BS: Popular views on McCain

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 23 Oct 08 - 09:12 PM

And if articles are really reflective of popular opinion because they are posted here, I will offer this one as an example off what Obama supporters are really like....


Of course we know that opinions and single evemts do noit reflect the entire picture, unless supported by the NYT.





McCain supporter maimed for her politics by robber; Update

posted at 4:50 pm on October 23, 2008 by Ed Morrissey


A 20-year-old woman got robbed at an ATM in a Pittsburgh suburb, and normally that would not make national news. However, her robber wanted to make a political statement as well. After seeing a McCain bumper sticker on her car, he beat the woman and scratched a "B" into her face:


"A 20-year-old woman who was robbed at an ATM in Bloomfield was also maimed by her attacker, police said.
Pittsburgh police spokeswoman Diane Richard tells Channel 4 Action News that the victim was robbed at knifepoint on Wednesday night outside of a Citizens Bank near Liberty Avenue and Pearl Street just before 9 p.m.
Richard said the robber took $60 from the woman, then became angry when he saw a McCain bumper sticker on the victim's car. The attacker then punched and kicked the victim, before using the knife to scratch the letter "B" into her face, Richard said."


This is a horrible story, and if it happened as alleged, I hope the man gets life in prison for both the armed robbery and the maiming. Our prayers go to the woman, who refused medical treatment at the scene, as well as our hopes for a quick and complete recovery.
However, despite the comments popping up in other threads, I don't think this says anything terribly significant about the election or either candidate. Criminals aren't known for their kindness, temperament, or intellect, and this particular criminal sounds like he's a couple of bricks short of a load even for that crowd. The initial crime had nothing to do with politics at all, so it's not an example of partisan thuggery as one would expect some to paint it.
I'm sure that the two campaigns will be sure to reach out to the woman. Someone will undoubtedly press the Obama campaign for a reaction, and will get the obligatory and emphatic denunciation that everyone would expect. We have many more important issues to debate, and many more cogent reasons to oppose Barack Obama than the offhand cruelty of one criminal in Pittsburgh.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 23 Oct 08 - 09:09 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 20 Oct 08 - 09:03 AM

John McCain palling around with ACORN, whom he later accuses of "destroying the fabric of democracy" in one of the most mentally umoored metaphors of the current campaign.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 19 Oct 08 - 10:28 AM

The NYT discusses why McCain failed.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Cluin
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 09:21 PM

Anyone else cynical enough to think McCain's blowing-off the Letterman Show was a calculated ploy?

Surely the media-savvy Republican election machine ought to have known Letterman would find out he was lied to and McCain wasn't rushing back to Washington to deal with the financial crisis and instead gave an interview to Katie Couric? And that D.L. would harp on it?

All to grab some headlines during a flagging campaign and pump up the audience for the show when he DID appear and graciously admit that he "screwed up"?

Didn't hurt the Late Show's ratings that night either, did it?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Stringsinger
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 04:40 PM

McCain is in an alternate reality. His economic program is silly. A spending freeze would
make the stock market drop like an anchor and keep it stuck at the bottom.

He wants to bail out investors who put us in the crisis to begin with. No tax on capital gains?
If anyone has them these days, what use is it to exempt them from taxes? Investors don't have jobs for workers.

His machinations about Iraq are story-book pipe dreams. He wants to create "democracy" there? We better do it here first.

John McCain wants to tax health care benefits after giving individuals five grand?

John McCain says he is "not Bush" and Nixon said he was not a crook.

Don't think of an elephant!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 16 Oct 08 - 07:07 PM

The Five Most Clearly Insane People Endorsing John McCain.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Oct 08 - 12:38 PM

McCain was given a free pass when he claimed that he put a stop to torure policy. He actually voted for a redefinition torure package that hasnt changed a thing.

At this point to call him on this lie would be piling on. I feel sorry for him in a way. With the few years he has left it would be cruel to strip him of the few delusions he needs to feel honorable about the awful compromises he has made.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 11:26 PM

Remember how much Bill Clinton aged in office? W as well. McCain looks as if the campaign has aged him that much. After four years in office, he would look like the grandpa in Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 10:48 PM

Early in 2007, just as her husband launched his presidential bid, Cindy McCain sought to resolve an old problem - the lack of cellphone coverage on her remote 15-acre ranch near Sedona, Ariz., nestled deep in a tree-lined canyon called Hidden Valley.

