Stewart to McCain: Will you reject and denounce Bush?
posted at 11:38 am on May 8, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
He’s no Huckabee, but Maverick usually fares well in these awkward comedy chat-show encounters. At the very least, he betrays no discomfort from the snoutful of self-conscious liberal hipness one gets when appearing on TDS or Colbert. Which, in fairness, may be due in part to how soft Stewart goes on him: To my continued surprise, Perino, Tony Snow, and now even the GOP nominee were treated to 10 minutes of schmoozing with only one or two glacing blows mixed in. After the media canonized Colbert for his White House Correspondents Dinner performance two years ago, you’d think he and Stewart would seize every opportunity to play Left-Wing Avenger. Credit him for showing restraint.
His one (gently broached) issue with McCain has to do with calling Obama Hamas’s candidate of choice, an apparently unfair shot notwithstanding the fact that it’s based on a quote from one of the group’s spokesmen. Since when do we take terrorists at their word, wonders Stewart? Answer: Since the left (and Ron Paul) first started pushing “blowback” as an explanation for hatred of, and attacks on, America. If Osama’s worth listening to vis-a-vis 9/11, Hamas must be worth listening to vis-a-vis Israeli policy. Know thy enemy, right? Except when it’s inconvenient.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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] 3 »
Every single McCain thread ends this way - everybody takes sides as though this is some sort of football game, and everybody leaves without accomplishing jack. Meanwhile, we’re stuck with either a liberal or a socialist as President.
How do we get ourselves out of this mess?
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 2:18 PM
This will never happen because as the narrative is already written: it is not McCain’s fault that the conservative base does not like or trust him, it is conservatives’ fault for sticking to their stupid, out-dated and inconvenient principles.
Hey, that’s another inspiring slogan: Damn your principles = (R) Victory in ‘08! I also appreciate the inclusive rallying cries of racism whenever illegal immigration is brought up; and I love being called names for continuing to question McCain’s fitness as a candidate. It’s all very motivational and I can hardly wait to get to the polls in November.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 2:21 PM
With all of the evidence out there to the contrary (Congressional Record, American Conservative Union ratings), including my efforts in this thread, you persist in calling the moderately conservative McCain a liberal.
I’m about to give up on you all-or-nothing types. But not yet.
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 2:22 PM
To vote for who?
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 2:24 PM
1) Get McCain elected (you knew I’d say that)
2) Keep his feet to the fire
3) Get conservatives into Congress
4) Next presidential primaries, support a more conservative alternative to McCain
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 2:27 PM
That’s incorrect. He campaigned for Bush in 2004.
Arainna Huffington says that he told her he didn’t vote for Bush in 2000, but he didn’t say who he voted for. Arianna says Cindy McCain told her she wrote in McCain when she voted. I think the story could easily be true, but I also know that Arianna has made up stuff in the past.
juliesa on May 8, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Is Jon Stewart Larry King’s son?
Travis1 on May 8, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Do you have a link with eviidence of that? I never heard that he “confessed”.
juliesa on May 8, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Oh, I dunno…Sunny Lukis I’m convinced she’s smarter than any hooman candidates in the running right now. ;)
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Ah, ok. My mistake. 2000, then. Thx.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Denial does not look good on you. His liberalism, including his direct assault on the First Amendment, are the REASON people are balking at him. There isn’t any other reason. We don’t trust what he says because his actions speak louder. Again you’re persisting in obfuscation of the truth and preventing a real dialogue.
Offering no solutions, eh? What else is new.
1) How will that get us out of this mess? The media will continue to elect moderate/liberals for us. This will not change anything.
2) We’ve already tried keeping his feet to the fire; he called us racists and has already gone back on his word about amnesty and the borders.
3)We’ve tried getting conservatives into Congress.
4) I supported a more conservative candidate but the media elected McCain. You’re once again blind to the reality of the situation. We conservatives are no longer allowed to choose our own government. My state hasn’t even voted yet and it’s already over. See?
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Hmmm… if PuffHo is remotely right on this, then certainly McCain will understand if we find someone else to write-in. ;)
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 2:37 PM
This is very true. It was all over months ago. The primaries were over before they ever got to any of the bigger, more important states. There’s been no choice left since Feb/March.
One fact you can take to the bank is that the base did not choose McCain. The Left did.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Obamarxist would:
1) cut off trade
2) raise taxes, thereby
3) trash the economy
4) nationalize health care
5) chat with Islamofascist leaders over coffee
6) surrender Iraq
7) appoint three “sensitive” liberal judges to the SC
8) give us the Fairness Doctrine
9) gut the military
How can any of you say that he & McCain are basically the same?
How can you keep from doing everything you can to oppose Obamarxist & help McCain?
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Close enough.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0607.benen.html
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Calling reality “denial” is fine, but what are your solutions?
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Not interested in your scare tactics. Don’t you understand that disillusioned conservatives will probably get out of politics after this election, no matter who wins? The only thing that matters now is how do we make sure we never get a nominee like McCain again.
Read my lips:
I. Just. Don’t. Care. Anymore.
So try another tactic.
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 2:46 PM
It is the 1992 playbook. After the Dem is elected there will be two years of disaster under a Dem government. The moderates in the Republican party will be swept away as driftwood and a conservative phoenix will rise from the ashes presenting a Contract with America II. Conservative Republicans take over the Congress in 2010. They build a fence and repeal the TSA, DHS, and a bunch of idiotic things that happened since 9-11. McCain tries so hard to defeat these conservative initiatives from his perch in the Senate that he publicly acknowledges he has been insane for years and is committed to an Arizona mental facility.
I wish.
Valiant on May 8, 2008 at 2:46 PM
I’m open to ideas that don’t involve capitulating to the establishment that has lost its way.
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 2:47 PM
How about this? McCain loses a drunken bet and is forced to nominate Fred! as his Veep. Eight days after inauguration, McCain passes away and Fred! takes over, also losing a drunken bet and nominating Ron Paul as HIS veep.
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 2:49 PM
That would be just fine with today’s Republicans. We are in the way of their Leftward “progress”.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 2:49 PM
You’ll call it “denial” again, but here’s the reality:
We’ll either get the nightmare I detailed at 2:43PM (call it “scare tactics”, but that’s BO’s plan), or…
We’ll vote for the lesser of two evils (I only say that to bring you on board).
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 2:51 PM
The media didn’t pick McCain, the Republicans did. He was the most acceptable to the greatest number. There are many tribes in the Republican party and the McCain haters are just one of those tribes. If Rudy had been picked we’d be hearing a lot of complaints from the religious right, but I don’t think we’d be seeing the level of self righteousness, vindictiveness and passion from them as we see from the haters of McCain. It’s no less destructive for our side than the Kos Kids attacks from the left for their side. They’d rather lose and claim purity of principle than win with compromise, all the while insisting that they and only they are the true base of the party.
Patrick H on May 8, 2008 at 2:53 PM
What state do you live in “Fosten”?
LtE126 on May 8, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Really? The greatest number in how many states? Three, four? Because it was all over before the states with the largest number of delegates and electoral votes ever got a chance to decide who was most acceptable. It was way over before the vast majority of Republicans got a chance to vote in a primary! The media played a huge part in that, as did the Left by meddling in early races. So how can you say McCain was the most acceptable to the greatest number?! It’s just not so.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Good point. Conservatives are no longer the base of the Republican Party. They are now the “radical fringe”. Certainly, the Republicans will be able to win without them. At least that’s the gamble this November.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 3:04 PM
“Haters of McCain” that’s hilarious. Yeah, it’s not like McCain ever hated on anybody in his party, right? Only all Christians and all those who oppose amnesty, just to name two groups.
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 3:08 PM
I don’t neet to watch this to know that John Stewart is a schmuck. And McCain is only a little better
Hunt035 on May 8, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Too Late Sir Valiant
SoCalInfidel on May 8, 2008 at 3:16 PM
So
Much
Drama…….
Please, every president since Kennedy has been the same media cow-towing poll reading (those who say they don’t do more)lily livered politician types that you wouldn’t want taking your daughter to the prom. They all do what they’re told, they all moderate to center, and they all are overly concerned about public opinion. You can’t say bush isn’t just because his numbers suck.
Also, when I say “president” I mean the entire administration. I believe with all my heart and soul that George Bush doesn’t really care what I think about his policies…but the media does, and therefore his administration does.
Obama will slide a little to the right, McCain farther to the left and they’ll all end up a little to the left or right of center. Our Government/Media prevents much more. It had rendered the office virtually obsolete. Virtually.
beefytee on May 8, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Brokered convention.
Valiant on May 8, 2008 at 3:50 PM
5) Tell his wife to release her tax returns in the spirit of full disclosure
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 4:05 PM
For everything you need to know about McCain but the press is not allowed to report on, (yet): http://www.newswithviews.com/Briley/Patrick47.htm
It mixes politics and religion but it has essential information about McCain that opened my eyes-wider.
Christine on May 8, 2008 at 4:18 PM
Patrick Briley is a bit of a Truther Type, don’t know if I would take too much stock in what he thinks.
He supports a website that has one of Cynthia McKinney’s - the looneiest of the looney - statements.
Sounds like a ton of lies, garbage and ridiculous conspiracy theories to me.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 4:31 PM
Good point. Conservatives are no longer the base of the Republican Party. They are now the “radical fringe”. Certainly, the Republicans will be able to win without them. At least that’s the gamble this November.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008
So you also believe that supporters of McCain aren’t true conservatives? Conservatives can’t be pro-immigration or amnesty? Many of us conservatives disagree and the issue isn’t big enough to capture the moderates needed to win a national election.
There are differences of opinion on immigration and other issues, but on most issues McCain is conservative enough. The only thing he’s done that I greatly oppose is McCain Feingold. Many conservatives can live with amnesty and grew to understand and accept the gang of 14 compromise. We’re also smart enough to know the anti-immigration crowd has already lost the debate. McCain winning while courting the Hispanic vote is better than McCain losing by courting the anti-immigrant vote. Driving the immigrants into the arms of the left is a prescription for a permanent Republican minority, and no amount of kicking and fighting will change that. Hispanics are religious, pro life, pro family, pro gun, pro hard work and pro school choice. We need to bring them into the tent, not lock them out.
Patrick H on May 8, 2008 at 4:37 PM
Well if thats true then we’re losing and will continue to lose. The ideology of neoconservatism and multiculturalism can’t defeat Islam.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 4:49 PM
No. The issue is not just one of job losses, not just of crime and murder, not even just of national sovereignty but one of national existence. At a bare minimum you can’t be pro-amnesty.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 4:52 PM
Well put, well said.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 4:57 PM
By the way McCain-Kennedy bill is a Dems in Charge forever bill.
BroncosRock on May 8, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Will you reject and denounce Bush? What does he think it is, a baptism?
rightwingprof on May 8, 2008 at 5:04 PM
MDS so strong you can’t even remember the men campaigning together in 2004, and can’t remember Rove saying they spent lots of time together then and “bonded.”
So desperate to believe McCain is equal to Obama (or worse!) that you jump at any straw. sad
funky chicken on May 8, 2008 at 5:12 PM
unbelievable that you would tell people you support scum like this.
Hey Christine, check out Ted Sampley. You’ll love him and his followers. Really, they are a perfect fit for you.
For anybody who cares about actual facts, try www.miafacts.org.
funky chicken on May 8, 2008 at 5:15 PM
Mary Katherine Hamm should really include HotAir in her reports about the snti-McCain remarks when speaking with Bill O’Reilly.
She mentioned the HuffPost and lightly touched on the Far Right, which O’Reilly didn’t acknowledge, of course.
The Far Right is obviously posting here against McCain daily, and have been for months.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Wooohhh The Far Right scary. I suppose you think Edmund Burke was a far-right fascist.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Captain Ed just referred to McCain as “the eighth most conservative senator”. But he’s really a liberal socialist traitor, right aengus/Valiant/Redhead Infidel?
