New McCain ad: It’s the jihad, stupid

posted at 2:00 pm on January 1, 2008 by Allahpundit

The sort of ad that the press will happily tolerate when aimed by one Republican at another, but when it’s reprised in the general against the Democrats, look out.

MM told me last me night she was shocked to find that even among the anti-amnesty stalwarts of the Malkin readership, 57% are still willing to pull the lever for Maverick next year if it comes to that. Here, in 30 seconds, is why. Exit question, per the new NBC poll showing Maverick leading in NH: If Mitt gets beat by Huck in Iowa and then by Mac in New Hampshire, how long does he stay in the race? Surely at least until Michigan, where he’s still got the Romney name to run on, and probably until South Carolina, where he’ll make his last stand by flooding the state with ads. Follow-up question: If and when he does drop out, to whom do his supporters flock? Fred will be gone before him so it’s either Huck, McCain, or Rudy.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Some in the field could run, like Wilson in 1916, on a platform of keeping us out of war. They’d be able to point to their abilities in keeping themselves out of one.

Not bad – did you come up with that one yourself?

CK MacLeod on January 1, 2008 at 5:57 PM

I meant to address this earlier – I don’t get it. I’m not an expert on Wilson except that as I recall his League of Nations was a flop.

How do you point to your ability to keep us out of a war that was started by Jihadists and struck us on our soil? Isn’t that like saying you’ll keep us out of the War with the Japanese after Pearl Harbor?

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 6:06 PM

One of the few candidates who actually served in combat counts for something–primarily judgment about what the military can do and what they need.

dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 2:46 PM

Didn’t Jim Webb and John Murtha also serve in combat? (I’m genuinely asking here, as I don’t know. I only know they were military).

My main point is that military experience, 30 years ago no less, does not necessarily mean that someone will be responsible about military and war matters when in office.

The guy who almost comes to tears thinking about how horrible it is to waterboard or play loud music to the poor little terrorists, and the guy who needs a tissue to overcome his emotion over the plight of the poor La Raza supporters doesn’t have ANY negative impact on national defense at all.

I’ll buy that.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 5:43 PM

Bingo. That’s one of the big reasons I do not trust John McCain with our national security.

Michael in MI on January 1, 2008 at 6:08 PM

Many years ago, on this day, I was able to intercept a surface-to-air missile with my own airplane, which was no mean feat to say the least.
- John McCain

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:08 PM

Allah nails it. Even though illegal immigration consistently ranks at or near the top of the issues pile, I will happily discard the issue and risk an intraparty squabble again in favor of a candidate who understands the threat of our most dangerous enemy — the wretched, hateful Islamists.

Surprised that MM is surprised. I sense that we compartmentalize these two issues, rather than see them interlocked, as some do.

Jaibones on January 1, 2008 at 6:09 PM

I see that two commenters with a serious case of border fever are being accused of making comments that are over the top. Shocka!

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 6:09 PM

That’s a little over the top!

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 6:01 PM

How so. Please explain, because absolutely nothing in that comment is inaccurate.

I think you’ve caught a case of border fever and need to chill a bit.

But that’s just me!

Yes, it IS you and I do recall many arguments between you and HotAir readers concerning the border issue. If I recall correctly, you were always on the open borders amnesty side of the argument.

That would seem to explain your position on this one.

Was it you who actually has a career which is dependent on cross border trade? Correct me if I’m wrong.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 6:10 PM

How do you point to your ability to keep us out of a war that was started by Jihadists and struck us on our soil?

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 6:06 PM

Maybe he’ll ask us all to convert to Islam.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 6:11 PM

To mb4: what is not prudent, not wise, and not sensible is your 5:05 PM diatribe. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards are all left wing anti-military socialists who will nominate left wing judges to the federal bench. Anyone who thinks that they are making sense in saying, as you do, that you will not vote for John MccCain, Rudy Guiliani or Mike Huckabee and allow one of the three leading Democrats to become President is just plain nuts. John McCain is a pro-life fiscal conservative who is committed to nominating strict constructionist judges and who is clearly the most qualified of any the candidates to be Commander in Chief, as he has real knowledge and experience concerning military, national security and foreign policy matters. Rudy Guiliani is an extremely capable individual, a fiscal conservative who has proven that he can handle crisis situations and a law and order man in governance. Mike Huckabee has attracted the support among Republicans that he has because he ia well speoken and is conservative on social issues. You may think that you have other preferences in one of the other candidates, but being suicidal is stupid.

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:13 PM

My main point is that military experience, 30 years ago no less, does not necessarily mean that someone will be responsible about military and war matters when in office.