Over the past year, she offered land for a permanent cell tower, and Verizon Wireless embarked on an expensive public process to meet her needs, hiring contractors and seeking county land-use permits.

Verizon ultimately abandoned its effort to install a permanent tower in August. Company spokesman Jeffrey Nelson said the project would be "an inappropriate way" to build its network. "It doesn't make business sense for us to do that," he added.

Instead, Verizon delivered a portable tower known as a "cell site on wheels" - free of charge - to the McCain property in June, after the Secret Service began inquiring about improving coverage in the area. Such devices are used for providing temporary capacity where coverage is lacking or has been knocked out, in circumstances ranging from the Super Bowl to hurricanes.


GRAPHIC: After a request from Cindy McCain, Verizon Wireless proposed installing a cell tower close to the couple's home near Sedona, Ariz.
In July, AT&T followed suit, wheeling in a portable tower for free to match Verizon's offer. "This is an unusual situation," AT&T spokeswoman Claudia B. Jones said. "You can't have a presidential nominee in an area where there is not cell coverage."

Ethics lawyers said Cindy McCain's dealings with the wireless companies stand out because her husband is a senior member of the Senate commerce committee, which oversees the Federal Communications Commission and the telecommunications industry. He has been a leading advocate for industry-backed legislation, fighting regulations and taxes on telecommunication services.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his campaign have close ties to Verizon and AT&T. Five campaign officials, including manager Rick Davis, have worked as lobbyists for Verizon. Former McCain staff member Robert Fisher is an in-house lobbyist for Verizon and is volunteering for the campaign. Fisher, Verizon chief executive Ivan G. Seidenberg and company lobbyists have raised more than $1.3 million for McCain's presidential effort, and Verizon employees are among the top 20 corporate donors over McCain's political career, giving his campaigns more than $155,000.

...

(WaPo)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Barry Finn
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 01:51 PM

The newest stance for the Macain CampLain (word play) is that the government should be ruled by a party balance. The Republicans are saying the if the Congress & Senate are dominated by what' they expect to be Democrates (there on fault mind you) then the Prez should be Repub.
They must think that the whole of the voting public is made up of idiots.

"You can fool some of the people,,,,,," how did Bush blow it? Let me see if I can count the ways. An all Democratic rule would suit me & many others just fine, including the top heavy repub Supreme Court! This regime needs toppling!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: PoppaGator
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 01:23 PM

"The McCain campaign just keeps looking more and more silly for trying to push this out as some kind of blemish on Obama. He is alienating the THINKING people in the Republican party by continuing this stupid Ayers connection slander. Every day, there are more and more Republicans announcing their dissatisfaction with the slimy tactics McCain has turned to."

Where were these "thinking" Republicans when Karl Rove was using the very same slimy tactics to influence the last two Presdiential elections in favor of GW Bush? And, specifically, in the 2000 primaries, where McCain was the victim of some particularly nasty Rove/Cheney/Bush slander?

Looks to me like these rats are abandoning a sinking ship not because of any distaste for McCain's newly-adopted mainstream-GOP dirty-tricks tactics, but purely and simply because he's losing.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 11:54 AM

The state of the McCain campaign is drawing fire from its own ostensible allies. At the head of the line of Republicans looking to be the first to flick dirt on McCain's grave is Bill Kristol, who says in today's New York Times, that if "the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed." Since that's coming from a guy who, through his own bad advice, has contributed mightily to the grave McCain is measuring, it makes sense that he be given the first shovel of dirt.

But didn't Kristol get the message? Today, the key line of John McCain's rebooted stump speech is directed at his rival, Barack Obama, and it goes a little something like, "We have him right where we want him." That was the plan, all along, you see! Be down double digits in the polls, possessed of the necessity of campaigning in West Virginia, and in need of tempering your supporters' passions because they have suddenly veered wildly in the direction of psychosis. I love it when a plan comes together, even if that plan is only indicative of the fact that McCain's moved to the "denial" stage of grief. Brace yourself, because anger and depression are still to come!

