Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

McCain's Crucial 73 Days

The coverage of Barack Obama's decision last week to forego public financing for the general election centered on the fact that the Illinois senator is almost certain to have a considerable spending edge in the fall campaign over John McCain.

What was largely overlooked, however, is how Obama's decision impacts McCain's fundraising between now and when he formally accepts the party's nomination on Sept. 4. Since McCain opted out of public financing for the primary race, he can raise and spend as much as he likes over the next 73 days. And, if he wants to have a real chance at the presidency, he must find a way to come within financial shouting distance of Obama over those next two and a half months.

"Advertising in the summer will be more important than advertising in the fall," said Curt Anderson, a Republican media consultant who advised the presidential candidacy of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. "After the conventions are over there will be a very tiny sliver of the electorate that remains undecided. The pool of undecided voters is bigger in the summer than it will be in the fall."

Recent presidential election history backs up Anderson's contention.

Back in 1996, President Bill Clinton effectively closed out the contest against Sen. Bob Dole (Kans.) during the summer with a slew of advertising that portrayed the Kansas senator as out of touch. Dole, essentially bankrupted after the primary fight, was unable to respond as he waited for his general election money to kick in. By the time it did, the race was over; Clinton sat on his lead and Dole was never able to overcome first impressions.

Fast forward eight years. It was early August when the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth launched its first ad questioning Sen. John Kerry's (Mass.) service in Vietnam -- a commercial that began to raise doubts in voters' minds that eventually led to them choosing to reelect Bush.

While voters don't vote until the fall, the structure of the race is more often than not established in the summer months. First impressions are made and, as we all know, those impressions tend to be lasting ones.

While the raising and spending of cash has always been a critical part of the summer months in recent campaigns, Obama's decision to be the first presidential candidate to opt out of public financing in the general election makes June, July and August absolutely crucial to McCain.

He must do two things simultaneously: identify the states in which he wants to play in the fall (yes to Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire/no to North Carolina, Georgia and Alaska) and work to define himself and Obama before the Illinois senator can do both.

Those two propositions -- particularly the latter one -- take money. And for McCain to have any hope of accomplishing those twin goals, he must find a way over the next three months to put together his strongest fundraising performance of the election to ensure that Obama doesn't run all over him in terms of the size and strength of ad buys.

Early returns are positive for McCain. In May, his campaign collected more than $21 million, a total roughly equivalent to the $23 million raised by Obama. McCain ended the month with $31.5 million on hand while Obama showed $43 million -- $33 million of which is for the primary election.

But, those numbers don't tell the full story. May was McCain's best month of the campaign in terms of cash collected while it was Obama's lowest total so far this year.

Here's a look at the fundraising for the two candidates so far this year, keeping in mind that McCain essentially locked up his party's nomination in early February.

MonthMcCainObama
May21.423.3
April18.532
March 15.442.8
February 11.656.7
January 12.736.7

The trend line is moving in the right direction for McCain. But, to date, he has shown no capacity to match the sort of $40 million and $50 million months that Obama has put on the board during the heat of his primary battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Already, Obama has brought to bear his financial edge. In his first ad of the general election Obama went up in 18 states including North Carolina, Georgia, Montana and North Dakota -- not states typically targeted by the Democratic nominee. Of the 18 states Obama is advertising in, 14 were carried by President Bush in 2004.

McCain, by contrast, went up in 10 states with his first ad of the general election -- a more narrow (and traditional) playing field that includes six states won by Bush in 2004 and four won by Kerry. McCain's newest ad, which focuses on the environment, is running in 11 states.

In order to prepare for the spending onslaught from Obama in the fall, McCain must make the most of the next two and a half months. If in that time McCain can't define the parameters -- geographically and ideologically -- on which the race will be fought between Sept. 5 and Nov. 4, he won't likely be able to do it.

For McCain then, it's hard to exaggerate the importance of the next 73 days for the future of his candidacy. Can he rise to the occasion?

By Chris Cillizza  |  June 23, 2008; 12:35 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: FixCam Week in Preview: Obama and Clinton Unite
Next: Race Matters (Or Does It)?

Comments

John McSame is no match for the democratic machine, voter registration, and voter turnout that can be expected in November 2008.

Over and above that McSame is financially strapped with matching govt. funds. Democrats will blow McSame to pieces come November 2008.

The Republican party does not have a prayer with Barr running on the conservative side.

Posted by: Ajay Jain, Garland, TX, USA | June 24, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

" Since McCain opted out of public financing for the primary race,"
After borrowing against the money he expected fro opting in to the public financing system.
Somehow, the press repeatedly reports Obama's up-front opting out, and agrees to frget McCain's violating of the law when he saw more money that way.

Posted by: Frank Palmer | June 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

As a Christian Conservative I want the Post to answer questions about McCain's character.
Why did he remarry ONE MONTH after divorcing his first wife, who was handicapped?
While having many affairs during his first marriage why didn't the military charge him for having affairs with subordinates?
What was the real reason he left the military?
Were there any complaints against him for sexual harrassment? or worse? Will, as is rumored, some of these women step forward soon to tell what happened?
Why did he call his second wife a "cun*" and a whor*? Why doesn't the Post report on this? Because guys like Broder and Cohen don't care about women being treated like dogs?
What role does McCain's affairs with lobbyists and other Washington-based women play on his thinking toward women?
Answer some questions and stop the constant stenography.

Posted by: Joshua Gen Against McCain | June 24, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Obama, rather than associating with people of ill repute, has severed connections with these former pastors. I am much more concerned about McCain associating with George W. Bush, whom I would definitely deem a "person of ill repute."

Posted by: asgaard | June 24, 2008 3:57 AM | Report abuse

All the money in the world will not elect Obama. The democ"rats" plan to raise 100's of millions. But why do they need it ??

Obama is the "BUZZ" he beat Hillary Soprano. How can he lose ?

I guess they don't feel safe with Obama unless they have 100's of millions of dollars

VJ Machiavelli
ps If you want to see what life is all about visit http://www.vjmachiavelli.blogspot.com and take the time to play and watch the video of our lives vs the lives of our solders.
It will be the best 5 minutes of your life.

Posted by: VJ Machiavelli | June 24, 2008 2:01 AM | Report abuse

McCain...Honor & Integrity? A four word answer...
Keating Five
Carol McCain (1st wife)

Posted by: A.Lincoln | June 23, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

McCain is basically DOA.

Posted by: Phil | June 23, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I can't believe the comment about Grete Van Susterin's (sp) blog. I hope they aren't serious.

I have a feeling I am going to be saying this a lot in the next three months. --

Not liking Obama or Mrs. Obama does not make one a racist.

Pointing out problems with their credibility is not racist.

It is part of the political process.

Posted by: CallMeMadame | June 23, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Give the old warrior McCain some credit for coming up with the 300 million reward for new battery technology. That's way more innovative that the tired liberal boilerplate coming from Obama.

Posted by: John | June 23, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Obama, rather than associating with people of ill repute, has severed connections with these former pastors. I am much more concerned about McCain associating with George W. Bush, whom I would definitely deem a "person of ill repute."

Posted by: asgaard | June 23, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Here's a copy of Obama's birth certificate versus a real Hawaii birth certificate.

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/06/21/obamas-birth-certificate-bamboozle-cont/

Wonder if he registered for the draft as was required again by 1980?

"On March 25, 1975, Pres. Gerald Ford signed Proclamation 4360, Terminating Registration Procedures Under Military Selective Service Act, eliminating the registration requirement for all 18-25 year old male citizens. Then on July 2, 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed Proclamation 4771, Registration Under the Military Selective Service Act, retroactively re-establishing the Selective Service registration requirement for all 18-26 year old male citizens born on or after January 1, 1960."

Posted by: Willipete | June 23, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse


Presidential elections are like blood in the water....

One question for McCain is whether other Republican candidates will help him raise money. Clinton introducing her donors to Obama will definitely help him broaden his fund raising base (and presumably lead to help in her paying off her campaign debts).

The other Republicans, and the Bush/Cheney folks need to rally around McCain, wallets in hand. Perhaps his increased fund raising is a sign of this, although hard to tell. I suspect the next filings will tell the story.

While the RNC has tons of money at this time, it is not clear if they are going to spend it now, or hold on to it until after the convention. If Obama gets an essentially free ride during the summer, then the defining may indeed be done.

It seems to me that the derogatory attacks on Obama are so far overboard that they are most likely to be counterproductive. I wonder if there are any polls investigating this? (And I could be wrong, a bit far from the heartland here!)

Besides the money, McCain needs to be folding the other folks campaign operations into his, is he doing this?

Posted by: PatrickInBeijing | June 23, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

only morons speak of "the truth."

Posted by: | June 23, 2008 6:40 PM

I resent that implication. It's settled.

Posted by: Al gore | June 23, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

There is little McCain can do other than have his hacks and handlers mount a campaign of racism, fear and smear using guerilla tacticts just as Bush and the paty that eats its own did against him. But McCain himself will be his own undoing.

McCain is completely out of touch with average Americans, as are Bush and the Republican Party; he cannot possibly represent us. He is clueless on the economy, energy and foreign policy because he has been insulated from the real world having married into wealth and enjoying far too much power for far too long insulated from the very people he purports to represent.

McCain, a career Navy officer and former POW, has voted against more VA funding and benefits at every opportunity for the new generation of service-disable veterans created by the Bush Administration which he has fully supported. This is even more repugnant considering McCain publicly stated he wants forces to remain in Iraq for another hundred years when there was no cause to be there in the first place. Now we learn that the Iraqi Oil Ministry will be giving no bid contracts to western oil companies. Considering that big oil has greased McCain's campaign this is more than just mere coincidence - it's simple quid pro quo to protect their new interests.

This country NEEDS fresh leadership with new ideas and a new approach both at home and abroad which is what Obama offers. Another four years of John McCain using the Bush-Republican play book would very well be enough to make us a two-tiered society despised by the entire world.

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

"who's paying snObama to spend the whole workday "

I'm a community organizer. I skipped wall street and did this. aren't I noble?

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

I am not a moron. I went to Harverd.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

The truth is the elections are not won by raising the most money, but they are lost due to a lack of it. McCain has shown in recent weeks that he can raise the funds necessary to compete with Obama. Moreover, Mitt Romney's mostly self-funded onslaught in the primaries failed to slow the Straight Talk Express. Obama can raise and spend his millions, but the reality is that McCain, not the junior IL senator, is best qualified to serve as our next president. No amount of cold, hard campaign cash can change this reality.

Posted by: buckybacker97 | June 23, 2008 6:46 PM | Report abuse

since when is the truth called "bashing"? I need to get my new me out to the voters. the old me is so last month. but hillary is beaten and now the new me will go after additional rubes.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 6:34 PM

++++++++++++++

reasonably intelligent people could only speak of shades of "truth."

only morons speak of "the truth."

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

My ideas could never stand the muster of people who know what they're talking about and have actually studied the issues. I call them elitist and look for the stupid person vote.

Posted by: mcAINT | June 23, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

since when is the truth called "bashing"? I need to get my new me out to the voters. the old me is so last month. but hillary is beaten and now the new me will go after additional rubes.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Okay, all I want to know is who's paying snObama to spend the whole workday bashing Sen. Obama.

The RNC?
McCain's campaign?

Or does he/she work out of the Vice President's cave?

Posted by: nklmll | June 23, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

"sat behind her in fact, because I was a campaign volunteer. (I'm also a caucasian, middle-aged, EDUCATED woman.)"

As long as you don't wear a headscarf, we can allow you on camera. thanks for attending. now give until it hurts. this will prepare you for my tax plan.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

The ignorance of some of the bloggers on this site is astounding - it's clear they don't have the capacity to evaluate the candidates, let alone articulate their positions.

Like Dianne72, who totally distorted Michelle Obama's speech in North Carolina. I attended Mrs. Obama's rally here in Asheville - sat behind her in fact, because I was a campaign volunteer. (I'm also a caucasian, middle-aged, EDUCATED woman.) Mrs. Obama never said anything suggestive of racism, and the large crowd was composed of the full range of humanity - young and old, brown and beige, Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. Mrs. Obama was warm, gracious, and eloquent.

If you want to know the Real McCain, take a look at this article about his military record:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-klein/mccains-secret-questionab_b_107409.html

Add that to his marital history: extramarital affairs; dumping his first wife after she became crippled; Cindy McCain's own affairs.

And today McCain's top advisor said that another terrorist attack on the US would be advantageous to McCain. Wonder why GWBush is pushing so hard for war against Iran???

Posted by: barbara | June 23, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Dianne72 wrote:
I wonder when Michelle Shaniqua Obama's "whitey" tape will surface. I think the Republicans will release it in October. It would not make sense to release it now. I know the Obama people dimiss it as a hoax but that is what they want you to beleive. Michelle Obama is a race baiter. Did you hear her speach in NC? SHe kept saying throughout her speech that "they are trying to raise the bar", "they keep moving the goal post, "they, they, they..." ("They" = "Whitey") Everytime she would say these lines you would hear the audience reply, "uh huh", "that's right", "amen", "I heard that" (obviously a black audience).
_____________________
you obviously have problems with black people period. I wonder when Cindy Adulterer McCain stuff will come--fine example for our young women don't you think--Jenna Jennison wanabe.
-------------------------------------
You girls are so great. lets bash the wifes. Thats cool because the issue's meen nothing. Lets just talk about race. Hey by the way did anyone notice Obama was Black! LOL come on!

Posted by: Timothy | June 23, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

A wife who owns a brewery. Now who wouldn't want one of those.

Libs of course prefer a ketchup factory. yummm.

Posted by: kingofzouk | June 23, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Cindy McCain is so made-up she belongs in a circus

Posted by: Carol | June 23, 2008 6:01 PM
++++++++++++++++

She's the usual trophe blonde wife God fearing, mighty White men like to stand smilingly next to them.

Beautiful teeth, eyes, nose, hair, custome-made dresses --- or so popular culture says and most of us believe IN popular culture even if we try to deny it: look at ticket sales in these mindless entertainment stuff these lame entertainers put out! --- but they don't say much. They just smile and node and look up to their alpha male husbands.

That's Cindy McCain and her blonde daughter. They are all very nice to look at. It's better that way...

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

Hi Ralph, two wrongs dont make a right.

Posted by: Irwing | June 23, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse


The nastiness here is nothing; go to Greta Van Susteren's blog at Fox where bloggers have called for lynchings. These people are sick. Thankfully most people are decent and want the best for the country, and this year we can spell relief O B A M A

Posted by: Ralph | June 23, 2008 5:59 PM

++++++++++++++++

Remember what the pot smokin' Karl Rove said, on Fox, about two years back, when some reporter asked him what SOME REPORTS where saying how the GOP was going to get clubbered and he idiot [bush's brain] said, idiotically with a retarded smile:

You have SOME NUMBERS. I have THE number!

The idiot and his crowds are now predicting a landslide [for McCain, of course, the big warrior who was brought down by an old, late 18th century French made trebuchet], when even conservative districts and their candidates are trying to cover their behinds with hands and leaves...

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 6:07 PM | Report abuse

How about the nastiness of Obamamaniacs and their fellow travelers at CNBC and CNN by conducting daily "pogroms" on Hillary.

Posted by: Irwing | June 23, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

The case of public financing is just too compelling to see why we even allow candidates to opt out.

I continue to be disappointed in Obama's calculated hypocrisy. He and his team are devious and untrustworthy as we saw during the debacle over the primary votes in Michigan and Florida. He waited until it was too late for those two states to have a second primary. All calculated.

And the town hall meetings with McCain. He is avoiding them intentionally. Without a script, without a teleprompter, he stumbles and stammers.

My vote goes now to McCain.

Posted by: Cornelius | June 23, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Cindy McCain is so made-up she belongs in a circus

Posted by: Carol | June 23, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

The nastiness here is nothing; go to Greta Van Susteren's blog at Fox where bloggers have called for lynchings. These people are sick. Thankfully most people are decent and want the best for the country, and this year we can spell relief O B A M A

Posted by: Ralph | June 23, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

For someone leaving Harvard with "honors" he is considered to be midget in the senate by his peers.

Posted by: Duffy | June 23, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

As long as I stay in protected, all-Liberal enclaves, I always do really good.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Getting in . . .?

How about leaving Harvard Law School with a Juris Doctor Magna Cum Laude. Think that's no accomplishment?

Posted by: Michael | June 23, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Getting into Harvard via affirmative action is no accomplishment.

Posted by: Duffy | June 23, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Somebody said Michelle's name was Shaniqua. How racist. It LaVaughn, or something like that.

Posted by: PONGO | June 23, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

First time donor

Stop wasting your money, if you really care about the inner cities, why don't you send your $100 directly to the inner cities - instead of sending it to a guy with two Ivy League degrees and who has already blown hundreds of millions of dollars?

geeshhh

.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

"price of oil prior to Pelosi congress: $1.50"

Yup, before Pelosi, milk cost 35 cents a gallon and you had a milkman bring it to you! Of course, before Pelosi, blacks couldn't vote. Actually, they couldn't really do much of anything other than pick cotton. They couldn't even play baseball since baseball wasn't integrated before Pelosi's congress. They didn't really have any idea what to do with those things, since there was no agriculture before Pelosi's congress and cavemen mainly used crude baseball rats to club a saber tooth tiger for dinner.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 23, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

What you are saying is that who wins is directly proportional to how much the individual candidates spend on advertising. Maybe advertising directs how most Americans choose whom to select to be Our President. If so, they are extremely misguided.

Posted by: BlueTwo1 | June 23, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Chris

Money only goes so far - there are diminishing returns.


Obama has already wasted hundreds of millions of dollars.


Obama has hit a glass ceiling of support - it is all downhill for him from here.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 23, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Chris

Money only goes so far - there are diminishing returns.


Obama has already wasted hundreds of millions of dollars.


Obama has hit a glass ceiling of support - it is all downhill for him from here.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | June 23, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama has no record of accomplishments.
That is all that needs to be advertised over and over again.

Posted by: mucko | June 23, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama has no record of accomplishments.
That is all that's needed to be advertised over and over again.

Posted by: Mucko | June 23, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

John Mc Cain, Bush, and Cheny are members of a wicked gang of neocons who have damaged the economy of this country and started unnecessary wars that cost us billions of US$ and thousands of the lives of our young and brave soldiers. They have lied to all Americans about WMD in Iraq and unfortunately got us stuck in a quaqmire with no way out in the near future.Nobody can trust or tolerate such wicked clowns for another presidential term under any circustances. The proper place for John Mc Cain is a suitable oldman house, not the White House nor even the Senate.

Posted by: SAM | June 23, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Dianne72 wrote:
I wonder when Michelle Shaniqua Obama's "whitey" tape will surface. I think the Republicans will release it in October. It would not make sense to release it now. I know the Obama people dimiss it as a hoax but that is what they want you to beleive. Michelle Obama is a race baiter. Did you hear her speach in NC? SHe kept saying throughout her speech that "they are trying to raise the bar", "they keep moving the goal post, "they, they, they..." ("They" = "Whitey") Everytime she would say these lines you would hear the audience reply, "uh huh", "that's right", "amen", "I heard that" (obviously a black audience).
_____________________
you obviously have problems with black people period. I wonder when Cindy Adulterer McCain stuff will come--fine example for our young women don't you think--Jenna Jennison wanabe.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

SDM Wrote:

Any interest in mentioning that McCain pledged to take public financing during this period, backed away from that pledge, and never got FEC approval to back away, meaning that any money he spends during these 73 days is actually illegal?
_______________________
Thank you. This is the story that Cizilla and the rest of the papers should be investigation and writing about. The fact that John McCain has committed a crime--I would love to see the coverage on this if that was BHO--you got to love the good old USA!!!

Posted by: Angel1966 | June 23, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

If, as you say, you've voted Democrat for 20 years, you must agree with Obama on the issues far more than you agree with McCain. So why vote for McCain? Spite?

Not at all you see I just believe the old Hillary when she said her and McCain have the experience to be President, Obama does not. Also ever since Rev Wright I don't trust Obama, he was not truthful about what he knew and why he went there for so long. Besides with the Democrats picking up more seats in Congress this year McCain will have work in a bipartisan way. And lastly because if Obama wins Hillary will never be President, if McCain wins Hillary will be the odds on favorite to win in 2012.

Posted by: rss | June 23, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Ummm ...

Hillary Clinton is not going to have as much a chance as you think should Barack Obama lose. She's $22 million in debt, and still has debts from Iowa and Pennsylvania. Every vendor, hotel, etc. is going to demand cash upfront because they aren't going to want to be the last in line for a campaign that may not win and has the potential to go deep into debt.

Also, how does Hillary Clinton expect to win Iowa or New Hampshire when by arguing for making the scofflaw Florida and Michigan primaries dispositive, she wants to eliminate Iowa and New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation status?

Posted by: jim | June 23, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

McCain's a nice guy, but appealing to a younger electorate will be very daunting for him.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | June 23, 2008 4:53 PM

---------------
McNasty is a nice guy? Tell that to his wife Cindy, who he called a c#@t.

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

I wonder when Michelle Shaniqua Obama's "whitey" tape will surface. I think the Republicans will release it in October. It would not make sense to release it now. I know the Obama people dimiss it as a hoax but that is what they want you to beleive. Michelle Obama is a race baiter. Did you hear her speach in NC? SHe kept saying throughout her speech that "they are trying to raise the bar", "they keep moving the goal post, "they, they, they..." ("They" = "Whitey") Everytime she would say these lines you would hear the audience reply, "uh huh", "that's right", "amen", "I heard that" (obviously a black audience).

Posted by: Dianne72 | June 23, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Republicans are the richest people in America. Don't think for a second that they'll hesitate spending money on any Republican candiate for president. The radical Republican Swift Boat Veterans for Lies was a sham, but it did what it intended to do, and for today's Repubs, the ends always justify the means. That said, you make some valid points. Whatever happens leading up to the two conventions, will virtually decide the election. It wil ultimately come down to McCain's experience vs. Obama's change. The burden of proof is really with Obama. If he can effectively argue that electing him will be a change for the better, it is his election to lose. McCain's a nice guy, but appealing to a younger electorate will be very daunting for him.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | June 23, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

If, as you say, you've voted Democrat for 20 years, you must agree with Obama on the issues far more than you agree with McCain. So why vote for McCain? Spite?

Not at all you see I just believe the old Hillary when she said her and McCain have the experience to be President, Obama does not. Also ever since Rev Wright I don't trust Obama, he was not truthful about what he knew and why he went there for so long. Besides with the Democrats picking up more seats in Congress this year McCain will have work in a bipartisan way. And lastly because if Obama wins Hillary will never be President, if McCain wins Hillary will be the odds on favorite to win in 2012.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Barry Hussein throws 1 billion Muslims under the bus. Hold on America, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Posted by: Nadeem Zakaria | June 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

I promise a return to Carter era policies. the result will be very much the same:

Energy policy - result - get yourself a sweater and turn off the Xmas tree lights

foreign policy - let's wait it out until a republican comes back into office, and cancel the Olympics for good measure

economy - interest rates of 21% are OK, aren't they?

but there is cause for hope and cheer. you can throw me out in a landslide in four long years of misery.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Report abuse

To: namelessprick @3:36PM

'CHE' never cut-and-paste anything from some left-leaning websites. He is a straight thinker who is out to teach right-wing nuts how to conduct a responsible debate that is driven by facts and not inuendos and fear.

Obama will utilize money machine very effectively. You can also rest assured that he will beat your old grandpa McSame. Oh yeah, he never competed in redneckvilles and lost those anyway (I mean KY and WV).

If you have been to school, you will probably have learned that 'CHE' is just a pen name that has nothing to do with what you are thinking. Return to debate the issues. Not names.

Posted by: Che | June 23, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Nadumb you sound like you have a secret man crush on Obama and his 'purple lips'. Get a room.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

McCann doesn't need that much money, McCann needs everyone to remind everyone to look closely at the issues, for eveyone to decide for themselves if obama or McCann can be trusted and Who has the policies that best match the issues of the voter. it all comes down to trust and in my opinion obama keeps switching his side on the issues which makes me nervious...

Posted by: Dwight | June 23, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

"Can you say alternative fuels, energy? By the time any NEW wells were dug, let's hope we are well on our way to independence from oil."

The one thing we shouldn't be willing to base our national energy policy on is hope.

Oil is going to take us into the next energy market which will undoubtably be alternative fuels, however we've had 30 years to develope alternative fuels and we have nothing.

The world is a much diffrent place and we have to take a pragmatic approach to dealing with energy while waiting for the magic alternative energy bullet to be developed and vetted.

Posted by: PAO | June 23, 2008 4:47 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 seductive tune while all the mindless gutter rats follow him around like he's the incarnation of the second coming. However, you know the outcome of that little story is that all the little rodents drop off into the sea while dancing to his hypnotic tune.

Posted by: Nadeem Zakaria | June 23, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Can you say alternative fuels, energy? By the time any NEW wells were dug, let's hope we are well on our way to independence from oil.

Posted by: Lynne | June 23, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

The Republican/Bush energy policy - LMAO. Deregulation while they LTAO with our dollars. The Democrats did NOT do this and MOST of the American public know it.

Posted by: Lynne | June 23, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

price of oil prior to Pelosi congress: $1.50

price of oil after only two years with Pelosi/Reid bumbling: $5.00

contemplate that effect with all prices soon after Obama gets elected. Add in double your tax bill too.

I feel a great nostalgia for some carter era promises.

Posted by: kingofzouk | June 23, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

"Oil is a global commodity and any new oil taken out of wilderness areas will cost just as much to the consumer, than not drilling. Why don't Republicans try and be intellectually honest with the American Public for a change?"

Abe, buddy, you need to wake up from the mid 19th century.

Drilling for our own oil can go in two directions-

1. Adding more supply to the global market will reduce the price of oil. Its that easy. Couple this with speculation regulation and there's your $2 gallon gas.

-OR-

2. Any oil extracted stays on US soil. This will foster new refineries which means new jobs, economic growth, the whole nine yards. Not a bad deal either right?

People need to start looking at this realistically.

Posted by: PAO | June 23, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Funny how people are saying the price of oil could hurt DEMOCRATS. HUH?

I mean, who has been in power for the last 8 years while the price of gas has risen?

People know drilling isn't going to have any effect on gas prices for 10 years. They aren't that stupid. There's a damn good chance that the price of oil could hurt REPUBLICANS. After all, it was THEIR policies -- especially the Iraq War -- that caused prices to skyrocket.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

voter in a voting booth:

Do I really want to vote for candidate supported by an unemployed head case like kingofzouk?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Patti wrote
"He is where he is due to his ability to deliver speeches... is this the basis for President? Shouldn't we have some idea who we are voting for?"

Yes, it's called DOING YOUR HOMEWORK.
Try this for starters and stop looking to the boob tube and canned sound bytes for edification:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

My God, do I have some lazy-ass compatriots!

Posted by: Rob Howard | June 23, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

We have all the oil we need in oil shale. It costs $50 a barrel to deliver it to market. The Takistan oil reserves are larger than Saudi Arabia and the Afghan/Pakistan pipeline should be a national priority. Invading Iran will cut 2 million barrels a day and destroy the worlds economy wit over $200 a barrel oil. Israel bombed Saddam's heavy water reactor ending his aspirations, the same can be done to Iran with the Arak reactor. As good measure when the reactor comes online processing, we should also go after their missile sites. Many billion wasted will not go over large with the ruling Mullahs. The people generally were better off under the Shah as men are married later and families are smaller because of the economy. We must stay in Iraq until the last remaining Al Qaeda elements are gone. Baghdad and parts of the triangle not yet purged by Sunni/coalition forces number in the thousands. The Pakistan/Afghan theater has more than a million supporters and millions of sympathizers. The proliferation of Saudi style madrassahs in Pakistan bodes poorly for our efforts to fight terrorism.

Posted by: Jimbo | June 23, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Busy/Cheney & Co. have been chomping at the bits for several years now grinning to themselves as the price of oil has skyrocketed. This is a win-win situation for the oil industry....pick the pockets of the average working man at the pump, then snooker him into believing that drilling in ANWAR or offshore will lower his monthly gas bill. Republicans are so dishonest in so many ways, this is one of them. Oil is a global commodity and any new oil taken out of wilderness areas will cost just as much to the consumer, than not drilling. Why don't Republicans try and be intellectually honest with the American Public for a change?

