George Will questions McCain's ability to be president.

McCain shot down fighters to defend us??

Who was attacking us? North Vietnam? I am not putting down his military service by any means. But when you sling out bullshit about him "defending us", you need to show who was attacking us.

Vietnam was a clusterfuck from day one. We had no business there. We didn't fight like we wanted to win. And there was no purpose to the entire fiasco.


I saw your name on the thread with an answer. I thought you would have a answer on what obama has done (but I know there is no answer). Answer the question please.

He is the most unqualified person we have ever had on the ticket--proove me wrong.
 
I saw your name on the thread with an answer. I thought you would have a answer on what obama has done (but I know there is no answer). Answer the question please.

He is the most unqualified person we have ever had on the ticket--proove me wrong.

I am not pro-Obama. I was talking about your "he shot down fighters defending us" bullshit.
 
Lets see how you conservatives spin this?

http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/646189.html


McCain Loses His Head

By George F. Will
Tuesday, September 23, 2008; Page A21

"The queen had only one way of settling all difficulties, great or small. 'Off with his head!' she said without even looking around."

-- "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"

Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.

Channeling his inner Queen of Hearts, John McCain furiously, and apparently without even looking around at facts, said Chris Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should be decapitated. This childish reflex provoked the Wall Street Journal to editorialize that "McCain untethered" -- disconnected from knowledge and principle -- had made a "false and deeply unfair" attack on Cox that was "unpresidential" and demonstrated that McCain "doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does."

To read the Journal's details about the depths of McCain's shallowness on the subject of Cox's chairmanship, see "McCain's Scapegoat" (Sept. 19). Then consider McCain's characteristic accusation that Cox "has betrayed the public's trust."

Perhaps an old antagonism is involved in McCain's fact-free slander. His most conspicuous economic adviser is Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who previously headed the Congressional Budget Office. There he was an impediment to conservatives, including then-Rep. Cox, who, as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, persistently tried and generally failed to enlist CBO support for "dynamic scoring" that would estimate the economic growth effects of proposed tax cuts.

In any case, McCain's smear -- that Cox "betrayed the public's trust" -- is a harbinger of a McCain presidency. For McCain, politics is always operatic, pitting people who agree with him against those who are "corrupt" or "betray the public's trust," two categories that seem to be exhaustive -- there are no other people. McCain's Manichaean worldview drove him to his signature legislative achievement, the McCain-Feingold law's restrictions on campaigning. Today, his campaign is creatively finding interstices in laws intended to restrict campaign giving and spending. (For details, see The Post of Sept. 17; and the New York Times of Sept. 19.)

By a Gresham's Law of political discourse, McCain's Queen of Hearts intervention in the opaque financial crisis overshadowed a solid conservative complaint from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, the RSC decried the improvised torrent of bailouts as a "dangerous and unmistakable precedent for the federal government both to be looked to and indeed relied upon to save private sector companies from the consequences of their poor economic decisions." This letter, listing just $650 billion of the perhaps more than $1 trillion in new federal exposures to risk, was sent while McCain's campaign, characteristically substituting vehemence for coherence, was airing an ad warning that Obama favors "massive government, billions in spending increases."

The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of capital. So, is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism. Does McCain have qualms about this, or only quarrels?

On "60 Minutes" Sunday evening, McCain, saying "this may sound a little unusual," said that he would like to replace Cox with Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York who is the son of former governor Mario Cuomo. McCain explained that Cuomo has "respect" and "prestige" and could "lend some bipartisanship." Conservatives have been warned.

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?



Okay, but Will is still going to vote for McCain once he gets in that booth.

Its a mental defect. I was watching some show where that conservative Pundit Ben Stein was saying how horrible McCain's economic policies were, and how he agreed with pretty much everything in Obama's platform.

But, when asked why he didn't just vote for Obama, he said he couldn't because McCain is pro-life.

So, his entire vote came down to some rhetoric on women's reproductive organs.
 
So, his entire vote came down to some rhetoric on women's reproductive organs.

Hasn't that been what this entire debate about Palin has been (and McCains judicial choices)? Polls first said Iraq was the number one issue then the economy. The number one issue is always abortion.
 
Okay, but Will is still going to vote for McCain once he gets in that booth.

Its a mental defect. I was watching some show where that conservative Pundit Ben Stein was saying how horrible McCain's economic policies were, and how he agreed with pretty much everything in Obama's platform.

But, when asked why he didn't just vote for Obama, he said he couldn't because McCain is pro-life.

So, his entire vote came down to some rhetoric on women's reproductive organs.
And yet Conservos will demean Libs for saying the same thing in reverse. Ben Stein is a very smart man yet his vote comes down to abortion as well. So when conservatives tell you there is SOOO much more to think about, remind them of Ben Stein, who is easily in the top .03% of Conservatives intelligence wise.
 
Hasn't that been what this entire debate about Palin has been (and McCains judicial choices)? Polls first said Iraq was the number one issue then the economy. The number one issue is always abortion.

Touche.

Everyone has some litmus test issues.

I will never, ever pull the lever for someone who denies evolution, global warming, and wants to overturn Roe v. Wade. Those are absolute bright lines in the sand I will never cross.

But, even if someone was pro-science, and pro-choice, I wouldn't blindly support them. I sure as hell wouldn't vote for Brad Pitt for president simply because he had the right position on my litmus issues.

that's what bugged me about what ben stein was saying. He fully admitted that he thinks McCain is a war monger, that McCain doesn't know what the hell he's doing on the economy, and that McCain has surrounded himself with corrupt lobbyists and cronys.

But, he still can't pull himself away from voting for McCain because of Roe v. Wade.

I don't get that.
 
Back
Top