Amid this turmoil, McCain's attempts to relaunch his campaign have encountered a new obstacle: his fellow Republicans, who, like Kristol, are prepping themselves for an old-fashioned circular firing squad. Over the weekend, the New York Times noted that party leaders "were worried Mr. McCain was heading for defeat unless he brought stability to his presidential candidacy and settled on a clear message" for his campaign. And in today's edition of The Hill, a chorus of disapproval weighs in on McCain's muffed punt of the Paulson bailout package.

But leading that particular pack of wolves is Kristol, who says that the "McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic."

Of course, a smart observer might have suggested that the incompetence-slash-incoherence was extant at the moment McCain selected Sarah Palin (inexperienced, embroiled in abuse-of-power scandal, earmark lover) as his running mate, and the toxicity was apparent after a week of all-Ayers-all-the-time campaigning. And we'd remind you that both the Palin selection and the Ayers-bashing had few supporters as frenzied as Kristol. But hey! If the Times was interested in good sense or accountability or even intellectual consistency from their columnists, they wouldn't have hired Kristol in the first place.

Naturally, McCain's responded through Nancy Pfotenhauer, who's accused Kristol of "buying into the Obama campaign's party line." These sentiments were similarly voiced by the ubiquitous Tucker Bounds later in the day:

So what's the new party line from John McCain? In the first place, McCain is now saying, "What America needs in this hour is a fighter." Doesn't that mess up Sarah Palin's constant contention that McCain being "the only man in the race who has ever really fought for you" was something that she had to say because McCain was too modest to admit it? More to the point, doesn't this mess up the Sarah Palin Stump Speech Drinking Game? Ever since she dropped the "I sold it on eBay" line I've been practically teetotaling!

But the crux of McCain's case seems to be this line:

"I come from a long line of McCains who believed that to love America is to fight for her."

So there you have it! Vote for McCain! He's the McCainiest!"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/13/lashing-out-mccain-flack_n_134228.html

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 11:48 AM

Oooo look, evewbody!! Hanging out with people who support terrorists!

"William Timmons, the Washington lobbyist who John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, aided an influence effort on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to ease international sanctions against his regime.

The two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign later either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal criminal charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government.

During the same period beginning in 1992, Timmons worked closely with the two lobbyists, Samir Vincent and Tongsun Park, on a previously unreported prospective deal with the Iraqis in which they hoped to be awarded a contract to purchase and resell Iraqi oil. Timmons, Vincent, and Park stood to share at least $45 million if the business deal went through.

Timmons' activities occurred in the years following the first Gulf War, when Washington considered Iraq to be a rogue enemy state and a sponsor of terrorism. His dealings on behalf of the deceased Iraqi leader stand in stark contrast to the views his current employer held at the time.

John McCain strongly supported the 1991 military action against Iraq, and as recently as Sunday described Saddam Hussein as a one-time menace to the region who had "stated categorically that he would acquire weapons of mass destruction, and he would use them wherever he could."

"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/14/mccain-transition-chief-a_n_134595.html

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Alice
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 10:09 AM

"William Timmons, the Washington lobbyist who John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, aided an influence effort on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to ease international sanctions against his regime.

The two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign later either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal criminal charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government."

read the full article
here

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 07:56 PM

John McCain heads into the third and final presidential debate against Barack Obama tonight promising to "whip his you-know-what" and transform a race now pointing towards a resounding Democratic victory.

Given the flailing Republican campaign in recent days, however, he may have trouble distinguishing Mr Obama's "you-know-what" from his elbow or any other part of the anatomy. Last night a CBS/New York Times poll showed the Democrat surging to a 14-point lead, the biggest margin so far. The disarray in the McCain team was apparent even as they sought to relaunch policies designed to tackle the financial crisis before the televised debate.

Over the weekend campaign aides promised that he would unveil details of a new package for the economy on Monday. Then, on Sunday night, they said that he would not. By Monday evening it was back on again.