Michael in MI on January 1, 2008 at 6:08 PM

There is probably only a small correlation, based mostly on it giving the recipient of said experience the understanding that most troops really do not much like war, particularly long ones.

I also think that although their probably is no expiration date on said experience, there probably is a half life on it of no more than 5 years.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:16 PM

To mb4: what is not prudent, not wise, and not sensible is your 5:05 PM diatribe.

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:13 PM

That was just a soft ball warm up pitch.

Wait till about 12:05 AM.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:19 PM

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:13 PM

BTW, not all of us have abused wife syndrome.

If you are going to go that route, at least wait till the general election.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:22 PM

Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards are all left wing anti-military socialists who will nominate left wing judges to the federal bench.

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:13 PM

Oh good God, where to begin?

Anyone who thinks that they are making sense in saying, as you do, that you will not vote for John MccCain, Rudy Guiliani or Mike Huckabee and allow one of the three leading Democrats to become President is just plain nuts.

Rudy Guiliani has a history of appointing liberal judges, regardless of what he TELLS you. Please do your homework before stepping into the booth.

Mike Huckabee is as far left as ANY of the Democratic candidates, on almost EVERY issue. Mike Huckabee has issued more commutations and pardons than all of the six neighboring states combined.

Somehow, you really believe he’s going to nominate the type of judges we’re hoping for?

John McCain? Doh! As I stated earlier … what type of SCOTUS nomination do you think McCain will come up with after he gets finished “reaching across the aisle” to compromise?

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 6:23 PM

You may think that you have other preferences in one of the other candidates, but being suicidal is stupid.

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:13 PM

So as you are so afraid of the democrats, what are you going to do if one becomes President in a year?

Leave the country?

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:25 PM

How do you point to your ability to keep us out of a war that was started by Jihadists and struck us on our soil? Isn’t that like saying you’ll keep us out of the War with the Japanese after Pearl Harbor?

It was a joke. I agree with those who say we shouldn’t elect McCain because he was in combat, but I do credit his combat experience more highly than those who used their intellects and connections to avoid a war that was so large it required a draft–they won’t be including Mitt or Rudy from the Vietnam era in any future editions of “Profiles in Courage”

dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 6:29 PM

I think you’ve caught a case of border fever and need to chill a bit.

Without borders, there is no nation.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:29 PM

If the missile had gone over the top, he would not have been shot down.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:02 PM

You are bad.

steveegg on January 1, 2008 at 6:32 PM

To mb4: It is not a matetr of being afraid of the Democrats; it is a matter of realizing, as Rush Limbaugh has explained in the last few months on his show, that the next election is about the direction of the country. The Democrats will lead the nation to a nanny state and weak-kneed appeasement in foreign policy. In the world that we live, that is a recipe for bad trouble.

I live in New York. I live in a land of elected Democrats. I don’t leave. I try to voice sanity amidst nonsense.

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:34 PM

that the next election is about the direction of the country.

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:34 PM

That’s a really great point, so I’m confused as to why you don’t seem to realize how important it is for the GOP to not allow them to get the idea that the country wants to move to the left.

A victory for a liberal RINO in the nomination would send this exact message and doom the GOP to a hard left turn in the future. A win by that candidate in the general election, would make that statement even more clear.

I’m sure you can imagine what the country will be like with a far left Democratic Party, and a left-of-center GOP.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 6:44 PM

The Democrats will lead the nation to a nanny state and weak-kneed appeasement in foreign policy.

Phil Byler on January 1, 2008 at 6:34 PM

I see less and less difference between republicans and democrats.

Nanny state?
What would you call Bush’s prescription drug program for seniors or his and Kennedy’s “No nino left behind” for just a couple of examples.

Appeasement in foreign policy?

Appease whom? Are you talking about Iraq? They bitch about it but keep funding even that.
Given their history I would be more concerned about wars that the democrats will get us into.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:44 PM

I just had a epiphany. Either that or indigestion.

Some keep on about how democrats want us to surrender in Iraq, yet want conservatives to surrender to RINO’s AND surrender to them even before the first voting for God’s sake!!!

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:57 PM

A victory for a liberal RINO in the nomination would send this exact message and doom the GOP to a hard left turn in the future. A win by that candidate in the general election, would make that statement even more clear.

I’m sure you can imagine what the country will be like with a far left Democratic Party, and a left-of-center GOP.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 6:44 PM

Bingo (geez, I have said that a few times today now).

