McCain: “Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign”
posted at 3:45 pm on July 22, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
He’s said this before, I think, but expect extra media glare this time per Obama’s trip and his own comparative graciousness (real or feigned) towards Maverick last night on Nightline: “John McCain doesn’t want to see us take a wrong strategy when it comes to fighting the war on terror.” Did St. Barry doubt the wisdom of the surge on the merits, did he take the position he did because it was politically expedient, or is he just a dime-store lefty defeatist who assumes failure at every turn? The answer, per Jonah Goldberg and Tom Maguire: It probably won’t matter to McCain’s electoral chances, no matter how much it should.
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 Next »
The Democrat mainstream is not against war. They are on the other side.
Niko on July 22, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Killer video
William Amos on July 22, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Wasn’t that the guy who everyone said was gonna trounce GW? Whta was his name again?
bbz123 on July 22, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Yes, but McCain also said he would rather lose the political campaign in order to win the war, and that wasn’t helpful, either. Why can’t he win both the political campaign and the war?
BigD on July 22, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Interesting video. And excellent find on lurch’s “tar baby.”
wise_man on July 22, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Does anyone know if Obama really intends to leave a strike force in Iraq? I have heard he wants to leave thousands of Americans there to “fight AlQaida” or whatever. How many is that and what happens to them if the Iraqis are left to fend for themselves too soon?
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 3:54 PM
Right on, John. Keep it up.
jeanie on July 22, 2008 at 3:54 PM
And for all those who do not understand the difference between McCain and Obama, watch the last 30 seconds of this.
right2bright on July 22, 2008 at 3:54 PM
BigD:
Maybe he can.
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 3:54 PM
He didn’t quite say “in order to”. This is what he said:
Priorities, Win the war, first. Win my campaign, second.
And he’s seeking to win them both.
wise_man on July 22, 2008 at 3:56 PM
FINALLY; McCain tells the truth! Amazing…
Dale in Atlanta on July 22, 2008 at 3:56 PM
McCain is getting hysterical. The American people do not like that in a President.
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Lurch found a camera and an open mike. Good for him.
“Press play and give me your news”
pedestrian on July 22, 2008 at 3:59 PM
But apparently they like the idea of someone with zero executive experience in the biggest executive role on the planet. Maybe it’ll wear off by November.
Chuck Schick on July 22, 2008 at 4:00 PM
He set them up as contradictory choices. No reason to. McCain says he wants to run an honorable campaign, but what we get is a campaigns from a standpoint of defensiveness. That is, while he sometimes appropriately criticizes Obama, he never really makes a positive case for himself.
BigD on July 22, 2008 at 4:01 PM
How is that hysterical? And so they’ll take the inexperienced moron who says, “Israel is the friend of Israel” instead?
amerpundit on July 22, 2008 at 4:03 PM
I stand corrected — I heard it earlier today and didn’t quote it correctly. I didn’t like the phrase, “I would rather lose …” It doesn’t need to be either/or.
BigD on July 22, 2008 at 4:03 PM
Not even one token African-American in that clip?
carbon_footprint on July 22, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Jonah Goldberg and Tom Maguire are off the mark on this. People are not only looking at the policy on its face, they are looking at character and trust and leadership. All qualities where obama is lacking.
elduende on July 22, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Good to see you back in the fight, John……. now take the point!
Seven Percent Solution on July 22, 2008 at 4:07 PM
By the way, being a Democrat means freedom of speech. If you are a Republican, not so much.
carbon_footprint on July 22, 2008 at 4:07 PM
Agreed. He’s going to get raped this election if he looks like grumpy old warmonger and can’t articulate a good governing philosophy. He should stop trying to play the soundbite game.
ninjapirate on July 22, 2008 at 4:07 PM
Ugh, this is a bit over the top by McCain. More than a bit.
If he said Obama was more concerned with his own political future than he was concerned about winning in Iraq, that would be okay for me. And more accurate.
But to say that Obama would “rather lose the war in order to win” is both unfair and, more important it seems to me, wrong.
Not good.
SteveMG on July 22, 2008 at 4:08 PM
This will probably end up in the MSM’s Black Hole.
HarryStar on July 22, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Barry already told us why he opposed the surge: because he needed to take a political stand against Bush. He also told us that he would still oppose the surge, even knowing that it would work, for the same reason. What more does anybody need to know about this guy?