When he finally took to the stage in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania, yesterday to announce a $52.5 billion (£30 billion) plan pitched towards voters on retirement incomes, much of its potential impact had been lost. He had no more luck with the $300 billion mortgage rescue proposal which, after being announced hurriedly in last week's debate, got panned by liberals and conservatives alike as inconsistent with his promised spending cuts. (TimesOnline, UK)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 07:55 PM

"The McCain campaign's recent angry tone and sharply personal attacks on Senator Barack Obama appear to have backfired and tarnished Senator John McCain more than their intended target, the latest New York Times/CBS News poll has found.

Related
Complete Poll Results (PDF)
Blog
The Caucus
The latest political news from around the nation. Join the discussion.
Election Guide | More Politics News
Readers' Comments
Share your thoughts.
Post a Comment »
Read All Comments (74) »
After several weeks in which the McCain campaign unleashed a series of strong political attacks on Mr. Obama, trying to tie him to a former 1960s radical, among other things, the poll found that more voters see Mr. McCain as waging a negative campaign than Mr. Obama. Six in 10 voters surveyed said that Mr. McCain had spent more time attacking Mr. Obama than explaining what he would do as president; by about the same number, voters said Mr. Obama was spending more of his time explaining than attacking.

Over all, the poll found that if the election were held today, 53 percent of those determined to be probable voters said that they would vote for Mr. Obama and 39 percent said they would vote for Mr. McCain.

The findings come as the race enters its final three weeks, with the two candidates scheduled to hold their third and last debate on Wednesday night, and as separate polls in critical swing states that could decide the election giving Mr. Obama a growing edge. But wide gaps in polls have historically tended to narrow in the closing weeks of the race as the election nears.

Voters who said that their opinions of Mr. Obama had changed recently were twice as likely to say that they had gotten better as to say they had gotten worse. And voters who said that their views of Mr. McCain had changed were three times more likely to say that they had gotten worse than to say they had improved." NYT

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 11:19 AM

The question is : Can McCain sufficiently distance himself from John McCain? He's trying real hard.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 08:52 AM

The one issue that McCain was most involved with and should have been the moment that he stood tall and proud was the torture issue.

Instead he caved into Bush for personal promises that if he left torture alone he would be rewarded with not being destroyed like other Republicans who got out of line like C Todd-Whitman.

McCain ended up voting for Bush torture definitions and use.

John did not put country, the Geneva Convention or the troops first.
He went along to get along with the Bush Cheney administration.

In light of backing down on his most salient issue of torture, the maverick label is undeserved and a myth.

I am Don Hackman and I approve these facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 08:49 AM

How McCain Will Steal the Election from Obama (Sort Of)

Imagine an election where one of the participants calls foul. Investigations are launched or at least called for. Prosecutors raise the specter of charges, the U.S. attorney and FBI get involved. No voter fraud is ever actually found. But by the time that conclusion is reached, the myth has been solidified both to soothe the loser's supporters and condemn the winner.

Sound familiar? Sound like the recent ACORN scandal?

Well, actually I'm talking about the 1960 election between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon. That Nixon was cheated out of a win is the stuff of legend on the Right. The allegations say that Kennedy loyalists fixed the vote counts in Illinois and Texas--swinging 51 electoral votes and a majority in the Electoral College to Kennedy. In more hyperbolic versions there is alleged involvement by the mob, the Teamsters Union or legendary Chicago mayor Richard Daley.

The story goes on that Nixon, "for the good of the country," conceded honorably and exited the scene. No matter that Nixon was later chased out of the White House for cheating in an election. The myth endures.

This whole story--maybe to be replayed with Obama playing Kennedy and McCain playing Nixon--is a canard. It is a fable. A lie made up by the conservative movement to hold together their fraying coalition.

In 2008 the stakes are bigger than they've ever been before for conservatives and the canard is that much more important to them.

In the case of Obama the conservative movement is lining up a serious of story elements. They are:

    • Obama was a community organizer.
    • ACORN, a group that does community organizing, has committed voter fraud.
    • Obama is from Chicago.
    • You know what happens in elections in Chicago. Remember the 1960 election.