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 5:43 PM
I would’ve guessed twelve or thirteen, but eight sounds about right.
jgapinoy on May 8, 2008 at 5:45 PM
jgapinoy,
I never said that. I think hes a right-wing liberal, like Bush. If thats acceptable to you then fine. Vote for him. I just don’t appreciate AprilOrit’s paranoid warning against The Far Right (capital letters for effect).
Is anyone right of McCain now considered the KKK/Hitler/the Paulbots? Its a pretty dumb argument except that its not even an argument.
I argue that Bush is intellectually liberal because his view of human nature (”Freedom is the desire of every human heart”) is not consistent with the physical and spiritual death brought into the world upon all mankind after the Fall.
Conservative thought has traditionally insisted upon the sinful and fallen nature of mankind and sought to restrain it. This is why the Republican Party especially has been traditionally against Wilsonian idealism and utopianism.
Plus I think illegal immigration is the defining issue of the 21st century. It is another areas where Bush (”Family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande”) has let his liberal vision of humanity govern his heart.
Here is an article that I think you will appreciate reading even if you do not agree with it. Parts I and II.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Easy funky. I already admitted my mistake (everyone got that except you). No need to gloat. I was carrying on a discussion in another thread about the Dem strategy of ‘04 and did indeed cross my wires here. Mea culpa. Again.
PatrickH, I didn’t say that though I’m quite often told the opposite is true. In fact, I’m on the record as saying that those of us who used to be just plain old conservatives are now considered “radical fringe” by the Republicans. It should be very easy to win the election without us, so I’m told. Therefore, as personas non grata among Republicans, we shouldn’t raise your ire. We have no influence, so there’s no need to get so defensive.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 6:31 PM
As in the British Whig Party?? LOL
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 6:46 PM
April, that “Far Right” includes your host Michelle Malkin, Ace (CPAC blogger of the year), many, many regulars here at HA, Misha, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and countless other old hat conservatives. You’ve known us for ages - we haven’t changed what we believe in - what’s so horrifying about us now other than we’re in the way of Leftward “progress”? Traditional pains in the a$$, we are. ;)
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 6:48 PM
The Right Wing Fringe can not win elections, period.
Most of this country does not agree with you guys, as they do not agree with the Far Left.
As in Islam, too much Far Right in our own Democracy is a mistake, and the general population will not tolerate it.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 6:51 PM
As for Rush Limbaugh, he plays a character on radio.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 6:52 PM
It’s hilarious how we are fighting a extremist enemy, begging the Moderate Muslims to step up to the plate and give us a hand.
But here in the US it’s supposed to be acceptable to be Far Right are Far Left Fringe.
Go figure.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 7:01 PM
Yet the contemporary mainstream Democratic Party were once considered the fringe radical left and the now supposedly “far right” crowd were once the core of American political life. So the centre is always shifting left like a man succumbing to quicksand.
Your solution is to cease resisting. If this keeps up the 2024 Dem candidate will be a hardline Communist and the Repub a moderate social democrat.
As Redhead Infidel said your smear includes Michelle Malkin whose web site you’re now commenting on.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 7:03 PM
I do agree with your point, but disagree with your presumed definitions.
As for conservatives not winning elections….well, as I said earlier, the Republicans are gambling the next four years on that premise. They could very well be right…we’ll see.
Not to be persnickety, but I kinda already laid out your entire argument already - albeit without the requisite scorn. ;)
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 7:04 PM
*My above comment is to April.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 7:08 PM
I wonder where Captain Ed got those numbers. I trust, but I’d still like to verify.
Maxx on May 8, 2008 at 7:21 PM
I smeared no one, I spoke the truth. You see it as a smear becuase of your idealogy.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 7:49 PM
And Michelle is well aware of how I feel, I have emailed her several times when I disagreed with her.
But Michelle doesn’t censor people nor does she consider political discourse a smear.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 7:51 PM
McCain is the right candidate for this point in time.
You’ll see.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 7:53 PM
Nice try, but crap. That’s anti-illegal immigrant. Those Hispanic virtues you tout belong to our Hispanic citizens, not to lawbreakers or those who facilitate their illegality. If they are as you say, they are against illegal immigration as well.
JiangxiDad on May 8, 2008 at 8:12 PM
I assumed by “far right” you meant neo-Nazi/KKK as that is what is usually implied by that usage.
You never actually said that so I assume you meant right of the current Republican leadership.
It would help it you would clarify your terms and define what it is you’re trying to say but in any case I withdraw my assertion that you smeared me or anyone else.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 8:13 PM
April Orit:
You see a virtue in occupying the so-called middle ground– in spite of it being constantly shifting. Without a fixed set of criteria, I can see why you would. What else could you do and still try to appear reasonable? But when you’re older, and the middle ground is far to the left of where you now stand, you will understand the folly.
JiangxiDad on May 8, 2008 at 8:19 PM
That’s what it used to be. Today, however, the entire Party has shifted Left, leaving those that used to be plain old conservatives where they always used to be but now to the right of everyone else. Yet we’re still the same patriots that love our country dearly as your neighbors, community volunteers, veterans, Little League coaches, teachers, police officers, doctors, etc. But somehow, now we’re evil and to be reviled, and unconscionably lumped in with Islamists and what has traditionally been a shunned evil splinter, though we’ve not changed and we’re still the same conservative Americans we always have been.
According to the new politically correct verbiage, conservatism is now “radicalism” or “fringe”. That is why I disagreed with April’s definitions - they are convenient to her argument, but deliberately derogatory to those of us the Party thinks it can now do without. I can see the new reality and recognize it for what it is, but I don’t have to accept the newly defined semantics.
Redhead Infidel on May 8, 2008 at 8:29 PM
I agree with your second point, but don’t think it necessarily follows from your first. Wilsonian endeavors that require big government investments to change the way that people live is rightly viewed with suspicion by conservatives. But not because man is fallen, rather it is because man, especially through his family and his churches, is more noble and smarter than an office-full of government do-gooders.
dedalus on May 8, 2008 at 8:33 PM
Patrick Briley says:
and
Yeah, I think I’ll skip that tool’s advice.
SouthernDem on May 8, 2008 at 8:48 PM
Yep. But I have a hard time seeing how you/we will avoid the dinosaur’s fate. The mantle of Western Civ. was passed across the Atlantic to us. Who’s left to receive it now? China could receive it and make it work if they wanted to, but then you’d have to believe that God has a sense of humor. Other than Rush Limbaugh’s ability to single-handedly tweak liberal noses on a daily basis, I’ve seen little evidence.
JiangxiDad on May 8, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Redhead Infidel, I have made a similar point on a number of threads, albeit in a less classy way than you did. There are what, 5 or 6 people who post here that won’t vote for McCain? The rest are fairly committed with varying degress of enthusiasm; fine. Yet, rather than be happy that they are headed to likely victory, I keep seeing torrents of nastiness unloaded on the few who won’t fall in line..and I just ask why? What is this obsessive need to browbeat the malcontents? Go celebrate. Go to a Dem forum and recruit some disgruntled Hillary voters; McCain’s record in the Senate will play a lot better to Democrats than it does to the hard right holdouts.
Now a fair question to ask in return is why do the holdouts criticize McCain? Because I don’t accept he was the best candidate; I don’t feel he deserves the nomination, and I think he’s going to screw us royal. I didn’t stop screaming while Bill Clinton was President; I don’t plan on stopping while McCain is either. As far as keeping his feet to the fire? Um, normally a President is malleable to pressure because he feels a sense of loyalty to his party and his base. He wants his party to continue to be in power. Anyone remember Rick Santorum’s interview with Sean Hannity or Mark Levin? McCain was hardly there for the party; he could always be counted on to take the opposite side. McCain doesn’t have any loyalty to his party. His actions toward the NC GOP and his kowtowing to La Raza show he has very little concern with pleasing his base. Also, consider his age. Whether he serves 4 or 8 years, by the time he gets out, he will likely retire. So, no loyalty to the party and inevitable retirement means you will have no pressure to exert on him. Frankly I don’t think he’ll give a f**k, which is one of the reasons why I thought he was a terrible choice to begin with. How can you trust someone who holds his own voter base in obvious contempt?
austinnelly on May 8, 2008 at 9:05 PM
I’m glad you agree with my second point.
My first point was not even a point, it was simply a mention of how traditional conservative philosophy arose from Christianity.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 9:24 PM
THIS.
THIS.
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 9:28 PM
So local man is nobler and smarter than man who works for the government?
We’re constantly told that the Iraqi people will prevail over the Sadrists. Yet the Sadrists are no less Iraqi than the government troops trying to kill them.
aengus on May 8, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Patrick Briley is a Truther Loon who believes that the Israeli govt was behind 9/11.
He isn’t someone anyone should be reading.
AprilOrit on May 8, 2008 at 9:34 PM
This post is just wrong in every way.
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 9:40 PM
fossten on May 8, 2008 at 9:40 PM
What is wrong with the post?
We’re also smart enough to know the anti-immigration crowd has already lost the debate.
If Obama’s elected amnesty is a given. If McCain is elected the illegal immigrants are here to stay. The far right lost this debate. Period.
McCain winning while courting the Hispanic vote is better than McCain losing by courting the anti-immigrant vote.
This is a point of contention with those of you that think McCain is a liberal, but I have trouble taking anyone that thinks a McCain presidency would lead to as liberal a 4 years as an Obama one seriously. SCOTUS and obstructing the liberal congress makes voting for McCain worth it even if you loathe him.
Driving the immigrants into the arms of the left is a prescription for a permanent Republican minority, and no amount of kicking and fighting will change that. Hispanics are religious, pro life, pro family, pro gun, pro hard work and pro school choice. We need to bring them into the tent, not lock them out.
Hate reality all you want, but as I explained in the first point, the immigrants are here to stay. Driving them to the left helps republicans how? This isn’t a wedge issue with the center. If we cede Hispanics (and yes, they are natural conservatives) to the left NOW, we’ll never get them back. We lost the blacks in the 60s and it cost us (and them) big time. Let’s not make the same mistake again.
Patrick H on May 8, 2008 at 10:09 PM
Stewart to Obama: Will you reject and denounce Michelle?
MB4 on May 8, 2008 at 10:17 PM
Over here [me] …Over their [you]…
How about Mc on Hill…? [Missionary]
Jon Stewart thinks it’s a WINNER!
Or…Hill on Mc…? [Dominant]
One hell of a ticket…!
Question is will the Missionary submit to the DOM…?
Jon’s absolutely right…THEY COULDN’t LOSE!
J_Gocht on May 8, 2008 at 10:31 PM
Hey folks…I’m only trying to think “outside the box”!
We encourage that sort or repartee at our work place…!
Honest…
J_Gocht on May 8, 2008 at 10:50 PM
It may take an act of god. Seriously. I find it interesting that the drive-by’s continuously refer to McCain as “the presumptive Republican nominee”, but act as if Obama can’t be anything but the democrat nominee. What do they know that we don’t?
SouthernGent on May 8, 2008 at 11:18 PM
In the final analysis its our fault. But in our defense I would have to say the Rush Limbaughs (God love him) and other conservative pundits let us down. They all knew who was what at the very beginning of the nomination process. And we had some folks that would have been a lot better, like Sam Brownback or Duncan Hunter.
But I didn’t know anything about those guys and none of the conservative pundits stepped up to the plate and put there support behind them, which would have been very helpful. So I guess we got to suffer with McCain.
Maxx on May 8, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Agreed, so true.
AprilOrit on May 9, 2008 at 12:35 AM
McCain was very relaxed. This is the kind of thing that will work to his favor as we roll into November. I just wish he wasn’t such a lib.
I so wish that it could have been Thompson.
Mojave Mark on May 9, 2008 at 1:01 AM
Why does everyone thing of the Nazis are right-wing?
1) pro-abortion
2) gun control
3) big gov’t
4) no free speech or assembly
5) persecutors of right-wing Christians
jgapinoy on May 9, 2008 at 1:10 AM
thingthinkjgapinoy on May 9, 2008 at 1:10 AM
“Will you reject and denounce Obama?” is the obvious response Stewart deserves.
maverick muse on May 9, 2008 at 1:55 AM
Why are we still listening to Jon Stewart?
Bladerunner1701 on May 9, 2008 at 2:05 AM
McCain is generally conservative.
You know, President Bush is generally conservative.
And even Reagan was generally conservative.
TexasDude on May 9, 2008 at 2:46 AM
It was a Communist Party propaganda ploy to delineate the fascists from the communist ranks. The fascists built their own INDEPENDENT power infrastructure and were gaining more converts. The communists had to censor them and close the party ranks against them to prevent losing communist domination politically. The communists being LEFT named the fascists RIGHT in order to ostricize them with negative PR. However, fascism is left of center, no matter which way it is diced. That we all “know” fascism as far right simply proves how well we have digested the Communist line. NAZI-ism is Germanic fascism established upon purity of their race. Each nation’s progressive party exemplifies its own culture’s fascist flavor; none are exactly identical. Given the progressive movement through decades over the past century, fascism has denied its own reflection in the mirror. To a certain extent, American society is fascistic today, though it still wears the “democratic” mask.
maverick muse on May 9, 2008 at 2:47 AM
It’s time for McCain to hang up the “Maverick” and take on a posse. It was too staged for much comfort seeing McCain toting Fred on the “Judicial” speech. Exactly WHO ALL stands with McCain’s presidency–official advisors, Cabinet nominees, etc. Conservative leaders may think McCain is the kiss of death. That he stays a loner in the Grand Ol’ Party isn’t going to help him.
maverick muse on May 9, 2008 at 2:55 AM
Your post is wrong. Let me count the ways.
1. You refer to them as immigrants, when in fact they are illegal aliens. Until you recognize that there is a difference, your entire premise is wrong.
2. McCain courting racist groups like La Raza is a slap in the face to legal immigrants everywhere, and they know it.
3. You obviously are ignorant about the political demographics of Hispanic voters - they are NOT conservative, otherwise McCain would be better served to court his conservative base and oppose illegal immigration.
4. By “bringing them into the tent” he is locking out conservatives who genuinely fear being overrun with tens of millions of illegals who are already straining our economies to the breaking point. And yes, he is alienating his base by calling us racists and lying directly to our faces.
fossten on May 9, 2008 at 7:50 AM
“. . . Climate change. . .”
Sigh.
MrLynn on May 9, 2008 at 8:17 AM
Republicans “got” McCain this year because the social conservatives who don’t trust the senator and the economic conservatives who don’t trust the senator went their own directions and never could agree on a compromise candidate until it was too late, united behind Romney after the South Carolina primary. McCain didn’t have a huge base in the party, but he had more than the other hopefuls if only due to name recognition, and that was enough this time around.
So any anger or finger pointing needs to be accompanied by some introspection by the “Anybody but McCain” crowd, which to this day still can’t agree on who would have been the best compromise nominee. And saying they won’t vote for McCain in November because he’s is no different from Barak Obama of Hillary sounds like the whinings of a spoiled child — if you’re going to argue against McCain, at least offer up a better rational, like he’ll be so wishy-washy in office he’ll be rolled by the media and put the Republicans in an even worse position in 2012, because he’ll delay the needed reforms in the party and its leadership in Washington. But don’t say he’s the mirror image of Obama or Hillary because you’re only preaching to the converted with that explanation.
jon1979 on May 9, 2008 at 8:35 AM
I agree with your take on talk radio 100%. Conservative blogs and talk radio - the alternative media - could’ve had much more influence had they worked together (like herding cats, right?) toward a conservative agenda. Instead, they accepted the narrative as posed by Big Media - that only certain candidates were contenders and the rest were “also-rans”.
That was the epic mistake. The alternative media should NEVER have allowed the Liberal Media to define this race - and they did. They followed along - with scintillating commentary, no doubt, - but never deviated from the narrow path the Media set.
Sure, talk radio interviewed the other conservative candidates here and there, but in their everyday punditry, only the chosen few were ever accepted as (and I hate this word with a passion) “electable”.
Talk radio missed an historic opportunity to become something more than just pundits, following along with the news as the Liberal Media crafted it. Rush has since tried - but it was far too little way too late. He has always had a policy of not endorsing a candidate before the nomination - and he blew his chance to really become a driving force in a conservative surge by endorsing early, and influencing his audience of millions. Same with Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity (too busy carrying water for Giuliani), Glenn Beck (came around mid-race for Romney), and the late night guys - Levin, Savage, etc. By far, though, Rush had the most influence to spend, and he may pay for his mistake with his career - when the Fairness Doctrine passes. They all will.
Redhead Infidel on May 9, 2008 at 8:56 AM
Okay, I accept your reason for not voting for him. But I’m still not voting for him. Happy?
fossten on May 9, 2008 at 8:57 AM
I’ve since this and plenty more very rational and convincing arguments against McCain. Everywhere.
Redhead Infidel on May 9, 2008 at 8:59 AM
I’m not the one who brought up Mao. You and McCain did. McCain quoted Mao in the first video. I don’t think a Presidential candidate should do that, even in jest.
Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 9:01 AM
I don’t think that what McCain did here was respectful at all.
Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 9:04 AM
jgapinoy,
You misinterpret criticism of McCain as support for Obama. I would never in my lifetime vote for Obama.
You also make the mistake of assuming McCain is already the nominee. He’s not.
After the convention, I will support and vote for the Republican nominee as long as it is a pure Republican ticket. If there is a split Republican/Democrat ticket on our side, all bets are off. I will not vote for Democrat VP.
Don’t expect me to support McCain before the convention. And don’t tell me I’m giving aid & comfort to the enemy by not supporting a “presumptive” nominee. McCain did a good acting job in the videos above, but this is the John McCain a lot of us know:
In 2000, McCain called evangelical Christian leaders “agents of intolerance” and then later affirmed the anti-Christian views on “Hardball” with Chris Matthews, saying, “I must not and will not retract anything that I said in that speech at Virginia Beach. It was carefully crafted, it was carefully thought out.”
McCain, Clinton, and Obama all despise the “far right”.
The way McCain set up and knocked down Bill Cunningham in this election was typical underhanded McCain behavior.
The way McCain no-showed two debates in February because he didn’t want to give his competitor an opportunity to expose him (as Hillary did in her last debate with Obama), was typical underhanded McCain behavior.
Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 10:06 AM
If you believe Rush Limbaugh is having a major impact with “Operation Chaos”, then you have to assume he could have had a major impact in the Republican primary if he had picked a candidate early, in order to stop McCain from getting the nomination. But he didn’t until after South Carolina, when he and others on the right went scrambling onto the Romney bandwagon. But by then it was too late, and big media outlets were running stories for the next few weeks saying how the right wing had lost its power to influence anyone … at least until they started influencing the Democratic primary.
The fact is by splitting the vote between Romney and Huckabee, and Tancredo, and Hunter, and even to some extent with Giuliani, conservative (non-Ron Paulian) Republicans have no one else but themselves to blame for allowing McCain to slip through and get the nomination. But to say you’re going to take your ball and go home in early May on an election in early November is a little premature. McCain’s campaign may prove to be a pandering to the media train wreck that, like Bob Dole, doesn’t figure out that the press doesn’t love him any more until it’s too late. On the other hand, there may be a lot more shoes left to fall about Barak Obama and the people who support him while McCain actually does run a decent general election campaign, though everyone will have to judge for themselves if any promises McCain makes to conservatives are true or not (in the same way some conservatives thought GWB was lying in 2000 when he said he would never raise taxes, because his dad lied in 1988).
If you don’t want to vote for McCain, don’t vote for him — early voting doesn’t start for 5 1/2 months, so there’s a lot of stuff that will show up on both sides between now and then. But if you don’t like President Obama’s Supreme Court choices or his foreign policy, pointing the finger at McCain for the next four years isn’t going to make it better.
jon1979 on May 9, 2008 at 10:38 AM
I read this comment at Rachel Lucas’ and it so perfectly summed up what I’ve been saying for many, many months. I just wish I’d said it this well:
[Emph. mine]
This wraps up the entire conservative independent political identity into two kick-a$$ paragraphs.
Redhead Infidel on May 9, 2008 at 10:39 AM
Comment pages: « 1 [2] 3 »