As for whether or not it will matter, I have a lot more faith in America’s voting public (or at least the majority of it) than Goldberg and Maguire. The MSM may believe the election is already over, and Barry O may already believe himself to be President, but the voters will have the final say — and I don’t believe that most of them are as stupid as Barry O and his handlers think they are.
AZCoyote on July 22, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Sorry, I’ve got to work the rest of the week – can’t spend my time counting.
Go get ‘em, Jengis.
Rick on July 22, 2008 at 4:12 PM
One of the only two USAF Wing Commanders in the Gulf War who was not promoted to General used “tar baby” in a speech to refer to how dirty the maintainers got keeping the jets flying. He was crucified and forced to retire.
Scruum.
E9RET on July 22, 2008 at 4:12 PM
Obama can blunt this argument if he comes out and admits he was wrong about the surge. This line of attack hits him where he is most vulnerable his image as a leader. Lets see him act like a leader and admit he was wrong lets see if he can overcome his arrogance, sanctimony, and sense of entitlement.
elduende on July 22, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Eh….I’ve been a doom and gloomer since McCain locked up the nom, but watching the polls lately I am beginning to think that the plebs aren’t buying what Barry is selling. Won’t be the first, or last time, I’m way off base (Fred!) but this race is far from over.
Limerick on July 22, 2008 at 4:16 PM
A Paulbot talking about hysterical, now that is hysterical.
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 4:18 PM
Indeed.
But not surprising.
SteveMG on July 22, 2008 at 4:18 PM
Are you still here?
wise_man on July 22, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Kerry used the phrase at least once several years ago without reprisal (scroll down this James Taranto column from a while back), so I think he’s been grandfathered by the PC police.
Ed Driscoll on July 22, 2008 at 4:20 PM
Steve:
I don’t think this is over the top. I think it is true. Obama’s remarks about the surge make it true. Obama has changed his position more often than some of his nutroot friends change their underwear, but the one thing he will not do is admit that he was about the surge. Screw the war.
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 4:20 PM
The message should come from RNC. McCain should keep a low profile at this point, and concentrating on getting his domestic (esp. economic) policy together.
Let the spotlight shine on Obama’s orchestrated tour, and any interesting tidbits of it.
Sir Napsalot on July 22, 2008 at 4:22 PM
Being a conservative, I have to say this – for my conscience. McCain is willing to loose the border, in order to win a political campaign. There, I typed it.
Sergei on July 22, 2008 at 4:22 PM
Tony Snow? Tar Baby? Never happened. Granted, you can have a video of Tony saying it, but the left will ignore it, they won’t bring it up.
Its only an issue if a white, rich and privileged Conservative uses it. Its a non issue when a white, rich and privileged Marxist uses it.
RobertInAustin on July 22, 2008 at 4:23 PM
Given how very important, like the most important thing in the Universe, that McCain thinks that Iraq is to America, that is very close to McCain calling Obama a sell out traitor.
American don’t like red-faced name calling at all and McCain is coming very close. If he does not watch himself, or get someone to watch him, he is going to run off the cliff.
If McCain had the sense that God gave a milk cow he would be saying that Obama was naive about how important Iraq was to America. and trying to make the case to America about how very important Iraq is to us.
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 4:23 PM
Oh, how things have changed….
Memo from McCain’s campaign, March 2008:
Of course, that just won’t work anymore. Not when Obama’s filling stadiums. The National Review spelled it out very clearly:
So we’re going to see many, many, many more negative ads before it’s all over. We’re probably not going to hear much about why McCain might be a good president anymore – just why Obama would be a bad one. Might be a way to win an election, but it’s a wretched way to run a country. Antacids, anyone?
Mal Carne on July 22, 2008 at 4:24 PM
“Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign” is an obnoxious and stupid thing to say.
McCain sounds weak and desperate. And his speaking is, how you say, inelegant. He’s not coming across well.
Dave Rywall on July 22, 2008 at 4:24 PM
You only typed what the rest of us were thinking.
RobertInAustin on July 22, 2008 at 4:24 PM
In my opinion, it’s very factual. Moveon PAC, Vote Vets, all of the liberal blogs have been screaming to abandoning Iraq to the terrorists so that Iraq will plunge again into chaos while there is still time. And then Blame Bush for the disaster. The worst news for them is a successful Iraq. Because that means that the history books will write favorably about Bush. This is something that give them nightmares.