The story is half true and half lies. As we all know, Barack Obama is from Chicago and was a community organizer. Those are the only true parts of the conservative story. But the other two facts are myths: the 1960 election wasn't stolen (says the conclusion of recounts and investigations in 1960 and numerous academic studies since). And, ACORN has not committed voter fraud. Not one bit.

The facts about ACORN are worth getting out. ACORN is an organization that, among other things, registers low-income people to vote. One of the ways they do this is to hire door-to-door canvassers from the neighborhoods they are working in. This sort of work is tightly regulated. So, when one of the thousands of people they give jobs to doesn't do their work right and brings back bogus or phony voter registration cards, the law REQUIRES that ACORN turn the forms in to the voter registration office. The law, rightly, doesn't want anybody throwing out voter registration forms for any reason.

But ACORN goes a step farther. They have people assigned to do quality control on all the cards--calling people on the forms after they fill them out. When they find bad information on the cards they attach a cover sheet to the card but, as mentioned above, they turn in the cards as required by law. The effect is that a few bad canvassers or a poorly run office will mean that bad cards are submitted as part of the normal process. But ACORN has done everything possible to make sure voting officials know to check the forms.

The sad fact is that in at least one state--Nevada--the voting officials disregarded ACORN's cover sheets flagging the voter registration forms. That should have never happened. The resulting blowup was a scandal in search of a scandal.

The stunning con of this whole thing is the assumption that bad voter registration cards being submitted will lead to vote fraud. If somebody submits a card for Mickey Mouse it isn't like Mr. Mouse is going to show up to vote. There is no voter fraud if nobody votes.

But the big story here is what the Right is doing. Their attacks on ACORN open up the door for two things.

First, the ACORN myth allows the Republicans to do more purging of the voter rolls--the process of removing people from the voter rolls because of arbitrary anomalies in the voter registration databases. Richard L Hasen, author of the Election Law Blog and a distinguished law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles recently wrote, "Careless purging--driven by unsubstantiated fears about voter fraud--can lead to many eligible voters being incorrectly removed from the polls." Already in Ohio the Republican Party is pushing for more purging and they found a federal judge who agreed citing ACORN's activities.

Second, in the event that campaigning, purging and intimidating voters doesn't work, the Right is creating a myth like they did in 1960. They are creating the myth of a stolen election. Conservatives plan to claim that ACORN and Barack Obama stole the election. Their hope is to steal the legitimacy of what is looking like a massive repudiation of Bush, conservatives and the Republican Party. The Right plans to steal the election by trying to steal the legitimate defeat of them by progressive forces.

And why wouldn't they? The entire Republican coalition could be shattered with this election. White suburban voters who once voted Republican on tax issues are running away from Republicans on a host of issues--including taxes. Independent are looking more and more like Democratic voters. Barack Obama may even win a majority of male voters. All of them are joining with urban votes, voters of color, young people, working class union members and others to form a long-term governing majority for progressives--a progressive majority.

Conservatives are scared of a progressive majority. And they're going to lie, cheat and steal to prevent it from happening. But they can only be successful if we let them.

The best way to deflate the conservative fable is to win with an overwhelming landslide that guarantees there won't be a dispute of the results.

We also need to confront the Republican vote purging and suppression. Already big efforts by the Obama campaign, the DNC and independent groups are working on this. Progressives and Democrats are united in this effort.

But we also need to make sure the ACORN canard doesn't get to live in daylight. It is time to circle the wagons and make sure John McCain and the Right can't steal the election...even if we win.

For progressives, the ball is in our court.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-matzzie/how-mccain-will-steal-the_b_133989.html

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 08:41 AM

"Your Faux News is lying to you about ACORN."


                     It's all over CNN and all the other news outlets as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 07:54 AM

Cindy McCain in this case (excerpts below)...

At a rally in Bethlehem, Pa. last week, Cindy McCain spoke about having two sons serving on active duty: "I'm proud of my sons, but let me tell you, the day that Senator Obama cast a vote not to fund my son when he was serving sent a cold chill through my body. I would suggest that Senator Obama change shoes with me for just one day, and see what it means."

