Guilty Of War Crimes

Posted by Kathy

I think we knew that waterboarding violated Geneva Conventions. It is nice to finally have a Senator, one who had been tortured as a POW, state rather clearly that waterboarding is a crime, emphasis mine below.

MCCAIN: "IT'S A VIOLATION OF THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS"

Transcript

McCain: Well, governor, I'm astonished that you haven't found out what waterboarding is.

Romney: I know what waterboarding is, Senator.

McCain: Then I am astonished that you would think such a -- such a torture would be inflicted on anyone in our -- who we are held captive and anyone could believe that that's not torture. It's in violation of the Geneva Convention. It's in violation of existing law...

(Applause)

And, governor, let me tell you, if we're going to get the high ground in this world and we're going to be the America that we have cherished and loved for more than 200 years. We're not going to torture people.

We're not going to do what Pol Pot did. We're not going to do what's being done to Burmese monks as we speak. I suggest that you talk to retired military officers and active duty military officers like Colin Powell and others, and how in the world anybody could think that that kind of thing could be inflicted by Americans on people who are held in our custody is absolutely beyond me.

FYI (emph mine):
"The practice garnered renewed attention and notoriety in September 2006, when further reports claim that the Bush administration had authorized the use of waterboarding on extrajudicial prisoners of the United States. ABC News reported that current and former CIA officers stated that

"there is a presidential finding, signed in 2002, by President Bush, Condoleezza Rice and then-Attorney General John Ashcroft approving the 'enhanced' interrogation techniques, including water boarding."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFhhvaIXA9A

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

I've read a great deal about both candidates. I had high hopes for John McCain, but the more I learned about him, the less likely he will get my vote. Some small things bug me-he is unable to use a computer-admitted in a video interview with Yahoo/Politco. Many of us have grandparents or know senior citizens that cannot use computers, but I find it incredulous that a 21st century candidate cannot check their email or be in touch with the internet community. He would have trouble finding a job in todays work environment.

Another thing that bothers me is the team of lobbyists associated with his campaign. Phil Graham for one. He lobbied for some of the bills that helped enable the subprime mess. Another law he lobbied for was the enron loophole which McCain supported. If that was eliminated today, experts say it could reduce gas prices by 25% at the pump. Yet McCain comes out for offshore drilling, which will not produce any new oil for 10 years. Also, there is no guarantee that oil would be sold to the US. It might go to China, India, et al. Charles Black is another lobbyist with the McCain camp. He has lobbied for some very nasty dictators.

The real kicker for me and others in the Northwest is the amount of lobbyists on McCain's staff that support the European company that won the Airforce re-fueling contract over Boeing. Thanks to the GSA, Boeing may get a second shot. It will be interesting to see if McCain's team again supports the Europeans over American jobs.

McCain, like many Republicans, favors corporations over workers. Obama supports eliminating the tax credit for companies to outsource jobs. This seems like a no brainer for politicians-good paying jobs help the country. John McCain would like to end the tax credit businesses receive for providing health care to employees. That will force many people to buy their own insurance. No guarantees that people with pre-existing conditions like Senator McCain's skin cancer would be allowed to buy insurance. Senator Obama's plan would allow for more universal coverage. The time has come for everyone in the world's richest nation to have access to health care.

I wanted to believe that John McCain was a Republican that would help the middle class. Instead, he appears to follow in Bush's footsteps and wants to favor the rich. I can understand that-he and his wife's income last year was 6 million. Senator McCain and Ms. McCain would receive $373,429 in tax breaks from his tax plan. I can also understand why many media pundits favor them-they receive substantial savings. The middle class needs some relief besides trickle down economics. Heck, we need downpour economics. :) That is one of the reasons why I supported Hilary Clinton, and now Barack Obama.

Personally, I would love to see some townhall meetings between Barack Hussein Obama and John Lindsay McCain. It would give people a chance to see and hear them side by side. John McCain is more gaffe prone in this venue, so it could make for some fun policial viewing.

Posted by: BJ, Seattle | June 22, 2008 3:53 PM | Report abuse

I have only the same bile to repeat everyday on every blog. I cannot think of anything new to do like McBush so I agree with him and the stupid War Criminal, we should stay in Iraq forever and send them all the American dollars possible from American taxpayers. I am a stupid boring hypocrite Con who voted in the stupid killer War Criminal twice, I am guilty of rapes and murders in Iraq but I am born again and agian and again, and now want another killer, McBush to win. I cannot really defend our killers and torturers but I hate anyone other than a white man to win, I am a racist bigot, I have no facts to bring just a lot of stupidity like all born again Cons, we are all products of Satan, but we are born again and we all say we love Jesus but we really don't know what Jesue is all about, we just say that because all the other hypocrite Cons believe us. I am a patriot I love America I love God I love Guns I love Flag Pins I love SUVs I love Big Oil I only usually buy American I love to Shoot God's creatures just for fun, I love the Military because we get to kill more living things just for fun and sometimes we get to rape for fun too women love to be raped every Con knows that I love to build a fence around the entire USA to keep all the enemies out, I always repeat the same old junk because we Cons are not that smart just look at our leaders now, I know all the same old cliches that we born again Cons always repeat because we are too stupid to think on our own and all the other ignorant Cons eat all of our dung everyday and every time we say these same stupid things so we keep feeding it to them and they so fat on it. We are hypocrite Cons in every way possible, but we are born again Cons.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

When will they finally talk about the Bush/McCain lies that have brought down America and destroyed its standing in the world???

Obviously, the media is doing all over the same again as they did when they misled the American public about the real intentions of the Bush/McCain gang in the run to the war in Iraq.

Posted by: Sascha | June 22, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Google these

McCain Adultery
McCain Womanizing
McCain Temper

Clayton Williams stirred controversy during his 1990 campaign for governor of Texas with a botched attempt at humor in which he compared rape to weather. Within earshot of a reporter, Williams said: "As long as it's inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it."

His Democratic opponent at the time, the late Ann Richards -- who, coincidentally, would lose the governor's mansion to George W. Bush in 1994 -- highlighted the comments in a TV ad during that 1990 campaign. (see above)

McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers said the Monday event was being cancelled, given the offensive comments. He said he could not yet say what McCain would do with donations brought into the campaign by Williams.

"These were obviously incredibly offensive remarks that the campaign was unaware of at the time this event was scheduled," Rogers said. He added that Williams apologized for the comments back in 1990, but he said that does not excuse them.

Williams told the Midland Reporter-Telegram recently that he had already raised more than $300,000 for McCain and the fundraiser to be held at his home in Midland. Williams said that he needed to help McCain raise money to stop an Obama campaign that would enact "socialist" policies if elected to office.

Here's an idea, McCain: Why don't you RETURN the money from such a sexist, hateful and ignorant swine? Or is this a new demographic you're hoping to capture? The Back Forty:

A man who has such a disgustingly cavalier attitude towards something as horrific, violating and criminal as the rape of a woman has no place in politics, let alone polite society. This is a man who should be shunned by anyone with a conscience. That includes Senator McCain.

It's not enough that Senator McCain cancels an event because the media got wind of it.

It's not enough.

Senator McCain should publicly reject and denounce this man.

He should donate every single dirty dollar that this man has raised for him - all $300,000 - to an organization working to combat rape in our society - like RAINN or RVA.

And he should apologize immediately and completely to his female supporters for daring to entertain the thought of keeping company with this despicable, disgusting individual.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY3mWJ1Cd0Y

McCain does not care about your wife, daughter, niece, mother or any other Women. Don't let the Dirty Old Lecher be alone with any of them. McCain Approves of Rape.

http://www.usvetdsp.com/feb08/mccain_trust.htm

Ethics complaint over attacking a grieving woman
In 1984, as a Member of the House of Representatives, John McCain gave a speech in Congressman Duncan Hunter's San Diego district.

At the end of the speech a woman approached Representative McCain and introduced herself as the wife of a Marine pilot shot down and still missing in Southeast Asia. She asked Congressman McCain if he could help her find information on her husband's case.

Eyeing the attractive woman, the married McCain replied, Why don't you ride with us and have dinner?

Congressman Hunter and an aide sat in the front seat of the car; McCain and this woman in the back as they drove to Hunter's house. Not long into the short ride, McCain ran his hand up the woman's skirt. Stunned, she pushed him away and resisted his advances. He continued trying to grab her, even after she moved as far away from him as possible.

As this time, McCain's wife, Cindy, was pregnant.

Disgusted over his behavior she left as soon as they arrived at Duncan Hunter's place. She promptly told the two Vietnam veterans who had originally encouraged her to try to see McCain about her missing husband's case that night.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

WHat timing!He comes up with this crap AFTER he's won the party nomination.Now, it makes more sense for him to forego federal campaign funds in order to defend himself.The mud slingers are getting ready to unload..

Posted by: Ray | June 22, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

STILL LOOKING FOR THAT 'BUSH BOUNCE'. NO BOUNCE UNDER HERE, NO BOUNCE OVER THERE, THAT BOUNCE MUST BE SOMEWHERE.

IT'S TIME FOR BRODER TO TURN IN HIS PENCILS AND GO HOME.

Posted by: timgeg | June 22, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Uh, Scott? David BROOKS is well known as a conservative. I don't know where you put the "center" as in "slightly left of center" but as it must, by your definition, be to the right of Brooks, it must be somewhere around Strom Thurmond.

Typical conservative: "We're the middle. Everyone else is the left."

Posted by: RealCalGal | June 22, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Google and learn more about Old Songbird "Make it a Hundred" McBush

McCain Flip Flops
McCain Temper
McCain Songbird
McCain Adultery
McCain Fortune

McCain Sets a New Record: 10 Flip-Flops in Two Weeks
By: Jon Perr on Monday, June 16th, 2008 at 9:50 AM - PDT

In his eternal quest for the Republican presidential nomination, the supposed maverick John McCain has repeatedly reversed long-held positions and compromised purportedly core principles. From the Bush tax cuts, the religious right and immigration reform to overturning Roe v. Wade, proclaiming Samuel Alito a model Supreme Court Justice and bashing France (just to name a few), McCain changed sides as changing political conditions dictated.

But over the past two weeks, McCain's rapid fire, acrobatic flip-flops have produced whiplash, at least for voters. 10 times since the beginning of June, McCain has retreated from, upended or just forgotten positions he once claimed as his own. On Social Security, balancing the budget, defense spending, domestic surveillance and a host of other issues so far this month, McCain's "Straight Talk Express" did a U-turn on the road to the White House.

1. Social Security Privatization. John McCain has apparently learned the lesson that the more President Bush spoke about his Social Security privatization scheme, the less popular it became. On Friday, Mr. Straight Talk proclaimed at a New Hampshire event, "I'm not for, quote, privatizing Social Security. I never have been. I never will be." Sadly, McCain and his advisers like ousted HP CEO Carly Fiorina are on record declaring fidelity to the idea of diverting Social Security dollars into private accounts. On November 18, 2004, for example, McCain announced, "Without privatization, I don't see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits." And in March 2003, McCain backed his President, declaring, "As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it - along the lines that President Bush proposed." As they say, let's go to the videotape.

2. Raising - and Slashing - Defense Spending. As Steve Benen noted Friday, John McCain was also for boosting American defense spending before he was against it. In the November 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs, McCain argued "we can also afford to spend more on national defense, which currently consumes less than four cents of every dollar that our economy generates - far less than what we spent during the Cold War." But facing the $2 trillion budgetary hole the McCain tax plan is forecast to produce (a sea of red ink even the Wall Street Journal noticed), Team McCain changed its tune. As Forbes scoffed in amazement:

"McCain's top economic adviser, Doug Holtz-Eakin, blithely supposes that cuts in defense spending could make up for reducing the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25% and the subsequent shrinkage in federal revenues. Get that? The national security candidate wants to cut spending on our national security. Wait until the generals and the admirals hear that."

3. First Term Balanced Budget Pledge. With its on-again/off-again/on-again promise to balance the budget by January 2013, the McCain campaign executed that rarest of political maneuvers, the 360. During a February 15th rally in La Crosse, Wisconsin, "McCain promised he'd offer a balanced budget by the end of his first term." But just days later, McCain's senior economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin announced a deficit-ending target of 2017. In mid-April, Holtz-Eakin proclaimed, "I would like the next president not to talk about deficit reduction." McCain, too, signaled the retreat from his first-term balance budget commitment, explaining to Chris Matthews on April 15th that "economic conditions are reversed."

Apparently economic conditions have improved dramatically since then. On June 6, Holtz-Eakin squared the circle, announcing, "That plan, when appropriately phased in, as it has always been intended to be, will bring the budget to balance by the end of his first term."

4. The Media's Treatment of Hillary Clinton. No doubt, John McCain suffers from recurring bouts of selective amnesia. And some episodes take only days to manifest themselves. During his disastrous "green screen" speech on June 3, McCain reached out to Hillary Clinton's supporters by proclaiming, "The media often overlooked how compassionately she spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received." But by June 7, McCain denied to Newsweek that his media critique never passed his lips, "I did not-that was in prepared remarks, and I did not-I'm not in the business of commenting on the press and their coverage or not coverage."

5. The Estate Tax. Just days before his contortionist act on Social Security, John McCain reversed course on the estate tax as well. On June 8, 2006, McCain on the Senate floor expressed his agreement with Teddy Roosevelt that "most great civilized countries have an income tax and an inheritance tax" and "in my judgment both should be part of our system of federal taxation." But after years of battling Republican colleagues dead-set on dismantling the so-called "death tax" and instead promoting a $5 million trigger, on Tuesday John McCain sounded the retreat. Now, he insists, "the estate tax is one of the most unfair tax laws on the books."

6. FISA, Domestic Surveillance and Telecom Immunity. When it comes to the Bush administration's program of domestic spying on Americans, McCain has performed similar logical gymnastics. On December 20, 2007, McCain suggested to the Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Charles Savage that President Bush had clearly crossed the line. As Wired's Ryan Singel noted:

"I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is," McCain said. The Globe's Charlie Savage pushed further, asking , "So is that a no, in other words, federal statute trumps inherent power in that case, warrantless surveillance?" To which McCain answered, "I don't think the president has the right to disobey any law."

But on June 2, McCain adviser Holtz-Eakin put that notion to rest, telling the National Review:

"[N]either the Administration nor the telecoms need apologize for actions that most people, except for the ACLU and the trial lawyers, understand were Constitutional and appropriate in the wake of the attacks on September 11, 2001."

Pressed to explain the glaring inconsistencies, John McCain on June 6 played dumb, deciding that cowardice is the better part of valor. As the New York Times reported, McCain now believes the legality of Bush's regime of NSA domestic surveillance is unclear and, in any event, is old news:

"It's ambiguous as to whether the president acted within his authority or not," he said, saying courts had ruled different ways on the matter. "I'm not interested in going back. I'm interested in addressing the challenge we face to day of trying to do everything we can to counter organizations and individuals that want to destroy this country. So there's ambiguity about it. Let's move forward."

As for immunity for the telecommunications firms cooperating with the White House in what before August 2007 was doubtless illegal surveillance, there too McCain's position has evolved. On May 23, campaign surrogate Chuck Fish announced that McCain would not back retroactive immunity "unless there were revealing Congressional hearings and heartfelt repentance from those telephone and internet companies." Subsequently, the McCain campaign swiftly backtracked, claiming its man supports immunity unconditionally.

7. Restoring the Everglades. On June 5, John McCain traveled to the Everglades to win over Floridians and environmentally-minded voters. There he proclaimed, "I am in favor of doing whatever's necessary to save the Everglades." Sadly, as ThinkProgress documented, McCain not only opposed $2 billion in funding for the restoration of the Everglades national park, he backed President Bush's veto of the legislation in 2007. "I believe," he said, "that we should be passing a bill that will authorize legitimate, needed projects without sacrificing fiscal responsibility."

8. Divestment from South Africa. During his June 2 speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), John McCain called for the international community to target Iran for the kind of worldwide sanctions regime applied to apartheid-era South Africa. Unfortunately, McCain's lobbyist-advisers Charlie Black and Rick Davis each represented firms doing business with Tehran. Even more unfortunate, John McCain was frequently not among those offering "moral clarity and conviction" in backing "a divestment campaign against South Africa, helping to rid that nation of the evil of apartheid." As ThinkProgress detailed:

Despite voting to override President Reagan's veto of a bill imposing economic sanctions against South Africa in 1986, McCain voted against sanctions on at least six other occasions.

9. Fighting Job Losses in Michigan. During the run-up to the Michigan primary, John McCain cautioned workers there in January that he didn't want to raise "false hopes that somehow we can bring back lost jobs," adding that it" wasn't government's job to protect buggy factories and haberdashers when cars replaced carriages and men stopped wearing hats." But after getting trounced in Michigan by Mitt Romney and watching the economy deteriorate further, McCain has had a change of heart. As Bloomberg noted on June 5:

Nowadays, the party's presumptive nominee is singing a different tune, striking a populist pose and saying "new jobs are coming"... ...Over the past few months, however, McCain has taken a lesson from Romney, acknowledging recently that "Americans are hurting." Returning to Michigan last month, the Arizona senator told a local television station that he would fight for new jobs and the state wouldn't "be left behind."

Perhaps the good people of Michigan, as John McCain suggested to a Kentucky audience in April, can make a living on eBay.

10. Opposing Hurricane Katrina Investigations. During a June 4th town hall meeting in Baton Rouge, John McCain answered a reporter's question regarding Hurricane Katrina and the failure of the New Orleans levees by announcing:

"I've supported every investigation and ways of finding out what caused the tragedy. I've been here to New Orleans. I've met with people on the ground."

As it turns out, not so much. McCain's revisionist history neglects to mention that in 2005 and 2006 he twice voted against a commission to study the government's response to Katrina. He also opposed three separate emergency funding measures providing relief to Katrina victims, including the extension of five months of Medicaid benefits. And as ThinkProgress pointed out, "until traveling there one month ago, McCain had made just one public tour of New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina touched down in August 2005."

And so it goes. As surely as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west each day, so too will John McCain change positions. (Like that other law of nature, McCain's flip-flops are literally becoming a daily occurrence. Since this piece was originally drafted on Saturday, McCain added two new policy turnabouts - on phasing out rather than repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax and on requiring a litmus test for his judicial appointees - to his litany of reversals.) As the Pew Research Center recently found, the word Americans now most frequently use to describe John McCain is not "maverick," but "old." Given the dizzying pace of his reversals, "opportunist" may soon top that list.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Why is Old Songbird "Make it a Hundred" McBush not releasing his Complete Military Records? What is he hiding? Won't the Navy wash his records for him?

Google "McCain Songbird" "McCain Traitor" "McCain Temper"

He is called a Songbird by his fellow Vietnam Vets.

He didn't leave there when given the opportunity. Why?

Why did the Vietnamese erect a bust of Old Songbird McBush?

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan08/mccain_military_record.htm

He was shot down October 26, 1967, and by November 9, 1967 he was giving interviews to foreign correspondents, providing information on his prior command, casualties and tactics, in direct violation of the Code of Conduct. (The U.S. military Code of Conduct is the definitive code specifying the responsibilities of American military personnel while in combat or captivity. Article V of the Code is very specific in ordering U.S. military personnel to avoid answering questions to the utmost of their ability and to make no oral or written statements disloyal to the United States and its allies, or harmful to their cause. Any willful violation of the Code is considered collaborating with the enemy.)

The Communist Vietnamese erected a bust of John McCain beside the lake where he was shot down. His defenders say that this is a tribute to the PAVN gunners that shot him down.

In the interview that he gave on November 9, 1967 to VNA International, he claims when he bailed out and landed in the lake, that locals pulled him out and took him to the hospital. Yet in the U.S. News and World Report - May 14, 1973. McCain is quoted as saying "I think it was on the fourth day (after being shot down) that two guards came in, instead of one. One of them pulled back the blanket to show the other guard my injury. I looked at my knee. It was about the size of a football . . . when I saw it, I said to the guard, Ok, get the officer'...an officer came in after a few minutes. It was the man that we came to know very well as 'The Bug'. He was a psychotic torturer, one of the worst fiends that we had to deal with. I said, Ok, I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital."
Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird "Make it a Hundred" Traitor McBush? What are you hiding???

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Obama's faux president seal is a direct challenge to the presidential authority in an unconstitutional way, and can be viewed as treason.

Posted by: God Father | June 22, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse


NEXT THING YOU KNOW

MR. AXELROD WILL COME OUT WITH THE OBAMA DOLL

IT CHANGES COLORS

CHANGES IT'S STORY

AND IT HAS A SLOT IN THE BACK WHERE YOU CAN INSERT MONEY AND HEAR ANYTHING YOU WANT

PERFECT

DAVID AXELROD PRODUCTIONS


OBAMA IS A MARKETING MIRACLE


SOMETHING FROM NOTHING


HOUDINI AXELROD


GOD BETTER BLESS AMERICA


WE'RE GOING TO ELECT A GUY WHO WAS DEAF DUMB AND BLIND FOR TWENTY YEARS IN A RABID RACIST CHURCH??

SILENT AND COMPLIANT ? DEAF DUMB AND BLIND FOR 20 YRS?

OR A LIAR ??


THAT'S THE ONLY CHOICE YOU GET WITH OBAMA

Posted by: Thinker | June 22, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

What I don't understand is the lack of attention to McCain's shifts. I've heard faint mentions of McCain's shift on drilling... but it seems its not the story that the public financing rejection by Obama is. And I really don't get why the other big shifts haven't hit the radar by McCain:
Tax cuts for the wealthiest (against then for)
Tax cuts in time of war (against then for)
Drilling in Alaska (its coming... he's already starting posturing this change)
Being against the Mccain-Feingold bill (is an explanation really necessary for this one?)
Fallwell (agent of intolerance... then favored host)
Torture (against then for)

To me... the biggest was his reversal on torture. This was a core principle... and he was the leading opponent on Capital Hill for 30 something years because of his personal experience. For him to flip on this suggests he would flip on ANYTHING. But the conservative media seems quick to use the word "flip flop" with Obama and looks the other way on McCain. I really don't understand it.

Posted by: Charlie S | June 22, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Broder is poster-boy for the MSM that bought a ticket on the Straight Talk Express in 2000 and has failed to see that it has run out of $4 per gallon gas.

John "Straight Talk" McCain who opposed the Bush tax cuts, but now supports them. Who was against federal action on abortion and is now for it. Who was against drilling off the coast and is now for it.

About the only position he maintains is that War is Good.

Time to retire, Broder, and let someone younger, with better eyesight, take your space.

P.S. Is Broder still considered "liberal" by the WaPo so that he offsets someone like Gerson? What a raw deal for the liberal point of view!

Posted by: RealCalGal | June 22, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

David Broder's absurd column today is not about Barack Obama much as it is about how much he "knows' John McCain. Whenever Broder writes about McCain, he ignores McCain's well established record, or his flip-flops, or the fact that McCain's "Straight Talk" persona is just that - a political persona, and talks about how he know who are what is motvating McCain.

So let me try to see what's motivating Broder: a belief that bipartisanship in and of itself is the paramount goal of government. That is the wake of all evidence to the contrary, one should trust a Republican's word over his record. Don't trust the Democrats...

...and make speeches in violation that violate both the letter and spirit of ethics policy that he would skewer other people for violating.


Posted by: Just an Apikores | June 22, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

NEW OBAMA SLOGAN:

"HYPOCRISY WE CAN BELIEVE IN"

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Obama will avoid townhalls at all costs, because this highlights his minimal policy knowledge. He also avoided any debates with HRC sans the moderators. He primarily wants the electorate to get to know him through his campaign ads, and his lofty stump speeches, neither of which give the voter the first glimpse into who he really is. If he can buy the election, only then will people have a chance to get to know him. He didn't want to allow all people to vote in the primary, and he doesn't want to allow average voters to ask him questions that might corner him. This speaks volumes...........

Obama mentions the Republican 527's, but so far, MoveOn.Org has been the one airing "over the top" ads. Until Moveon.Org, and other far left liberal groups knived Hillary the way they did, I didn't realize how bad they really were...not until they did it to one of their own.

Posted by: Getting to know him... | June 22, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Obama is new on the scene. Yes, it may be troublesome to many when he turned down public financing. Yes his reason for doing so may be somewhat self-serving but nonetheless real. For those of us who are old enough to remember Willy Horton and Swiftboat, his concern is real. So to me it is troublesome but understandable.

As to the town hall meeting, it is a style that McCain prefers. Clearly, Obama does not have to accept a format that is preferred by his opponent. Besides, the idea of a weekly debate is ridiculous. The public will grow tired and bored with it in short order.

Posted by: Steve Chan, Los Altos Hills | June 22, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

I don't agree with Broder that rejection of McCain's proposal for "town hall" meetings is troublesome. Challenges to debate in various forums are part of any campaign, and are almost always made first by the candidate who is behind. The challenges go back and forth and eventually a format is selected and the dates set. It will be so this year as well.

As far as refusing public funding in order to raise more money, that is also very common. McCain may feel he has "talking points" on the issue, but presidential candidates have been whining about the side that has more money for years. It hasn't been effective in the past. Why should it be now?

Posted by: AlaninMissoula | June 22, 2008 3:27 PM | Report abuse

I used to enjoy reading Broder. For a long time he understood, and did a good job reporting on, the prevailing political currents of our times. Unfortunately for Broder and most of the chattering class, but fortunately for common folks - the time they are a changin'. Obama is not a perfect person but he is a perfect fit for the times we live in. At the end of the day this is an election where positions and contradictions will matter little. What matters most is that Obama appears to in touch with the prevailing zeitgeist and McCain appears a lot like...Broder. For the so called Conservatives who complain about Obama's lack of substance - the fact that most of you were so convinced of Bush's 'substance,'pretty much disqualifies you from ever being taken seriously.

Posted by: Walt | June 22, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

AT what point does one RETIRE, and stop trying to hog editorial pages? Isn't it time for Broder and Novak to pack it in? Good God, if not now, WHEN? They no longer have their fingers on the pulse of America than George Bush.

Posted by: Dalai Agaga | June 22, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Broder is a neocon fool, without ethics (see Howell's ombudsman piece, still on the website)
Obama isn't a God but a politician. Big surprise.
He isn't Bush.
He isn't Bush-lite (McCain).
He is going to be President.

Posted by: capemh | June 22, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I agree with David Broder's observations. It comes at a time when I am carefully and sincerely questioning how much I really know about Obama. I don't know enough and I ask myself why I didn't learn more about this candidate during the intense and long primary campaign?

It makes me question a lack of transparency in the candidate who ran on the hope for change. Yes, we can, Obama says. Can what, specifically? I wonder. I'm afraid too many people, myself included, got caught up in the extraordinary and historic momentum of this campaign. What do I really know? Show me.

However, at this critical juncture Obama strategically chooses to reject an open invitation to travel with and participate in townhall mtgs with McCain so that we can learn more about Obama in context. Obama's rejection of public financing adds to my questions about who this candidate is and my premature choice to support him.

My unease dovetails into Broder's remarks. Obama has not built sufficient trust with me as a voter. Therefore I cannot trust the motives of the Obama machine that I am only now "starting to figure out".

Obama's rejection of townhalls/public financing tell me that there is much more of a lack of transparency than I realized in this campaign. I am concerned that Obama's campaign for change is, once again, change only on his own terms. As a citizen of this country I am not happy with that and I will not vote for change that is only on Obama's terms.

Posted by: Questioning | June 22, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama based much of his candidacy on his Iraq war stance. Truth is...he gave an anti-war speech at an anti-war rally. This took no guts! HRC did vote for the war resolution, but what most did not know..in a letter to Pres. Bush, which can be found in the Senate archive reports, HRC emphatically stated the US could not go it alone. She also stated inspectors must be allowed to do their job. She also emphatically stated the US must use war as a last resort! Obama received so much credit for being against the war from the beginning, but fast forward to MTP after he was a US Senator, and Obama states he doesn't know how he would have voted if he had been in the Senate at the time. He also, at one point, praised Pres. Bush's handling of the war. It is amazing to me to hear Obama's supporters call into C-Span and mention that Obama "VOTED" against the war in Iraq. How can there be that many people who still do not know he wasn't even in the US Senate at the time of the vote!

Posted by: Iraq Vote | June 22, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Chris, there is nothing revelatory in Broder's missive here, and it was to be expected. Broder is a water carrier for the Beltway elites and the hacks who make their living off the current GOP/corporate stranglehold over this country. Of course Broder is unhappy that Obama won't debate McCain by McCain's rules. Of course Broder is unhappy that Obama refuses to be boxed into a broken fundraising system that up until recently advantaged GOP charletans who talk of general election public financing while going around the limits to support "independent actors" who savaged unilaterally-disarmed Democrats.

Perhaps you can find a link for us of Broder's column lamenting Bush's fundraising practices from 2000 and 2004 as threats to the current system.

Posted by: Steve Soto | June 22, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

6/22/08

I would like to know the thinking of the Council on Foreign Relations with regards to the presidential candidates. And with David Broder's piece on "How Well Do We Know Obama?"

First and foremost Obama is no Martin Luther King nor is he John F. Kennedy. Anyone can propose to have the same mindset and thinking of an individual or individuals to gain popularity. Don't ride on the coat tails of our former historians who worked so hard to bring this country to a civilized society.

Speak your mind my friend. For your word is as good as your character.

And for Obama to reject public funding and 10 town hall meetings does not sit well as representative of a democratic progress.

Public funding may be tracked or traced much easier and would come to the attention of the American public much sooner in the race even before the Democratic Convention in August in Denver, Colorado.

Another aspect of David Broder's question and I believe that Obama never served in the military. I was raised around the military.

Oh, yes you might say I am going to withdraw troops, talk to the Iranians in formal session. Well I would like to know how many more miracles can you make the American people think that can happen?

The quagmire that we have in Iraq is not only politically, economically, and religiously based but the cause and effect and affect has brought doom on the American people.

These issues will never be changed overnight nor perhaps another decade.

The domino effect and affect will continue to residue throughout our country.

With regards to Senator McCain and the town hall meetings. I believe if one is a true debator and legalist then one should be open to debates in front of the American public.

I believe that Senator McCain would bring up issues and would hold fast showing his charisma and his strong character as a leader and that is exactly what Obama does not want.

He does not want the American people to be able to see him at a standstill and that they can make up their minds early in the campaign process.

Perhaps there is something to age which brings about wisdom.

I believe that Senator McCain has the guts, the braun and the brain to bring a resolution to matters in Iraq.

And also has the backing and support of the U.S. Military.

He has many alliances with retired and active military generals, captains, colonels, and Joint Chief of Staff.

I believe the "True Grit," would be shown with respect to many important issues which have not been brought up in this campaign.

I really don't think that the American public wants someone to buy their way into the White House.

Be diligent while informed with regards to your vote.

Diane M. Newman-Gregerson
Julian, Ca

Posted by: Diane M. Newman-Gregerson | June 22, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

So, McCain needs more free air time, and Obama wants to not be constrained by public funding given the already non-McCain based attacks, and somehow we (as citizens) should be concerned about "who he is?" Is this serious?

Posted by: Dwilson | June 22, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Obama had demonstrated that his word means nothing. We may indeed need a different kind of politics, but he ain't it.

Posted by: Off the bandwagon | June 22, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

"You see the faux presidential seal he created? Obama is as real as that seal."
Posted by: Vnd22 | June 22, 2008 2:04 PM
---

That was a riot. It reminds me of the one the Ramones made.

Go Obama!

[about Broder - hey, he needs the big bucks and doesn't need the spider McCain inviting him into his web]

Posted by: johng1 | June 22, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

It is against the law to use the Presidential Seal in a campaign. Obama's seal has such a strong resemblance to the actual seal, he could run into problems over this as well. Former Pres. Bush made sure to remove the Presidential seal when he was running for re-election, and he was already the President! Obama is such a self-aggrandizing fellow.

Posted by: Presidential Seal | June 22, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

I have only the same bile to repeat everyday on every blog. I cannot think of anything new to do like McBush so I agree with him and the stupid War Criminal, we should stay in Iraq forever and send them all the American dollars possible from American taxpayers. I am a stupid boring hypocrite Con who voted in the stupid killer War Criminal twice, I am guilty of rapes and murders in Iraq but I am born again and agian and again, and now want another killer, McBush to win. I cannot really defend our killers and torturers but I hate anyone other than a white man to win, I am a racist bigot, I have no facts to bring just a lot of stupidity like all born again Cons, we are all products of Satan, but we are born again and we all say we love Jesus but we really don't know what Jesue is all about, we just say that because all the other hypocrite Cons believe us. I am a patriot I love America I love God I love Guns I love Flag Pins I love SUVs I love Big Oil I only usually buy American I love to Shoot God's creatures just for fun, I love the Military because we get to kill more living things just for fun and sometimes we get to rape for fun too women love to be raped every Con knows that I love to build a fence around the entire USA to keep all the enemies out, I always repeat the same old junk because we Cons are not that smart just look at our leaders now, I know all the same old cliches that we born again Cons always repeat because we are too stupid to think on our own and all the other ignorant Cons eat all of our dung everyday and every time we say these same stupid things so we keep feeding it to them and they so fat on it. We are hypocrite Cons in every way possible, but we are born again Cons.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Only fools, the racists who hate white people and the liberal America-haters would support a fellow racist, white-hater and a America-hater like Barack Obama. Real Americans are not that dumb! It'll be President John McCain in '09.

Posted by: sparksUSN | June 22, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Kudos to D. Broder! I've thought for the longest that Obama was a disingenuous fraud! He's very intelligent, but a fraud.

I didn't count on msm to inform me. It took researching his Il. Senate days, and basically being very observant of so many things with regard to the primary process between he and HRC. I do not believe most voters know Obama at all. Most voters will not do the necessary research, and will be swayed by Obama's inundation of ads, supposedly serving to inform the voters on "who he is", which is laughable, but it works for many voters.

I notice Obama is now saying he will support the FISA compromise bill. Obama also, when backed into a corner about his tax increases for the wealthy, now says, we will need to wait for the economy to stabilize before doing anything. On Iraq, Obama backs away from firm commitment given during primary season. On public financing, Obama uses cover of "the little people are funding my campaign", which is another way of saying, many are maxing out their credit cards, and the taxpayers will pay for it one way or another. On Nafta, Obama tells voters one thing, advisor tells Can. Gov. another. In speech to AIPAC, Obama makes gaffe with regard to US/Israel stance of 40 yrs.

Obama has gotten where he is because he's a great orator...plain and simple. He doesn't know policy well enough, but can deliver policy statements as long as he has his teleprompter. Give the same words...turn the page, yes we can, urgency of now...blah blah blah, to another speaker, a dull speaker, and that candidate would have gone nowhere, even with the same rhetoric.

In the Il. Senate, Obama earned the reputation of "gutless" because he was always absent when time to make the tough votes, a colleague stated. He almsot came to blows with a colleague because he mistakenly voted to cut off funding for a child welfare office in the colleague's district. Emil Jones placed Obama's name on many pieces of legislation that Obama never worked on, angering many of his colleagues. Obama blocked other candidates from having their names on the ballot so he could run uncontested.

During the primary race, Obama was quick to come out and state he wanted to be above all the nasty divisive antics, above Washington politics as usual, but all the while, his surrogates were forwarding as many memos to the msm networks to add fuel to the fire at every opportunity. Obama has former "registered" lobbyists working on his campaign. He has former Clinton era campaign staffers. He takes advice from lobbyists. He has endorsements from the oldest dynasties in Washington. He's the slickest kind of hypocrite there is.

Hillary was perfectly comfortable being on Bill O'Reilly, speaking in townhalls, or in diners, supermarkets, fire stations, you name it...Obama is comfortable on the big stage before huge crowds giving his proverbial stump speech. Hillary was the one willing to give autographs, chat, listen...Obama, rarely gave autographs, and he doesn't feel comfortable one on one. Hillary had the policy knowledge, the compassion/passion, and she worked her ever loving heart out. She made plenty of mistakes, but I have no doubt she would have stood firm for the people who elected her. I think Obama will "fold like a cheap suit", just as Sen. Ted Stevens said he did in the US Senate. Well...he's already folding, so what's to prevent him in the future.

Furthermore, Obama's associations are also worrisome. I am judged by my 20 yr. associations, and so should Obama be.

I don't care how long the DNC, the Media, and all Obama's advertising tries to convince me, and many other Hillary supporters, to vote for him... I've always had a good read on people, and my gut says "no" to the "anointed" one.

Posted by: kmb08 | June 22, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

You need not choose between 2 undesirable candidates: John McCain and Barack Obama. No one is forcing you to vote for one or the other.

Exercise your right to express your political views to Washington. Write "Hillary Clinton" on the voting ballot in November.

Even if she does not run as an independent candidate, you should still write her name on the voting ballot. By law, the state goverment must report the percentage (of votes) given to each person -- including an unofficial write-in candidate. The aim is for Fox News and CNN to report the following percentages of the popular vote.

1. 50% Hillary Clinton
2. 30% John McCain
3. 20% Barack Obama

Such strong support will essentially make Clinton the de-facto president of the United States. Before President John McCain initiates any policy, he will unofficially seek the approval of Senator Clinton.

Read "Hillary Clinton as an Independent Candidate" @ http://theclearsky.blogspot.com/#8706393981159671199 .

Posted by: reporter, USA, http://theclearsky.blogspot.com/ | June 22, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Many Americans are desperately anxious to be deluded by Obama. Sad.

Obama is a dangerous man - he acknowledges no responsibility to anyone. He will say anything and do anything to get what he wants. Dangerous man.

Posted by: Keith | June 22, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

nice try david. Obama wld have been stupid to give up a financial advantage in this race. Also, McCain thinks his strong suit is in town hall situations, why wld anyone go to fight on his opponents turf? David we really are not that stupid.

Posted by: robbe p | June 22, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

"McCain benefits from a long-established reputation as a man who says what he believes," writes Broder.
So when McCain reportedly called his wife a c@nt and a trollop he really believed it and meant it? Fabulous. Now I can NOT vote for him with a perfectly clear conscience.
If only I could find someone to vote FOR.

Posted by: miss-crabby-pants | June 22, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/16/mccain-sets-a-new-record-10-flip-flops-in-two-weeks/

To see 10 major McCain flip flops in the first two weeks of June, see the prior link. McCain is to the point where he may well not remember that he is reversing so many prior positions.

Obama's decision not to forego his gigantic advantage in money raising capabilities is just good common sense. One would have to question his judgment if he did NOT reject public financing.

Obama's decision on the town halls reflects the fact that John McCain can't draw flies on his own. Why give McCain an audience and free TV time? Why not make him pay for his TV spots with his underfunded campaign war chest?

Why people should expect a candidate to take legal actions that aren't in his interests is beyond me. Hey, why not just ask him to pay for some McCain ads?

McCain is political road kill -- don't expect Barack Obama to resuscitate him by recruiting him audiences and forgiving him his inability to raise money.

Posted by: Dolph T | June 22, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Google these to learn more about Old Songbird "Make it a Hundred" McBush

McCain Songbird
McCain Flip Flops
McCain Arizona Mob
McCain Adultery
McCain Temper


McCain Sets a New Record: 10 Flip-Flops in Two Weeks
By: Jon Perr on Monday, June 16th, 2008 at 9:50 AM - PDT
In his eternal quest for the Republican presidential nomination, the supposed maverick John McCain has repeatedly reversed long-held positions and compromised purportedly core principles. From the Bush tax cuts, the religious right and immigration reform to overturning Roe v. Wade, proclaiming Samuel Alito a model Supreme Court Justice and bashing France (just to name a few), McCain changed sides as changing political conditions dictated.

But over the past two weeks, McCain's rapid fire, acrobatic flip-flops have produced whiplash, at least for voters. 10 times since the beginning of June, McCain has retreated from, upended or just forgotten positions he once claimed as his own. On Social Security, balancing the budget, defense spending, domestic surveillance and a host of other issues so far this month, McCain's "Straight Talk Express" did a U-turn on the road to the White House.

1. Social Security Privatization. John McCain has apparently learned the lesson that the more President Bush spoke about his Social Security privatization scheme, the less popular it became. On Friday, Mr. Straight Talk proclaimed at a New Hampshire event, "I'm not for, quote, privatizing Social Security. I never have been. I never will be." Sadly, McCain and his advisers like ousted HP CEO Carly Fiorina are on record declaring fidelity to the idea of diverting Social Security dollars into private accounts. On November 18, 2004, for example, McCain announced, "Without privatization, I don't see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits." And in March 2003, McCain backed his President, declaring, "As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it - along the lines that President Bush proposed." As they say, let's go to the videotape.

2. Raising - and Slashing - Defense Spending. As Steve Benen noted Friday, John McCain was also for boosting American defense spending before he was against it. In the November 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs, McCain argued "we can also afford to spend more on national defense, which currently consumes less than four cents of every dollar that our economy generates - far less than what we spent during the Cold War." But facing the $2 trillion budgetary hole the McCain tax plan is forecast to produce (a sea of red ink even the Wall Street Journal noticed), Team McCain changed its tune. As Forbes scoffed in amazement:

"McCain's top economic adviser, Doug Holtz-Eakin, blithely supposes that cuts in defense spending could make up for reducing the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25% and the subsequent shrinkage in federal revenues. Get that? The national security candidate wants to cut spending on our national security. Wait until the generals and the admirals hear that."

3. First Term Balanced Budget Pledge. With its on-again/off-again/on-again promise to balance the budget by January 2013, the McCain campaign executed that rarest of political maneuvers, the 360. During a February 15th rally in La Crosse, Wisconsin, "McCain promised he'd offer a balanced budget by the end of his first term." But just days later, McCain's senior economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin announced a deficit-ending target of 2017. In mid-April, Holtz-Eakin proclaimed, "I would like the next president not to talk about deficit reduction." McCain, too, signaled the retreat from his first-term balance budget commitment, explaining to Chris Matthews on April 15th that "economic conditions are reversed."

Apparently economic conditions have improved dramatically since then. On June 6, Holtz-Eakin squared the circle, announcing, "That plan, when appropriately phased in, as it has always been intended to be, will bring the budget to balance by the end of his first term."

4. The Media's Treatment of Hillary Clinton. No doubt, John McCain suffers from recurring bouts of selective amnesia. And some episodes take only days to manifest themselves. During his disastrous "green screen" speech on June 3, McCain reached out to Hillary Clinton's supporters by proclaiming, "The media often overlooked how compassionately she spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received." But by June 7, McCain denied to Newsweek that his media critique never passed his lips, "I did not-that was in prepared remarks, and I did not-I'm not in the business of commenting on the press and their coverage or not coverage."

5. The Estate Tax. Just days before his contortionist act on Social Security, John McCain reversed course on the estate tax as well. On June 8, 2006, McCain on the Senate floor expressed his agreement with Teddy Roosevelt that "most great civilized countries have an income tax and an inheritance tax" and "in my judgment both should be part of our system of federal taxation." But after years of battling Republican colleagues dead-set on dismantling the so-called "death tax" and instead promoting a $5 million trigger, on Tuesday John McCain sounded the retreat. Now, he insists, "the estate tax is one of the most unfair tax laws on the books."

6. FISA, Domestic Surveillance and Telecom Immunity. When it comes to the Bush administration's program of domestic spying on Americans, McCain has performed similar logical gymnastics. On December 20, 2007, McCain suggested to the Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Charles Savage that President Bush had clearly crossed the line. As Wired's Ryan Singel noted:

"I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is," McCain said. The Globe's Charlie Savage pushed further, asking , "So is that a no, in other words, federal statute trumps inherent power in that case, warrantless surveillance?" To which McCain answered, "I don't think the president has the right to disobey any law."

But on June 2, McCain adviser Holtz-Eakin put that notion to rest, telling the National Review:

"[N]either the Administration nor the telecoms need apologize for actions that most people, except for the ACLU and the trial lawyers, understand were Constitutional and appropriate in the wake of the attacks on September 11, 2001."

Pressed to explain the glaring inconsistencies, John McCain on June 6 played dumb, deciding that cowardice is the better part of valor. As the New York Times reported, McCain now believes the legality of Bush's regime of NSA domestic surveillance is unclear and, in any event, is old news:

"It's ambiguous as to whether the president acted within his authority or not," he said, saying courts had ruled different ways on the matter. "I'm not interested in going back. I'm interested in addressing the challenge we face to day of trying to do everything we can to counter organizations and individuals that want to destroy this country. So there's ambiguity about it. Let's move forward."

As for immunity for the telecommunications firms cooperating with the White House in what before August 2007 was doubtless illegal surveillance, there too McCain's position has evolved. On May 23, campaign surrogate Chuck Fish announced that McCain would not back retroactive immunity "unless there were revealing Congressional hearings and heartfelt repentance from those telephone and internet companies." Subsequently, the McCain campaign swiftly backtracked, claiming its man supports immunity unconditionally.

7. Restoring the Everglades. On June 5, John McCain traveled to the Everglades to win over Floridians and environmentally-minded voters. There he proclaimed, "I am in favor of doing whatever's necessary to save the Everglades." Sadly, as ThinkProgress documented, McCain not only opposed $2 billion in funding for the restoration of the Everglades national park, he backed President Bush's veto of the legislation in 2007. "I believe," he said, "that we should be passing a bill that will authorize legitimate, needed projects without sacrificing fiscal responsibility."

8. Divestment from South Africa. During his June 2 speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), John McCain called for the international community to target Iran for the kind of worldwide sanctions regime applied to apartheid-era South Africa. Unfortunately, McCain's lobbyist-advisers Charlie Black and Rick Davis each represented firms doing business with Tehran. Even more unfortunate, John McCain was frequently not among those offering "moral clarity and conviction" in backing "a divestment campaign against South Africa, helping to rid that nation of the evil of apartheid." As ThinkProgress detailed:

Despite voting to override President Reagan's veto of a bill imposing economic sanctions against South Africa in 1986, McCain voted against sanctions on at least six other occasions.

9. Fighting Job Losses in Michigan. During the run-up to the Michigan primary, John McCain cautioned workers there in January that he didn't want to raise "false hopes that somehow we can bring back lost jobs," adding that it" wasn't government's job to protect buggy factories and haberdashers when cars replaced carriages and men stopped wearing hats." But after getting trounced in Michigan by Mitt Romney and watching the economy deteriorate further, McCain has had a change of heart. As Bloomberg noted on June 5:

Nowadays, the party's presumptive nominee is singing a different tune, striking a populist pose and saying "new jobs are coming"... ...Over the past few months, however, McCain has taken a lesson from Romney, acknowledging recently that "Americans are hurting." Returning to Michigan last month, the Arizona senator told a local television station that he would fight for new jobs and the state wouldn't "be left behind."

Perhaps the good people of Michigan, as John McCain suggested to a Kentucky audience in April, can make a living on eBay.

10. Opposing Hurricane Katrina Investigations. During a June 4th town hall meeting in Baton Rouge, John McCain answered a reporter's question regarding Hurricane Katrina and the failure of the New Orleans levees by announcing:

"I've supported every investigation and ways of finding out what caused the tragedy. I've been here to New Orleans. I've met with people on the ground."

As it turns out, not so much. McCain's revisionist history neglects to mention that in 2005 and 2006 he twice voted against a commission to study the government's response to Katrina. He also opposed three separate emergency funding measures providing relief to Katrina victims, including the extension of five months of Medicaid benefits. And as ThinkProgress pointed out, "until traveling there one month ago, McCain had made just one public tour of New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina touched down in August 2005."

And so it goes. As surely as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west each day, so too will John McCain change positions. (Like that other law of nature, McCain's flip-flops are literally becoming a daily occurrence. Since this piece was originally drafted on Saturday, McCain added two new policy turnabouts - on phasing out rather than repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax and on requiring a litmus test for his judicial appointees - to his litany of reversals.) As the Pew Research Center recently found, the word Americans now most frequently use to describe John McCain is not "maverick," but "old." Given the dizzying pace of his reversals, "opportunist" may soon top that list.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Broder is old, senile and stupid like Old Songbird "Make it a Hundred" McBush

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama doesnt have to accept every McCain´s proposal to gain voters´ trust. McCain knows well that if Obama accepts public financing, he would be the one in advantage, and that´s why he cries out when Obama does not accept that. Why is such a problem that Obama didn´t accept town hall meetings? McCain also knew that he had more experience in these kind of format,so he is just trying to put Obama in disadvantage. This shouldn´t be seen as a sign of weakness. Instead, they should be seen as a sign of Obama´s open eye to McCain´s traps and dirty games. Too bad for him he is an old politic and he has too much Washington in his blood to change right now

Posted by: dan | June 22, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

There seem to be a curse on those who support Obama. Kennedy, Tim Russert, Rezko, Rev Wright, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri... Is that a proof Hillary is a witch?

Posted by: Barak08 | June 22, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Right. Broder framed the conventional wisdom in 2000 that someone who was patently unfit for the Oval Office (George W. Bush) was superior to someone who had spent his entire life preparing for it (Al Gore, Jr., who won the election to boot).

So of course we should pay attention when the "dean of the Washington press corps" tells us that it's not fair for a Democrat to refuse to run his campaign the way the Republicans think the Democratic campaign should be run. It's not fair that Obama won't lend his charisma to the boring MCCain; it's not fair that Obama won't tie up ten weeks of campaigning showing up on demand where McCain wants him to show up; and it's not fair that a Democratic candidate should, for once, have more money to spend than a Republican candidate. It's just not fair -- and I'm glad the dean of the Washington press corps pointed that out.

Posted by: blaneyboy | June 22, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Yesterday I read quotes From Omama's book.I was so shocked that I can't even remember the name of the book.But he said in one of the quotes that he would distance hisself from his Mothers people forever.Other things he said would only be said by a devout Muslim.What better way to bring our Country to it's knees than by running it.

Posted by: Carol Walsh | June 22, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

i do not blame senator obama one bit for backing out of public financing for his campaign. he knows very well from history that the gop slugs will be crawling out from under their rocks and inundating the 527s with s-loads of money to slime him just as they did with senator kerry. and as far as obama caving in to mccain's demand for town hall meetings, why in the hell should he? is it because mccain is his elder and he should respect his elders? i think that obama should start making demands of mccain and see what his reaction is. mccain is grasping and is such a phony with his "reverend john" voice, chuckle and "my friends" every other word. yuck.

Posted by: lynn's therapist | June 22, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Zaney said:


Many of us (Democrats) . . . Even when he was in Illinois, he said "present" instead of voting, leaving listeners guessing as to his positions there.

My Comment

Democrat my eye. As for the comment about "present" that's a lie and you know it. Obama has explained, in detail, exactly why he voted present. It was a method of voting done AT THE REQUEST OF A GROUP ADVOCATING VERY STRONGLY FOR A POSITION in order to provide political cover for members in less secure districts. His position was VERY well known on this issue and the vote of "present" was entirely and completely in accordance with this position.

To claim to the contrary is a lie. And you know it.

Posted by: That's a Lie | June 22, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

You see the faux presidential seal he created? Obama is as real as that seal.

Posted by: Vnd22 | June 22, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad Obama's raising boodles of money. There are so many Americans out there who don't know Obama and just have an email to judge him by, so he's going to need all the money he can get to win. Then he can make a difference. I trust Obama. I trust his decisions.
http://ochairball.blogspot.com

Posted by: Olga | June 22, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

You think he could be worse then Mccain and the Bush policies that will follow him? Give me a break, I am happy to take my chances on Obama before Mccain and I don't care if I know anything about him.

++++++++++
Many of us (Democrats) have been saying for months, We don't know Barack Obama! He's been in Washington such a brief time and has left a thin, obscure trail of accomplisments. Even when he was in Illinois, he said "present" instead of voting, leaving listeners guessing as to his positions there. What is really scary is that he does things like duplicate the presential seal which belongs to the nation, puts his name on the bottom of his seal--does he have delusions of grandeur?

Posted by: zaney8 | June 22, 2008 1:55 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Who cares, Mccain is such a piece of sh&t Obama can not in our wildest dreams be worse. Also in four years we can make another change if we need to. Either way the Republicans have to be gotten out no matter what. Who knows, Obama may be surpassingly good.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Many of us (Democrats) have been saying for months, We don't know Barack Obama! He's been in Washington such a brief time and has left a thin, obscure trail of accomplisments. Even when he was in Illinois, he said "present" instead of voting, leaving listeners guessing as to his positions there. What is really scary is that he does things like duplicate the presential seal which belongs to the nation, puts his name on the bottom of his seal--does he have delusions of grandeur?

Posted by: zaney8 | June 22, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Rather than disheartened by Barack Obama's decision to forgo public funding, I am thrilled. He is so much smarter than many of the standard Democratic hack politicians who have proceeded him - and lost!

That a hack political journalist like David Broder, who hasn't had a new idea since, say, August 7, 1975 (to pick a date a random), is wagging his finger disapprovingly at Senator Obama tells me that the junior senator from Illinois is on the right track. Good Democratic candidates who play the rigged game by the Republican party rules get kudos from dull-witted columnists like Broder, and then go on to lose elections. Obama said that if he and McCain could agree to go head to head, with no outside or sideways funding from the parties or 527 groups, he would be willing to accept public financing. That is not the case, so he wisely chose to enter the battle fully armed. So much for those who thought Obama was weak and naive.

Posted by: Chuck | June 22, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Considering Broder has spent the last few years with the occasional column discussing how Bush is poised for a political comeback, I don't really think I'll trust his opinion on what the people think.

He might create conventional opinion, but conventional opinion about what the people want has proven spectacularly wrong (not including conventional wisdom about actual issues, which has been wrong for the entirety of the Bush presidency).

Addressing his actual points - people don't care about debate negotiation or public financing. If you're waiting for something to take down Obama, look for something as substance. Like say if Obama had wildly changed his position on tax cuts or energy policy for political expediency this election.

Posted by: Justin | June 22, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

37th & O Street,

You're as damn as they come!

It doesnt matter how many times you post these comments - in fact u're helping out! The fact is that the Extremists in the Republican Party have already said these words aganist the Obamas! Both the McCians have used this crap against the Obamas - that is just how low your likes are!

Shame on you!!!!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

According to the Associated Press:

"U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve jailed Rezko...saying he had disobeyed her order to keep her posted on his financial status. Among other things, he failed to tell her about a $3.5 million loan from London-based Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi -- a loan that was later forgiven in exchange for shares in a prime slice of Chicago real estate. Rezko gave $700,000 of the money to his wife and used the rest to pay legal bills and funnel cash to various supporters."

NADHMI AUCHI
I'M SURE SADAM'S MONEY LAUNDERER KNOWS HOW TO DIVIDE A MILLION DOLLARS INTO FIFTY DOLLAR CONTRIBUTIONS.

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

The hypocrisy in what Broder says here is breathtaking.

Has he built sufficient trust so that his motives will be accepted by the voters who are only now starting to figure out what makes him tick?

Is this the same David Broder who Deborah Howell criticized for making big-dollar speeches that put his trustworthiness and motives into doubt?

"I am embarrassed by these mistakes and the embarrassment it has caused the paper,'' Broder said.

Me too, Mr. Broder. me too.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Allah is Great! Allah loves you Mr McCain, your 100 years war, very brilliant plan, Please continue to send more your lovely American Trillions to us in Iraq.

Hello Rich American friends, please support Mr McCain, he and Mr Bush help us Iraqis very much with your America Trillions, and they make Oil prices very very nice now for our Islamic Muslim brothers, we in Iraq love your Mr McCain, a smart and rich man, he come visit sometimes, he promise to stay in Iraq for 100 years and more, he will give our people many American Trillion Dollars, Allah praise American Trillions, nsha'Allah it is good for America too, we have new American built Resort and Hotel to enjoy, you come to visit in our new American made Airports, we have new American made Hotels and new American made Roads and Ports for all Rich Americans to come and visit. We love to see nice Rich American lady like Cindy McCain, very nice to look at, Mr Bush and Mr McCain very good send many nice American women here, very nice to look, we Muslims can have 4 wives, Mr McCain can have 2 more wives, maybe 3 more, we don't count his first one, he have many kids like us Muslims, very strong and powerful man, please come and visit our new American made Resorts and Hotels and spend some American Dollars. We in Iraq praise Mr. McCain, his 100 year war in Iraq and send us many American Trillion Dollars, amazing idea, very smart Military leader for America, you must be very proud to have such smart leader. He will help build our nation with your wonderful American Trillions and we praise Mr McCain very much at our new American made Islamic Mosques and new American made Mosjids, I have a new one near my new American made Home, I drive there in my new Benz, I only have 2 new Benz now, American car not so good, I have new good American job paid with nice American Dollars. All young men gather at our new American made Wahabi Islamic Center School for new Islamic Fundamentalist teachings but we don't learn about attacks, no wory Rich American friends, mostly discuss good things like American women, no need to worry. Please vote for your smart Mr McCain, his 100 year plan for Iraq and American Trillions for Iraq will help America very much. He is good rich man. Your Mr Bush, also very smart man, make Oil Prices very, very good for our Islamic Muslim brothers, but not enough, please do not attack our Iranian brothers, they help Iraqi people very much. However, we do have some enemies to the West, they are also causing trouble and we need more of your powerful American weapons and American Trillions to fight back our enemies to the West. SAMI ALLAHU LIMAN HAMIDAH McCain means Allah hears and send praise to Mr McCain. Iraqis love American Trillions! Takbir! means Allah is Great! Praise Allah!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

"Obama can only perform on script.Just like Bush.If Obama is elected,he will,like Bush,Actually,bush pick only his supporters at all his public speakings.The question is, who will be the puppdtmaster???Four more years.Empty suit.If he cant face Mccain at town hall debates,how will he face foreign leaders not totally enamoured of him as the American media clearly are? actually Bush is a much better speaker than Obama.

Posted by: Nannie Turner | June 22, 2008 7:14 AM"

"I can press when there needs to be pressed; I can hold hands when there needs to be - hold hands." GWB on his role in the Mideast peace process, 1/4/08 as cited by Gary Trudeau in the morning's Post

My dog can speak better than Bush.

Posted by: Bush a better speaker than Obama? | June 22, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

A blogger in The New York Times yesterday finally admitted his brainwashing and love for Obama was really a hatred of Clintons. How many others were just hating Hillary, Billary, Shrillary, etc.? A lot. They knew all along that Obama was a fake or close to one. They just didn't want Hillary Clinton to get the nomination. Why? Buying into the old stories? Bill's indiscretion? Woman in the White House? Sad. Now we have someone who is twice as incompetent, inexperienced and has an agenda that is a major concern. And the only thing they can say in defense is that if we don't vote for their candidate, we'll be forced to vote for Mc Cain. That's the worst recommendation of any presidential candidate in history.

Posted by: Lynn E | June 22, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I enjoy your blog, but I don't want a mere re-hash of another WaPo columnist's work. Just because Mr. Broder has been the "dean" of political reporters doesn't mean he's always right, that you have to advertise for him, or that your job is to solicit comments on his writing (there are plenty of comments over at the original piece). If you were intent on making his column part of your column today, I would have appreciated some critical analysis of whether Mr. Broder's comments are in fact well-founded.

Posted by: jayhawkdem | June 22, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse


What gets me is that McCain has completely gamed the system- his loan scheme with public financing then opting out is currently not even an issue on the show, and it would seem to me that would be at least mentioned. Of course, it is not, for whatever reason. Additionally, this is even more egregious when you consider that this is McCain's signature issue. His name is on the damned bill, and the message he has sent is that the bill is a joke. Hell, aren't there even lawsuits against the man on the issue?

I never much bought into the notion of liberal media bias but the longer I am outside the Republican hive mind, the more I recognize that liberal media bias may be the biggest fraud the right-wing has ever gotten away with. It is absurd.

Posted by: former republican | June 22, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

You read Broder's piece with interest? That's pathetic. He's a corrupt old fool, no more honest in his writing than he is ethical in following Post policies regarding taking money from lobbyists.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Harper's Ken Silverstein recently revealed that the Washington Post's David Broder and Bob Woodward have been regularly appearing "on the business-lecture circuit" and receiving fees for speaking before a wide variety of special-interest corporate groups.

With his persistent and tenacious reporting, Silverstein forced the Washington Post to address the matter. In her Sunday article, the Post's ombudsman -- Deborah Howell -- writes that the paper's policy requires journalists to get "permission from department heads" before accepting such speaking engagements, but "Broder and Woodward did not check with editors on the appearances Silverstein mentioned."

Howell confirms that Broder received speech fees from the Northern Virginia Association of Realtors and the Minnesota League of Cities, and accepted a "13-night 'Rio and the Amazon' cruise in exchange for three speeches about presidents he has covered." Silverstein notes that Broder and Woodward are "regulars on the talk circuit" and that the problem is not restricted to just a few speeches.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Broder needs to first pay off his bet to Hunter Thomspon's family before being taken seriously.

Posted by: info | June 22, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

We know nothing about Barack Obama because the Democratic Party--controlled Main Stream Media has been censoring everything Obama has ever done or has been involved with. They want Obama elected no matter what. We would never have heard of his racist white and America--hating Pastor's Jerimiah Wright Jr, Michael Pfleger, Louis Farrakhan, or Otis Moss 3d and Barack and Michelle Obama's 20 year love affair with them if it hadn't been for the few conservative news sources like Fox News, the ONLY news source that one can trust to report ALL THE NEWS (it's the reason liberals hate Fox). Todays MSM is not the "WATCHDOG FOR THE PEOPLE" anymore--as they like to tell us--but has become just another arm for the Democratic Party

Posted by: madhatter | June 22, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted yesterday...and you're still an anonymous coward and a pathetic loser-

Hey Anonymous Coward who posted the McCain songbird blog, I hope you paid your taxes this year...John McCain appreciates your support of his campaign...that's the American way. We all pay our taxes and then support both candidates from the proceeds. Then MOVEON.ORG, etc. gives millions to advertise for the Democrat and Republican 527's place ads for the Republican. Now we have a precedent...America is writing a blank check for Obama. You see he believes in CREATIVE FINANCING...that's how he bought a 2.5 million dollar house and property for half of its value...through an Arab millionaire who loaned it to Rezkos's wife who overpaid for the adjoining property and sold it back to Obama...a "Bonehead Move", according to Obama...sounds like we have to watch every dollar coming in to make sure no more arab money influences our election in another "Bonehead Move."

Let's just say that calling an American Hero whose arms were broken and then rebroken, left to die in a pool of his own blood and feces,inorder to obtain a statement a songbird, is the deplorable tactic of a scared little coward who would have folded like a deck of cards at word one...your anonymity speaks volumes loudly!

Posted by: Scott | June 21, 2008 10:37 PM

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

The shifts Obama has taken this past week are nothing compared to ones he'll take as president -- when he'll attempt to shift the country toward socialism.

Better start practicing the Internationale. We'll all be singing it. Or else.

Posted by: info | June 22, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Broder's question was "How well do voters know Obama".

Apparently, tere are two answers.

a. We don't, he is jeopardizing his brand
b. OH-MY-GOD-HE-IS-THE-ONE-ROT-IN-HELL-BRODER-YOU-SCHILL.

About sums its up?

Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

David Broder has zero credibility with me when it comes to political commentary.

The column that sealed the deal? The one in February 2007 where he told us Bush was poised for a comeback.

Second, he should be more honest in his columns. When he writes something will "trouble the voters", what he really means is "it troubles me, David Broder".

And finally, he's a bit of a hypocrite when he talks about ethics, isn't he?

Posted by: CT Voter | June 22, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

"Since 1976 we have had presidential debates."

The first Presidential debates in the modern era was Nixon vs. Kennedy in 1960.

What we have had since then are engineered game shows. In a debate the moderator asks a question, both sides have an opportunity to speak and the moderator moves on. Other than that the moderators only job is to control time.

Unless you are willing to devote long, long hours, I do, to researching the issues and candidates on your own you will be making an uninformed decision. Probably why we end up with so many LOSERS.

Click the remote off and take advantage of the fact that we can know first hand what these candidates are about. Otherwise perhaps you should stay home. Which is what the majority will do in any event. Add up the numbers from the primaries and add say 30 percent for independents, who are not allowed a voice in a primary in many states such as AZ, and the number you have is a speck on the wall compared 300 million or so,

Posted by: RetCombatVet | June 22, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

F__K Broder. He is supporting McCain because he has found a candidate as ancient as he is. Have the senile old clown write a column explaining how McCain calling his wife a c__t will win over Hillary Clinton supporters.

Posted by: shiva7 | June 22, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Let's talk about what Obama's presidential seal tell us about him

http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/06/obamas_great_seal.html

Posted by: God Father | June 22, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Why does Old McBush Support Tax Cuts to the Rich?

$200 million net worth, private jet planes, 8 homes, multiple cars are some clues.

The Old McBush fortune has ties to the Mob as well.

Google "McCain Fortune" "McCain Arizona Mob"

In government records, McCain is permitted to describe his wife's salary at Hensley as simply "more than $1,000″ and, when listing her major assets, say only that they are worth "more than $1 million."

The reports show Cindy McCain has at least $9 million in assets on her own and at least $15 million with the McCain children. But those figures are virtually meaningless; her stake in Hensley & Co. alone almost certainly exceeds them by tens of millions of dollars.

Beverage industry analysts estimate Hensley's value at more than $250 million and its annual sales at $300 million or more. Hensley describes itself as the third-largest Anheuser-Bush wholesaler in the United States. It sold more than 23 million cases of beer last year and is among the nation's biggest beer distributors regardless of brand.

Cindy McCain's assets go beyond the family beer company.

She and her children own a minority stake in the Arizona Diamondbacks. The professional baseball team's chief executive, Jeff Moorad, and former majority owner Jerry Colangelo are McCain fundraisers. Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling, a former Diamondback player, appeared in a New Hampshire campaign advertisement for McCain.

Assets held by Cindy McCain alone or with her children also include Anheuser-Busch stock; two condominiums along the California coast worth a total of at least $3 million and Arizona investments in rental medical offices and a parking lot, according to property records and John McCain's latest financial disclosure reports.