Obama has been against the surge along with the left, and he can’t weasel his way out now. So McCain is simply capitalizing on Obama’s own situation. Democrats have always been about losing the war. Immediate removal of all troops. Maybe even the last escaping from helicopters taking off from the roof tops as hundreds attempt to climb up and escape. Yeah. That kind of loose the war.
wise_man on July 22, 2008 at 4:25 PM
Obama has changed his position more often than some of his nutroot friends change their underwear,
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 4:20 PM
Do they wear any? nudists, hippies ect are very clthing optional you know
unseen on July 22, 2008 at 4:26 PM
I can’t stand McCain, but to be quite honest its a bit refreshing to hear someone speak like that. I get so sick of all the pu$$y footing around.
RobertInAustin on July 22, 2008 at 4:26 PM
John McCain channeling some Andrew Jackson got to love it.
unseen on July 22, 2008 at 4:27 PM
This issue will come up; it just hasn’t yet. Good point, though. Cross reference to recent HA post on Newseek trying to get hold of Juan Hernandez.
BigD on July 22, 2008 at 4:28 PM
Well, I agree (I think) that Obama didn’t care how Iraq turned out. He voted against the surge because he needed to gain the support of the left in order to win the primaries against Clinton.
From that, I think it’s fair to conclude that even if he was convinced that the surge would succeed that he would have voted against it. Again: for political reasons.
But that’s different than saying he wanted to lose it in order to win his campaign.
“Wanting” to lose versus a disinterest or lack of concern.
Again, if McCain had said that Obama was more interested in his own political fortunes than the fortunes of the Iraqi people, I’d go with that.
SteveMG on July 22, 2008 at 4:28 PM
Great point McCain. But the bigger problem is that most of Girlbama’s supporters don’t care whether we win or lose in Iraq. Many would just prefer that we lose because “Amerikka deserves it.”
Therefore, he’s not going to make any headway with Barry’s supplicants. He might get through to a few in the mush middle, though.
Cicero43 on July 22, 2008 at 4:28 PM
Wise_man:
Yes, but did he oppose the surge because he wanted to lose or because he didn’t care whether we lost?
To be sure, those leftwing groups you cited like MoveOn et al. did indeed want us – more accurately, Bush – to lose.
But to accuse Obama of wanting to lose is a very serious charge. Especially when made by another candidate.
It seems to me, as I stated above, that Obama was more concerned with winning the primaries then he was concerned about winning in Iraq. He didn’t want to lose Iraq; he just didn’t care.
SteveMG on July 22, 2008 at 4:31 PM
McCain is willing to sell out the country with amnesty, so what’s the difference. Both acts are a disaster for the US, and endanger national security.
saiga on July 22, 2008 at 4:32 PM
Good – the American people need to be told by McCain that Obama will make a crappy President, since as usual, the MSM is completely in the tank for the Democrat.
If we had a media that did its job instead of shamelessly cheerleading for Democrats (and the media lifts its pretty little skirt daily for the Obama campaign), negative ads might not be necessary. Because the candidacy of an incompetent, inexperienced clown like Obama wouldn’t be happening.
McCain talks policy differences all day long and no one will notice because the media will not broadcast it and even if they do, they’ll distort it. And you place weighty policy discussions in TV ads. Just newspapers, which 5% of the population might occasionally read.
Negative ads work and are necessary because the media refuses to do its job. Blame them, not McCain.
NoDonkey on July 22, 2008 at 4:33 PM
I hate to be an MDSer, but McCain has always sounded this way when in campaign mode. He has never been positive and on offense. National security is presumably his best issue, and look at the discussion.
BigD on July 22, 2008 at 4:34 PM
saiga
Good to have the paulnuts weigh in within more original thinking.
NoDonkey on July 22, 2008 at 4:35 PM
He has said before that he would rather lose a campaign than a war, but this is the first time I have heard him say the opposite about Obama.
I wish this was the McCain that showed up more often. He must continue to fight bareknuckle and hammer Barry in order to stand a chance.
Grafted on July 22, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Peek a boo.