These are my sentiments as well. As I stated a while back, I am not for a Republican President, I am for a Conservative President. And I am for a Conservative GOP. If the GOP goes Left, then Conservatism takes a hit as the mass media and the Left would have a field day announcing the death of Conservatism in this country.

And we would have no defense against that accusation, if we nominate a liberal/RINO Republican.

This is why I am voting FOR conservatism, not AGAINST Hillary/socialism.

People are always inspired by what you stand FOR, not what you stand against. Just like love is more inspiring than hate.

The Democrats lost in 2004, because they were a Party of being against things. The Republicans lost in 2006, among other things, because they were running on a campaign of being against Democrats, instead of running on what they stand for.

Let’s not imitate those failures. Let’s stand FOR something. And if you stand for conservatism, all the better. :)

Michael in MI on January 1, 2008 at 6:58 PM

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 6:57 PM

I thought all your great non-quotation posts were inspired by indigestion. That or alcohol. heh :)

Anyway, as I stated either earlier in this thread or in another one today, I see Republican voters of 2008 as the same as Democrat voters of 2004.

Anybody But Bush 2004 = Whoever Can Beat Hillary 2008.

Campaigns of what one is against don’t inspire as much as campaigns of what one is for.

Granted, it is good to point out the bad policies of the opponent, but only if you follow it with explaining what your policies are and why they are better.

Kinda like Wendy’s and McDonald’s. People don’t go to Wendy’s because McDonald’s sucks (well, I guess some do), but rather because they like Wendy’s food. However, if Wendy’s simply sells their product, saying they are better than McDonald’s, and people say ‘so what, McDonald’s sucks, you just being better than them is not saying much’ and decide to stay home and have a home-cooked meal, Wendy’s is out of luck.

Point being, you have to have a sales pitch that is going to inspire people to get people out of the house.

Michael in MI on January 1, 2008 at 7:06 PM

Anybody But Bush 2004 = Whoever Can Beat Hillary 2008.

Campaigns of what one is against don’t inspire as much as campaigns of what one is for.

Point being, you have to have a sales pitch that is going to inspire people to get people out of the house.

Michael in MI on January 1, 2008 at 7:06 PM

And your point will, of course, be even truer if the dims double cross us and do not nominate Hillary.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Still Shocked?

McCain is the only option.

Fred’s an idiot. Huck is unelectable. And the rest are morons…

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:20 PM

If and when he does drop out, to whom do his supporters flock?

Alan Keyes.

Mcguyver on January 1, 2008 at 7:23 PM

McCain is the only option.

A month ago Rudy was the only option.

Now McAmnesty is the only option.

Who will be the only option next month?

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 6:10 PM

Was it you who actually has a career which is dependent on cross border trade? Correct me if I’m wrong.

LOL. NO! Not me!

Yes, it IS you and I do recall many arguments between you and HotAir readers concerning the border issue. If I recall correctly, you were always on the open borders amnesty side of the argument.

That would seem to explain your position on this one.

What?? You clearly have me confused with someone else. I have no idea who that could be, but that does not describe me or my comments at all. Unless you think that fact that I support the conservative Rudy Guiliani makes me an “open borders amnesty” person. Not to mention my comments about McCain and Shamnesty should have provided a clue.

How so. Please explain, because absolutely nothing in that comment is inaccurate.

Because you went beyond legitimate complaints about McCain’s record to transforming him into a Socialist which is…over the top.

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 7:26 PM

MB4,

McCain was always the only option

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:27 PM

McCain was always the only option

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:27 PM

What we have here is premature surrender.

MB4 on January 1, 2008 at 7:34 PM

Do Iowa and NH really matter all that much that there’s serious talk about whether Romney will bow out if he doesn’t win either? I don’t get why they matter so much.

Gribbit agrees.

MT on January 1, 2008 at 7:37 PM

Having said that… GO FRED!

MT on January 1, 2008 at 7:38 PM

Do Iowa and NH really matter all that much that there’s serious talk about whether Romney will bow out if he doesn’t win either? I don’t get why they matter so much.

Gribbit agrees.

MT on January 1, 2008 at 7:37 PM

People will say that he spent all that money and failed and is a flop who can’t win so it’s a matter of perception – and there are a lot of people who can’t wait to to say that.

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 7:43 PM

And that 43% refusing to vote for McCain is exactly why we can’t allow him to get the nomination. I doubt any other republican (with the exception of Paul) has that high of negatives within his own party. If we nominate him we are just rolling the red carpet out for Hillary.

BTW, I am one of those 57%, because I know how bad the alternative is.

conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 7:58 PM

I think it’s important for Republicans to start backing John McCain (even if you don’t agree with some of his positions). In fact, a Push for McCain campaign would be great.

I understand that he’s not a conservative and he is liberal on a couple of important issues… but, politics is about getting what you can, when you can. And we CANNOT afford to lose this election to either Hillary of Obama.

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:59 PM

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 7:43 PM

… if it weren’t for all of the people, eh?

Funny… so Rudy loses and no one really cares. I’m sure there are many nice people up in Iowa and NH, but it’s seeming more and more bizzare to me that we’re all caring so much. I have to think that Mitt is in this longer-term regardless of what happens. I hope the same is true for Fred, but I guess money is more his issue. Maybe Fred and Ron Paul should open a dialog!

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:02 PM

I think it’s important for Republicans to start backing John McCain (even if you don’t agree with some of his positions). In fact, a Push for McCain campaign would be great.

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:59 PM

Don’t hold your breath for that on this site. Most commenters here feel that McCain betrayed them a couple of times. Myself included.

conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 8:03 PM

When did McCain come to this realization,
after Fred’s video!(I’m being sarc.)

canopfor on January 1, 2008 at 8:05 PM

conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 8:03 PM

yeah, that seems to be the case

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 8:06 PM

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:59 PM

Right… so ultimately it boils down to being principled or not so much.

Republicans are going to have to do better than McCain for my vote. This country is marching towards Socialism, and a McCain Presidency will only continue the parade.

Feels like conservatism is dying. Religious organizations are moving left all over the place, Republicans are moving left, MSM is more left than ever… anyone got a pick-me-up?

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:14 PM

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:27 PM

You are so full of it.

McCain SchmuckCain.

There was a news blib of McCain on the campaign trail (sorry I couldn’t immediately locate it in my favorite archives) where he was quoted as saying, “I have to gain your respect and trust”.

FOR THE LOVE OF SLEEPING BEAUTY McCain Schmuck, just how many more more years do you need? Would 72 years be enough?!

At 72 years he’s still trying to gain our trust? There aren’t enough cuss words in the English language to describe this Schmuck!

It’s over for McCain, get over it!

The only reason – besides the general dissatisfaction for all candidates – McCain is showing up in NH among likely.. but not actual primary voters is because he is well known there.
He will not show up anywhere else.

Romney is NOT going to drop out because he wants to win too bad.

Fred and McCain are gone, get over it!

I have said it and I will say it again, this is the year when some outlier/independent/off party candidate will rock the “old guard” elections like nothing you have ever seen.
No matter who gets nominated, some other is going to come along and absolutely shake the “old guard” until they are “white with fear”.

MARK. MY. WORDS.

Mcguyver on January 1, 2008 at 8:15 PM

anyone got a pick-me-up?

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:14 PM

The answer my friend is FRED!

conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 8:17 PM

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 7:59 PM

Nice try, dude. Include me out!

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:02 PM

Agree with a lot of what you say, except for the Ron Paul part :-)

I think Iowa and NH are more important for the newbies like Romney who need to introduce themselves to the American people. Rudy is already well known, so he doesn’t need that as much.

In Hillary’s case she has to fight off the upstarts who threaten to dethrone her.

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 8:18 PM

No matter who gets nominated, some other is going to come along and absolutely shake the “old guard” until they are “white with fear”.

MARK. MY. WORDS.

Mcguyver on January 1, 2008 at 8:15 PM

Tell me more about Bloomberg…

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:18 PM

Tell me more about Bloomberg…

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:18 PM

heh, good one!

conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 8:20 PM

The answer my friend is FRED!

conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 8:17 PM

I agree, but sheesh… the talk is like he’s already dead! No money, no fire, no chance. Again, why is everything riding on Iowa and NH? I’m in VA, and I’d like to have a say before my option is Rudy, McCain or staying home!

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:26 PM

lol, we’ll see who turns out being right

Opinionnation on January 1, 2008 at 8:28 PM

I’m in VA, and I’d like to have a say before my option is Rudy, McCain or staying home!

I agree. This primary system is half-baked. It seems like the candidates meet everyone in Iowa personally and then blow through the later half of the states when the nomination has already been decided.

I think this system is undemocratic and doesn’t give either party the best candidate–unless I move to Iowa, in which case I reserve the right to amend my comments.

dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 8:38 PM

Not bad – did you come up with that one yourself?

CK MacLeod on January 1, 2008 at 5:57 PM

Yes, sometime after my fingers start moving my brain will kick in.

dedalus on January 1, 2008 at 8:43 PM

What?? You clearly have me confused with someone else.

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Okay. I apologize. I’m not sure who I’m thinking of.

Because you went beyond legitimate complaints about McCain’s record to transforming him into a Socialist which is…over the top.

???

No I did not. There’s nothing in my comment that calls him a socialist.

Here’s your comment:

He may want to fund some of those things, but he won’t do it at the expense of our national defense, and that separates him from the Left.

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 5:36 PM

And my comment in response:

Right. The guy who almost comes to tears thinking about how horrible it is to waterboard or play loud music to the poor little terrorists, and the guy who needs a tissue to overcome his emotion over the plight of the poor La Raza supporters doesn’t have ANY negative impact on national defense at all.

I’ll buy that.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 5:43 PM

Absolutely nothing regarding socialism in either comment. The comment was refering to national security issues.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 8:53 PM

I agree, but sheesh… the talk is like he’s already dead! No money, no fire, no chance. Again, why is everything riding on Iowa and NH? I’m in VA, and I’d like to have a say before my option is Rudy, McCain or staying home!

MT on January 1, 2008 at 8:26 PM

I hear ya, I get pretty upset that by the time we in Texas get a voice it is all but over. And Iowa and New Hampshire sure don’t have the same political leanings that we do. Why should these yankee states get to make decisions for all of us?

conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 9:11 PM

Has anybody asked this OPEN BORDERS ZEALOT about The Keating Five yet?

DfDeportation on January 1, 2008 at 10:26 PM

Absolutely nothing regarding socialism in either comment. The comment was refering to national security issues.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 8:53 PM

Please refer back to this exchange:

What if a Socialist Dem Republican wins the presidency and the control Congress? It doesn’t take much to slide backwards.

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 4:15 PM

Fixed it for you.

Gregor on January 1, 2008 at 4:35 PM

McCain? He’s a liberal Republican but he’s not a Socialist. He’s not going to cut defense spending to fund pre-k, a single payer health care system, or any of the Utopian dreams that could be our national nightmare.

He may want to fund some of those things, but he won’t do it at the expense of our national defense, and that separates him from the Left.
Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 5:36 PM

It’s over the top to claim that he is a) a Socialist b) someone who cares nothing about our national security.

I agree that his solutions are poor, but I don’t think you can question his patriotism or intentions.

Buy Danish on January 1, 2008 at 11:07 PM

McCain.

sanantonian on January 2, 2008 at 12:02 AM

It’s the Border, Juan.

pat on January 2, 2008 at 12:11 AM

McCain does not believe in free speech. Except for himself. When he thought he was king of the MSM, he cut the knees out from all conservatives. This guy believes the Constitution is advisory. He might as well be Justice Breyer.

pat on January 2, 2008 at 12:15 AM

McCain believes in fighting terrorism through open borders. Smart!

Mojave Mark on January 2, 2008 at 1:19 AM

McCain is a great man and American hero but he hasn’t run anything, is squishy liberal on some issues, and has a temperament problem.

Tantor on January 2, 2008 at 2:22 AM

Holy non sequitur, Batman! (the ad)

Mark Jaquith on January 2, 2008 at 8:49 AM

To mb4 one last time: I had ignored your disparagement of John McCain’s service in the Vietnam War as beneath contempt, but lest there be any misunderstanding, let’s be clear about what John McCain and a number of other naval aviators did during the Vietnam War. What John McCain and his fellow naval aviators did was to take off from carriers and fly jet aircraft on bombing missions in North Vietnam, which had one of the better air defense systems in military history. On the day that John McCain was shot down, he took off from a carrier, flew over Hanoi, North Vietnam, bombed a Hanoi power plant that was the target that day and then was shot down by a surface-to-air missle. He survived bailing out of his aircraft but was very badly injured; he then endured six years of captivity in North Vietnam and was subjected to real torture. John McCain may joke now about being shot down, but no one should question for a second the courage and character involved in John McCain’s wartime service.

Phil Byler on January 2, 2008 at 10:04 AM

Phil Byler on January 2, 2008 at 10:04 AM

Well-said, Phil. I don’t agree with you about McCain the Presidential candidate but this sort of criticism is unwise.

From what I gather, MB4 served in the Army so maybe he suffers from Naval Aviator Envy.

Buy Danish on January 2, 2008 at 1:22 PM

Direct election of state legislators and congressional representatives seems to be quite enough responsibility for the citizenry at large. I think the Americans would do better for their country if they could arrange to have a truly deliberative Electoral College choose their President, and if they could restore their Senate to election by the state legislatures.

Kralizec on January 2, 2008 at 5:07 PM

Comment pages: 1 2