Never mind how many drinks are needed to erase the mental image of Barack Obama wearing Cindy McCain's stiletto heels. The fact is -- many military spouses support Obama-Biden, and they were deeply offended by Mrs. McCain's outburst.

Let's fact-check her remark, shall we?

Cindy McCain was referring to a single 2007 Senate vote: Obama voted for a war-spending bill that included language calling for withdrawing troops from Iraq; but later he voted against a version of the same bill because it no longer included the withdrawal language. "We must fund our troops, but we owe them something more," Obama said at the time. "We owe them a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else's civil war."

In other words, Sen. Obama wanted to fund the troops, he just didn't support the flawed military strategy this particular bill would enable. (Previously, Obama had voted YES on at least 10 other war funding bills. For a lengthy list of John McCain's NO votes on military funding, click here.)

"It ruffles our feathers when someone claims that Barack Obama doesn't support the troops, because the Obamas have gone out of their way to understand the military, its families, and its veterans," Stephanie Himel-Nelson, deputy director of outreach for Blue Star Families for Obama, told OffTheBus. "In fact, Michelle Obama has adopted military families as one of her causes."

Would Cindy McCain "Change Shoes" With These Military Wives?

"When millionaires such as Cindy McCain act as if they understand our lives, and the lives of everyday military families and veterans, we get upset," said Himel-Nelson.

Today the number of service men and women forced to deploy over and over again is unprecedented. Loneliness is leading to frayed marriages. Toddlers are just getting to know their parents when -- poof! -- mommy and daddy disappear to serve overseas again. Career paths are falling off track. Household budgets are in disarray...

...Deployments Are Lasting Longer, Coming Closer Together

Casey Spurr's husband has been deployed three times. "Mostly I find myself saying 'I wish your daddy was here' when I really, really need to take a break, or when our son lets out a big belly laugh -- he has the best laugh," said the Virginia Beach, Va. resident. Spurr told OffTheBus, "Obama proposes a Military Family Advisory Board, which I think is long overdue."

The number of Navy and Air Force vets re-deployed to fill gaps in Army units on a one-off basis -- with just a few weeks of combat training -- continues to grow. "The Navy is providing manpower because the Army doesn't have enough troop strength for our front lines," said Vivian Walker, a Navy veteran and military spouse who is using her GI Bill benefits to earn a Ph.D. in public administration and urban policy.

Walker confesses she forgot her wedding anniversary amid the chaos of managing work and family by herself. "A big paper was due, I was trying to find a Halloween costume for our four-year old, my mother was visiting...the list goes on, but I'm not complaining. The only time I get upset is when I feel I have to defend my patriotism if I vote for Obama. I live this war daily. My support for the troops is all-consuming."

Maria Arwitz's husband is a Navy dentist who was onboard the USS Comstock when it delivered a marine corps unit to Afghanistan in 2002. Three years later he was sent to Iceland for 11 months, something that "probably would not have happened if Navy Medicine wasn't stretched so thin," Arwitz told OffTheBus. "He left right after one of our 10-month-old twins underwent heart surgery. It taught me a lot about how strong a military mom has to be with no family around."

Arwitz likes that Obama believes all Americans are entitled to quality health care. "The conditions at Walter Reed Hospital really infuriate me. I feel connected to these troops when they return home -- I shop with their wives at the commissary, my kids play with their kids on the playground. You wouldn't believe what some families are going through," said the Beaufort, SC resident...

...For The Record, Mrs. McCain...

The non-partisan group Disabled American Veterans gives John McCain a 20 percent rating for his voting record on veterans' issues. (It gives Barack Obama an 80 percent rating.)

The non-partisan group Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gives McCain a "D" grade for his voting record on issues such as additional funding for combat body armor, and additional funding for post-traumatic stress disorder and other medical treatment. (Obama earned a B +.)


More here...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-tucker/the-big-chill-cindy-mccai_b_134068.html

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: TIA
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:21 PM

Rig:
Your Faux News is lying to you about ACORN. Please get just a little bit of info from a different source, and you will see that the true story is vastly different. There's a conspiracy alright, and its perpetrators have you thinking exactly what they intend. I honestly feel sorry for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 10:16 PM

Good: understands the history behind the job; understands the ideals behind the job; understands fully the terrible costs of warfare; can communicate intelligently with others on many levels; can inspire people toward a vision and organize to accomplish it.

I have seen no indication John McCain has any of these qualifications.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:48 PM

Maybe it would help to define a "good" and a "bad" president.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:42 PM

It's an amazing thing to say, but I think John McCain would make an even worse president than George W. Bush. I really do.

I could be wrong, of course, but so could anyone else around here... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:36 PM

"You've beaten those dead horses long enough."


                  Them horses ain't dead. Now the investigation has spread to two additional states.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 09:35 PM

I heard Kristol on George Step-in-awful-stuff on Sunday, and again on NPR today. It didn't sound like he'd abandoned McCain to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 08:44 PM

"In the tank with..." is a modern expression meaning "aligned with", "on the side of". No particular sort of physical tank is implied. Not sure where the expression originated.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 08:37 PM

John McCain should distance himself from Bush by proving they are opposite.

While Bush graduated in the middle of his class with a gentleman's C, McCain graduated at the bottom of his class.

While Bush kept away from active duty and then mysteiously drfted away, McCain stayed with active duty before during and after his POW capture.

While Bush promised that America will not engage in regieme change or be a cop to the world, McCain promises that he will.


While Bush claimed he had lots of experience in economics as a govenor, oil driller and Baseball Team owner, McCain admits he knows little about the economy.

While Bush was young ish McCain is old ish.

etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 08:28 PM

The staunch neo con Bill Crystal is now accused by the McCain campaign for being in the tank for Obama.

What are these tanks. Are they drunk tanks? Water tanks? Fuel tanks, or are they real Bradly Army tanks? And where are these tubes that the McCain campaign is going down?
If there are tanks, why are people in them for Obama instead of with Obama?

If you have an answer please let me know
tanks, Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Alice
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 08:24 PM

Governor Crist of Florida is one of the most recent Republicans to turn away from McCain. William Kristol has also written now about how McCain should drop the personal attacks on Obama and fire the campaign staff, because the smear tactic isn't working.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Alice
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 08:20 PM

Typo, sorry.


Notice that McCain didn't say who OR what he is fighting.

He is still repeating the dark insinuations trying to connect Ayers to Obama in some way as a terrorist link when Obama has stated clearly in the past that he did not agree with the Weatherman group and what Ayers did back in those protest days (when Obama was a child).

The McCain campaign just keeps looking more and more silly for trying to push this out as some kind of blemish on Obama. He is alienating the THINKING people in the Republican party by continuing this stupid Ayers connection slander. Every day, there are more and more Republicans announcing their dissatisfaction with the slimy tactics McCain has turned to. He used to be a person who spoke against this type of politicking. I used to admire McCain for his previous ways of speaking out against smear campaigns. Now he is leading one of the worst smear campaigns ever.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Alice
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 08:11 PM

Notice that McCain didn't say who are what he is fighting.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 07:31 PM

Well, well, well...

Seems that the McCain cmapaign is going to try something new... Rather than just blast away at Obama as being a terrorist McCain now is saying he is ready to "fight"...

Ahhhhhh, excuse me but doesn't that beg the question "What have you been doing and if you don't think it has been fighting then just what made you think that you could wait until 3 weeks before to election to begin now???" In other words, if McCain thinks he has been slacking for the last year then what kind of president could ghe possibly be if there ain't much fight left in him???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Alice
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 06:41 PM

You've beaten those dead horses long enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 06:17 PM

I wonder if they gave him a dollar and a cigarette like ACORN gave that goofy kid in Missouri who registered 73 times?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Alice
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 05:17 PM

I just heard some voters call in to CNN news, including an Alaskan, to say that this divisive and hateful campaign that Palin and McCain have run is "unAmerican" - that Americans want a higher standard than that. He said Palin had been his mayor and now his governor, but what she is doing to incite anger and division is wrong and that voters will not stand for it. I was grateful to hear these people calling and speaking up against the bigotry and hatefulness.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 04:25 PM

"...her bizarre religious and political affiliations..."