Posted by: A.Lincoln | June 23, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

voter in booth on election day:

Is McOld going to make it to the inauguration? Does he sleep in a coffin?

Posted by: Patrick NYC | June 23, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

This whole off shore drilling issue is a bogus non-starter. Endangering our pristine environment for the purpose of providing Exxon/Mobil more oil to sell for the same high price. Less than 5% of our oil needs would come from these new oil rigs and since the oil is a global commodity, waiting five years to pay $5, $10 a gallon is a bogus issue...just like McCain's "gas tax vacation"...bogus.

Posted by: A.Lincoln | June 23, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Sen. McCain -- er, Chris -- you might want to explain this money thing in a little less loaded terms. You make it sound like John McCain is going to be out there with a tin cup. Please note that Sen. McCain has his own FEC problems -- you fail to mention that McCain DID sign up for public financing of his primary bid, and got a loan based on that pledge, only to back out once HE saw he actually had a shot. It's only THAT slight of hand that makes him able to raise and use private funds this summer (the FEC is expected to sanction him ... once it gets a quorum). And you also fail to mention that John McCain is NOT going to be outspent once you take into consideration the vast amount of unregulated (no donation caps) money collected by the RNC. That cash will make up for any direct head to head advantage Obama may have over McCain. So Chris -- please, stop with the hearts and flowers for McCain -- unwarrented and untrue.

Posted by: omyobama | June 23, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

It looks like McCain is the underdog. I like McCain and I hope that he will rise to the occasion. I know that a vote for McCain in November doesn't mean a vote for Bush, as Obama would like for me to think. I'll do my own thinking, thank you. I just don't like Obama, the candidate. No hard feelings.

Posted by: Maggie | June 23, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

voter in booth on election day:

Do I really want Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama running this country with no adult oversight?

Posted by: kingofzouk | June 23, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Grandpa McSame doesn't have a snowball's chance in Bagdad to win the election. The country is sick and tired of the same old crap coming from Washington and grandpa McBush is just more politician that will provide the same old stale rhetoric, same old policies of George "Poop For Brains" Bush.

Posted by: A.Lincoln | June 23, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

The question of the price of gas could well work against the Democratic Party in this election.
The United States could be self-sufficient in fuel but for two decades the Democrats have opposed drilling off-shore and in Alaska. They oppose driving for primarily environmental reasons. We can't drill in Alaska they say because it will despoil the area and prevent the annual migration of the carribu. Who is more imortant, John Q. Citizen who can't afford to fill up his gas tank to get to work or animals in Alaska?
They oppose off-shore drilling citing danger to beaches. A CNN commentator actually reminded the viewers about the Exon Valdez to suport the Democrats in their argument against off-shore drilling despite the fact that the Exon Valdez was a tanker.
How do they think oil gets to us if we don't drill for our own? It comes in big tankers which get larger each year. These tankers come far closer to the coastline than any drilling operation fifty miles out. The Europeans, who are far more environmentally-conscious than Americans have been drilling off-shore for decades.
When these facts are presented to them the Democrats argue that drilling off-shore and in Alaska will make no difference because it would take ten years to have an effect. They said that twenty years ago and they then said that ten years ago and now they are saying it again!
But for this two-decade old Democratic arguement, the oil would be flowing to a pump near you right now.
To suport their arguement the Democratic Party also insists that the amount of oil would be minimal-this is nonsense since we have more untapped reserves than all of the Middle East.
They also challenge whether a decision to drill would help today's high prices-again using their ten year arguement. This is also nonsense. Speculators gamble on "futures". The price of oil can go up or down depending on whether the president of Iran has a bad day. It recently went down because Saudi Arabia announce an increase in production.
What possible sense does it make to ignore our resources and instead import oil from the Middle East in huge tankers which could in one accident destroy our beaches for a decade and in adition allows other nations who are not friendly towards us to influence our foreign and domestic policy?

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | June 23, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

even obamaidiots better learn what their candidate stands for, seems to me he will manipulate the American citizen by controlling their oil, their power their way of life, did he not say, America cannot continue to be the way we are, that we have to be put in our place...didn't he...

Posted by: Dwight | June 23, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Obama's money is way over rated. Just look at what he had accomplished in states like New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, New Jersey, when he out spent Senator Clinton 2-3 to 1. Nothing. In fact he lost in those states by a large margin.

Don't be un-nerved by Obama's money. This is the year, finally, the voters can prove that "money deosn't talk, people talk."

Posted by: GY | June 23, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

One more thing:

Let's not forget that McCain has consistently opposed public financing at all levels of government. In a 1998 (or was it 1992) National Political Awareness Test, he checked "yes" that he supported removing public financing at the presidential level. In 1996, McCain voted against the Kerry amendment to increase the presidential campaign public subsidies to reflect the cost of campaigns.

Has anyone called McCain on this?

Posted by: jim | June 23, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Let's not forget that McCain was in the public financing system before he got out of it. Because he was in the public financing system, he was able to get on certain state ballots -- most notably Ohio -- using the public system as his collateral. Meanwhile his primary opponents who opted out of the public system -- Mitt Romney and Rudy Guiliani -- spent countless hours and millions of dollars trying to get on those state ballots during the GOP primaries. McCain then opted out of the system after benefiting from having been in the system.

Nobody in the media has called McCain on this hypocrisy, and it's about time someone does it. Tomorrow marks the day which someone is able to file a lawsuit for McCain violating campaign finance laws. Will the press cover that story?

Posted by: jim | June 23, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Well.

As of today, June 23, 2008 I've donated for the first time via the internet to
Barack Obama. $100.00 to Senator Obama.

and of course

Because I desperately want the DREAM TICKET. $100.00 to Hillary. Can't wait to see them together on Friday!!

Peace and Love
-Thomas

Posted by: First time donor | June 23, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

If Senator Obama were as "articulate" as George Bush and gave speeches like Bush, he would NOT be the presumtive nominee for the Democratic party. He is where he is due to his ability to deliver speeches... is this the basis for President? Shouldn't we have some idea who we are voting for? we know less about Obama than we knew about Bush.. and look where that got us.. and by the way, while Kennedy was a new Senator, he had 14 years as a Congressman before he ran for the Senate..he was not a newbie without any record of any thing...

Posted by: Patti | June 23, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

McCain is the old Brian Dunkleman.

Posted by: Spectator2 | June 23, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Florence...Who is shoving Obama down your throat? If you don't want to vote for him don't vote for him. You are obviously an upset dem who is lost in the wilderness looking for a place to vote. Vote McCain, you will be getting everything Hillary Clinton doesn't want. Voting in America is for adults, not children throwing tantrums!!!

Posted by: Chuck | June 23, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

McCain is not a very good campaigner (I've seen his first general election ad and laughed at it) but it looks like now that he can be competitive with Obama unless Obama finds some issue he can stick with. The high price of gas is the biggest political issue in the country now and that's working against the Democrats.

Posted by: ThisIsReality | June 23, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

republican failures, you are a sad, sad little man. i hope someone loves you in your next life.

Posted by: poor guy | June 23, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

8 years ago, McCain was a semi-respectable candidate. He is still one of the Keating Five and bears some responsibility for the Savings and Loan collapse, but at least he seemed to be relatively honest back then about Straight Talk and addressing problems honestly.

Now, I can't tell whether he's trying to be a far-right conservative, or a maverick who goes against his own party. I say "trying", because both his votes and his policies show him toeing the W line like a good little automaton on everything except global warming. Fall in line and you'll get your turn, Johnny. About the only issue he has open to him is Iraq - and there, he's against 70% of the voters.

Obama is younger, and doesn't have as much experience as McCain - but he is not as young as, for example, Kennedy, who was also elected as a first-term Senator and handled the Cuban Missile Crisis much better than I think (the more experienced) Nixon could have. I can respect McCain's experience, but I don't see why decades in the Senate (or years as a POW) would make McCain a *better President* than Obama.

I think McCain is clueless on the economy - both how it works generally, and how people are hurting right now. I think he is too belligerent about problems in the Middle East (and if you refuse to have talks with other countries, the *only* other way to bring them around to do what we want is to use force). He is anti-woman. He doesn't understand the Constitution, separation of powers, or checks and balances (compared to Obama, who was president of Law Review at Harvard, and who lectured on Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago). McCain calls any judicial decision the far right doesn't like horrible "judicial activism," even when the decision is actually the Supreme Court *refusing* to overturn lower court or legislature decisions.

I think the first prerequisite for our next President is that he recognize the problems he'll have to deal with in office. I think McCain is denying that W has created or aggravated any problems at all. And that completely disqualifies McCain.

Experienced or not (and there is always something to be said for the non-stuck-in-a-rut advantage of fresh *in*experience), Obama, at least, recognizes the problems he'll have to deal with.

It's as if Obama is gathering the tools and supplies and workers he'll need to build a home, but McCain says that's a waste of time and effort and resources because it's sunny and getting better and he'll sign legislation requiring that it always will get better if he wins.

Obama is no messiah. But at least he's not nuts.

Posted by: Aelfric (Falls Church, Va.) | June 23, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

I took the money because if anyone comes after me wife, I am hoping that John McCain defends her.

When confronted, I always turn tail and run away. Michelle knows this as she is the one that usually bullies me. Iraq will know soon enough.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse


U.S. CONSTITUTION - WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES


DEMOCRAT $24 BARREL OF OIL


OIL WAS $24 A BARREL WHEN DEMOCRATS LEFT AND REPUBLICANS TOOK OFFICE AND NOW IT IS $145 A BARREL.


REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL


YOU DO THE MATH AND DECIDE IF TEXAS OIL MILLIONAIRES WARRANT INVESTIGATIONS TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE


REPUBLICAN WALL STREET CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND STEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES TREASURY.


REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.


NO MORE REPUBLICAN LIES, CONSPIRACIES, AND GRAND LARCENIES.


REPUBLICAN $145 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $175 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $195 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $215 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $235 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $255 BARREL OF OIL SPECULATIONS


REPUBLICAN $4.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $5.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $5.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $6.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $6.50 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS
REPUBLICAN $7.00 A GALLON GASOLINE SPECULATIONS


WHEN DOES IT STOP IF EVER?


REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION DOES NOT WORK.
REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION IS HURTING AMERICA.
REPUBLICAN WALL STREET GREED SPECULATION IS HURTING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.


STOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY
STOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY
STOP REPUBLICAN WALL STREET OIL SPECULATIONS TODAY


REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS AMERICAN JOB OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.


The laws of economics do not promote idealism or higher consciousness. The logic of profit and loss in a market-driven culture reduces the grandeur of the human species down to one role, that of "consumers." And all along, the pleasure principle is saying, "I have products I can sell you to take care of all that."

NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.
NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.
NATIONALIZE U.S. OIL FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE.


CLEAN NUCLEAR ELECTRIC ENERGY IS THE ANSWER


WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.


BARACK OBAMA WILL BRING BACK OUR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND RIGHTS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.


REPUBLICAN WALL STREET MILLIONAIRES ARE PAYING THEMSELVES $10,000,000 BONUSES FROM MONEY STOLEN FROM THE U.S. TREASURY, WHILE SENDING OUR AMERCAN JOBS OVERSEAS. RECKLESS OUTSOURCING IS DESTROYING AMERICAN MANUFACTURING AND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.


STOP REPUBLICAN MCCAIN FROM SELLING OUR AMERICA.

Posted by: Republican Failures | June 23, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Let me clarify, once again:

Michelle didn't mean she'd never been proud of America, Barack didn't mean Iran was a small country we had no reason to fear, and Father Pfleger didn't mean a word of his racist screed

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

I like it ....Barack Obama is the black Ryan Seacrest.

Posted by: Grant | June 23, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Like many people I'm just plain tired of bias in the media. First it was against Hillary Clinton and now it's McCain's turn. Everyone in America knows that the media favors Obama and to ensure his nomination in the primaries they slanted the news in his favor, now they slant their coverage to aide the senator from Illinois in his battle with John McCain. Dana Bash on CNN seems to give a negative report on McCain daily. I'm suprised he lets her on his straight-talk express.
When Bill Clinton said the words "Jesse Jackson" in South Carolina there followed an amazing over-the-top barrage of criticism from the Obama campaign promptly supported by a chorus of hallaluya from the media.
Yet now we have Obama bringing up race in recent speeches, in a somewhat flipant manner to accuse the McCain campaign of planning dirty tricks and the media thinks that's just fine and a good way to deal with his Republican rival.
In several speeches recently Obama has said that "they", his opponents, are planning to use the question of race against him. The media reported this and concluded that for Obama to use race was a good move on Obama's part. Since his only current opponent is John McCain, Obama is presumably suggesting that McCain intends to use racial predjudice to win this campaign.
The media may think that Obama's comments in his speeches labelling McCain this way are a good way to go but the American people are a different audience.
John McCain is not the kind of man to use racial intolerance to win an election. In the 2000 primaries when Bush supporters took the low road to attack McCain, he didn't respond in kind.
Obama owes McCain an apology for this unwarranted attack.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | June 23, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

McCain, who gets a free ride from the press, is a total bore. Maybe he should have his press conferences late at night so that he can aid me into falling asleep.

Posted by: truth1 | June 23, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Dole lost because hew WAS out of touch. In the debates he came across as the typical representative of the corporations (haves) against the middle class and poor (have nots)

It had nothing to do with raising cash. he was old school republican and every one knew it.

McCain is the same, yet people forgive him because they think he is war hero, which he is not. He is playing towards their gullibility and they are eating it up

He is not the third Bush term. He will be much worse

Posted by: abbedd | June 23, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

If you are the same "CHE" who previously only graced "The Fix" with multi-page cut-and-pastes from left leaning sources, congratulations on having found your own voice and an appropriate length of post.

Your chosen pen-name is still an insult to liberty, but we are grateful for small favors.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama will continue to be a fine Senator after November. We should be thankful for the attention and enthusiasm he has brought to Washington.

But let's be serious: presidential material, this guy is not. Ryan Seacrest is good looking and great on the mic, too, but would you want him handling your social security?

Posted by: yeah, that | June 23, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

to mnteng, who thinks the Gitmo tribunals were closed to the media:

From the sources you yourself quoted,
550 Gitmo tribunals were open to the media while only 14 were closed because of evidence related to national security. Read your sources all the way through and you'll learn more.

Posted by: ThisIsReality | June 23, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone ever seen snObama and Cillizza in the same place at the same time?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Obama can't buy my love. As a 38-year-old, 20-year faithfully voting Hispanic female democrat (With a four-year degree!!)... I'm voting McCain. He's close to the center I prefer rather than the ultra-liberal hippie full-on crazy the Democratic party is turning into.

Posted by: Diana | June 23, 2008 3:11 PM

+++++++++++++++++

You are fully noted, Diana! You are a McCain type "loyal Democrat"! LOL

McCain and those gun totin christian nutz are more mainstream, we hear you loud and clear!

If you are a non-White Hispanic and you come to our GOP convention here in the Twin Cities, you would add to the flavor and diversity of the GOP's big tent, 'cuz without a few SMART racial like you and Clarence Thomas, the big tent would have 98.5 percent Whites... especially in a state as white as Minnesota...

But even if you put you, Louisiana gov "Bobby Jindal", Clarence Thomas, and Alanes Keyes all on stage....the big tent GOP get together would still be over 95% Whites, many of them carrying hunting guns. But, hey, that's okay,,, since the GOP has the really really smart racial minorities among them!! ;o)

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

" I'm voting McCain. He's close to the center I prefer rather than the ultra-liberal hippie full-on crazy the Democratic party is turning into. Hillary would have been the best candidate - she would've been the best PRESIDENT... "

So what are these issues that McCain and Clinton agree on that make you vote for McCain?

Posted by: DDAWD | June 23, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a paper tiger. His donations drop like a rock since Feb. His support turns into anger against him. What all his campaign is doing now is inventing a fake presidential seal, and paint him white! Sorry, Obama, if you could somehow move into the white house, millions would go there to puke.

Posted by: God Father | June 23, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

ThisIsReality writes:

"You didn't know that the Gitmo trial processes were open to the media? Uhh, you might want to start looking things up."

As might you, if you think the media has access to the Gitmo tribunals.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257179,00.html
http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2008/06/06/05

Posted by: mnteng | June 23, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

I have a very strong feeling that most of these so-called 'democrats' who are not voting for Obama, but are switching to McShame are really republican trolls trying to build momentum for McOld. Nice try, but true democrats would never vote for McBush.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | June 23, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

To 'no spin'

If you can go back to the statistics you cited about PA and OH, you will probably pull your head out of the sand and realize that Obama started 20 points behind Clinton in both races but he utilized his resources to introduce himself to public in those states. He lost them by a single digit. In other words, Obama starts at a point of disadvantage but he effectively closes the gap within a very short time. He now has 4 months to do that and McSame a$$ will be toast come November when he has flip-flopped himself silly.
When using statistics, try to understand that learned people will be looking at the same numbers and will know something is up with your supporting argument.
You may also benefit from learning that a bunch of rednecks and purplenecks voted against Obama the man and not his policies. If this is an error, ask Rush Limbo and Operation Chaos crew.

Posted by: CHE | June 23, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

The clown is 115 years old!
Will he LAST another 73 days?
LOL

Posted by: Kase | June 23, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

How many empty promises do I have to make to buy your vote. I am offering:

free health care
free college
free gasoline
free security
free food
free morals

What else do you need?

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Diana, can you identify any specific issues on which you agreed with Hillary Clinton more than you agree with Barack Obama? Their platforms were very similar, and neither had much in common with McCain. If, as you say, you've voted Democrat for 20 years, you must agree with Obama on the issues far more than you agree with McCain. So why vote for McCain? Spite?

Posted by: Blarg | June 23, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

A lot of voters are sick and tired of Obama being shoved down our throats by most of the media and his campaign. Yes, Obama is young, thin, and good looking. Yes, he's good at delivering speeches. My questions is: So??? Why should this country elect the next President just to "make history"? Obama is extremely arrogant and hypocritical. He will do anything and promise anything in order to win. His supporters treat him as some sort of long awaited Messiah. He has ZERO experience and is guilty of associating with several persons of dubious character. I don't care how much money he spends campaigning since I will not vote for him.

Posted by: Florence | June 23, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Obama can't buy my love. As a 38-year-old, 20-year faithfully voting Hispanic female democrat (With a four-year degree!!)... I'm voting McCain. He's close to the center I prefer rather than the ultra-liberal hippie full-on crazy the Democratic party is turning into. Hillary would have been the best candidate - she would've been the best PRESIDENT... but between the MSM and the DNC's premature 'coronation' of Obama, it simply wasn't to be. Frankly, all these rabid Democrats yelling that those of us crossing party lines (and in face re-registering Independent, as I have) are 'not real Democrats' or 'some setup by the Republicans', 'not really female voters', 'not really Hispanic', etc has cemented my decision to not vote Democrat. McCain would have to do something AMAZINGLY BAD (like rob a bank) in order for me to not vote for him now. And my family - and I - were talking about doing this WELL before the final primaries and it started coming out in the news more that people were doing this. The people are just sick of being TOLD to 'toe the line' rather than be the SMART voters we can be. The party does not own us, we own IT and it's time it got slapped down and remembered that.

Posted by: Diana | June 23, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, I did not mean to post that twice...
But it makes for good reding huh?

Posted by: JL Mealer | June 23, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

GEE GOLLY Obamanites...
McCain has had this outlined and online (via my leak) for months!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JOHN McCAIN'S 3R ECONOMIC PLAN 2008
Abbreviated version

Progressive Candidate John McCain comes through for America with his 3R economic plan.
In the persona of Theodore Roosevelt, McCain's plan just makes sense.

1. RETHINK: America must rethink the global views on what America is capable of in our current state of technology, engineering and the demands that face the world.

"RE-Think" the basic job goals involve the dwindling retirement, health care and social security plans that are failing Americans. With a strong base and a higher Gross Domestic Product (GDP) America has a new bargaining chip in the way we live and the ways we retire.

The framework is already in place through existing laws to make this happen. The Progressive attitude of John McCain to get things done by crossing party lines will resurrect America.

2. REFORM: America must rise to these demands and compete aggressively in a global economy. American people must demand higher quality products and less restricted trade routes for Made in USA components.

The USA will reform its dead manufacturing base to create the most innovative and green-engineered products possible. We will compete in a world market along with other high quality products. Once again, the world needs American success in these new ways of manufacturing.

3. REINVENT: America and Americans must reinvent themselves to reach and maintain these standards and by sheer American ingenuity, control the world's marketplace in the competitive manner, as we have always been proud to be #1. Can you hear Theodore Roosevelt shouting this?

Americans are going back to a 3R-schooling program where they are paid to reinvent their skills and learn new skills to design and lead their personal LLC, Corporation or joint venture company. That's easy enough to comprehend and just as easy to implement. The 3R plan is designed as a six-month rapid advancement system. Graduates may return for additional skill enhancements from time to time, or step up after new advanced training in executive management.

NUTS AND BOLTS of the plan are simple.

Green Engineering firms with actual answers to viable fossil fuel free transportation and climate control for homes and office have products that will save end users billions per year have finally realized why these ideas have always been avoided. Billions of savings equates to millions of lost tax revenue from energy companies.

Here is the John McCain 3R solution.

McCain's 3R is about technical, closely monitored and rapid hands on training from pros to create new pros. Thousands of currently-job-displaced "once leaders in the manufacturing arena" will be asked to train and play instructor rolls in the 3R plan. Paid, of course, as these new leaders will help create a whole new style of prosperous America.

A new guard for Social Security.

While manufacturing is a very important part of this plan, thousands of new businesses must to be created to meet the new surge of 3R manufacturing industries to create a new era of prosperous Americans.
Initial estimates of 1 in 5 students will begin his or her own company and drive even more Americans into a viable lifestyle with real jobs, real benefits and a retirement to look forward to.

All of this can be done without costing taxpayers (or the government) additional funds. America has the means to follow through with John McCain's 3R plan, ready and in place across the USA. The buildings we need sit vacant for the most part. By assuming leases on abandoned stores and factories across America with MC-3R schools and mini-manufacturing training centers, the USA made products can be sold and support the stores. Building owners write off the loss in taxes over a few years!

This is the new place for financial speculators to invest!

The speculators who first drove the economy with mortgage investments and most recently with crude oil investments have a better arena for their investments. America as nation of industrious individuals who want to work and want to succeed will make them huge profits. The supply of eager Americans with ideas and dreams to prosper is limitless.

Although the thousands of new businesses manufacturing USA Made products is exciting enough, the real excitement comes from the massive amount of additional jobs that will be created to provide the new housing, new buildings, new parks, shopping, grocery stores, schools, government outlets and so much more.
McCain's Progressive nature embodies Theodore Roosevelt more than any US presidential candidate in history since the original Rough Rider blazed the greatest era of growth in America.

We need John McCain to lead our nation with the same type of change.

Posted by: JL Mealer | June 23, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Funny how Obama's handlers are trying to claim McCain's 3R plan which has been leaked online for months, has any connection to Obama's latest claims.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JOHN McCAIN'S 3R ECONOMIC PLAN 2008
Abbreviated version

Progressive Candidate John McCain comes through for America with his 3R economic plan.
In the persona of Theodore Roosevelt, McCain's plan just makes sense.

1. RETHINK: America must rethink the global views on what America is capable of in our current state of technology, engineering and the demands that face the world.

"RE-Think" the basic job goals involve the dwindling retirement, health care and social security plans that are failing Americans. With a strong base and a higher Gross Domestic Product (GDP) America has a new bargaining chip in the way we live and the ways we retire.

The framework is already in place through existing laws to make this happen. The Progressive attitude of John McCain to get things done by crossing party lines will resurrect America.

2. REFORM: America must rise to these demands and compete aggressively in a global economy. American people must demand higher quality products and less restricted trade routes for Made in USA components.

The USA will reform its dead manufacturing base to create the most innovative and green-engineered products possible. We will compete in a world market along with other high quality products. Once again, the world needs American success in these new ways of manufacturing.

3. REINVENT: America and Americans must reinvent themselves to reach and maintain these standards and by sheer American ingenuity, control the world's marketplace in the competitive manner, as we have always been proud to be #1. Can you hear Theodore Roosevelt shouting this?

Americans are going back to a 3R-schooling program where they are paid to reinvent their skills and learn new skills to design and lead their personal LLC, Corporation or joint venture company. That's easy enough to comprehend and just as easy to implement. The 3R plan is designed as a six-month rapid advancement system. Graduates may return for additional skill enhancements from time to time, or step up after new advanced training in executive management.

NUTS AND BOLTS of the plan are simple.

Green Engineering firms with actual answers to viable fossil fuel free transportation and climate control for homes and office have products that will save end users billions per year have finally realized why these ideas have always been avoided. Billions of savings equates to millions of lost tax revenue from energy companies.

Here is the John McCain 3R solution.

McCain's 3R is about technical, closely monitored and rapid hands on training from pros to create new pros. Thousands of currently-job-displaced "once leaders in the manufacturing arena" will be asked to train and play instructor rolls in the 3R plan. Paid, of course, as these new leaders will help create a whole new style of prosperous America.

A new guard for Social Security.

While manufacturing is a very important part of this plan, thousands of new businesses must to be created to meet the new surge of 3R manufacturing industries to create a new era of prosperous Americans.
Initial estimates of 1 in 5 students will begin his or her own company and drive even more Americans into a viable lifestyle with real jobs, real benefits and a retirement to look forward to.

All of this can be done without costing taxpayers (or the government) additional funds. America has the means to follow through with John McCain's 3R plan, ready and in place across the USA. The buildings we need sit vacant for the most part. By assuming leases on abandoned stores and factories across America with MC-3R schools and mini-manufacturing training centers, the USA made products can be sold and support the stores. Building owners write off the loss in taxes over a few years!

This is the new place for financial speculators to invest!

The speculators who first drove the economy with mortgage investments and most recently with crude oil investments have a better arena for their investments. America as nation of industrious individuals who want to work and want to succeed will make them huge profits. The supply of eager Americans with ideas and dreams to prosper is limitless.

Although the thousands of new businesses manufacturing USA Made products is exciting enough, the real excitement comes from the massive amount of additional jobs that will be created to provide the new housing, new buildings, new parks, shopping, grocery stores, schools, government outlets and so much more.
McCain's Progressive nature embodies Theodore Roosevelt more than any US presidential candidate in history since the original Rough Rider blazed the greatest era of growth in America.

We need John McCain to lead our nation with the same type of change.

Posted by: jl mealer | June 23, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

McCain's Crucial 73 Days

And Cillizza and Associates will do everything in their power to help him.

Posted by: JLE | June 23, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Sorry. I didn't mean to post that. My medication wore off, they're trying to evict me from my trailer, and the police were here asking about my cousin this morning, so I guess all that triggered one of my little episodes.

Posted by: Chris | June 23, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

"spending onslaught"

now you're talking my language. I also like taxing onslaught.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Only thing McBush needs to wory about is not making a doo-doo mess in his depends- every time you see him making a speech(spewing lies), he looks on the verge of a doo-doo.

Posted by: Herndon, VA | June 23, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Just the sound of the words "spending onslaught" in reference to a Democrat is such a turnaround from four years ago. Who would have thought?

Posted by: el_barto | June 23, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

73 days? How about his almost 72 years?

When McCain was born the Civil War had ended just 71 years earlier. That's how old this guy is.

Posted by: Spectator2 | June 23, 2008 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama's racist and white and America--hating past will come back to bite his a** come the general election. The chickens will be comming home to roost. Real Americans won't be voting for a racist white-hater or a America--hater like Barack Obama. Posted by: sparksUSN | June 23, 2008 2:23 PM

So who are the "Real Americans"??? Get over it. In fact, do us all a favor and move to Canada when BHO wins the election.

Posted by: Chris | June 23, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Why did BHO raise "only" $23.5M in May?

Posted by: MarkInAustin | June 23, 2008 2:34 PM
------------------
My guess is battle fatigue. With the primaries running for 18 months and a pretty non-stop campaign they were not pushing. It will start to pick up as the summer moves on. I see a big jump when the VP's are picked and the convention hits. That's when I plan to start giving again.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | June 23, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

sparksUSN, we know now that YOU are a racist! What's even better is that the fact that you will probably be cryin like a little sissy girl when he becomes president. Nothing will stop that, not your crying eyes, drool filled mouth, hateful words. You calling him names DEFINITLEY won't change the outcome so go ahead with your wah wah wah wah, in fact, this goes out to all of you neo cons. wah wah wah blah blah blah, your really really really really really really really old McCfaint probably won't make it thur the general election, hey don't he owe jesus a nickel? lolololololol McCain and all his followers, LOSERS!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

In 73 days, McSame will have made the case for Obama. I can't wait to see that old geezer self destruct.

Posted by: Yuri Lipitzmeov | June 23, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Why did BHO raise "only" $23.5M in May?

Posted by: MarkInAustin | June 23, 2008 2:34 PM | Report abuse

all we need is love. Iran is surrounded by Two american Armies right now and that is making them feel bad. I will correct this by retreating immediately and letting the Iranians feel better about themselves.

that will fix everything.
and if anyone bombs us, I will be the first to dial 911 and get in line for help. we will spare no expense cleaning up the debris. and our cops will chase those bad guys all the way to the state line if necessary.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

bsimon:

You didn't know that the Gitmo trial processes were open to the media? Uhh, you might want to start looking things up.


Posted by: ThisIsReality | June 23, 2008 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama's racist and white and America--hating past will come back to bite his a** come the general election. The chickens will be comming home to roost. Real Americans won't be voting for a racist white-hater or a America--hater like Barack Obama.

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

No one outside of us political junkies is paying attention to the election at this point. Until they pick VP's and the conventions everyone is in summer mode.

The real race starts after Labor Day.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | June 23, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Money won't make McShame's problems disappear.

His biggest problem is that he isn't on the Straight Talk Express any longer, more like the Pander Parade. He has yet to sufficiently lock of the GOP base so he has to continue to shore up that flank by saying things that do not resonate with the independents.

Posted by: Roofelstoon | June 23, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain is going to have a difficult time defining the parameters of the election in terms he prefers. Because of the state of the Republican party, McCain is battling to hold on to his constituencies. Obama, in contrast, is on the offensive attempting to pick up states and demographics that are "normally" Republican. Unless McCain can turn the tide and line up conservatives behind him (which he hasn't shown he can do) it will be a tough summer.

Posted by: JNoel002 | June 23, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

I am an Obama voter. I revel in my ignorance.

Posted by: ddawd | June 23, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

To ddawg:

Germany never performed an act of aggression against the United States in WWII? Waddaya, nuts?

A declaration of war by itself is an act of aggression. You may not know what happened in WWII but you ought to learn.

Posted by: ThisIsReality | June 23, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

you probably think the Nazis bombed Pearl Harbor or something stupid like that.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 23, 2008 1:53 PM

Everyone knows it was Iran. and I am going to be nice to them to convince them to be my friend. I will be nice to all our enemies and nasty to our allies. that is the new way.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 2:06 PM | Report abuse

" without realizing that the Gitmo prisoners were going thru the same military commission process as used at Nuremberg."

The Gitmo tribunals are multi-lateral? I didn't know that. Weren't the Nuremberg trials open to the media? Did they use secret evidence at Nuremberg?

If the Gitmo trials were modeled after Nuremburg, we'd be doing ourselves a huge favor in fighting the GWOT. Trying these criminals in an open & fair process that demonstrates what cruel, sadistic, immoral bastards these guys are would go a long way towards winning the hearts and minds of the average Abdul on the streets.

Posted by: bsimon | June 23, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

National Review = violently partisan, hackridden piece of rightwing toilet rag.

Posted by: LOL | June 23, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

"Everyone knows we Libs don't pay attention to budgets and income."

"Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."
--Dick Cheney

Yep, conservatives are excellent stewards of the people's money.

Posted by: Doug in NYC | June 23, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

The Fix writes
"[McCain] must do two things simultaneously: identify the states in which he wants to play in the fall (yes to Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire/no to North Carolina, Georgia and Alaska) and work to define himself and Obama before the Illinois senator can do both."

The problem McCain faces is that he does not get to select the states in which he wants to play - Obama also gets a say in that process. Obama has already released ads in states McCain would prefer to consider safe. So: will McCain be able to make his case in the swing states he wants to hold or pick up? Or will he be forced to play defense in traditionally red states? So far it looks like McCain will be forced to play defense. I also see some pundits including the RNC's cash-on-hand in addition to the McCain campaign's balance to argue Obama is behind. But that seems premature, given the GOP Senate & House committees that are way, way behind in money.

Posted by: bsimon | June 23, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

" without realizing that the Gitmo prisoners were going thru the same military commission process as used at Nuremberg."

Um, no. Just because both used something called tribunals doesn't mean they are the same process. It's not like the US could unilaterally try the Nazis seeing how they never performed an act of aggression against the US. Of course, you probably think the Nazis bombed Pearl Harbor or something stupid like that.

Posted by: DDAWD | June 23, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

terrorism is a distraction:

In his ABC interview last Monday, for example, Obama attacked the Bush approach on fighting terror. He claimed that, in the case of "the first attack against the World Trade Center, we were able to arrest those responsible, put them on trial. They are currently in US prisons, incapacitated."


As an assistant US attorney, Andrew McCarthy prosecuted the perpetrators of the 1993 WTC attack. He calls Obama's statement "a remarkably ignorant account of the American experience with jihadism."


Writing for National Review Online, McCarthy notes: "While the government managed to prosecute many people responsible for the 1993 WTC bombing, many also escaped prosecution because of the limits on civilian criminal prosecution.


"Some who contributed to the attack, like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, continued to operate freely because they were beyond the system's capacity to apprehend. Abdul Rahman Yasin was released prematurely because there was not sufficient evidence to hold him - he fled to Iraq, where he was harbored for a decade (and has never been apprehended)."


Pointing to the later terrorist attacks on Americans and US assets, culminating in 9/11, McCarthy concludes that the law-enforcement approach to combating terrorism was futile. "

I think I need to clarify again.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

I went to Harverd. History and economics were not required courses. I took wymen's studies instead. and as you know the military is banned from campus so I admit I know nothing about that either. I did get an A in public speeching though.

what is a budget anyway? I like to complain alot when given limitations. and you know piano lessons cost a lot. but health care is free.

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

when I said I was a new type of politician, I meant that you can expect new renditions of me and my policies every week. I have to do it that way because so much of what I say doesn't end up making sense and needs clarification.

the excuses I give for this action will seem very hypocritical. but my true believers will not be phased. they do not think for themselves anyway so it is OK. I just hope with all audacity that the moderate voters can be hoodwinked with equal ease.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

To bondjedi, re: the Nuremberg post

Here's the point you missed. Obama praised the Nuremberg trials as the way to handle prisoners in contrast to Gitmo, without realizing that the Gitmo prisoners were going thru the same military commission process as used at Nuremberg. So the question stands: Is Obama ignorant of history, or is he cynically feeding on the ignorance of other Democrats?

Posted by: ThisIsReality | June 23, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Just hand over all your money to me. I will spend it all, don't worry. I don't care whatever I said before, when there's money involved, We Libs can be trusted to do whatever it takes to spend a lot.

you can expect me to be doing a lot of backpeddling in the next few months. I need to renivent myself into someone else. the real me is unelectable. Pray (in a no-religious way, of course) for voters who are as gullible as the rest of my base - the MSM and loony leftists.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Any interest in mentioning that McCain pledged to take public financing during this period, backed away from that pledge, and never got FEC approval to back away, meaning that any money he spends during these 73 days is actually illegal?

Posted by: SDM | June 23, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Obama could spend all his money before the convention and then take the public financing for the general election. Yes, there could be Democratic 527s to offset the GOP 527s.

But Obama has plainly and repeatedly asked his supporters NOT to fund 527s. This is because he doesn't want to have to publicly or privately admonish or disavow such groups for going negative on McCain. It is illegal to coordinate with these groups.

Much better to take all those small donations and be able to coordinate the entire campaign message on a positive note. He can't completely stop all independant ads, but a far greater percentage will have him saying "I approve this message" than will be the case for the GOP side.

That's being responsible.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | June 23, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

McCain camp cheerleading for another attack on US..

'McCain adviser: Another attack on the U.S. 'would be a big advantage' for McCain.

Earlier this year, after former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated, pundits speculated that the shocking attack may have benefited Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) politically. Now, McCain's chief strategist, Charlie Black, tells Fortune that the "unfortunate event" of Bhutto's death "helped us." Asked if another terrorist attack on U.S. soil would help McCain as well, Black told Fortune that it would be "a big advantage to him":

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an "unfortunate event," says Black. "But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us." As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. "Certainly it would be a big advantage to him," says Black.'

In other words, bring it on...

Posted by: Anonymous | June 23, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse


OBAMA TAUGHT CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
WILL HE LIVE UP TO HIS RHETORIC?

WHERE DO THE CANDIDATES STAND ON THE
RESURGENCE OF KKK-STYLE VIGILANTISM
ALL ACROSS AMERICA?


Obama now says he'll work to eliminate the telecom immunity provision when the FISA bill passed last week by the House reaches the Senate... but he also says he may end up voting for the bill anyway if his effort fails.

Obama can be forgiven for flip-flopping on public financing of presidential elections. He correctly argues that his private fund-raising is even more democratic, since it's built upon millions of small contributions from (mostly) average citizens.

But Obama can't be given a pass on his apparent equivocation on issues involving warrantless surveillance and other as yet unknown government programs that jeopardize constitutionally guaranteed rights. Obama used to tout his constitutional bona fides in his stump speech. Now, as the nomination appears to be his, he's doing the old soft shoe.

OBAMA BACKTRACKS AS THE NATION LEARNS OF
THE EVILS OF "GANG/COMMUNITY STALKING"


Obama's transformation into the great equivocator comes just as word has begun to surface of widespread, organized vigilantism in American cities, towns and counties coast to coast -- a veritable resurrection of Ku Klux Klan- like harassment, intimidation and even physical and psychological abuse of American citizens they deem undesirable, or whose political or social views do not comport with their twisted world view.

It's called "GANG STALKING" or "COMMUNITY STALKING" ... organized bands of self-righteous extremists, the evil twins of the "town watch" brigades, who are taking the law into their own hands while public officials appear to be ignorant of their law-breaking, or choose to look the other way.

These are nothing less than organized terrorists who spread false rumors, ruin reputations and careers, stalk and intimidate, commit unlawful burglaries and acts of vandalism, sabotage and worse, in a twisted, ongoing campaign to bypass the judicial system and enforce their view of what might be called a new world order.

Dozens of internet sites detail the plight of individuals and families who have been falsely and maliciously targeted by these community stalkers, whose fascist credo is summarized in four frightening words:

"Indentify, Vilify, Nullify, Destroy."

Read more here:

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

The mainstream media has yet to expose the resurrection of vigilantism in America, and to explore why authorities on all levels have failed to take action -- allowing this creeping fascism to fester and spread.

Will someone please ask mainstream journalists why they have not pursued this story? Why they have not questioned public officials about the increasing number of reports of gang/community stalking, and the extreme measures being they are employing against their "targets"?

Have John McCain and Barack Obama heard reports about gang/community stalking -- and what are they doing to ensure that the rule of law prevails over extra-legal, neo-fascist vigilantism?

Chris Cillizza and Washington Post staffers, I entreat you to research this subject and inquire of the candidates. Because gang/community stalking is nullifying the rule of law as well as the electoral process in America. And people are being destroyed.

Do it now, while there's still a chance that principled public officials and well-meaning but oblivious civil libertarians can take action to stem the abuses and restore civility and the rule of law.

Posted by: scrivener | June 23, 2008 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama's chances of getting elected in the general is very slim and it has little to do with money. If Barack Obama were white or Hispanic it would, but not a black candidate because race matters in the Democratic Party. Probably half of all registered Democratic Party voters are closet racists who tell pollsters one thing but once in the privacy of the voting booth will do the other. If Obama can't get these voters in his own party to vote for him, he's toast. While the Democratic Party voters give lip-service to racial equallity and all of us getting along, they're the most racist and most dishonest political party there is. Just watch come November how many supposedly Democratic Party safe-states go for McCain. As a conservative Republican it'll be fun to watch.

Posted by: madhatter | June 23, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

It would be a travesty if money determines who wins in November. In the Pennsylvania and Ohio primaries, Obama outspent Clinton 3 and 4 to 1 and he was thumped. I like to believe that ideas, vision and character will win out. I still believe that to be so. Why? --- Because even though Obama has a tremendous money advantage, and the media in the tank for him, not to mention a lousy economy and the generic democratic advantage of over 15 points, he is still running only 4 to 6 points ahead of McCain. What does that tell us? -- It tells us he is not trusted and has not made the sale to the american people.

Posted by: no spin | June 23, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Hey snObama, you are ignorant to your own statements!

Where does public financing come from... hmmm? The ~$84 million comes from all taxpayers. Argubly, you can say that Obama opting out of public financing is saving the government $84 million because the money for Obama's general election campaign will come from those of us (over 1.4 million) who financially support him.

McCain is choosing to spend our tax money on himself, and holding his hand out for "free stuff"!

Posted by: Obama-Junkie | June 23, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

'don't know much about the law I took' and anObama are both kingofzouk.

Posted by: kingofzouk | June 23, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

"A Republican media consultant who advised the presidential candidacy of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney."

Say no more! With credentials like that, how could he be wrong?

Posted by: FlownOver | June 23, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

re: the Nuremberg post. Leave it to the GOP to stick up for the Nazis and say they were given a raw deal, if it means getting a dig in on Obama.

Posted by: bondjedi | June 23, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Good insight, Chris. If it wasn't for the fact that Obama wants to pursue a 50 state strategy, win with a clear mandate and have coattails for down ticket races, I think he would have accepted public financing. But you are correct about these critical remaining 73 days of the primary season. It should be fun!

Posted by: Optimyst | June 23, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

I decided to opt out of public funds because I am going to need practice if I am going to learn how to spend boatloads of other people's money. spending a paltry 80 million on my campaign is not enough. I have needs. We Libs like to spend more, anyway we can.

After I'm elected I plan on opting out of the IRS too, that is just limiting the money I wish to spend.

Everyone knows we Libs don't pay attention to budgets and income. It's all about who we can buy.

If you want free stuff from the government, vote for me. don't worry, someone else will pay for it.

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

here's change you can bank on:

I am not sure about NAFTA
I am not sure about IRAQ
I am not sure about campaign finance
I am not sure who my uncle is
I am not sure about who will pay for all this

I may change my mind, that is change you can believe in

Posted by: snObama | June 23, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama approves: He recently asserted that the "principle of habeas corpus, that a state can't just hold you for any reason without charging you and without giving you any kind of due process - that's the essence of who we are."

He explained: "I mean, you remember during the Nuremberg trials, part of what made us different was even after these Nazis had performed atrocities that no one had ever seen before, we still gave them a day in court and that taught the entire world about who we are, but also the basic principles of rule of law. Now the Supreme Court upheld that principle."

Oops. At Nuremberg, an international military commission composed of representatives of the victorious Allies put the top surviving Nazi leaders on trial starting in late 1945.

Yet, in Boumediene, the Supreme Court disapproved of the system of military commissions that Congress had adopted for Gitmo (at the high court's previous urging). Thus, the Nuremberg defendants' "day in court" came before a kind of tribunal found constitutionally inadequate in the decision Obama was praising.

The Nazi war criminals had no access to US courts. The fair-trial provision of the charter governing the trial was relatively skimpy - and the provision on appeal rights was even shorter and sweeter: The defendants had no right to appeal. The procedures the court found deficient in Boumediene, by contrast, provided for appeal rights to the DC Circuit, the most prominent US bench below the Supreme Court.

In short, the procedural protections for Gitmo detainees under the statute before the Supreme Court in Boumediene exceed those accorded the Nuremberg defendants.

Obama's unfavorable comparison of the legal treatment at Gitmo with that at Nuremberg suggests either that he doesn't know what he's talking about - or that he feels free to exploit the ignorance of audiences that don't know the truth of the matter.

Posted by: don't know much about the law I took | June 23, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama approves: He recently asserted that the "principle of habeas corpus, that a state can't just hold you for any reason without charging you and without giving you any kind of due process - that's the essence of who we are."

He explained: "I mean, you remember during the Nuremberg trials, part of what made us different was even after these Nazis had performed atrocities that no one had ever seen before, we still gave them a day in court and that taught the entire world about who we are, but also the basic principles of rule of law. Now the Supreme Court upheld that principle."

Oops. At Nuremberg, an international military commission composed of representatives of the victorious Allies put the top surviving Nazi leaders on trial starting in late 1945.

Yet, in Boumediene, the Supreme Court disapproved of the system of military commissions that Congress had adopted for Gitmo (at the high court's previous urging). Thus, the Nuremberg defendants' "day in court" came before a kind of tribunal found constitutionally inadequate in the decision Obama was praising.

The Nazi war criminals had no access to US courts. The fair-trial provision of the charter governing the trial was relatively skimpy - and the provision on appeal rights was even shorter and sweeter: The defendants had no right to appeal. The procedures the court found deficient in Boumediene, by contrast, provided for appeal rights to the DC Circuit, the most prominent US bench below the Supreme Court.

In short, the procedural protections for Gitmo detainees under the statute before the Supreme Court in Boumediene exceed those accorded the Nuremberg defendants.

Obama's unfavorable comparison of the legal treatment at Gitmo with that at Nuremberg suggests either that he doesn't know what he's talking about - or that he feels free to exploit the ignorance of audiences that don't know the truth of the matter.

Posted by: don't know much about history | June 23, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

If McCain can invent a brand-new kind of car battery, he could win $300 Million. That would close the gap in a hurry.

Posted by: bondjedi | June 23, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Who chooses a candidate they intend to vote for by a 30 second commercial? By this point you should know who you're supporting and if you don't there is something called the Internet where you can find all the info you need.

No question which way I'm voting.

Obama 08 Change We Can Believe In!

Posted by: jansjay | June 23, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand, then, why Obama opted out. He is, already, ahead in the polling and could raise and spend a prodigious amount of money before the convention in order to seal the deal. In the last two months of the campaign he would have the same amount to spend as McCain.
Yeah, the 527's would be able to kick in then, but that would for both sides.
Obama could raise, before the convention, more money than he could wisely spend before the convention, then bequeath the money for other Democrats running for the Senate or House and have them use it for ads showing Obama endorsing those candidates, giving both exposure and not given McSame a flip-flop issue.

Posted by: capem | June 23, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone watch TV in the summer? Do candidates need to define the other or do they need to demonize the other? Just how is McCain going to please the Republican right wing without losing the independents. Answers to these questions and more coming to a small screen near you.

Posted by: nclwtk | June 23, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company