I’m here! To help the helpless! To befriend the friendless! And to defeat….. the … … the … … feetless!
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 4:37 PM
,
I’ll grant you that point, technically, but I don’t see a great difference between “wanted to lose the war in order to win an election”, and “being completely indifferent to the consequences of his proposed policy, which was made for political expedience.”
And I see little evidence to question the latter. His policy, as Allah has repeatedly observed, was made and is supported even now, with reckless disregard for the consequences to the soldiers, the Iraqis, and this country.
I truly believe that.
Jaibones on July 22, 2008 at 4:38 PM
I understand. In my opinion, when Obama went on the record that many years ago, while Iraq was in more violence then that it is now, removing all troops and leaving Iraq to their own destiny, as many democrats put it, knowing that US troops was the only thing in the way of the bad guys killing everyone in sight – the consequences of removing all troops would have only one effect.
And when the interviewer asked Obama, if you knew then what you did now, his hemming and hawing about, with the ‘you don’t have a crystal ball’ reply – it very disengenuine. More troops helped to make it less violent. Less troops to no troops would not in any way have brought violence down, as these bad guys were and still are intent in killing the people they hate in order to topple the government of Iraq.
We will have to agree to disagree if Obama wants to loose. In my mind, it’s very much clear, given the facts at hand.
wise_man on July 22, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Dammit, Mac stole my line! I’ll be waiting for my royalty check! (and waiting, and waiting …)
I have heard he wants to leave thousands of Americans there to “fight AlQaida” or whatever. – Terry
Yup, typical dem CinC, same thing Klinton did in Somalia, and we all know how THAT turned out.
Tony737 on July 22, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Grafted,
That was more of a mild, slobbery gumming by McCain.
Head to head, Obama puts Grandpa down in the first round…and McCain and his cronies know it.
Thank goodness McCain and his child bride have 13 houses to hide in…
alphie on July 22, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Yeah, well, Dave, elegant speaking ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. You know?
I caught about 5 minutes of Limbaugh on the way to my office today, and his engineer had put together a clip of Obama’s “uh”s, “ummm”s, and other stuttering, mumbling inanities, all from his staged interview in Iraq with the military guys. Rush says the entire tape, without a single repeat, is 8 minutes long.
He played 45 seconds and you can’t believe it’s a man who was elected to political office. If he was a college history professor, you’d drop the class and take Intro to Film Art. You have to find it…
Jaibones on July 22, 2008 at 4:42 PM
There would be greater consequences than just the deaths of Iraqis.
If we would have followed Obambi’s “plan”, US troops would have had to retreat under fire. Unless, the messiah could have talked the terrorists into accepting the Geneva Convention.
We would have had far greater casualties under Junior Jackass’ “plan”, not to mention, abandoning weapons in equipment to Al Qaeda.
Obama is a morally and intellectually bankrupt buffoon. He’s a living, breathing comic strip. Unbelievable that anyone would vote for this guy.
NoDonkey on July 22, 2008 at 4:43 PM
This is good coming from McCain, it sets things into perspective. Just wait for the debate props, McCain will go note card (with quotes) on Obama.
DanStark on July 22, 2008 at 4:43 PM
Nice. Any attack on Obama is weak and desperate, any attack on McCain is just truth telling (McCain is Bush).
I think McCain would do well to attack Obama the same way Hilary destroyed him in all the mid to later dem primaries.
Obama had clinched the nomination and people came out in record numbers to vote against him. Why?
elduende on July 22, 2008 at 4:44 PM
See above. You’re delusional. I am a McCain crony, and I’ll listen to him for an hour for every minute I have to listen to Obumbler.
Jaibones on July 22, 2008 at 4:44 PM
Yeah, Obama will win in a landslide. Just like Gore, Kerry, Mondale and Dukakis did.
Perhaps if Democrats didn’t nominate such crappy candidates, they wouldn’t have that stupid, bewildered look on their faces post election day.
But it’s a look that we all love.
And good luck with that port-o-potty crusade, you’re really onto something there.