                      When Christopher Hitchens sobers up, he'll realize that Obama's political and religious affiliations are even more bizarre than Palin's.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 04:21 PM

"Vote for Obama
McCain lacks the character and temperament to be president. And Palin is simply a disgrace.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Oct. 13, 2008, at 10:44 AM ET
...The most insulting thing that a politician can do is to compel you to ask yourself: "What does he take me for?" Precisely this question is provoked by the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin. I wrote not long ago that it was not right to condescend to her just because of her provincial roots or her piety, let alone her slight flirtatiousness, but really her conduct since then has been a national disgrace. It turns out that none of her early claims to political courage was founded in fact, and it further turns out that some of the untested rumors about her—her vindictiveness in local quarrels, her bizarre religious and political affiliations—were very well-founded, indeed. Moreover, given the nasty and lowly task of stirring up the whack-job fringe of the party's right wing and of recycling patent falsehoods about Obama's position on Afghanistan, she has drawn upon the only talent that she apparently possesses.

It therefore seems to me that the Republican Party has invited not just defeat but discredit this year, and that both its nominees for the highest offices in the land should be decisively repudiated, along with any senators, congressmen, and governors who endorse them.

"

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 03:25 PM

Someone over at Gather.com has made a list of One Hundred Reasons NOT to Vote for McCain.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 04:09 PM

"...the Senator voted repeatedly "against Congressional efforts to tighten regulations of Savings and Loans and in 1987..."


                  And with this EXPERIENCE, the senator tried to get the government to rein in the abuses a Fanny-Mae and Freddy-Mac(sp?)two years ago, and Obama and other Democrats prevented that from happening.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 02:36 PM

I looked up the Keating Five thing. As Rig said, all of them were Democrats but McCain (always the maverick, eh? Way to go).

According to Rosa Brooks, professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, in 'Keating Five Ring a Bell?', these are among the things that McCain enjoyed from Charles Keating:

* Contributions amounting to "about $200.000 in today's dollars"
* Several free vacations, for both McCain and his family
* Private jet trips*Other perks

In return, the Senator voted repeatedly "against Congressional efforts to tighten regulations of Savings and Loans and in 1987 when he learned that his constituent's savings and loans bank was the target of federal investigation he (McCain) met with regulators in an effort to get them to back off."

Among the exploits of Charles Keating:

Was investing his depositors' federally insured savings in risky ventures. When those lost money, Keathing tried to hide the losses from regulators by inducing his customers to switch from insured accounts to uninsured (and worthless) bonds issued by Lincoln's near-bankrupt parent company. In 1989, it went belly up - and more than 20,000 Lincolns customers saw their savings vanish."

Charles Keating went to prison.

"Together with the rest of the so-called Keating Five - Sens. Alan Cranston, D-California, John Glenn, D-Ohio, Don Riegle, D-Michigan and Dennis DeConcini, D-Arizona, all of whom had also accepted large donations from Keating and intervened on his behalf - McCain was investigated by the Senate Ethics Committee and ultimately reprimanded dor "poor judgment."

I don't know what happened to the other Senators- but they are not runing for President of the United States.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 09:17 AM

Hardly!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Amos
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 09:05 AM

Your use of the word bankroll is disingenuous and an intentional alteration of the facts.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 02:31 AM

He employed them to do a job for a while. That's not at all the same thing as bankrolling them.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Riginslinger
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 01:06 AM

"There's nothing illegal about that."


                   No, certainly not. All I said was Obama was bankrolling ACORN and I caught a lot of flak for it. It's true!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 12:58 AM

Insert "not" in the correct spot.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Oct 08 - 12:42 AM

Hey, Riginslimer, you say : "Not true. McCain was absolved of any wrong doing in the Keating investigation. He was only included in the original chargers so the the thing wouldn't look totally partisan. All the others were Democrats."

McCain was "absolved of any wrong doing in the Keating investigation." He was not charged with a crime, it's true, but his colleagues did slap him with a "poor judgment" call on him and it stung.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular views on McCain
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 10:00 PM

There's nothing illegal about that.