Arizona Senator John McCain (official)

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeMike80

Of course Zawahiri also said that AQ never attacks "innocents" which is utter bull[censored] and we all know it.

I don't disagree with you on this point at all - that doesn't mean al-Qaeda doesn't hate Shiite Iran as much as the U.S. More importantly, I'd like the Commander in Chief to know the difference.

Canadians and Americans probably look alot alike to some people too...

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeMike80

Of course Zawahiri also said that AQ never attacks "innocents" which is utter bull[censored] and we all know it.

Not to get in to it, but I'm quite sure our definition of innocent and AQ's definition are not the same. You're guilty because you're a US Citizen, I think would be AQs rationale. Not saying that's right... but ... they can still believe they're acting in accord with the notion of not killing innocents. Reminds me of the thread re: if there are evil people or not... it depends on what we all think is evil, or not.. in this case, it would depend on who we define as innocent. Don't bother defining innocent for me.... I'm pretty sure you and I are in agreement that civilians in a high rise building going to work some September morning are indeed innocents.

[Best Buckeye]

well you're into it now .

[BuckeyeMike80]

Originally Posted by Buckeyeskickbuttocks

Not to get in to it, but I'm quite sure our definition of innocent and AQ's definition are not the same. You're guilty because you're a US Citizen, I think would be AQs rationale. Not saying that's right... but ... they can still believe they're acting in accord with the notion of not killing innocents. Reminds me of the thread re: if there are evil people or not... it depends on what we all think is evil, or not.. in this case, it would depend on who we define as innocent. Don't bother defining innocent for me.... I'm pretty sure you and I are in agreement that civilians in a high rise building going to work some September morning are indeed innocents.

Absolutely. And a couple hundred people in a train terminal in Madrid too...

[BuckeyeMike80]

Originally Posted by 'BusNative

I don't disagree with you on this point at all - that doesn't mean al-Qaeda doesn't hate Shiite Iran as much as the U.S. More importantly, I'd like the Commander in Chief to know the difference.

To a point, that is probably true, but it's more of a Arab v. Persian and a Sunni v. Shiite thing. However, we have to remember that the enemy of my enemy is my friend so to speak. That rules the roost over there in general.

Canadians and Americans probably look alot alike to some people too...

Just make them say "about"

[methomps]

Originally Posted by Gatorubet

This is the exact same thing as the Sista Soulja Clinton deal. There is no way that their base will vote of the other side even if you diss them. They will not let the evil Clinton or loony left Obama (their words) be President over McCain, not matter how they are dissed by their own candidate.

As evangelicals Republicans are high percentatge voters anyway, they will be in the booth for the local elections, and vote for McCain no matter what he does, save flip flop and support abortion rights.

Maybe, but I'm sure some will also think (1) not voting McCain will send a message to the Republicans for the next time they pick a candidate and (2) a McCain win means 8 years without a candidate they want while an Obama/Clinton win means a chance to get their kinda guy in only 4.

[BuckeyeMike80]

Originally Posted by methomps

Maybe, but I'm sure some will also think (1) not voting McCain will send a message to the Republicans for the next time they pick a candidate and (2) a McCain win means 8 years without a candidate they want while an Obama/Clinton win means a chance to get their kinda guy in only 4.

With Obama, perhaps condition 2 exists, but Clinton is so completely onerous for the Right that she is the key to a GOP landslide in the general election.

With obama v. McCain the key will be how many former Clinton supporters cross over to McCain or don't vote at all. Otherwise we are in for another 49-48 election in all likelihood....

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeMike80

Just make them say "about"

I'd ask them if they understand curling. If they say anything about rocks and ice and brooms, Paul Anka. If they reference their hair, Uncle Sam.

[sandgk]

McCain Seeks Condemnation Reciprocity from Obama Camp:

McCain condemned Cunningham's Intro when he warmed up a crowd in the Queen City.

Now, McCain wants the Obama Camp to separate itself from the warm-up speech given by rare-bird non-rightist talk radio host Ed Schultz's comments at a Grand Forks ND campaign stop.

Schultz's offending remarks?

He called McCain a warmonger - before Obama's arrival.

Right now this doesn't appear to have wide coverage. Likely that a repudiation will be issued, much as was McCain's in February, ex post facto.

[CookyPuss]

McCain: Loving His Misspent Youth - TIME

"I remember with affection the unruly passions of youth," he said Monday in Meridian, Miss., where he once helped organize an off-base toga party — the furniture swapped out for mattresses — for his military buddies and some local girls. On Tuesday, he returned to his Virginia high school to announce that his frequent disobedience earned him the nickname "worst rat." (He used to sneak away to hop a bus to Washington, D.C., for the burlesque houses and bars.) On Wednesday morning, he stood outside the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., where he spoke of his "nocturnal sojourns" beyond those school's walls and the hundreds of miles he was forced to march in punishment for "petty insubordination."

None of these confessions were muttered accidentally. After McCain dropped the line about the strip club in Pensacola, I asked Mark McKinnon, the campaign's media advisor, if drunken escapades at strip clubs were a good message for a presidential campaign. "That's why we like him," McKinnon said with a smile. "That's why he has potential appeal to young people."

McKinnon's answer was mostly a joke, but he was hinting at the real message behind McCain's weeklong "biography" tour around the country. The purpose was not just to show the places and experiences that had shaped McCain, but to draw for voters and the media a clearly defined narrative of what those experiences signify. The tumultuous early years are, for McCain and his campaign, the first parts of a story of redemption, of a transformation from irresponsible youth to the wise elder, from selfish child to selfless adult.

It is interesting how McCain so easily gets off with the classic "boys will be boys" defense on his past. It will be interesting in the general to see how Obama's admitted drug experimentation and smoking habit are portrayed against McCain's drunken brawling, womanizing, and general mischief.

[OSUsushichic]

McCain getting lots of negative press for his veto of MLK Day. Nice move there, Walnuts.

Think Progress ? Blog Archive ? McCain Faces ‘A Little Bit Of Heckling’ During MLK Speech

[shetuck]

Reuters: McCain says Democrats can't keep promises on Iraq

McCain says Democrats can't keep promises on Iraq
By Jeff Mason

Mon Apr 7, 6:36 AM ET

Republican presidential candidate John McCain will accuse his Democratic rivals of making promises they cannot keep with regard to Iraq on Monday in a speech that kicks off a week in which the war returns to center stage of the presidential campaign.

McCain, a senator from Arizona who has wrapped up his party's White House nomination, will tell an audience of veterans that the United States can look ahead to success in the war, but a hasty withdrawal of troops would go against both U.S. and Iraqi interests.

Democratic presidential hopefuls Barack Obama, a senator from Illinois, and Hillary Clinton, a senator from New York, have promised to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq soon after taking office and both have pounced on McCain for indicating troops could stay there for 100 years.

"Our goal is an Iraq that no longer needs American troops. And I believe we can achieve that goal, perhaps sooner than many imagine," McCain will say, according to excerpts of his speech seen by Reuters.

"But I do not believe that anyone should make promises as a candidate for president that they cannot keep if elected," he says.

cont'd...

I tend to agree with this (the bolded part). Hillary and Obama are playing with fire on this. They are bound to get themselves into trouble with those who voted for them once they get into office and learn that pulling out of Iraq might not be a trivial thing.

I suppose it's a bit of a Machiavellian thing... How much are you willing to promise, and how much of your reputation are you willing to put at stake in order to win the office and have a shot at putting your grand plan into action?

As attractive a notion as an "immediate" withdrawal may be, I for one am not going to decide who to vote for just based on a campaign promise on that one issue. I'm sure there are people out there who have made their choice solely based upon the candidate's position on that singular issue, but I think they're setting themselves up to have their hopes dashed.

[BayBuck]

Originally Posted by MuckFich06

McCain: Loving His Misspent Youth - TIME
It is interesting how McCain so easily gets off with the classic "boys will be boys" defense on his past. It will be interesting in the general to see how Obama's admitted drug experimentation and smoking habit are portrayed against McCain's drunken brawling, womanizing, and general mischief.

Slate had an interesting take on this discrepancy:

"Speaking at his high school yesterday, he mentioned his ?unruly passions? but left it at that. And no one has pushed him to reveal more.
Compare that to Barack Obama, whose admission in his memoir that he tried cocaine has produced reams of speculation. (The pinnacle would be the Times article accusing Obama of doing less drugs than he claims.) Why does Obama?s (relatively minor) youthful indiscretion merit so much more attention than McCain?s?
Two reasons: Because McCain's youth happened so long ago and because it?s been well-documented. On the first count, I?d guess this is one area where McCain?s age helps him. Whereas Obama?s youthful indiscretion occurred only 25 years ago, McCain?s wildest years are twice as far gone.
...the third reason McCain?s misspent youth doesn?t dog him on the campaign trail: His redemption narrative. The years he spent as a POW in Hanoi?and the epiphanies he describes having had there?have not only supplanted his drinking habits and sex life as the key part of the McCain Story, they?ve made those earlier phases seem admirable. Everyone loves a redemption story, which is why McCain can be so honest about his past. Obama?s drug story is essentially, I did coke, then I stopped. For McCain, though, the early mess-ups are necessary to tell the story of his eventual self-discovery."

[sandgk]

Originally Posted by shetuck

As attractive a notion as an "immediate" withdrawal may be, I for one am not going to decide who to vote for just based on a campaign promise on that one issue. I'm sure there are people out there who have made their choice solely based upon the candidate's position on that singular issue, but I think they're setting themselves up to have their hopes dashed.

A very reasonable point - and one that should become highlighted more once the Democratic candidate is announced. The key distinction between McCain and either potential Democratic nominee boild down to this:

McCain is on record favoring "staying the course" over withdrawal. In fact he favors increasing troop levels.
He is also fully aligned with the present administration's foreign policy that got us into Iraq and with all it's longer-term goals and assumptions.
Both Democratic nominees are aligned against the war on principal (Clinton belatedly so, Obama from the beginning).
The Democratic nominees are also on record as wanting to be out of Iraq ASAP.
Given the war's unpopularity it seems unlikely to me that it would be more damaging for the eventual Democratic nominee to couch their goals in careful language - and both have done just that, and will likely be ever more careful not to paint themselves into a corner - than it would be for McCain to undercut his assertive foreign policy stance. The one with which he eventually found favor with a significant fraction of the Republican base.
Yet, to try and win the center McCain likely will have to try and do just that.

Which effort becomes much more difficult to sustain once he is facing a single Democratic campaign machine.

[Gatorubet]

Originally Posted by sandgk

A very reasonable point - and one that should become highlighted more once the Democratic candidate is announced. The key distinction between McCain and either potential Democratic nominee boiled down to this:
McCain is a crotchety curmudgeon with a lighting quick temper who is hovering on the cusp of senility as he tries to become the oldest elected President ever - and Obama is not that.

FIFY