NoDonkey on July 22, 2008 at 4:49 PM
McCain is outmatched rhetorically. Keep talking Iraq, who was on the right side of the issue there? The consequences of going into Iraq versus not going in are much more consequential than surge versus no surge. And everytime McCain wants to talk about the surge Obama can go back to the wisdom of going in. This tough guy BS is going to wear thin, Bush used that for so long that it has become a joke. Attacking candidates has never been McCain’s strong suit, being above them was, but now he is fighting from behind, considering many indicators, and the only things he has going for him is that old people vote and his opponent isn’t white. McCain act is a sad old routine that went out of style after he started kissing Bush’s behind. He jumped on the Bush bandwagon for political expediency and now he is paying for it. On the bright side, the sooner the Republican Party implodes, the sooner a small government entity can grow in its place, whether that is a Republican Party or whether the RP gets whigged and something new sprouts in its place, because currently it is a joke.
McCain 2008:
Pray for Racists
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 4:50 PM
At the rate McCain is going that would be maybe November, 2012.
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 4:51 PM
I remember when G. H. W. Bush said of Clinton/Gore, “My dog Millie knows more about foreign policy than these bozos!” I thought, “It’s over.”
I hope McCain doesn’t get any more strident than he did today. He sounded a little desperate with Viera, too.
jgapinoy on July 22, 2008 at 4:53 PM
saiga:
Oh please, McCain is not going to sell out the country with amnesty. Considering who he is running against that does not even make sense. If the Democrats win the White House and the Congress and Pelosi and Obama end up running the country just what do you think will happen with amnesty or the border or any other immigration issue. First of all, people ignore the issue for years and then blame the entire problem on John McCain and George Bush…and then half of the same people are ready to turn the government over to people that they know damn well are going to pursue a far more liberal immigration policy.
I just think that is weird.
Besides, this thread is not about immigration.
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 4:55 PM
McCain. Next question.
Which Obambi bravely opposed along with the other lunatic left Democrats of the powerful Illinois legislature. Real political courage there.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who can . . . OK, nothing more to read here, we know where this guy is coming from.
NoDonkey on July 22, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Are you sure that’s not George Armstrong Custer?
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Considering what an expert MB4 is on just about everyone and everything, it is kind of amazing that he threw his support behind a certified loon.
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Every thread is about immigration and every immigration thread is about bashing John McCain with these people.
But they’re the “real conservatives” remember.
NoDonkey on July 22, 2008 at 4:58 PM
Pray for Racists
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 4:50 PM
You must mean the 95% of blacks that will be supporting Obama because he’s black?
elduende on July 22, 2008 at 4:58 PM
I mean come on, what did Ron Paul channel? David Duke? Huey Long? LaRouche?
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 4:58 PM
No Donkey:
Well if they feel that way then they need to find a viable alternative on the right side of the aisle and stop trying to get Mr. Obama elected.
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 5:00 PM
Oh yeah that is race based voting, but that would only be a slight tick above the usual 90-10 Dem Republican split anyway. There will many more racist whites who are dems and moderates voting for McCain than the sample you are talking about. It might not sound nice to say but its true and unlike the blacks voting for Obama the racist whites have the potential in changing the outcome.
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 5:03 PM
I’m not supporting Obama if that is what you are trying to say.
By a man’s finger-nails, by his coat-sleeve, by his boots, by his trouser-knees, by the callosities of his forefinger and thumb, by his expression, by his shirt-cuff – By each of these things a man’s calling is plainly revealed. That all united should fail to enlighten the competent inquirer in any case is almost inconceivable.
- Holmes
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 5:07 PM
Does this guy ever say anything useful? Ron Paul ran this year. Back in 1994 the Republicans were running on don’t police the world and small government, and now the Republicans are making excuses why they are in the crapper when the reason is that they are policing the world and have bloated government so obviously no one that isn’t a blind hack doesn’t trust a word out of their lying mouths. And fools like you cheerlead the same people who got us into this mess. Idiots, bashing their head against a wall to cure a headache.
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 5:07 PM
It’s pretty clear the Paulbots just want everything to go wrong (and celebrate when it does as we see at this site) so that their leader can ride to the rescue of America.
The old Leninist “the worst the better” approach.
They’re not really conservatives as much as they are radicals.
Of course, a collapse of America would more likely lead to a statist government and movement and not one that will dismantle the federal government.
SteveMG on July 22, 2008 at 5:08 PM
Real conservatives that have been waiting at least fourteen years for results. Do we have to wait a lifetime? Do we have to wait 50 years? Out with it.