John McCain has seven ch1ildren: two stepsons and a daughter from his first marriage, and two sons, a daughter and an adopted daughter from his second. McCain's financial disclosure reports do not identify the children who share assets with Cindy McCain.

Arizona is a community property state, so McCain may share possessions his wife didn't inherit, such as their primary home. Cindy McCain, through a family trust, sold the family mansion in Phoenix for $3.2 million and bought a $4.6 million Phoenix condo in 2006. The couple may also jointly own a condo in Arlington, Va., assessed at $847,800. McCain's campaign and Hensley declined to say whether the couple has communal property.

John McCain held a barbecue recently for reporters at a two-story cabin near Sedona, Ariz., that sits on 15 acres owned by his wife's family trust and a real estate partnership in her name. The property includes four single-family homes and is worth nearly $1.8 million.

It's clear the rustic retreat is considered family property. The cabin features artwork by the McCain children and editorial cartoons depicting McCain. A doormat reads: "GEEZER (formerly known as `Stud Muffin') Lives Here." The amenities include a soda fountain and, of course, a Budweiser beer tap.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Broder reveals, not only with his violation of the Post's ethics policy but also with every column he writes, that he has become nothing but a shill and propagandist for Beltway power. What is even sadder, though, is that Broder's decline mirrors the Post's decline. It is very telling that Rove attacked McClellan by saying McClellan sounded like a left-wing blogger. Precisely. Because only left-wing bloggers like Glenn Greenwald have been working to get the facts in front of the American people. The MSM has still not figured out that a key reason for its decline is that it has chosen to tell us what the government wants us to know, rather than what the government does not want us to know. That is why the Post is now increasingly obsolete, and corrupt. The country has paid a huge price for this failure of the MSM. It will not be forgiven, nor is the MSM smart enough or brave enough to realize its mistake and make amends. Plenty of people are happy enough to settle for government propaganda -- Fox News proves that. But there always will be a substantial portion of the population who truly want to know what is going on and who are able to distinguish real reporting from stenography and propaganda. I grieve for my old profession, but it has failed, fatally, and thus deserves its sorry fate.

Posted by: Aformerjournalist | June 22, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

anonymous at 1:04 - were you trying to tell us that McCain is old?

Ah, the unity . . . the new politics, no divisiveness here folks, move on . . .

gotta love it.

Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

How much do you know about OLD Songbird McBush?

Why is OLD Songbird McBush hiding his Military Records? Kerry signed the 180 Waiver and release all of his. Yes, you can keep it sealed, but the Cons forced Kerry to release his, but there was nothing bad in his records. Old Songbird McBush refuses to sign the 180 Waiver. Why is Old Songbird McBush hiding his Military Records? Maybe, the Navy will wash his Military records. Both his father and grandfather were 4 Star Admirals.

Is OLD McBush a Traitor? Did OLD McBush collaborate with the Enemy?

Why is OLD McBush's codename Songbird?

Google these to learn more about OLD Songbird McBush.

McCain Songbird
McCain War Criminal
McCain Temper
McCain Arizona Mob
McCain Hero
McCain Adultery

This website also has some clues for us.

http://www.usvetdsp.com/jan08/mccain_military_record.htm

Old Songbird McBush has a lot to hide from the American People unlike Kerry. Old Songbird McBush is no hero, he is a Traitor and a Coward.

Where are your Military Records, OLD Songbird "Make it a Hundred" Traitor McBush? What are you hiding?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFM1xqqTX_g

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Opinionators like Broder are so rediculous. First, they waste everyone's time proclaiming Obama weak and naive...then when he acts like a tough politician, they whine about that. Where is THESE guy's integrity?????

Posted by: kirk | June 22, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

Chris, i considered your column one of the few must-reads in what aint Katherine Graham's newspaper any more... but your attempt to suck up to Broder is unconvincing.

We now have proof of what we have suspected for a long time: Broder is Krauthammer without the wheelchair. At 54, I am starting to worry that I won't outlive this loathsome toady windbag.

Posted by: Lamb Cannon | June 22, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

I'd reiterate the fact that Broder was publicly chastized himself for his ethical problems this week.

And by the way, since when was "conventional wisdom" anything more than platitudes and cliche? The fact that you tout this as a good thing questions your credibility as well.

Posted by: MRC | June 22, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Here is the Ombudsman's article on David Broader breaking WaPo rules on accepting money. I can't say it does much for my opinion of his objectivity, especially when the article is run by his own paper.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/20/AR2008062002627.html

Posted by: Drew | June 22, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Let's see...

In past campaigns, the GOP has had the money edge and used its financial advantage with little more than wimper from the Fourth Estate, but now its "an issue" beacuse the fundraising advantage is so starkly on the Democrats side.

Since 1976 we have had presidential debates. After the fact, the press has reported various things done by the GOP to takae advantage (eg In 1984, the GOP played withe the lighting to make Mondale look like he had teabags under his eyes. In 1988, a platform was removed from Dukakis' podium to emphasize the height difference. In 2000 and 2004, town hall debates were stacked with GOP supporters who were filtered in the mix as independents. Oh wait, George Stepanopolous is reading right wing blogs during a Democratic Debate in PA a few months ago) The whole debate system has become a game --- the GOP seems to use the game to gain an advantage.

I did not go to an Ivy league school or get a free education at a US Military Academy, but I am smart enough to not play a rigged game.

Obama take the money and run to victory --- Refuse to let the GOP push you into a rigged game

Posted by: Kevin | June 22, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Here is what Broder and this paper are all about:

The senile Broder probably never heard of McCain calling his second wife a "cun*t" and how we have tape of it. When will the American people hear it? Think this constant censorship of the McCain reality will end? We have to make it end.
YouTube and other new media will force the Post to do its job.
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=Euu_DMhsXQo

Posted by: GOP Christians against McBush | June 22, 2008 12:07 PM
================================
I just watched your suggested youtube. It is labeled as a Reproduction Meeting and features actors discussing what McCain said. If you want people to hear McCain actually saying that, you need to direct us to that video.

Posted by: Michael | June 22, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

"McCain benefits from a long-established reputation as a man who says what he believes."

One, that's his reputation, rather than the reality. Two, accepting for the sake of argument that the above is true, the problem with McShame is that he doesn't do what he believes, i.e., he is a hypocrite of the highest order.

Posted by: bondjedi | June 22, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

I have been 2 month Obama supporter...
I was a quite enchanted his campaign and I was thinking that finally the ideal could become reality....
But after this case, I was deeply disappointed...
still I will vote for him. but now, the real enchantment is gone... I wish obama would be an authentic person who value the means as well as the goal.... maybe that is too much expectation...

Posted by: zenni | June 22, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

HAHA. Broder talks about Obama's 'creditibility?' What a joke.

Hey, CC, go read your ombudsman's column this week, where she upbraids Broder for breaking the Wapo's rules and violating ethics by taking money -- lots of money --from Republican corporate groups. And vacations, and gifts, and you name it -- a long, long list.

Broder is a hack, an aging windbag, a Republican corporate mouthpiece -- and totally irrelevant.

HE HAS ZERO CREDIBILITY.

Posted by: drindl | June 22, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

posted by doc at 12:11:
"It's fairly obvious that the MAINSTREAM PRESS is against Obama and has just been looking for ways to destroy him through innuendo and slander."

**************
I guess I reiterate my previous comment - it really is funny how people see things differently.

The press is AGAINST Obama? Because he was questioned on two items? EGADS! The nerve! Thou shalt not question The Obama!

Broder has actually been pretty sympathetic toward Obama.

This is amazing!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

PLEASE!!!! WAPO-- cease and desist from using the phrase, "FLIP-FLOP" It is soooo yesterday! It is sooo 2004! We have closed our ears and minds to that stupid phrase!

Shut up and move on!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

David Broder becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy with shallow pieces like this one.

Voters will be suspicious of Obama's motives, he says -- because he and other purveyors of conventional wisdom spout those suspicions.

Voters aren't troubled by McCain's flip-flops and indiscretions, he says -- if only because he doesn't seem troubled enough by them to actually examine them.

Broder repeats unchallenged the McCain talking points that Obama broke a promise to use public financing, without even examining the counter-claim that he only promised to "pursue negotiations" for public financing if other outside money could be controlled. He doesn't need to accept the other version - but he is obligated to not simply ignore it.

And while Broder expresses angst about what he thinks is Obama's self-serving stance on public financing, he somehow manages to totally ignore the possibly illegal games that McCain - the alleged paragon of campaign finance reform - as played with the public funding. If we only read Broder, we would never know that McCain (when his campaign was broke), agreed to take public financing for the primaries, and used public funds as collateral for a bank loan to his campaign. But after his NH win, he decided that it would be better to not take public funding -- so he backed out. Even the Republican chair of the Federal Election Commission has said that this is probably illegal -- but Broder doesn't seem to mind, or even to notice.

Broder treats McCain's townhall proposal as something that Obama was obligated to accept, yet doesn't question for a second why McCain is too cowardly to accept the Obama campaign counter-proposal.

Broder doesn't ask why Saint McCain of campaign reform has benefitted from illegal free rides on corporate jets (including his wife's), or why the anti-lobbyist has staffed his campaign with lobbyists and filled his campaign coffers with lobbyist money.

Broder doesn't bother to mention that McCain - who has always advocated for disclosure and transparency - doesn't feel obligated to make his multi-millionaire wife's taxes public. Teresa Heinz would have loved such media indifference on the subject.

And Broder says the public accepts McCain's flip-flops, but never actually gets around to discussing what they are -- against/for tax cuts, against/for drilling, attacking the hatred of the religious right/brown nosing them for votes, etc -- the list is long and growing. But because Broder seems to think McCain is a straight shooter, he doesn't want to bother American voters with such details -- after all, we all certainly accept Broder's blind acceptance of McCain's probity.

David Broder used to be a fine political reporter and analyst. Sadly these days he has become little more than a mere repeater of outdated conventional wisdom and repeater of the talking points he hears from his buddies who have been in DC forever. Maybe if he bothered to put as much energy into actually doing reporting and thoughtful analysis as he does in giving high paid speeches to corporate groups, he would give us something better than cold leftover one sided talking points. But columns like this one make it clear that is very unlikely to happen.


Posted by: terje | June 22, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

I'm an African American who is NOT voting for Obama. Nor will I vote for McCain. I'm going to write in a candidate. It's true that many African Americans are voting for Obama just because he's black, and that's just as wrong as NOT voting for him because he's black. I respect and honor his historical achievement, but I don't want him to be my president. He has very little experience on the national level, and his decision making has been suspect at best.

Posted by: linroy62 | June 22, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse

pHOENIX, Amen! you nailed it. I didnt even know that Obama is this much revered! WOW! I love Obama more than ever! God bless Sen. Obama to be our next President! Hallelujah!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

How well do we know Obama! What an absurd column. A better question is how well do we know McCain? Or more accurately, who will McCain be next week?

These are McCain's major policy flip-flops from just the past three weeks: He supported the moratorium on drilling for oil in ANWR; now he's against it. He supported a windfall profits tax on Big Oil; now he's against it. He was against warrantless wiretapping; now he supports it. He was for privatizing Social Security; now he's against it. He supported a change to the RNC platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape or incest; now he's against it. He was against the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects; now he supports it. He stated there would be no "litmus test" for nominees; now he supports it.

Who is the real liar? Who is really getting a media pass? Who is the one person we cannot trust to be honest with us? The answer is John McCain. Wake up people.

Posted by: maxfli | June 22, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

How the worm turns!

All those people that vigorously defended Bill Clinton's Monica problem as a personal matter are now Obamorons. Today, anything John & Cindy McCain did (or DIDN'T do) is an issue. No more personal matters! Hypocrits!

Posted by: MJ | June 22, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Blacks are voting for Obama because he's black and they want to win at all cost. If it was a black Hitler, they would vote for him too out of ignorance.
But the Obama rise to power has nothing to do with blacks and will do nothing to uplift black Americans or any minorities for that fact. Obama has a large and powerful family world-wide, brothers and sisters who are world deal makers that no one talks about.

The last frontier for domination is the continent of Africa, rich in oil, minerals, all types of natural resources, including people, and China has made a claim on Africa making the USA the losers. Along comes Barrack Hussein Obama, kingship to Africa, and aspiring to be world leader. Obama and family are the deal makers for the take over of Africa, just like in slavery times, Africans sold Africans.

It is obvious that the democrats, world deal makers such as Kennedy, Kerry, etc. intent to take over Africa and its natural resources. African American people this has nothing to do with you, but your race hate has been used to accomplish world dominance. Meaning, Obama thinks you are all emotional stupid people and he has defrauded you. Obama will sell Africa to the highest bitter and it's not going to be the USA.

Obama doesn't even have the experience to be president or CEO of a Microsoft, GE or McDonalds, but he has the deal makers to take over the continent of Africa. Everybody is on Obama's gravy train, including the G7. How we vote as American citizens means zero.

Welcome to Change and the New World Order.

Posted by: Phoenix | June 22, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

John McCain called his wife a C&*t?? and the MEDIA is silent? Wow! What an irony! This is a disrepect for all women!http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=Euu_DMhsXQo

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a liar.

Posted by: Doctorate | June 22, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Did I miss a turn here? Isn't David Broder the man who violated the Post's policy by taking money from parisan/advocacy groups for speeches? And he wants to talk ethics? Gimme a break.

Posted by: barry08 | June 22, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Wow, a lot of people here are either fast typists or have way too much free time.

You can rely on Broder to supply the conventional, inside-the-beltway wisdom. He hasn't noticed that Obama is running a 21st century campaign against a 20th (or is it 19th?) century opponent. But inflating a couple of no-brainer tactical decisions into "do we really know this man?" is a cheap shot.

McCain lost his reputation (except among his fawning media groupies) as someone who sticks to his beliefs when he kissed up to the people he once called "agents of intolerance." So it wasn't a surprise when he flipped on taxes and even on torture. Obama choosing not to give away his tactical advantages in the campaign are nothing like McCain's substantive sell-outs.

As for what this means to how well we know Obama: well, it may mean that he knows the first step to effecting any substantive program is to win. It may mean that he's not the wimpy flower child the Republicans would have us believe; rather he's got steel in his core and is not going to be rolled by the I'm-a-dinner-jackets or the Broders of this world.

Posted by: turningfool | June 22, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

It's fairly obvious that the MAINSTREAM PRESS is against Obama and has just been looking for ways to destroy him through innuendo and slander. The bias is everywhere...just watch the talking heads on Meet the Press, George Stapholococcus, etc. The bias is obvious as they get on Obama but leave McCain unscathed.

I have two more points here.

1. Why does the press constantly attack Michelle Obama, yet never mention Cindy McCain's problems? In the mid-nineties she was addicted to prescription pain killers. Worse, she was stealing the drugs from the American Voluntary Medical Team, a third world relief organization she founded. Like most ridiculously rich people, she didn't have to go to jail for her crimes and was allowed to enter a rehab program rather than face criminal charges. The charity was shut down. So when Cindy McCain says, "All I know is that I've always been proud of my country," take it with a grain of salt. She spent at least three years stoned out of her mind. It's impossible to know what she thought during that time. Was she really proud, or was she just hallucinating?

2. Where are John McCains psychological reports? Senator McCain, during combat operations in Viet Nam, was shot down, captured and held as a POW for some years. Additionally, it was reported that he was tortured during his captivity. Understandably, the mental stress and duress of his ordeal took their toll upon him physically and mentally. Post traumatic stress, in varying degrees, is the lot of many, who have been in combat. In McCain's case, add the circumstance of being a POW accompanied with torture.

In view of the bewildering physical and mental experiences suffered by McCain, as a candidate for President of the United States of America, the state of his mental health should rightfully be of grave concern to all Americans. Is it rational for a Navy Officer, who is rather wealthy, to be of the judgment that the titanic sacrifices being made by our troops in Iraq are not worth the price of a college education?

In the not to distant past, the former Senator Thomas Eagleton of Missouri was put forth as a potential VP candidate. After the fact, his mental state was discovered and revealed. The country needs to know if Senator John McCain was given ample mental screenings by competent medical personnel subsequent to his being freed. How many, how often, by what competent medical entities and when was the last screening performed? What were the results? Are those results going to be made public well before the elections in November? A mushroom cloud and fifty million casualties later will be too late to ask!!! Won't it?

Posted by: the doc | June 22, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Bush was a fairly well known quanity when we got him for his first term, and we thought we knew him better when he was re-elected during his second term. In reality, we had no idea who he was and what he was capable of. I'm just not so sure we ever really know a candidate until history reveals a multitude of unknown truths about them. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Obama is perfect. As an independent leaning democrat who votes based on issues, I would have considered voting for the McCain that I "knew" eight years or so ago. The McCain I "know" today is something far different and Obama seems to have a degree of candor not remotely similar to the politicians of the past. I'm not sure I remember Broder ever writing anything positive about Obama so I have to wonder what it is about Obama that Broder really dislikes. Maybe he's one of the 3 in 10 white americans who has a bit of racial bias.

Posted by: sherre15 | June 22, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

Greg..I agree only everything you say is really describing McSame , sorry Mr. Magooo
cause he is the only needing attention from Jimminy Cricket

Ha=ha

Posted by: barry08 | June 22, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Here is what Broder and this paper are all about:

The senile Broder probably never heard of McCain calling his second wife a "cun*t" and how we have tape of it. When will the American people hear it? Think this constant censorship of the McCain reality will end? We have to make it end.
YouTube and other new media will force the Post to do its job.
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=Euu_DMhsXQo

Posted by: GOP Christians against McBush | June 22, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

In it, he argues that two decisions by Barack Obama in the last week -- to reject John McCain's proposal for 10 joint town halls and to opt out of public financing -- will put to the test the question of how well voters know the Illinois senator and how far they are willing to trust him.
=======================
Willing to trust Obama? Please. No one trusts Obama. There are some who want to believe what he says and those that will do anything he says because he looks like them...but no one trusts Obama. Even his most ardent supporters aren't sure about his motives. They want to be......but they're not. How can you trust a man who changes his position every time the political situation changes. No, no, there is blind following but not trust. Write about something else.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Oh dear! we're again! David Broder, Why can't you ask us the other way? i.e. Why does McCain want 10 townhalls? Why doesn't he want debates? Why should Obama accept, without question, what McCain wants? Obama is not WAPO who gave BUSH a pass on the debate that led us to Iraq!!

And who aru to say that Obama should have accepted McCain's demands? Do u really think Obama can't think for himself? Obama gave McCain an answer, one that McCain didn't like. Obama proposed half/ half and McCain rejected it offhand without even giving it a thought!

So, BRODER, don't sit there and tell us what's wrong with Obama, when you FAIL/ REFUSE to see what's wrong with McCain!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

WHAT EVER WE KNOW ABOUT THE CANDIDATES IS WHAT EVER YOU GUYS IN THE MEDIA DECIDES WHAT WILL BE. YOU TOLD US THAT BUSH WAS A REAL RANCHER, A COWBOY, A PERSON SECURE OF HIS IDENTITY WHILE GORE WAS AN IMMATURE PRETENDER. AND NOW YOU KEEP TELLING US THE MACCAIN IS THE SUPER HERO, GREATER THAN PATTON AND THAT HIS AURA OF STRAIGHT TALKER IS INTACT. FRANKLY DEAR, THE ONLY THING STILL INTACT IS YOUR FABRICATIONS.

Posted by: gus vidal | June 22, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

The circus comedy that constitutes the Obama campaign. This is a scenario that has repeated itself multiple times on other issues. On terrorism - Obama is asked a straight forward question on his anticipated policies to combat terrorism; and, he responds in an equally forward manner that he would handle the issue as a police action. The McCain camp immediately exploits Obama's naive response, correctly highlighting Obama's dangerous inexperience and lack of understanding of the gravity/complexity of the issue. Obama's handlers immediately haul him into the cloak room; advise him that his response was feeble and misguided; tell him what he should have said; and, send him back into the public forum, teleprompter in hand , to read his handlers prepared text on the latest version of his position. The Main Stream Media immediately chimes-in lauding Obama for what he meant to say on the issue all-along!
Unequivocally, Obama is the equivalent of a circus clown; a stand-up comic; a circus-barker attempting to lure the mentally-challenged into the tent with promises of an epiphany; a Charley McCarthy mannequin that appears to lip-sync the commentary from his ventriloquist controllers. This man is an virtual imbecile who is totally without the capacity to speak intelligently on issues on which he has not been previously programmed by his puppet masters. P.T. Barnum was right on target when he observed: "There's a sucker born every minute." ; but, hopefully the American electorate will not be duped by such a charlatan. Electing Obama as President Of The United States would be the equivalent of appointing Jack Kevorkian as Director of The National Institutes Of Health. National suicide. Greg Neubeck

Posted by: Greg Neubeck | June 22, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I always wonder who's more stupid: Cilizza writing the fix or us (including myself) reading it. It's a column about nothing, including non-starters such as obama being annoyed by a fan. There are no news: it's all about perceptions about perceptions. I am not even antagonized. This is the last straw. I recommend to all of you just not to read these useless articles anymore.

Posted by: gman | June 22, 2008 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: aBigSAM | June 22, 2008 11:31 AM
"When asked to name a fault, Hillary and Edwards both gave glowing answers that weren't faults at all, like "I love my country too much." The ONLY candidate to provide an honest answer, that he's "horribly sloppy when it comes to keeping track of paperwork," was Obama."
*************
Ha! its funny how people see things differently. You said this is where you decided to go for Obama because he gave an honest answer compared to the other two.

This moment "marked the spot" where I got extremely uncomfortable with press coverage over Obama - pundits loved his answer and talked about it incessantly - how honest and inspiring it was.

Please. Obama's "I lose papers" was no more deep or honest or inspiring than Hillary's (paraphrased) "I'm too passionate" (well, in retrospect, her answer does seem more honest! She did have a hard time letting go of her campaign!).

But "I lose papers" as an inspirational talking point? ah. . no.


Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse


From "Head of State"
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/06/three-in-ten.html

Sunday, June 22, 2008
Three in Ten

According to today's Post, three in 10 people, in an ABC News/Post Center survey, admit to race bias.

What this means:

All surveys are subject to what is called a "social desirability" bias. Therefore, if someone approaches you with a clipboard and asks you if you believe that exercise and a healthy diet are part of your daily routine, you are likely to answer "Yes"--even if you have been stopped on your way to fulfill at daily urge at the nearby Ben and Jerry's--because you want to be viewed in terms that you believe are socially desirable, rather than the more ugly and human truth.

Therefore, when three in 10 people admit to a race bias, we can be sure that the actual rate is higher.

This is especially true when we are dealing with a particularly repulsive characteristic like racism (more powerfully loaded for social desirability than, for example, age bias). Few will admit to holding the view--often, even to themselves.

As a result, the bias takes many different forms, beyond the blatant bigotry that one may think of when first asked the question.

One may think, for example, that they are not biased against race--just against a perceived "arrogance" that they have never stopped to consider that they allow for more easily in some people than others.

They may intellectualize their bias by creating a stereotype or straw man of the holder of unbiased attitudes--rather than of the target of their bias. This, I'm sure, was akin to focusing on the supposed intellectual naivety of the abolitionist 150 years ago, as a screen for their more essential perspective. We see the equivalent of this today--scan the blogs.

They might also want to believe that they are beyond such fearful, impulsive and banal reactions--congratulating themselves for the simulacrum of a reaction, in an act of self-deceptive and illusory personal consistency, likely to crack at the first powerful test, in a cloud of inarticulate (or unarticulated) and unexamined scattered doubts.

Cracking the crust of deep and hardened attitudes and taking a core sample has its own difficulties. Having the focus, persistence and courage to evaluate those attitudes in yourself, to an extent that you will allow them to change your behavior, rather than fading into the easy familiarity of the past, is a far greater challenge.

However, in the face of the all-too-familiar difficulties of the past 8 years, it is an imperative.

Just as the unexamined life is not worth living, the unexamined vote is not worth casting.

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/06/three-in-ten.html

Posted by: Robert Hewson | June 22, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

With all due respect to Mr. Broder's experience, his main audience lies firmly inside the beltway, not outside. He's been wrong as many times as he has been right (see his prediction last year about the President Bush's approval numbers improving). In this day of blogging, the Broder's of the world are becoming less influential. Why listen intently to a Washington insider when we can now converse with others who live out in the real world with the rest of us?

Posted by: J | June 22, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

No. I do not agree with Broder. The mistake that all of you have made, including Broder, whom I respect, is to underestimate Sen. Obama's capabilities. I happen to think that these are tactical moves that Sen. Obama made. It proves he has the muscles to fight his own battles; it proves that he is a master, a genius at politics - and that the media is not ready to accept that.

The media, like Sen. McCain and the Republicans have the same low-minded thinking: You all want to put Obama into this small box of "race" becoz that's what tickles America. Well, Obama is telling you that he is a strategic and independent thinker, and you're not going to box him up! So, get it, and start reporting substantive policy stuff!

Accept it palz, that Obama outsmarted you this time!!!!

Posted by: Liz, DC | June 22, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

I think it's fair to call Obama on this about-face, but I find it pretty sleazy and unprofessional that Broder is couching this in the leading headline of "how well to we really know Obama?".

This is barely-veiled code for all the paranoid suspicions that Broder's friends in the swiftboating far-right like to try to stoke: Does he hate America? Is he secretly a Muslim? Does he possibly have an agreement drawn up with Osama bin Laden (and have you noticed that the candidate's name sounds a lot more like the guy who attacked us than one of your neighbors?) to cede large parts of the Union for the planned North American Caliphate? How well DO we know this man (whose middle name by the way is the same as the dictator we ousted in Iraq)? What sinister secrets might he be HIDING???

Meanwhile, the Post politely sits on all the slimy things about McCain that most voters don't know. And they continue this inane meme about him knowing his head from his rear on foreign policy. Just disgusting. But what do you expect from the neocon editorial board that cheerled us into Iraq? Truth? Yeah, right.

Posted by: Mark | June 22, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Cabby:

I read your post where you more or less stated that your views of Barack Obama dimmed in the course of the Iowa debate because he and Edwards seemed to be attacking Hillary as the status quo candidate. What I find ironic in this is it was the Iowa debate that turned ME away from Hillary and toward Obama. When asked to name a fault, Hillary and Edwards both gave glowing answers that weren't faults at all, like "I love my country too much." The ONLY candidate to provide an honest answer, that he's "horribly sloppy when it comes to keeping track of paperwork," was Obama. After hearing Hillary's ridiculous answer, he joked and said "I forgot to mention that I like helping old ladies cross the street!"

So the same event, the Iowa debate, seems to have pointed us separate ways.

Now your next point sort of loses me. You say you're a veteran, yet you oppose Barack Obama's voting FOR better benefits for Afghan/Iraq war vets, and embrace McCain for voting AGAINST it???? Nobody said you had to take the benefits, but why would you be against your fellow veterans receiving them?

Posted by: aBigSAM | June 22, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Broder has been for a long time now a smarmy shill for the neocons, Bush and now McCain. He is the dean of the Post collection of equally smarmy "journalists" including Chris, Kurtz, Kane, etc. Except for Froomkin and Robinson and a few others the Post has become just another plaything of the Right Wing owners of the 4th estate who shape and frame analysis of what is happening and then go out and shill for the corporate elite that are running America into the ground. Broder is truly disgusting only outdone by the fawning shills at the Post and on Gwen Ifil's show.

Posted by: its over | June 22, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

David Broder really ought to know better that this. These aren't issues of character, but political positioning of the candidates that deal only with election tactics...not their moral centers.

I mean, come on....

-Why would McCain ask for town hall debates? Because everyone agrees it's best venue and Obama's worst.

-Why would he ask for 10 debates? Because he's behind and *needs* to generate a mistake out of Obama.

-Why is he pushing for public financing? Because (last month not withstanding) the GOP funding machine is moribund and McCain is a terrible fund raiser (this, by the way is NOT an indictment of the man. I like a guy who has trouble begging)

-Why else would he be for public financing? Because he's already shown that Bush has his back if he decides to do an end-run around the system (and not just with 527 money). He'll find a loophole that allows him to spend whatever he needs without FEC sanction. He's certainly done that in the primaries and he'll do it again if needed in the general election. Obama on the other hand would likely have a legion of justice department lawyers following his expenses like hawks....Doubters about this anyone?

Now, McCain SHOULD do all these things. It's politics and the name of the game is winning. Likewise, Obama SHOULDN'T rise to the bait. But for Broder to elevate such obvious political machinations to the level of moral failure on the part of EITHER candidate is really disingenuous.

If there IS a failure on the part of Obama it has been in his lack of a quality response.

-He should have countered with a smaller series of debates that were in his best and McCain's worst format.

-He should be saying that he doesn't feel that good faith public financing is POSSIBLE in this election because McCain has already (in his opinion) severely bent, if not broken financing laws for the primary, and he did so with the help of the Bush administration.

Perhaps Obama will get around to making both points in the future. Perhaps not. Either way, it doesn't say anything about the character of the man. This is all just posturing.

If Broder were seriously looking for a 'moral' failure on election tactics, then his best example would be McCain's behavior with public money in the primaries. While it might have been *technically* legal to do what he has, it was at best a major break with his previous principled stands on the issue of financing. It was ALSO a break that got him the nomination! So, really, who's gonna blame him?

Now there are many reasons to be suspicious of Obama. His record is thin. He DOES have some past associations that are troubling. He is lacking in specifics on many issues (though to be honest this is ALSO just good politics-why present a second target when the public is shooting at the GOP?). However, debates and financing aren't really high up on the list. If anything, his behavior suggests the pragmatism and discipline that a winning candidate needs. He clearly isn't aiming for the 'moral high ground' occupied by Al Gore and John Kerry.

The fact that David Broder *appears* to be unable to distinguish between politics and policy suggests that he's either losing his edge or objectivity. I suspect the latter. He does write an op-ed column, so he can put his biases out there for all to see like Krugman and Kristol do. But it's not his history.

I guess I expected a bit more from 'the Dean'.

Posted by: Cometboy | June 22, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

Well, the fact is he does lie....alot.
He lied about his father coming to Amercia during the Kennedy Adm., he lied about the Life mag. article that"moved him" as a young boy, he lied about his pastor, and just recently he went back on his word about public financing. I would call that a pattern.
But, the most troubling part is that we just went through a very long drawn out primary and most of you Obama supporters don't know this stuff...this stuff that is like a window into the candidates soul.The media has pushed this myth about him, and you people just think it's true.
Get to know your candidates first before you started to defend him.

Posted by: bake201 | June 22, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

You know, for all the respect I have for print media, especially the WAPO, I am really, really disppointed at you. I cannot believe how WAPO and NYT have jumped on Sen. Obama for wanting to be funded by people like me giving $10, $15/ month! Why are you guys now vilifying Obama? for what? nonesense!

What I can't understand is why is WAPO & NYT giving McCain a pass? You have all given him a pass, why? becoz he's old, perhaps? or is it becoming a conspiracy against Obama?

Are you people going to give us the same treatment you gave Bush when he took us to Iraq? WAPO never questioned him, now our sons and daughters are losing their lives there while you sit on ur warm seats! becoz u never had the guts to question the President's motives and rationale! You're doing it again with McCain! I dont want my son going to war - becoz the 4th Estate failed us again!

Pliz, VET John McCain the same way, you are making up stuff about Obama.

McCain has made major, major gaffes and policy blunders - and yet WAPO keep mum about it. The most current is the OFFSHORE DRILLING! where McCain has flip-flopped, how about that?

Posted by: concernedcitizen | June 22, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

Too angry. Have to leave the haters now...bye.

Posted by: Louise | June 22, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

How charming to see the colleagues circle the wagons around Broder on the day your own ombuds discusses Broder's ethical issues.

Posted by: Siun | June 22, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

If you will look below, Obama was accused of not holding any hearing for his "Afghanistan" oversight committee. That is what I was referring to.

And I didn't say that anyone who doesn't suport Obams is a racist. I said that people lie about him for racist, partisan or sore-loser reason.

If you are not a racist, then, I guess you fit into one of the other two categories.

You can't even tell the truth about a posting this is an inch away from your reply.

Jeez.

Posted by: Louise | June 22, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

For the Record:

Obama heads a Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Subcommittee on European Affairs -- which he could have used to have a "dog and pony show" in an obscure" basement room and blathered on about NATO in Afghanistan for PR purposes. But if he had, you all would have accused him of exploiting his position for political purposes; THERE IS NO PLEASING YOU, IS THER?
--------------

Well to point out the facts to you.. as head of his subcommitte.. he's held what? two hearings..
really getting our tax dollars worth from that guy.

And no, we are not racists because we don't like Obama.

The point is that he flat out lies and does whatever he needs to garner more support

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Why in hel* is the GOP hack Broder, the guy taking thousands in cash from GOP-connected cruise companies and business interests, given space in this increasingly NeoNut rag?
McCain is seen now, finally, for the political hack he has always been. The senile Broder may think McCain is a mav and enjoy licking his arse (just like he thought the party hack Ford was some sort of hero of the Republic), but to think Obama has to lick McCain's arse by agreeing to McCain's demands is another laughable example of a Post so gone to Hyatt's touch as to engender near pity for those who might actually still remain in that place who believe in real journalism. You guys better hurry and do all you can to save McLame now. McTanic is sinking fast off the shores of NC.

Posted by: GOP Street Against McNut | June 22, 2008 11:08 AM | Report abuse

I haven't trusted Obama since he began to hedge on Public finnacing months ago. But, here is the strange thing. I trust McCain much more then Obama, but I cwould never vote fro McCain simple because I know he will do what he says. I don't trust Obama on anything, yet I have to vote for him. This is the first time since I have been voting that I could not trust the person I vote for.
Go figure that out.
If it was Hillary, I could trust her, because she has a record.

Posted by: bake201 | June 22, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

I agree with regard to Obama, but I think Broder is criminally negligent with regard to McCain. How many contradictory positions does McCain have to take to lose his reputation as a "straight talker" in the eyes of "The Dean"? Yes, Obama's positions this week should lead people to reexamine him, but is McCain immune to reexamination? Frankly, Obama's decisions this week were more on process issues, which I think have less to do with how he would govern, than McCain's switches and deceptions, which have come on policy issues. The polling seems to agree that McCain's image has taken more of a hit than Obama's, so maybe Broder should write about that reality.

Posted by: Adam | June 22, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

For the Record:

sorry for the typos but I am so darn mad!

Posted by: Louise | June 22, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

I am really disgusted of the way the primary was done; even lost interest to the Democratic Party, that I had consistentlly voted "straight" since Dukakis. They enamored people, especially the media, did not see the omen, that was there but no one pay any attention. Senators Kennedy and Kerry was rejected/rebuffed by their own people because of their preemptive anointment of Obama. Senators Rockefeller and Byrd, despite of their stature and political clout in W.Virginia were also given a thumbs down, resulting to the lopsided win by Hillary. Sen. Dashle, was also slapped down silly by his state because of his being Obama's campaign honcho. In New Mexico, Gov. Richardson, despite of the people's will, made a heinous political act by making the Clintons believe that he was going to endorse Hillary but then pulled a "Judas" per Carville words. California spoke it's preference for the more qualified Hillary than the more glorified Obama, despite of Caroline, Oprah, Michelle and Maria. The preference of the true working people who are feeling the pain of the Bush administration, as reflected by those in Pennsylvania, Ohio, W. Virginia and Kentucky, is not given any much attention either.
My disgust started during the first debate in Iowa, where Obama and Edwards ganged up on Hillary in order to topple her being the front runner. Media accused her as acting like she was already the standard bearer of the Democratic Party, because she focussed on attacking just Bush and not anyone from among the Democratic aspirants. The media did not think of such an omen of character flaw, as when Obama made his Reagan trajectory, and just downgrading the success of Bill Clinton's "peace and prosperity" administration to that of Nixon. The hypocrisy of Edwards' attack about Hillary's being a "stastus quo" candidate, notwithstanding that the majority of the preemptive anointers of Obama and the so called superdelegates are Washington insiders and the real status quo! The hysterics of Olberman of CNN about assassination is beyond compare. Now we are seeing why Hillary did not just want to be pushed aside by the anti-Clinton elements of the Party. From Obama's sleight of hand re NAFTA and now the biggest flip-flop, that did in the presidential quest of Sen. Kerry, is laid before our eyes, not just to our ears. Reneging to his pledge for a reform campaign finance, is not just a big flip-flop, but shows an opportunist charcteristic. Why? Money is the foremost reason - the glitter of gold and silver that blind the eyes.
Why should he indeed move any further when he found a school of fish that is filling up his container with his catch? He is now beginning to do the Bush-McCain association and even belittling the senator from Arizona relative to his support of the veterans. As a veteran, I find it odd, even weird, for him to attack Sen. McCain on this one. The game of name association could boomerang to him and could be fatal for his thirst for a seat at the Oval Office.

Posted by: Cabby | June 22, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

You can be sure McCain would have opted out of public financing if he thought he had a chance of raising more money privately, so Broder's confusion of their relative positions with principal is entirely off base. Broder seems to have a short memory about McCain's eagerness to to accept public funds for the primary until he realized he was raising enough money to eschew them and then tried to weasel out of of public funding. Also Obama hits the nail on the head by pointing out McCain's tacit acceptance of 527 money/commercials into the election, which could end up surpassing the 85 million he (Obama) would have available from public financing even with democratic 527 money. Broder tends by his position here and in other instances to simply join the media crowd in treating McCain's gaffes and other misteps as inconsequential and insignificant simply because he (McCain) has been around the public scene so long and conversely to blow up Obama statements and positions with which he does not agree into hugh issues. I used to respect Broder's opinions and positions and opinions immensely, but not so much any more.

Posted by: Stan Suser | June 22, 2008 11:02 AM | Report abuse

Can one Obama supporter please honestly tell me WHAT PREVENTS FOREIGN INTERESTS FROM CONTRIBUTING TO OBAMA'S CAMPAGN THROUGH AN AMERICAN COUNTERPART...as was the documented case with Obama's home and land purchase?

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 8:58 AM

What? No takers...here's why-

Obama's Iraqi Oil for Food connection
By Andrew Walden American Thinker

Out on bail awaiting trial, dual US-Syrian citizen, Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, was rousted out of bed by police pounding on the doors of his Chicago mansion the morning of Monday, January 28. According to the Associated Press:

"U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve jailed Rezko...saying he had disobeyed her order to keep her posted on his financial status. Among other things, he failed to tell her about a $3.5 million loan from London-based Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi -- a loan that was later forgiven in exchange for shares in a prime slice of Chicago real estate. Rezko gave $700,000 of the money to his wife and used the rest to pay legal bills and funnel cash to various supporters."

NADHMI AUCHI
I'M SURE SADAM'S MONEY LAUNDERER KNOWS HOW TO DIVIDE A MILLION DOLLARS INTO FIFTY DOLLAR CONTRIBUTIONS.

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

For the Record:

Obama heads a Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Subcommittee on European Affairs -- which he could have used to have a "dog and pony show" in an obscure" basement room and blathered on about NATO in Afghanistan for PR purposes. But if he had, you all would have accused him of exploiting his position for political purposes; THERE IS NO PLEASING YOU, IS THER?

Instead, Obama chose not to waste his and our time and our taxpayer money doing it.

So, to all you Haters out there, GET YOUR FREAKING FACTS STRAIGHT!

I am so sick, SICK of you all lying and getting facts wrong.

DOOE ANY ONE OF YOU GIVE A FIG ABOUT FACTS?

Or are so you wrapped up in your racism, partinsanship or sore-loser mentality that facts mean nothing?

A few more?

1. Obama voted "present" in IL -- were it is a common political tactical device -- and often approved of or requested by by the party leadership.

2. ANY candidate can have bad people donate money to them if a person lies on the federal form.

3. Just because a Donor knows some bad people, doesn't mean a candidate is or knows terrorists. George Schultz has spent time with Syrians, Soviets and Chinese. Does that mean McCain shouldn't accept money from him?

4. George H W Bush is good friends with lot's of Arabs -- and is in business with them -- is McCain a terrorist because GWH Bush supports him?

5. Abortion clinic terrorists are supported by some of the religious supporters of McCain -- does not make McCain a terrorist?

6. Some of Bush's relatives were Hitler appeasers -- does that mean McCain shouldn't have GW or Jeb -- or Laura campaign for him?

Just say you don't support Obama's policies. You don't have to do the character assassination junk.

Why does it always have to get like this? Why do you have to get personal and LIE?

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?


Posted by: Louise | June 22, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

I wouldn't worry about it too much Chris.

Obama did agree to town hall meetings, but to do it strictly on McCain's terms would be stupid. Obama is campaigning for president, as is McCain. Obama is busy. McCain less so.

Perhaps McCain will agree to town meetings on Obama's schedule. Mostly Broder's comments on the town meeting thing is a week attempt at gotcha, and nothing more.

Posted by: Jim M | June 22, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Can one Obama supporter please honestly tell me WHAT PREVENTS FOREIGN INTERESTS FROM CONTRIBUTING TO OBAMA'S CAMPAGN THROUGH AN AMERICAN COUNTERPART...as was the documented case with Obama's home and land purchase?

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 8:58 AM

What? No takers...here's why-

Obama's Iraqi Oil for Food connection
By Andrew Walden American Thinker

Out on bail awaiting trial, dual US-Syrian citizen, Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, was rousted out of bed by police pounding on the doors of his Chicago mansion the morning of Monday, January 28. According to the Associated Press:

"U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve jailed Rezko...saying he had disobeyed her order to keep her posted on his financial status. Among other things, he failed to tell her about a $3.5 million loan from London-based Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi -- a loan that was later forgiven in exchange for shares in a prime slice of Chicago real estate. Rezko gave $700,000 of the money to his wife and used the rest to pay legal bills and funnel cash to various supporters."

NADHMI AUCHI
I'M SURE SADAM'S MONEY LAUNDERER KNOWS HOW TO DIVIDE A MILLION DOLLARS INTO FIFTY DOLLAR CONTRIBUTIONS.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I agree with David Broder, the dean of political columnists.
He's GREAT!
And this blog by Chris Cillizza is GREAT too!

Is that what it takes to have a comment posted you pathetic cowardly "decider"?
Censorship at the Washington Post, whoda' thunk it?

Posted by: SamBrown | June 22, 2008 10:57 AM | Report abuse

When will you morons in the MSM get over your incessant ranting about public financing? Poll after poll shows NOBODY cares. Everyone knows that any politician in Obama's shoes would do the exact same thing.

Posted by: Jeremy | June 22, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Just like his pretentious Presidential Seal, Senator Obama is a not so reasonable facsimile of a man who should be President. In today's multi-media world, he inundates us with his personal cool and marketing blitz --the Obama branding with all its staged oratory, teleprompters, glitz, talking point packages, taglines and message toting backdrops flanked by beautiful US flags. The only problem is the general electorate voter is much more interested in what 'he stands for' and not 'how he stands.' We tried the 'New Coke' and we didn't like it.

Posted by: mpwynn | June 22, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Why should we listen to anything David Broder says? I can't think of a greater hack in journalism right now.

Posted by: Marcia | June 22, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

I respect David Broder, and know all too well the role he plays in shaping CW. But I just have to disagree with him here, for one main reason. Voters just do not care about these things. I'm SURE most voters don't even know anything about the town hall proposals (and seriously, even if they do, what voter would really care about more debates? not everyone's a political junkie), and polls have continually shown that campaign finance is not a deciding issue, certainly not a salient issue this year, especially when they're paying $4 at the pump, or trying to make their loan payments. I mean we have to put these things in perspective. And the Obama campaign is too smart to do something that would risk their brand; it's no surprise they rolled this out this early in the campaign. Get the bad press over with now, and it'll all be yesterday's news by the time he and HRC campaign together next week.

p.s. People worrying that Obama's May fundraising was the same as McCain's need to remember the circumstances. For much of May, Obama essentially had the nomination wrapped up; HRC's attacks were becoming less frequent. Now that the GE has started, I would expect Obama to raise upwards of $40-50 mil this month. Not only can he go back to the small donors, but he's going to go after Clinton's donors too. It could be a HUGE month for the Obama camp. Oh, and there's just no way his campaign would have made this decision unless June's fundraising numbers were looking HUGE. If they had any doubt that they could continue on that tremendous fundraising pace, they could have waited to pull out of public financing until they were sure it was the right choice. The fact that they made this decision 3 weeks into June tells me that it'll be a big month for them on the money front.

Posted by: James | June 22, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

How well do I know McCain? Barely at all, after all these years. But, he's predictible, and changeable.
How well do I know Obama? Barely at all. But, he's promising and changeable.
How well do I know Broder? All too well. And, he's comfortably lazy.
He is a senior member of the chattering class, a giant among the lemming set...a 'must read' for seekers of conventional wisdom who need to know which way to go, what to think and what's safe to say on a daily basis. He is, alas, predictible. Not very exciting and hardly informative if original thinking is desired.
Let's evaluate the candidates and issues on their faces without the need to spray a little perfumed poison called 'Innuendo" into the political atmosphere. `Fear of the unknown' is Broder's message here. Get it?
Anyway, to Broder's red-hot issues of the moment:
Obama turned down public financing because it would be plain stupid to accept it. McCain accepted because it would be plain stupid for a weak candidate not to.
Accepting public financing has nothing to do with avoiding influence peddling. It's like a lot of Washington issues and causes...a dead tree that hasn't fallen yet.
Taxpayers shovel campaign funds in the front door at great ease and benefit to the candidate in need.
Then, the special interests simply use a side door while apparently the likes of Broder and the camera crews stake out the front door. think Party, PAC, 527, bundlers.
Taxpayers know it's a joke. Notice how almost no taxpayer chooses to donate a dollar to the campaign fund on tax forms? This is a non-issue.
The next non-issue is the town halls. What campaign whooey! McCain desperately needs Obama for his campaign to attract any attention. Now, this "small government" Republican chooses to rely on the taxpayer hand-out campaign funds and the evil special interest moneys coming in the side-doors and he needs his opponent to play in a sandbox he designed.
Obama doesn't need McCain. He chooses to run his own campaign his own way with his own money....drawn from the smaller, simpler set of Americans. The Little People' Washingto pays such eloquent lip service to from time to time. No taxpayer hand-outs for this "big government" Democrat.
There is plenty of opportunity to contrast the candidates and the issues and to "get to know them" both just fine.
So, how well do we know David Broder? All to well. How well does Broder know the realities to `the issues?' Apparently not too well.
But, just enough to read well in print and look smart on TV.

Posted by: JMFulton, Jr. | June 22, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

I think those who say the voters don't know Obama are wrong. Voters NOW know who Obama is and it's not the messiah figure he was marketed to be. But the majority of his supporters don't support him because of what he says and what he does..they support him because he looks like them. The white people who support Obama were hoodwinked from the gitgo and they don't want to admit they were hoodwinked so they keep defending him so they won't lose respect for themselves as well as him.

Keep giving him your $25 donations too. Senator Clinton needs some help with her debt and Obama has agreed to pay them off if she campaigns for him. So come on Obama supporters....give til it hurts.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Voters now know that Obama isn't willing to put himself out there in town hall meetings. That shows that he doesn't have the confidence to discuss issues with McCain in front of the world without a teleprompter. Obama's decision to "play it safe" and not stand up and be counted isn't new. He's been doing that since his Illinois days.

Voters now know that Obama is meeting with Hillary's donors. He obviously wants their money. This shows he doesn't have the confidence that he will be receiving enough of those $25, $50 and $100 donation from his supporters, along with those donations from his unknown cash cows. This shows that Obama thinks he needs another $300 plus million to win and isn't confident enough to keep his word to take public financing.

Posted by: Michael | June 22, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Seems to me that Broder's take on Obama is an attempt to cover his genuine concern about what a possible Obama victory means for him and the rest of the "high rollers" in our political system . Big money political interests and corporate media (including those "deans" like Broder) are beginning to see that Obama may not NEED them to win the presidency. Millions of individual donors are paying for the Obama campaign, and they do NOT demand or assume they will receive special access to Obama in the White House. Those donors mean that the old power brokers will no longer control the political power structure in this country.

Posted by: Susan E. | June 22, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

Broder's old school. Obama is changing he face of politics. Why should he play by McCentury's rules?

Posted by: SoonerThought | June 22, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

We know McCain is the preeminent flip-flopper on practically every issue that matters to Americans. There is overwhelming evidence of his "maverick in same old Republican/conservative clothing." The public financing issue is among the least newsworthy of this campaign because of what Obama has done. Obama still has the moral ground on this issue. 1-He refuses to accept money from lobbyists and PACs. 2-He has forced the DNC to refuse money from lobbyists and PACs. 3-The small donor, grass roots base of Obama's campaign is the ideal in terms of funding a clean campaign that will not be tied to special interests. 4-McCain already flip flopped during the primary on public financing. First he asked for public financing then after accepting money under those pretenses decided it wasn't enough and as late as February said he was changing his mind. Not only did he change his mind he violated the laws and FEC rules. See this link: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/mccain-told-he-must-take-public-money/?scp=2&sq=mccain%20matching%20funds%20primary&st=cse

Any fool knows the Republicans will fire up their Swift Boat 527s to sabotage Obama. Obama has demonstrated good leadership on this decision. He is living up to his "electability" factor. The fact that someone had to dig through thousands of innocuous questionnaires to find the one where Obama made any indication of his plans regarding financing demonstrates how idiotic this story is.

Posted by: TJK | June 22, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

I can't believe that the comment I made which insinuated that Cillizza is a brown-noser was taken down.
Whoever "the decider" is is pathetic.

Posted by: SamBrown | June 22, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Broder calls Obama's decisions on town halls and public financing "troublesome."

C'mon, now. Seriously. Does anyone REALLY care? I think not.

Part of Broder's job is to create conflict and political tension where none exists in order to ratchet up excitement leading into an election that, for most smart pundits, is a foregone conclusion.

Broder reminds me a football announcer working a lopsided game in the 4th quarter but endeavoring to keep the audience glued to the TV by trumpeting the possibility that the other team could potentially have a miraculous comeback.

Ain't gonna happen. John McCain is the Bob Dole of 2008, and there isn't much that's going to alter that fact.

Posted by: Bill Randle | June 22, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

David Border is a serial liar and the subject of a column in today's WAPO by the ombusperson.

See http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/06/hbc-90003124
Froma reader:
Broder said he adheres to "the newspaper's strict rules on outside activities" and "additional constraints of my own."

Broder later said he broke the rules on those speeches. He also said he had cleared his speeches with Milton Coleman, deputy managing editor, or Tom Wilkinson, an assistant managing editor, but neither remembered him mentioning them.

Ok, so when Broder was first confronted he lied about the speeches. When he was faced with clear evidence he then admitted that he broke the rules but then tried to blame it on others by saying that he had told them. They of course didn't remember him saying a word (remind you of Judy Miller at the NYT?). Mr. Broder is obviously a serial liar who thought he could BS his way out of a mess of his own making. So the only question left to ask is--what is the Post going

Posted by: Richard Burt | June 22, 2008 10:39 AM | Report abuse

F__K Broder. He is supporting McCain because he has found a candidate as ancient as he is. Have the senile old clown write a column explaining how McCain calling his wife a c__t will win over Hillary Clinton supporters.

Posted by: shiva7 | June 22, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

The man cannot debate issues. Debating in front of live audience and taking real life questions is lot different from reading a pre-written speech from a tele-prompter.

Latter is advertising we hear every day like James Earl Jones's voice over of "This is CNN" and the like.

Obama showed inability to debate Clinton many times during the primary. Further, McCain's style will clobber Obama.

Posted by: Independent | June 22, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

To all the commenters who keep repeating Obama is a slick Chicago politician who is marketing himself as a "New type of politician" i say ... so f***ing what ?

McCain is a arch-conversative who has been selling himself as a "straight-talking maverick" for years now.

Yeah Mccain has had moments he broke his party. And Obama has done a handful of things that break with the usual mold of politics. But overall their profiles are much closer to the former than the latter.

GET OVER IT.

Thats POLITICS. You sell yourself a certain way even though reality is always more nuanced.

Posted by: benjamin | June 22, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: mark | June 22, 2008 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Maybe David Broder should read this: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-te.infocus15jun15,0,4687694.story

The idea that McCain's "aura" has not been damaged is only valid among journalists. Don't project your own feelings onto the electorate. You guys may still love the man in spite of his flip-flops and many missteps but voters start to see through them.
And same with Obama. The idea that his not participating in the public financing system will damage him is only Broder's projection of his own feelings onto the electorate. The only people pissed at Obama for this are the editorial boards.

In any case, I don't think Obama's supposedly unethical change of mind about the money situation will hurt him a bit. I mean it didn't hurt Broder to break the rules of ethics of the Washington Post, did it ? He said "Sorry" and everyone moved on. It will be the same with Obama and I hope Mr Dean won't have the chutzpah to whine about it.

Posted by: benjamin | June 22, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Broder isn't paying attention if he can't see the views behind McCain flipping on The Issues. I'm telling you right now I trust Obama to work on behalf the vast people of this country, to help restore our credibility to the rest of the world, and I do not trust McCain. I've seen McCain's stances, and I've seen him flipping so much on the top of it all, that I do not trust him with presidential authority. When the Dems attempt to push something through that needs to take place, I'm afraid McCain will veto left and right on behalf of corporate and other special interests. No, I do not trust McCain, and I don't care how long he's been in the public eye. That makes zero difference. Simply because he is more known, regardless of the rest of the information behind him, that is sufficient logic to trust him more? Not in my book, sorry. I can't do it. I'll take almost any person, even a WaPo poster who shows some kind of knowledge and common sense on what's happening, before I could even find reason to trusting McCain. I sincerely do not believe that McCain is what this country needs after the current President Bush. This is not intended to be an insult, but I would be terrified if McCain got into office. I am in full support of a Dem taking office next. I trust that. I trust them, and with the majority.

Posted by: Obama2008 | June 22, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse


YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT BRODER IS?

a couple of quotes by Broder...

"...I like Karl Rove... we've had many long and rewarding converstions...several publicans owe karl and apology over their reporting on the Plame investigation...

(watch the coming congressional hearings to see if this is true...)

"...Katrina opened new opportunities for Bush... to regain his standing with the public...poised for political comback..."

Might wish to refer to Wickepedia for more.

So his 'reporting' on Obama takes on a different hue, right? He doesn't even pretend to be a fair or objective. And he isn't.


Posted by: on broder | June 22, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Barack Obama is an unknown quantity. Barack Obama raised the race card, hit the Clintons over the head with it, and now is mired down in his own quagmire of having fractured the Democratic Party irreparably.

Obama is not a winner - he is a loser. Our country will be so much worse off with Obama than Bush. Just wait and see. Obama is a dictator in the making and we had better stop him while we can. gw.

Posted by: Iowatreasures | June 22, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

CC asked if readers agree with Broder's position or not - its a pretty straightforward question that allows you to air your opinion.
A large number of readers (seem to be pro-Obama) have decided to use this forum to just bash Broder.
How is this new and uplifting and unifying? Again, the words and the actions aren't matching and that is yet another question mark on the Obama campaign.

Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Obama is not perfect. No one is, and certainly no politician is. McCain HAS been around longer, but do we really know HIM? I would think many do not. I have heard stories about his infamous temper, and even directly out of the mouth of someone who has witnessed his outbursts. My opinion? Not stable. And he votes with Bush 95% of the time. Bush=BAD. Obama=Unknown. Sorry folks, I will take unknown anyday. I would rather have a president that sees a position is really not a good one, and have the wherewithall to say so, and make a change, than one who will stand by a bad decision until it bankrupts my country. My beef is with the congress we voted in for change, and they continue to vote with the president. Let him veto everything that comes across his desk. He would never get another penny for his never ending, (What constitutes a win anyway?) war for oil in Iraq that had nothing to do with 9-11 anyway. We need to be out of Iraq, not dependent on the middle east for oil (and not by just dumping more money into big oil to look for more oil here, to burn and contribute more to global warming.) and to find ways to use LESS energy. We have to get big oil out of the Whitehouse.

Posted by: biggirl | June 22, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Oh God how funny here again old has been
WAPO Obama Shill David Broder and his punk
assistant Obama shill Chris Fizzle think
they can con us into voting for their pal,
Leftist Liberal Eletist Marxist Black Power
Racist Freak Barack Hussein Obama,if we only got to know Obama better nonsense. As
the truth is more voters know about that
racist looney toons Barack Hussein Obama
and his weird wife Michelle Obama,the more
totally turned off by the Obama's they then
become and decide to vote for John McCain.
No Way Obama! Just Say No Obama! NOBAMA!

Posted by: Claudine 1000 | June 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Obama's Iraqi Oil for Food connection
By Andrew Walden American Thinker

Out on bail awaiting trial, dual US-Syrian citizen, Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, was rousted out of bed by police pounding on the doors of his Chicago mansion the morning of Monday, January 28. According to the Associated Press:

"U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve jailed Rezko...saying he had disobeyed her order to keep her posted on his financial status. Among other things, he failed to tell her about a $3.5 million loan from London-based Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchi -- a loan that was later forgiven in exchange for shares in a prime slice of Chicago real estate. Rezko gave $700,000 of the money to his wife and used the rest to pay legal bills and funnel cash to various supporters."

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

for those who will vote for Obama to stop the war in Iraq. What made you so sure he will ? Senator Obama has issues with integrity standing for what he believes.All of us know that withdrawing from Iraq is complicated and difficult.If Senator Obama does not have the courage to stand up for spiritual mentor/uncle, muslims, public financing decisions, his church that he attended for 20 years and his own grandma. what made us so sure he will do it in Iraq?

Posted by: CVO | June 22, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

A generation of Democratic Presidential candidates have bowed to the alter of the Washington Post. They have run their campaigns to gain the approval of Broder and the Washington Post Editorial Board. And they have lost. It is about time we had a candidate who broke free from the Washington Post. George Bush has proven that the opinions of folks like George Broder are meaningless. Most Americans have no idea that Obama rejected public financing and they really have bigger problems to deal with.

Obama is doing the right thing, running his campaign and not letting George Broder run it for him.

Posted by: SFPolitico | June 22, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse


The "McCain woman democrat below" who says she's voting for McCain because Obama is
"hiding"? Hiding?

She's taken the 'line-of-the-day from some post or org somehwere and used it about as well as the rest of the 'daily line'
republicans here. Not too speedy.

Posted by: speedy | June 22, 2008 10:07 AM | Report abuse

David Broder and David Brooks are right.
Broder, frankly, has been more a champion for liberals than conservatives. Lately, he's seemed more conservative. Finally, though, even reporters on CBS news have been heard saying:
"It's hard to really assess the actual truth about a candidate who has only had some a limited record in the Senate." Ah, none too soon, I might add, for some truth!
Brooks correctly pegs Obama as a split personality.
Think about the incredible arrogance and frightening (for what it implies) self-belief, when Obama could have held numerous foreign policy hearings for his committee -- instead of learning from the people scheduled for those hearings -- he tells us that he has the greatest self-confidence in himself and his insight into foreign policy -- because he lived in Indonesia (as a boy, up to 10 years of age); visited Pakistan and Kenya in 1981 (and Kenya more recently).
People should google "Obama discloses 1981 Pakistan Trip" and see how curious it is that NONE of the five Pakistan men, and one Indian man, who were directly connected with that trip ... have refused to discuss the details of that trip. It is important to note that the disclosure of his trip to Pakistan was such a jolt that hardly ANY reporters had ever heard of it.
The reason they hadn't heard of it was because all chronologies of Obama, favorable or unfavorable, showed NO MARK OF THE trip to Pakistan. And, review what Pakistani and Indian posters have said about the state of Pakistan in 1981.
Obama has apparently figured that since he self-innoculated on his drug use (and therefore, NO ONE HAS ANY RIGHT TO CRITICIZE HIM FOR THAT PHASE OF HIS LIFE), he can also self-innoculate himself on the Pakistan Trip. But, both his drug use and the Pakistan trip could be connected, since one of the primary reasons males would travel to Pakistan would be because he was buying drugs.
That one seems less likely than another reason to visit Pakistan: for a young man, of mixed race, mixed ethnicity, and mixed religious upbringing, who on his own, befriended at least FOUR Pakistanis and/or Indians at Occidental College and at Columbia, and wound up going to Pakistan. Men with those kind of identity issues, would travel there to discuss Islam with clerics who could have offered him specialized instruction into Islam.
Or, to see what was happening with mujahadeen going into Afghanistan to fight the Soviets.
The Pakistani men and Indian man who were associated with this trip, won't say anything. They DO, however, admit that their fears are that Americans might conflate all of this into a conclusion that Obama WAS at that time, a Muslim.
Personally, I do NOT care what the reason was for his trip to Pakistan. I simply believe that on March 20, he was informed by the State Department and FBI, that his passport files had been peeked into 3 times. And that one way or another, either the peekers were seeking to know more about the Pakistan Trip (which again, Obama never disclosed), or, the passport never HAD that trip accounted for. And that Obama decided he'd best disclose first, to do exactly what he's doing now: refuse to provide any more details.
The relevance? When Obama's drug episodes were referred to by a Black Entrepreneur who supported Clinton, the Obama campaign drowned him out, and demanded an apology from the man and Clinton. Unfair, the media and Obamistas said. Really?
Well, get this: the damage done to African-American communities by CRACK COCAINE (which IS one use for coke), and powdered coke, are radically different. Obama may have been a powder user, but any African-American who has witnessed the horrible destruction CRACK wrought, would want to know: did Obama use CRACK, or did he use powder?
As a person in recovery, I can claim my anonymity, but if I break it myself, (as he did in his books), then I'm open for more detailed questions & answers. And, if Obama went to Pakistan in 1981, then he should be hammered until he provides more detail.
His friends are uniformly concerned that negative inferences will be made about Obama and Islam. I don't care if he WAS studying Islam as far as how he should commit to a religion, or a minister. I don't CARE if he was a doper, even a crack user.
I don't CARE if he was looking for a bride, as brides were arranged in Pakistan in that era; I don't CARE if he wanted to see, first hand, Arab Afghans flowing into Afghanistan, to fight the Soviets. What I care about is having the press, and this includes Cilliza and Broder both ... asking for a follow up interview on this topic.
Obama IS a highly skilled manipulator. HE is saying: oh, there are terrible rumors all over the Internet about his being a Muslim. Hear ME: I don't care if he IS (now) a Muslim. We need more Muslims in Congress if we're going to ever seek balance in how we deal with Israel. But HE disclosed this. HE credits his trips to Pakistan, Kenya, and living (until 10) in Indonesia as giving him deeper sense of confidence in his knowledge of foreign policy. Imagine the hubris! Senator Clinton and Senator McCain's experience is minimal, compared to his!
Brooks is right.
This IS a very, very gifted con man.
It's time the National Press ask him to go back, and discuss drug use, and trips to Pakistan and Kenya, both with sizeable Muslim popualtions. And both with many things going on in that era. This man wants to be our President. And he doesn't want to provide more details on these and other topics?
I smell smoke.
I suspect there is more fire in here somewhere.
Who will seek the answers? A professional, go for the truth, no matter where it leads me, media? Or, Swift Boaters, who will make negative inferences as they attack Obama.
Warning: the Republican Party, with Swift Boat ads, took a bona fide hero of the Vietnam War, and a Purple Heart winner as well, and made it look like he self-inflicted his wounds; and was a liar and a coward -- COMPARED TO A VILLAGE IDIOT WHO WAS IN THE TEXAS AIR NATIONAL GUARD. And, with those tactics, beat Kerry by 3 million more votes than Bush had won with before.
Any prudent DEMOCRAT would want to know the full truth, and nothing but the truth, from Obama.
Not many Obamistas, I guess, have the integrity to ask these questions as a way of providing a "push comes to shove" honesty for their candidate. I hope Obama is jammed up and forced to answer these questions, or, ads appear everywhere infering whatever. it is time HE stepped up to the plate, and disclosed the whole of the stories, not hidden, in a highly manipulative way, behind "How DARE you ask that question when I broached the matter myself!"
Brooks and Broeder were both right. Cillizia himself is far too much a lightweight to take this on. He's such an obvious MSNBC shill Ultra Liberal Democrat himself, he's been coopted by the allure of being a pundit who correctly calls the election. He & the rest of MSNBC are phonies. Hopefully, David Broder and David Brooks will plow on, seeking more answers from Obama.

Posted by: Zen | June 22, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Can one Obama supporter please honestly tell me WHAT PREVENTS FOREIGN INTERESTS FROM CONTRIBUTING TO OBAMA'S CAMPAGN THROUGH AN AMERICAN COUNTERPART...as was the documented case with Obama's home and land purchase?

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 8:58 AM

Posted over an hour ago...NO ONE CAN!

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

Obama's motives in rejecting the town hall meeting suggestion are obviously political in nature, just like the McCain's own motives in suggesting it in the first place.

Obama is perfectly entitled to reject suggestions made by his opponent if he believes that it would serve his opponent more than himself. McCain would do exactly the same. Broder should remember that being able to say 'no' is one of the necessary skills a leader must have. Obama has shown that he can say that necessary 'no'.

Posted by: thisworld | June 22, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

NOTE: This site is monitored by the NSA and FBI under FISA et al. Unpatriotic themes are addressed accordingly.

Posted by: Maddogg | June 22, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Broder is a pompous ass, famous for emitting "High Popahiram," when others indulge in "Low Populorum." There's even a neologism, "Broderism" to describe inane, high-sounding generalizations.

Public financing, and "campaign finance reform" is a ridiculous ideas whose time has come and gone. Too bad BHO didn't say that.

BHO is too liberal for me, but he has more charisma in his toe than John "I'm not Bob Dole but I am a deer in the headlights" McCain.

BTW, I'm leaning to Barr.

Posted by: Grumpy Old Man | June 22, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

We know enough about Obama to realize that he is a fraud:
Contrary to Obama's claims he is
not an agent of change,
not a new kind of politician,
not above race,
not a uniter,
and he does not represent a new kind of politics.

McCain is a good man and a known quantity. Hillary or McCain!

Posted by: mehuwss | June 22, 2008 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Mary McGrory would not be happy with how her underling has lost his objectivity.

Posted by: Jay | June 22, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Hey, you skipped Obama supporting bush's telecom law and immunity for those who spied on Americans .

Obama,,,, bush redux!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 9:57 AM | Report abuse

So just because Obama won't adhere to McCain's agenda on town hall meetings we "don't know him"?
It doesn't matter that McCain is trying to set the agenda and have the debates in the arena which suits him best and Obama is merely countering that?
What garbage.
The only people who agree with Broder about what is "troublesome" aren't interested in voting for Obama anyway.
I don't think I could possibly care less what David Broder finds "troublesome", and by the way Mr. Cillizza, you have a little something brown on the end of your nose there.

Posted by: SamBrown | June 22, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Obama has shown himself to be a gifted strategist and that skill carries through yet again in his refusal of McCain's ten townhalls and in rejecting flawed public financing. Ten is too many and it was merely a way of using Obama's crowd and media appeal to pump up McCain for an extended period of time. Obama offered to do it on the two main issues, but McCain wasn't interested. I want to win this election and the best way to accomplish that was to opt out of public financing. Period. The republicans have shown their colors on dirty attacks in other elections and to trust that they won't this time is dumb. Obama needs to keep his flexibility and he recognizes that he does. Good for him. As for McCain, you're goofy to say that America will give him a free pass on all his flip flops. He flops like a fish on the river bank nearly every day on something that he thinks will get him elected. There may have been a time when he spoke only what he really believed, but that time is long past. And then there's the matter of his love affair with Bush. The picture of him hugging Bush with a little smile and half closed eyes while Bush waves to the crowds? That picture all by itself would be enough to keep me from ever voting for him. It's one of those pictures that's worth a thousand words. Ugh!

Posted by: karela | June 22, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Interesting. Still, many voters knew Bush and he still got in. Twice no less.

Posted by: Maddogg | June 22, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

"Has he built sufficient trust so that his motives will be accepted..."

Something about glass houses comes to mind, Mr. Broder.

Posted by: Neal1960 | June 22, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

David Broder has no credibility with me but I am sure he can find some made up man in a diner in Iowa who agrees exactly with him. Chris, you ruin you reputation by regurgitating this bunk.

Posted by: Greg in LA | June 22, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

McCain isn't getting, can't get, big crowds.

So he'd like Obama to pull 'em in for a
"shared" town hall. And shared bill.

Broder, once upon a time a need to read columnist, is now a hack. Vicious, a little, and undoubterdly planning more of same. The Post's determination to elect poor McCain, Israel boy. He'll be more malleable as he gets foggier and foggier.


Posted by: old foggy | June 22, 2008 9:40 AM | Report abuse

David Broder's premise in today's column is based on the mindset of D.C. Village pundit-land, it's how he and the other MSM still want to cover politics:
1. big media events (debates)
2. on trivial issues (public financing)
3. so these amateur theater critics can evaluate candidate "performance"
4. and pontificate and render their judgements.

My premise is this: What the hell does any of this have to do with:
a. $4 gas
b. economic, housing and banking meltdowns
c. $5 trillion added to the deficit (McCain extends Bush tax cuts)
d. 100 moe years of war in Iraq
e. the future of the courts and
f. universal health coverage vs. corporate health insurance?

Broder is a toothless old lion who lost sight of everything important years ago. Get off the stage David, your part is done.

P.S. In the original campaign finance reform bill, the goal was two-fold, both tax-paid financing and small donor funded campaigns. I've made several $25 and $50 contributions to B.H.O. as have 2 million other donors. I consider that "public financing". Again Mr. Broder is full of it...

Oh and Mr. Broder, go back to Sycamore. Sign me, NIU '71.

Posted by: Daver9i | June 22, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

Broder has been in Washington too long and is making the same assumption that McCain is making, i.e., that the American electorate is stupid. McCain has been in and out of the public financing system, in long enough to get his $5 mil loan, then out and now back in. At least Obama has not gamed the system. And Broder is missing three major points. First, the purpose of public financing is to avoid the special interests. Obama's campaign fundraising has done that. Second, Obama's agreement was conditional on including trying to control the 527s. Obama has done that while McCain has not so Obama did not "change his position". Third, is there any doubt that McCain would have done the same if he had the fundraising capabilities of Obama? But just keep assuming we're all too stupid to figure it out. That was the same mistake that Clinton made and look where it got her.

On the town halls, the only reason that McCain wants them is because he can't attract anyone to his when he is the only star. Report after report indicates his town halls are half empty in the areas not shown by the press. Again, the assumption is that we're all too stupid to find this information on our own. Why would Obama want to share his audience with McCain and do his job for him?

Finally, neither of these issues are important to most of us concerned about rising gas prices, paying our mortgages, figuring out the rising cost of food, the lack of health care, decaying infrastructure and a failing education system. But just let the pundits and McCain continue to think we, the electorate, is too stupid to figure this out.

Posted by: Foxfire | June 22, 2008 9:34 AM | Report abuse

I agree with Broder. It is abominable that Obama is hiding from public debates and forums with John McCain. And the changes in position that Obama makes on a weekly basis point to a very weak and indecisive leader.

Obama does fine with a rehearsed speech, but give him and open mic and your get George Bush's twin. Did you watch the press ocnference when he decided to leave his church after ardently defending it?

Despite the already apparrent flaws in Obama's health care reform plan, economic stimulus plan, and foreign policy - he will be elected by the virtue of his hugely profitable internet fundraising and his rock star status ala Oprah Winfrey. And there are a lot of people who stand to get a lot of money by riding along with Barack Obama - unfortunately it will not be the American public.

Then it will be another long 8 years of moronic press conferences and policies....

I was intelligent enough to never vote for George Bush, and I am intelligent enough to not vote for Barack Obama.

Posted by: McCain Woman Democrat | June 22, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Broder is a self-effacing "in the middle" uncommitted, friend to all candidates, god of impartiality. Right? Wrong? His convoluted reasoning in this piece shows that he is still carrying water for J D Sawyer and John McCain. One, Sawyer, is on infomercials begging for a buck, and McCain is huckstering his lies to people like Broder who want to believe them. The Straight Shooter is Janus-faced and so is Broder.

Posted by: doc86 | June 22, 2008 9:26 AM | Report abuse

John McCain - Missing in action in Vietnam. IN SERVICE TO HIS COUNTRY


Barry CHANGED his name Obama - Mssing in action in the Senate. Mr. Vote Safe, Mr. Don't vote. Not one meeting in a year and a half of the oversight committee on Afghanistan. WHAT ARE WE PAYING HIM FOR? TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT ? DEMOCRATIC GW PUPPET.

EVERY MINUTE OF HIS LIFE - IN SERVICE TO HIMSELF

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 9:23 AM | Report abuse

John McCain's recent so-called "Town Hall" meetings are, as one blogger-attendee reported, "actually rallies hosted by the local Republican Party."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/14/0952/31661

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/19/112851/676
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/12/mccain-stacks-fox-news-to_n_106881.html

Posted by: VirginiaMom | June 22, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

No I do not agree with Broder because Broder has a long history of treating Republicans better than Democrats.

And Broder has a lot of nerve when he expects us to simply forgive him his own misdeeds of taking corporate money for speeches when it was against Post policy and still consider him an unbiased political authority! Especially, given his history of disrespect toward liberals -- you all expect us to take his word on -- ANYTHING?

Puh-leaze!

Broder has no credibility for liberals and Democrats. We don't even bother to read him anymore. Don't you and the Post realize that?

We read his "lede" and then comment. Period.

We always know what he will say:

Trash Dem. Praise Republican. The End.

Broder has become a sad joke to your readers who are left of center.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

One thing Broder has right is that the voters don't know Obama. They're all hepped up abut a black candidate, but they obviously don't pay attention to what he says. Disarm America's military, take profits from corporations, appease our enemies, promote abortion and perverse homosexual behavior? I just don't believe that the majority of the people will sign up for those extreme postions.
Obama wants change, but from what? Low unemployment, low taxes, no terrorist attacks? High gas prices are the product of democrat/environmentalist success in blocking drilling for our own oil. The democrat controlled Congress, of which Old ears is a member, rates about half as good as the President. That's what needs to be changed.

Posted by: LarryG62 | June 22, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Broder is the consummate voice of "conventional wisdom." If there's ever been a year in which we should question "conventional wisdom," this is it. His comments are interesting but probably wrong.

Posted by: SteveIowa | June 22, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

The elephant in the room that CC is not acknowledging--because he can't--is that Broder is a has been.

Posted by: LA Democrat | June 22, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse


REAL Journalism !

June 20, 2008
The Two Obamas
By DAVID BROOKS

God, Republicans are saps. They think that they're running against some academic liberal who wouldn't wear flag pins on his lapel, whose wife isn't proud of America and who went to some liberationist church where the pastor damned his own country. They think they're running against some naïve university-town dreamer, the second coming of Adlai Stevenson.

But as recent weeks have made clear, Barack Obama is the most split-personality politician in the country today. On the one hand, there is Dr. Barack, the high-minded, Niebuhr-quoting speechifier who spent this past winter thrilling the Scarlett Johansson set and feeling the fierce urgency of now. But then on the other side, there's Fast Eddie Obama, the promise-breaking, tough-minded Chicago pol who'd throw you under the truck for votes.

This guy is the whole Chicago package: an idealistic, lakefront liberal fronting a sharp-elbowed machine operator. He's the only politician of our lifetime who is underestimated because he's too intelligent. He speaks so calmly and polysyllabically that people fail to appreciate the Machiavellian ambition inside.

But he's been giving us an education, for anybody who cares to pay attention. Just try to imagine Mister Rogers playing the agent Ari in "Entourage" and it all falls into place.

Back when he was in the Illinois State Senate, Dr. Barack could have taken positions on politically uncomfortable issues. But Fast Eddie Obama voted "present" nearly 130 times. From time to time, he threw his voting power under the truck.

Dr. Barack said he could no more disown the Rev. Jeremiah Wright than disown his own grandmother. Then the political costs of Rev. Wright escalated and Fast Eddie Obama threw Wright under the truck.

Dr. Barack could have been a workhorse senator. But primary candidates don't do tough votes, so Fast Eddie Obama threw the workhorse duties under the truck.

Dr. Barack could have changed the way presidential campaigning works. John McCain offered to have a series of extended town-hall meetings around the country. But favored candidates don't go in for unscripted free-range conversations. Fast Eddie Obama threw the new-politics mantra under the truck.

And then on Thursday, Fast Eddie Obama had his finest hour. Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue. He aspires to be to political reform what Bono is to fighting disease in Africa. He's spent much of his career talking about how much he believes in public financing. In January 2007, he told Larry King that the public-financing system works. In February 2007, he challenged Republicans to limit their spending and vowed to do so along with them if he were the nominee. In February 2008, he said he would aggressively pursue spending limits. He answered a Midwest Democracy Network questionnaire by reminding everyone that he has been a longtime advocate of the public-financing system.

But Thursday, at the first breath of political inconvenience, Fast Eddie Obama threw public financing under the truck. In so doing, he probably dealt a death-blow to the cause of campaign-finance reform. And the only thing that changed between Thursday and when he lauded the system is that Obama's got more money now.

And Fast Eddie Obama didn't just sell out the primary cause of his life. He did it with style. He did it with a video so risibly insincere that somewhere down in the shadow world, Lee Atwater is gaping and applauding. Obama blamed the (so far marginal) Republican 527s. He claimed that private donations are really public financing. He made a cut-throat political calculation seem like Mother Teresa's final steps to sainthood.

The media and the activists won't care (they were only interested in campaign-finance reform only when the Republicans had more money). Meanwhile, Obama's money is forever. He's got an army of small donors and a phalanx of big money bundlers, including, according to The Washington Post, Kenneth Griffin of the Citadel Investment Group; Kirk Wager, a Florida trial lawyer; James Crown, a director of General Dynamics; and Neil Bluhm, a hotel, office and casino developer.

I have to admit, I'm ambivalent watching all this. On the one hand, Obama did sell out the primary cause of his professional life, all for a tiny political advantage. If he'll sell that out, what won't he sell out? On the other hand, global affairs ain't beanbag. If we're going to have a president who is going to go toe to toe with the likes of Vladimir Putin, maybe it is better that he should have a ruthlessly opportunist Fast Eddie Obama lurking inside.

All I know for sure is that this guy is no liberal goo-goo. Republicans keep calling him naïve. But naïve is the last word I'd use to describe Barack Obama. He's the most effectively political creature we've seen in decades. Even Bill Clinton wasn't smart enough to succeed in politics by pretending to renounce politics.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 9:17 AM | Report abuse

BARACK OBAMA IS A MISSING IN ACTION POLITICIAN

HE HAS NEVER DONE ONE THING FOR ANYONE ASIDE FROM HIMSELF


NO VOTES

NOT MEETINGS FOR AFGHANISTAN WHILE 135 HAVE LOST THEIR LIVES FOREVER - HE WAS "TOO BUSY" WITH HIS OWN


MR OBAMA IS EASY STREET SAFE EDDY

HE PLAYS EVERYTHING SAFE TO THE POINT OF DOING A B O S L U T E L Y N O T H I N G


WAKE UP DEMOCRATS

THE BOYS CLUB PUT THEIR PUPPET OUT THERE AND YOU BOUGHT THE PLASTIC NOTHING


Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Broder is right in the sense that Obama's decisions on campaign finance and town hall debates make him seem more like just another ordinary "inside the beltway" politician. That being said, however, if Obama is able to better frame the political debate as a result of these decisions, Broder's argument should not matter. Moreover, I am not so sure the public cares that much about these decisions -- they are paying more attention to $4 per gallon gas. Time will tell.

Posted by: BenK | June 22, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

Not sure Broder gets it. First, Obama said he strongly considers taking public financing if he can get a deal approved with the Republican candidate which includes 527 groups and the RNC. That didn't happen and McCain made it very clear that he is not willing to reign in his own party members. If Obama would have opted for public financing, I would have considered that extremely stupid and not worthy for a future president. A good president sees realities and reacts accordingly. Why would he give up to be financed by 1.5 Mio supporters with mainly small donations to be outspent by the Republicans as in previous elections? I would have seriously question his judgment. I read somewhere that it would have been "political malpractice" and I totally agree. When it comes to townhall meetings: why would he give McCain a "leg up" and free airtime in a format which might or might not be of advantage for McCain. I like Obama because he is smart and runs a smart campaign. After Bush, smart is what I am interested in. It will help us getting out of the ditch the Republicans drove us in.

Posted by: DBCA | June 22, 2008 9:10 AM | Report abuse

I couldn't care less about either of these non-issues.

A vote for McCain is a vote to leave 50 million people without healh insurance for 8 more years. It is a vote to turn over federal agencies and courts to Pat Robertson. And it is a vote for war without end, including an invasion of Iran as soon as McCain can get his warmongering little finger on the button.

And Broder expects people to walk into the voting booth in November and, say, "Oh, I can't vote for Obama because he didn't have those town hall meetings"?

The only thing I get from Broder's piece is that his perspective would benefit from being stripped of health insurance a while.

Posted by: Steve | June 22, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

BRODER: #1. You are writing as though BRODER: you have NOT been reading the smears about Barack and Michelle. MY RESPONSE: At the juncture when ignoramuses started the lies that: (a) Barack is Muslim (b) Michelle is NOT proud of her country - she, same as I, have NOT been proud that too many voters are racist. SHE is right - many voters have proven THEY will vote for a black man. AND Michelle, I and many others NOW have
reason to be REALLY proud of the political process.

McCain has NOT forcefully told his supporters to STOP the smears, lies. MY RESPONSE: The Obama Campaign MUST have more money to 'set the record straight.' Neither Barack nor Michelle could have known the mean spiritedness of many Americans.

Does McCain remember the 'Swift Boat ad'?
The 'Willie Horton ads'?

Barack and McCain did not start on a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. Barack has to play "Catch UP.' THAT takes money which he would not have with public financing.

He, I and most would like to have Public Financing. When Republicans stop their lies it may be possible for a black couple to do. NOT until the racism is stopped can this happen.

Broder, I have noticed you are NOT black. And apparently you are not dealing with reality.

I hope you will do a 'Reality Check.'

Posted by: jjudyphill | June 22, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse


Broder knows full well that McCain broke his own finance law...that he dives in and out of it when it suits him.

Obama was too much a gentleman to talk about hillary's many "gates" and legal problems over the years.

But hopefuly he will, or someone will, point out McCain's record. He talks
plain, but not straight, starting with the Keating Five and lately with Lieberman
(I-Israel).

Posted by: crooked talk | June 22, 2008 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Jimmy Carter promised never to lie to us and to give us a politics as good as the American people. He raised expectations and then didn't deliver. The result: disillusionment, sadness, dashed hopes. Obama's failure to deliver on his promises may create a similar result. Recall all the criticism directed at Hillary for wanting to win at any cost. Well, it seems as if Obama also wants to win at any cost. In the past week, I have been struck by how many reporters are willing to give him a pass on this and have opined that the public will as well.

I have never voted for a Republican for president. But I feel so alienated from Obama and so angered by the media's behavior in this election, that I'm not sure how or whether I'm going to vote in November.

Posted by: dissertator08 | June 22, 2008 9:02 AM | Report abuse

obama has flip flopped on issues and things he says he is going to do and then does the opposite, so at least we know he can lie...we don't know more about him and we should, but he hides it...can anyone envision a white house loaded up with farakhan, sharpton, rev wright and jesse and the nation of islam...can you...

Posted by: Dwight | June 22, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

Can one Obama supporter please honestly tell me WHAT PREVENTS FOREIGN INTERESTS FROM CONTRIBUTING TO OBAMA'S CAMPAGN THROUGH AN AMERICAN COUNTERPART...as was the documented case with Obama's home and land purchase?

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

McCain can't get big crowds, and he's short on money and getting more so.

But if he piggy backs on Obama for town meetings, he an use Obama's mega bucks and Obama's huge crowds. What a deal.
Maybe the Post would like Obama to just disarm and let the old man ride right in.

McCain is a big phony and Broder follows the Wapo line, so determined to elect McCain...and to take Obama down 'hard and early', I thnk is the phrase.

Posted by: Broder | June 22, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

Well, whether or not Broder is right, is argument is reasonable.

Posted by: David | June 22, 2008 8:58 AM | Report abuse

I don't agree with Broder's positions on the two proposals that Obama rejected. Are "town hall" meetings really more democratic or publically-oriented? Only if we delude ourselves to believing we live in the same, equally represented small-town, where we are all spoken for by these 'average' joes/janes, from whichever towns are picked. And only if we think that candidates should have to explain policies like door to door salesmen, in what would likely be ten stultifying performances before heavily vetted audiences asking vetted heart-jerking questions eliciting shows of empathy or sympathy, and "straightforward," i.e. reductionist, accounts of policy, that feel good for the gut. It doesn't actually involve the public. Who does it involve? The media even further, because they have 10 more events to cover, 10 more events to tediously unpack, when there is really little substance there in the first place...
As for public financing, why would anyone have faith in it at this point, as it is? It's not at all clear why taxpayers should have to pay for presidential races, unless it actually means that non-millionaires can run for president. Well, oops. Given that it's an elitist system, people might as well feel personally attached to the elite by choosing what they do with their money.

Posted by: oboynton | June 22, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse


Yes McCain says what he thinks.

It's just that he thinks something different than before.

Whichever way the wind blows if what McCain thinks.

Posted by: housing | June 22, 2008 8:51 AM | Report abuse

vonpfahl

Obama made a COMMITMENT to the American People that he would go with the Campaign Finance System - you act like this issue is not important - restraint of the money machine in Washington IS A MASSIVE ISSUE.


What is wrong with you?


McCain now has a CLEAR PATH to have CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM be McCain's issue - McCain has been running on this issue as McCain's signature issue for 10 years and now McCain holds the ground solely.

Why Obama would open himself up to issues of trust is beyone me, it shows his inexperience.

McCain has proven himself to be a LEADER ON CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM FOR 10 YEARS. A Leader takes the difficult road. A Leader holds in there. Obama just fell by the wayside. McCain has taken a great deal of heat on this issue and McCain deserves credit for it.

Clearly Obama can't take the heat.


In contrast to McCain's persistence, when the going got difficult, Obama abandoned campaign finance. Obama is not a leader, his inexperience shows.

McCain is the Leader who will lead this country to a Stronger Goverment in which the People have more influence and the Lobbyists are Checked.


.

Posted by: 37thOStreet | June 22, 2008 8:50 AM | Report abuse

cadbury

You are 100% correct - allow me to expand a bit on your thoughts - Obama is a FRAUD to his own brand.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 8:42 AM | Report abuse


Ned at 8:29 - I enjoyed your post. I am happy that an Obama supporter agrees that "Obama needs to cultivate the electorate's trust of him and comfort with him as a leader. "
However you say "But he should do it on his own terms, with his strengths."
While I understand that may be considered a "politically smart strategy" I have issues with it because Obama's strengths seem to be built on one way communication - speeches, white papers. (I think I'm the only person in America who isn't moved by Obama's repetitive speeches!!). I would much prefer a give and take scenario - either a real/healthy debate (not "gotchya" debates with silly questions) or a town hall meeting.
That is why I think Mr. Broder's column has many good points.

PS on the public financing issue - I have on problem with Obama opting out but his explanation as to why was a bit . . . unreal.

Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 8:42 AM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

B.O. (I don't even care how to spell his name correctly) is the biggest phony we have seen in many years. George W. Bush at least is consistent.

Posted by: Twopennies | June 22, 2008 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Defenders of Obama's decision to reject public financing come up with lots of good sound reasons for why he should do so. But none of the reasons they give (527's, the swiftboating of Kerry, etc.) are new. These things were all right there when he gave his pledge to accept public financing--something he himself Ssupposedly supports. Bottom-line: He broke his word. What this, the recent pandering to AIPAC re: the status of Jerusalem, shifting positions on NAFTA, support for the new FISA bill, etc., Mr. Obama is in serious danger of destroying his own brand.

Posted by: cadbury | June 22, 2008 8:36 AM | Report abuse

There has be much said about Senator Obama's change in tactics for financing his campaign. Those backing Senator McCain would have us believe that this decision is more important than Senator Obama's decision to stop Bush's war, or to support universal health care, or to create an energy policy that will stop global warming. We, the general public are not buying the spin.
Old Senator McCain, is stuck in Bush's mine set, and even though he is right on a few topics he is so wrong on the really big picture that we would be nuts to put him in the White House.
.

Posted by: vonpfahl | June 22, 2008 8:34 AM | Report abuse

So why is Broder not talking about McCain slipping in and out of the primary public financing system? How could Obama trust McCain when McCain broke his own campaign finance law? McCain took himself out of public financing without the permission of the FEC? Why should Obama trust him? This is a stupid controversy because once again the press is building a double standard against Obama. McCain should be taken to task for his opting out of the primary public finance system when he used it for a loan and for getting on the ballot. He broke the law.

Posted by: Goldie | June 22, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

So why is Broder not talking about McCain slipping in and out of the primary public financing system? How could Obama trust McCain when McCain broke his own campaign finance law? McCain took himself out of public financing without the permission of the FEC? Why should Obama trust him? This is a stupid controversy because once again the press is building a double standard against Obama. McCain should be taken to task for his opting out of the primary public finance system when he used it for a loan and for getting on the ballot. He broke the law.

Posted by: Adam | June 22, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

You just keep justifying your candidate Scott.
=========================
Sorry Scott, just noticed this post was by Cwatson.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

I don't always agree with Mr. Broder, but I do like the points in this column. Sen. McCain is a more well-known entity - both the good and the bad. Senator Obama has received national attention only in the relatively recent past, when in full campaign mode. That in itself may make a voter pause - who is this guy, REALLY? (Let's face it, politicians are different and not fully honest when in campaign mode).

Sen. Obama also has some of his famous "uniting" to do - with Hillary supporters, with Independents, etc. before he can win the presidency.

I get the sense that he is laying low, just giving safe speeches, posting statements on his site, limiting "face" time with REAL questions (whether it be reporters or the public).

That strategy does not make me warm to him. It does not help allay the concerns I have about him. In fact, just the opposite.

I would love the 10 town hall meetings and am sorry that Sen. Obama is shying away from them.

Posted by: Echo21 | June 22, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

I just read Broder's column. No one seems to have pointed out that how well one handles a town hall meeting has nothing to do with how well one might handle being president. Presidents mostly give speeches to present their views to the public, and in meetings and press conferences, they still control the agenda.

It follows that McCain's town-hall challenge is a purely political set-up tactic by an underdog who is not good at speechmaking, and Obama's people should make that clear. If Obama clearly acts presidential, the need for him to be folksy or chummy will practically disappear. Moreover, I have listened to his recorded reading of "Dreams from My Father," and I believe he has a great gift for telling amusing stories, which can make him, in the style of Lincoln, "likable enough."

As for Obama's changed position on public funding, it's obvious that no one could have known before the Spring how much he could raise in small donations. They make him beholden to no one, which is the primary aim of public financing. From that perspective, it very arguably merits praise that he will not be taking and spending public campaign funds.

I do agree that Obama needs to cultivate the electorate's trust of him and comfort with him as a leader. But he should do it on his own terms, with his strengths. Assuaging some critics by agreeing to the constraints of public financing and to McCain's self-serving town-hall scheme would not demonstrate the character that a president must possess.

Posted by: Ned | June 22, 2008 8:29 AM | Report abuse

Most media outlets ignored what Obama wrote with his pledge:
"My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce ..."

Two parties failed to come to an agreement on a public financing "truce" - not one. It takes two to fight or disagree but Mr. Broder and others in the media overlook that fundamental point and in fact, haven't taken the time to report those facts.
=========================

You just keep justifying your candidate Scott. Obama signed a pledge that if the Republican candidate agreed to public financing, he would also. He is a liar and you can't believe a thing he says. We Democrats have gotten screwed thanks to idiots like you who will justify every idiotic, dishonest thing this black man does. Are you also black?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 8:28 AM | Report abuse

David Brooks in the NY Times...David Broder in the Washington Post....these men are slightly left of center journalists who have supported Obama every step of the way UNTIL NOW...now Obama is, to paraphrase Brooks, showing himself to be just another slick Chicago politician...when the truth hurts, NO SPIN is right, the messenger is attacked....written oaths mean nothing to such politicians...political expediency is the rule of the day....Obama attacks Hilary for her position on NAFTA, then once she's out of the race he changes his own...Don't do this and claim to be DIFFERENT!...What actually does prevent foreign nationals from donating to the Obama campaign through American cash conduits?...Certainly not Tony's buddy's principles.

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 8:20 AM | Report abuse

I think Media Matters coverved aspects of Obama's decision on campaign financing better than Mr. Broder has:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200806200012?f=h_top

Most media outlets ignored what Obama wrote with his pledge:
"My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce ..."

Two parties failed to come to an agreement on a public financing "truce" - not one. It takes two to fight or disagree but Mr. Broder and others in the media overlook that fundamental point and in fact, haven't taken the time to report those facts.

Shortly after John Kerry annouced for public financing, they Swiftboated him. When McCain flip-flopped on public financing and quite possibly broke the law, where was the FEC on passing judgement on that ? Incapable of rendering a decision or acting because they haven't had staff since January to do so. If McCain flip-flops out of public financing during the general election, what recourse does Obama have? Currently, little that one might have any confidence in.

The decision is is not merely and simply to accept or not accept public financing. It involves all the other 'financing' that goes on around it. How much of a decision maker would Obama present himself as if he ignored those other factors that he generally acknowledged when he made his pledge (limited to 250 words on the form).

Mr. Broder may pretend those are not issues that concern Mr. Obama by not reporting them but I suspect a number of informed voters are aware of them and more will get acquainted with them as the campaigns go on.

Likewise on the debates. McCain offers 10 townhalls that suit him. Obama counters with a total of five - more than any presidential election in modern history. Because the two parties haven't come to agreement, this is once again all Obama's fault? Mr. Broder assumes too many of his readers are stupid. Again, it takes two to have a disagreement. Why hasn't McCain counter proposed a compromise?

I do not agree with Mr. Broder. On the debate issue, I think he's being premature. Quite frankly, I think Obama will clobber John in a debate in any forum and therefore, I'm not sure we'll hear back from the McCain camp with a counter proposal.

Posted by: CWatson1 | June 22, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Will the media investigate McCain's lie about campaign finances?
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/06/mccain-camp-lie.html

Posted by: Why the double standard? | June 22, 2008 8:14 AM | Report abuse

Isn't interesting that comments on Broder's columns have been moved over here with a a shill praising him? I forgot to mention that WAPO dropped the comments section on Border's column over a year ago. Why? Because all he got was negative and reasonable criticism of his mindless, biased and delusional columns. As you can see from these comments, not one reader has anything good to say about this poor excuse for a pundit. Clearly, Broder needs to get his friends to post happy comments about him, just like the Bush appointee in the Department of Justice now being investigated by the FBI.


Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 8:05 AM | Report abuse

I read D. Broder's column. Thanks for suggesting I read it. I was 3 paragraphs into the column when I realized Politcs REALLY IS not much different than reporting sports. Writers, columnists. PUNDIT(s) truly are at the mercy of, "what is happening right now!"

With the news cycle now condensed to 9 hrs(?) the media is turning every LILLE statement, or opinion, into subject matter for MAJOR NEWS REVELATIONS.

A friend was watching me, watching the news, only to remark, "I'm sicvk of this stuff, I can't believ I am going to watch, nagging, bickering whining, pratle for six more months!" prattle.

And the media is feeding on this diatribe justifying their existance. I like to call myself a second generation newspaper a man. But the 'Monica Lewinsky like' daily coverage of, 'he said, then, he said', is no longer entertaining, much less informative . . .

B-T-W I heard that every 4th of July John McCain burns a N' Viet Nam flag in his back yard! ! ! !

Posted by: Mike S Gainesville FL | June 22, 2008 8:05 AM | Report abuse

THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 22, 2008 8:04 AM | Report abuse

"David Broder's Sunday column in the Post should be required reading?" Dude, are your editors making you shill for Broder because no one reads him anymore? Remember his "Bush will make a comeback" column last February? Broder should have retired long ago. He has either become senile or lost his mind from smoking all that crack he buys over in the Baltimore projects. In any case, he is just another symptom of how arrogant, conservative, and totally out of touch the WAPO punditry are.


Posted by: Richard Burt | June 22, 2008 8:03 AM | Report abuse

I find it interesting that Obama supporters always attack the messenger when they don't like what the messenger has said. Like Obama himself, they parse, parse, and parse somemore, no matter the wrongness of his position. When he flip flops they say, he has a right to change his position. When he outright lies, they say, well, Hillary lied about this or that, and McCain lied about this or that.And, the examples they use are trivial. And,as though 2 wrongs make a right. To the issue at hand: The truth is, as David Broder writes, we do not know who Obama is. Until this primary season, we did not know about his religious mentor, Rev. Wright; we did not know about his seatheart deal with Tony Retzko; we did not know about his relationship with a known terrorist; we did not know about his relationship with Fr. Phfeger; we did not know about his speaking with a forked tounge, saying one thing to the american public about NAFTA, something different to foreigners; we did not know about his ultra liberal views and no show for votes in the Illinois Senate; we did not know about his wife's feelings towards this country, and the list goes on and on. We simply do not know him as we would someone who has been around long enough to have a record. I cannot believe that with so many unknowns about him that he may be a step away from assuming the most powerful office in the world. Will he make us more secure; I can truly say I do not know. Will he be honest with the american people; I truly do not know. I await the comments, spin and vitriolic invectives of his supporters which I expect. I don't expect comments which focus on the truth; only comments which will spin his positions and character, and attack me , another messenger whose message they do not like.

Posted by: no spin | June 22, 2008 7:57 AM | Report abuse

It's not that Senator Obama merely "opted out" of public financing; it's that he specifically promised that, if the Republican nominee would agree to public limits, he would as well. Now, he's back-pedaled out of that promise and blamed McCain for it. McCain has no power over 527s, no more than Obama does George Soros.

Couple that with Obama's interview in Fortune, in which he says he will no longer attempt to unilaterally renegotiate NAFTA, which he unequivocally stated he would do earlier this year. In fact, when it was said that his one of his advisors had told the Canadians that it was only campaign rhetoric, he first denied that meeting had taken place and then fired the advisor. Now, he's saying exactly what the advisor had said--it was overheated campaign rhetoric, nothing more.

I started out this season quite impressed by Senator Obama. He eloquence, his style, his promise of post-partisanship sounded great. But now, I'm afraid, it was all just campaign rhetoric. I don't think he actually meant much of it.

Posted by: Jim | June 22, 2008 7:53 AM | Report abuse

Hey Obama voters, John McCain appreciates your support of his campaign...that's the American way. We all pay our taxes and then support both candidates from the proceeds. Then MOVEON.ORG, etc. gives millions to advertise for the Democrat (thousands of BABY ALEX who isn't allowed to join a peacekeeping force commercials) and Republican 527's place ads for the Republican. Now we have a precedent...America is writing a blank check for Obama. You see he believes in CREATIVE FINANCING...that's how he bought a 2.5 million dollar house and property for half of its value...through an Arab millionaire who loaned it to Rezkos's wife who overpaid for the adjoining property and sold it back to Obama...a "Bonehead Move", according to Obama...sounds like we have to watch every dollar coming in to make sure no more arab money influences our election in another "Bonehead Move."

Posted by: Scott | June 22, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

remember the compassionate conservative ?
it led us in to this mess
any body is better than bush and definitely obama is better than mcain
broder can keep his wisdom to himself if he has any

Posted by: charlie | June 22, 2008 7:45 AM | Report abuse

McCain is solid - Experience is a two edged sword - one has the wisdom from seeing things over time - however other people also have the experience of seeing you in action. This is a massive compliment which goes to McCain: "McCain benefits from a long-established reputation as a man who says what he believes."

Obama is again a study in contrast - no record.


No one really knows Obama - it is not a good idea at all to go with someone with no experience for an important position - have the person learn more.


We don't know Obama, maybe even Obama doesn't know Obama.


The signs are really really bad Obama really did it last Friday when he FALSELY ACCUSED the Republican party of racism BEFORE THEY SAY ANYTHING - Obama does not have an actual quote or instance of racism - so he went with the "Republicans are GOING TO BE RACIST" line instead.


The Constitution states one is innocent until proven guilty - Obama's new version of the Bill of Rights is "one is a racist before one says or does anything."

Obama's new version is "One is a racist until you vote for Obama."

Is this Obama's version of a post-racial campaign ? Obama IS RUNNING A RACIAL CAMPAIGN. THERE IS NO DOUBT. THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN THAT IS POST-RACIAL EXCEPT THE HYPOCRISY.


Give the country a break.


Obama is a disgrace to the Bill of Rights.


This is actually a new version of twisting someone's words around and "FALSELY PRETENDING TO BE OFFENDED." Or the FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF "OFFENSIVE COMMENTS."


This time, Obama has nothing to go on. He has nothing.


So Obama says the Republicans are "GOING TO SAY SOMETHING WHICH MIGHT BE TWISTED INTO SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED RACIST IF ONE REALLY REALLY REALLY TRIED." THESE REMARKS BY OBAMA ARE SO ANTI-AMERICAN AND SO OFFENSIVE TO EUROPEAN AMERCANS THAT Obama should RESIGN FROM THE SENATE IMMEDIATELY AND WITHDRAW FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE.


****************************************


JACKSONVILLE, Florida (CNN) - Barack Obama told supporters that Republicans will "try to make you afraid of me" in remarks he made Friday at a Florida fundraiser.

"The choice is clear. Most of all we can choose between hope and fear. It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy.

"We know what kind of campaign they're going to run," said the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. "They're going to try to make you afraid. They're going to try to make you afraid of me. 'He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?'"

In similar comments at a Chicago fundraiser last Thursday, Obama told supporters that Republicans would try to portray both him and his wife Michelle as "scary."

"They're going to try to make me into a scary guy," he said last week. "They're even trying to make Michelle into a scary person. Right?" And so that drumbeat - 'we're not sure if he's patriotic or not; we're not sure if he is too black.'


"I don't know, before I wasn't black enough," said Obama. "'Now he might be too black. We don't know whether he's going to socialize - well, who knows what.'"

Posted by: Anonymous | June 22, 2008 7:39 AM | Report abuse

The question is asked: "How well do voters know Obama?"

To get to know Senator Obama, visit:

http://www.theobamafile.com

Posted by: Dave | June 22, 2008 7:35 AM | Report abuse

I think, like some of the other commenters, Broder and others would do well to "unpack" this worry of not "knowing" Obama.

People thought they "knew" GWBush, and were surprised to discover that what they thought they knew (easy-going, OK kind-of-guy) was irrelevant to the question of competent governing.

And as others have noted: I think Broder needs to think about how well WaPo readers "know" him, and how his credibility has been damaged by how much we "know."

P.S.: Obama never promised to be stupid. Why in the world would he agree to 10 townhall meetings, an absurdity of its face, giving McCain all that free exposure?? He's traveled that road before with I-demand-a-debate-NOW!! Clinton. The fact that McCain can't get any energy behind his campaign (partly because he didn't really have to campaign to get his Party's nomination)is not Obama's problem to solve.

AND...

Why would he not opt out of a system that McCain has been able to game to his own advantage thus far? That, too, is just stupid.

This piece (yours) is the first time I have become aware of the Washington "bubble" that others have noted. Broder thinks?? Broder says???

Who cares???? But I suppose people will see you on MSNBC and other places repeating what "Broder" says, and this is what passes for political commentary in this country.

Posted by: mphillip | June 22, 2008 7:34 AM | Report abuse

Senator Obama is known by the voters. That's why he couldn't beat Senator Clinton in any of the big primary states. He won in the caucus states because moveon.org had hundreds/thousands of people at the caucuses and some could even vote in the caucuses because the state residency requirements were so weak.

We don't support him because he is another arrogant left wing (or right wing depending on what he feels will get him votes today) politician who will do and/or say anything to be elected. He would sacrifice his family and friends to put himself over the top (in addition to the ones he's already dumped). His ethnicity is not important to us.

His race, however, is the prime reason that voters support him. Obviously African Americans feel he is one of them (although he doesn't share their slave heritage)and they vote for him en masse. Very naive Democrats support him also because he's black and they think he can speak well and, therefore, will be a great president.

Although some of the polls show Obama ahead in some critical states, he is absolutely not ahead. Take PA for instance. He won only 5 counties in the primary, the counties populated with African Americans around Philadelphia and Harrisburg and the county where Penn State is located. If he couldn't even win half of the Democrats in PA, he surely isn't beating McCain. Most of the Dems who didn't vote for him won't vote for him. The Repubs have been informed that he is a left wing Democrat who has no positions that appeal to them. It is absurd that these polls have him ahead of McCain. That is not going to happen.

The polls are trying to position Obama as the frontrunner (for fundraising purposes probably)....he isn't. His halo has dimmed considerably and people have a much less favorable opinion of him. That's because he has flipflopped on every major issue he used during the primaries. We don't trust him at all and we're very angry with the DNC for pushing this weak candidate on us. We had a great list of candidates and look what we ended up with.

I'm not sure how the polls get the results they do...maybe they call only areas populated with high numbers of African Americans or maybe people just don't want to say they're not voting for a black man. Who knows? I just know those polls showing him way ahead are very wrong. And most people realize that. The polls are not trusted this year. They have been appallingly inaccurate...doing it on the cheap maybe. Or maybe they have African Americans making the calls. Who knows...we just know they're wrong. And we'll vote for McCain, Nader, or no one before we vote for Obama. If you think I'm wrong, wait until November.

Posted by: hazwalnut | June 22, 2008 7:29 AM | Report abuse

Not to be rude, but I don't bother to read David Broder anymore. He seems totally out of touch with today's electorate. And if I remember correctly he totally called the 2006 election wrong on the Senate side. It is time for the Washington Post to put him out to pasture.

Posted by: JR | June 22, 2008 7:23 AM | Report abuse

"I don't think he is as dirty as people think." says an Obamaniac.

A wonderful bar thet they set for Obama, the first Messiah to condescend to save the nation.

Irrespective of Broder's 'wisdom", "ethics", and "Dean-dom", Obama is as Obama does, which is abominable. An expedient Chicago Southside politician who is marketing Himself as a "New Age Candidate".

And the line for Kool-Aid is endless.

Posted by: As I Toot Samba | June 22, 2008 7:21 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Broder lost his fastball years ago, and is a biased defender of the Washington status quo. I couldn't care less about what he thinks, except as a reflection of the DC echo chamber that hasn't a clue about the country. People want fundamental change from the Republican disaster of the last eight years. All the rest is detail.

Posted by: David | June 22, 2008 7:20 AM | Report abuse

Did I miss a turn here? Isn't David Broder the man who violated the Post's policy by taking money from parisan/advocacy groups for speeches? And he wants to talk ethics? Gimme a break.

Posted by: carl5 | June 22, 2008 7:14 AM | Report abuse

Obama can only perform on script.Just like Bush.If Obama is elected,he will,like Bush,Actually,bush pick only his supporters at all his public speakings.The question is, who will be the puppdtmaster???Four more years.Empty suit.If he cant face Mccain at town hall debates,how will he face foreign leaders not totally enamoured of him as the American media clearly are? actually Bush is a much better speaker than Obama.

Posted by: Nannie Turner | June 22, 2008 7:14 AM | Report abuse

I think Broder's article was full of bias. While I agree that people are just now getting to know Obama, giving McCain a pass on his flip-flops is pretty egregious.

Having said that, the two Obama issues Broder highlighted are not likely to resonate with the public. I would question Obama's intelligence if he were to let McCain set the agenda for the election. Obama is ahead. Why would he forego his monetary advantage? Did he renege on his promise? Maybe but if he agreed to take public financing ( in a system that is rife with loopholes), the press would be all over him for being weak. The town hall thing is just silly. McCain needs free publicity. Why would Obama agree to hand it to him?

I am an Obama supporter but I too have questions about how Obama will perform as president. These two issues are not even on my radar. And on the flip side, I know how McCain will perform. In his best "maverick" year, he still voted with the Rs 90% of the time. Those policies are proven failures, so I'm willing to take a chance on a guy with high intelligence and a belief that he can bring some needed change to the corrupt system of Government in this country.

Posted by: Sharon | June 22, 2008 7:12 AM | Report abuse

Conventional wisdom indeed. 2 process issues that won't fix what's wrong in America. If BO were an old hand, his decisions would be "shrewd" and "strategically smart, not ceding the initiative to his opponent." Since he's not one of the Washington insiders, he's untrustworthy.

BO's tough strategic decisions are worthy of a Clinton or a Kennedy, and that's a compliment. You gotta win first baby.

Posted by: Utec | June 22, 2008 7:11 AM | Report abuse

If Obama gets into office, gets us out of Iraq, and starts spending the Billions of dollars here in America, I wouldn't care if he store candy from a baby. I don't think he is as dirty as people think. If we don't change the direction we are headed then it doesn't really matter anyway.


Posted by: Thomas | June 22, 2008 7:02 AM | Report abuse

Who can argue with David Broder? Didn't he predict the bounce in the polls for Bush? The famous " Bush Bounce"?

Posted by: Rj2z | June 22, 2008 7:00 AM | Report abuse

Yeah aleks, but Broder isnt running for public office, specifically the presidency, Obama is.

I bet there will be over 400 posts by the Obama-junkies defending those 2 decisions ad nauseum and going on McCains age by the end of the day.

Posted by: 761=342 | June 22, 2008 6:52 AM | Report abuse

I know he's the Fix's superior and everything, but isn't Broder just about the last person who should be talking about trust and ethics right now?

Posted by: aleks | June 22, 2008 6:43 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company