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 5:09 PM
alphie on July 22, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Hey alphie…
My good friend happens to be a dem operative in philly. He states one of the dems big weaknesses this year is McCain’s age and the left’s open mocking of it (and yours). He claims the dems are walking a fine line with this sort of attack because the senior citizen dems don’t like it, hence, the threat of alienating them. He claims many are already disgusted by this tactic and are leaning towards McCain. Yet, the left, in all it’s infinite wisdom, is counting on the youth vote (that never shows up in the numbers dem project).
So, encourage your pals on the left to continue your age discrimination with a bigger and louder megaphone and watch what happens.
And for the record, my lefty friend in Philly is voting for McCain and actively campaigning for him.
swami on July 22, 2008 at 5:10 PM
How will leaving Iraq in 16 months “lose the war”?
Nonfactor on July 22, 2008 at 5:13 PM
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 5:03 PM
OK. So if blacks vote according to race and its ok then I don’t see an issue with Whites doing it either right? I mean there are a large number of whites voting for Obama based on race alone according to the exit polls from the primaries (you know the condescending “articulate” Biden types)
I guess obama better hope they can find many more racists on their side to offset those racist McCain supporters.
elduende on July 22, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Oy.
SteveMG on July 22, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Obama has just told the terrorists that if he is elected, they win in 16 months. Are Americans awake?
volsense on July 22, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Good chance. But the fact that Obama isn’t up by 20 right now should worry him.
Chuck Schick on July 22, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Old people vote en masse. Most old dems think they are still voting for FDR, this year they can see the difference. The seniors come from a different time and race relations is much different with them.
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 5:23 PM
Honestly, I now believe there’s very little daylight in between Obama and McCain on Iraq anymore. The only difference is that Obama keeps repeating the number 16.
Obama’s got no more spine on Iraq than any other issue he’s sold the left out. He’ll defer to the generals or the polls in the end.
Chuck Schick on July 22, 2008 at 5:27 PM
LevStrauss on July 22, 2008 at 5:23 PM
Ok. Point taken you’re right, I live in south FL and see this here every day. I follow your reasoning now.
elduende on July 22, 2008 at 5:27 PM
The fact that either Obama or McCain is going to be the next President should worry us all.
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 5:28 PM
I’ll take care of the plutonium, you just get that Delorean up to 88.
Chuck Schick on July 22, 2008 at 5:32 PM
Well when I was “young and stupid”, not to mention somewhat drunk, I had my 68 Camero 396 up to almost 140, so I should be able to handle my part.
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 5:43 PM
I wonder how long before McCain disavows himself, and his comments, as drastically partisan and outside the discussions that we need in this nation?
Snake307 on July 22, 2008 at 6:22 PM
I try not to overuse the word “hero”, but…
Chuck Schick on July 22, 2008 at 6:29 PM
Nonfactor:
How will staying long enough to make sure the gains are not lost hurt? Why so bound and determined to cut and run? Anyway, Obama promises to be flexible so who knows what 16 months really means?
Terrye on July 22, 2008 at 6:58 PM
Yeah, Americans hate hysterics. And hyperbole.
Someone alert the WWE and Hollywood! Apparently their multi-billion dollar empires are based on teh lies because MB4 said so!
Bet they didn’t like that dummy Patton either.
flashoverride on July 22, 2008 at 7:25 PM
I can just “see” it all now.
It has come to my
joyfulattention that while I was in the middle easttrying to look Presidential, one of the most important and sensitive parts of the world, Senator John McCain publicly attacked my loyalty to the United States of America! Asthe Messiaha candidate for the highest office in our land, as a U.S. Senator and as an American citizen, I am absolutely outraged and call on him to immediatelythrow himself under a busrepudiate his slanderous remarks. This kind ofbig boost to my campaigndisgusting smear has no place in America and is especiallyhelpfuldisgusting from someone who had pledged to run a decent and issues oriented campaign.– Barack Obama (barley able to restrain his joy at having an idiot as an opponent)
MB4 on July 22, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Its amazing how Hussein is bravely asking for more troops in Afghanistan. Do the nutroots know he wants a new war? Wheres Cindy Sheehan? Everyone..go up to your favorite Lib..and ask them if they endorse Obama’s new war initiative in Afghanistan.
malkinmania on July 22, 2008 at 8:37 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »