submitter: Joe Klein - "With his 'Country First' slogans, repeated 'Obama would rather lose a war than a campaign' mantra, and no response to the Corsi smear book, John McCain has officially sold out to win the White House"

I take it that the above quote doesn't actually exist.

So in other words, McCain's like Hillary?

So now it's the responsibility of the opposing candidate to defend any competitor against false attacks from any source? If I were to insult McCain, say perhaps if I were Wesley Clark, does that mean that a failure to defend is "selling out"?

/still undecided between "none of the above" and a potential mystery, miracle, last minute candidate

azmoviez: So now it's the responsibility of the opposing candidate to defend any competitor against false attacks from any source? If I were to insult McCain, say perhaps if I were Wesley Clark, does that mean that a failure to defend is "selling out"?

Well, When Clark made his comments about McCain, Obama *did* distance himself from those comments, disavowing them.
But lets not forget though, the comments Clark made were, while somewhat snide, were at least based in the realm of fact.
Corsi on the other hand, seems to have no such limitation, and McCain's silence on the matter speaks volumes.

azmoviez: So now it's the responsibility of the opposing candidate to defend any competitor against false attacks from any source? If I were to insult McCain, say perhaps if I were Wesley Clark, does that mean that a failure to defend is "selling out"?

/still undecided between "none of the above" and a potential mystery, miracle, last minute candidate

McCain defended Kerry from the Corsi smears in 2004. In 2008, The Maverick thinks they're funny, apparently.

And yeah, the above paraphrased Klein headline is damn skippy. McCain's sold his principles right down the river.

SilentStrider: Corsi on the other hand, seems to have no such limitation, and McCain's silence on the matter speaks volumes.

Is Corsi even an official member of the GOP, let alone related to McCain's campaign in any direct way? I think Clark is far more connected to the Democratic party and either was intentionally planting those comments or foolish and rogueish. As a member of the military, I doubt Clark was the latter.

Either way, no one can or should be responsible to defend their opponent for them at all times. For McCain (who has defended Obama in the past), this might be a full time job.

robsul82: McCain defended Kerry from the Corsi smears in 2004. In 2008, The Maverick thinks they're funny, apparently.

We can all paraphrase. My interpretation of McCain's statement is that Obama should just laugh it off and not that it's funny. I can't find the actual statement, but the article was on Yahoo.

John McCain sold out the second he stepped on stage at Falwell's University. He just got progressively worse from there.

He threw every independent who backed him under his Maverick Express and backed over them a few dozen times.

azmoviez: SilentStrider: Corsi on the other hand, seems to have no such limitation, and McCain's silence on the matter speaks volumes.

Is Corsi even an official member of the GOP, let alone related to McCain's campaign in any direct way? I think Clark is far more connected to the Democratic party and either was intentionally planting those comments or foolish and rogueish. As a member of the military, I doubt Clark was the latter.

Either way, no one can or should be responsible to defend their opponent for them at all times. For McCain (who has defended Obama in the past), this might be a full time job.

robsul82: McCain defended Kerry from the Corsi smears in 2004. In 2008, The Maverick thinks they're funny, apparently.

We can all paraphrase. My interpretation of McCain's statement is that Obama should just laugh it off and not that it's funny. I can't find the actual statement, but the article was on Yahoo.

Again - 2004, McCain didn't think Kerry should laugh it off. 2008, Maverick McMaverickstein thinks Obama should laugh it off. Besides, I know whenever I say "have a sense of humor" it means "that's funny, lighten up, etc." We're not asking for McCain to defend Obama all the time - we're asking for his standards to be consistent and maybe hold up that "respectful and civil" idea by saying Corsi's a lying douchebag.

robsul82: Again - 2004, McCain didn't think Kerry should laugh it off. 2008, Maverick McMaverickstein thinks Obama should laugh it off.

Ugh. Please don't make me dig up the quote. It was essentially, "Obama should laugh it off" as in "Don't give it any extra publicity, kid". Read into it something sinister and evil if that's what you want to see in it.

A candidate should be responsible for defending themselves against attacks and their opponent should not. I can imagine that McCain more vigorously defended Kerry because it's a veteran thing, not something else. And again, they weren't in a race.

I don't imagine that I should have to help my rival in ANY way and that if I should choose to do so, they should be thankful. I can't see an instance in politics or human history where someone has helped their rival in a head to head contest. But now I guess it's "selling out".

azmoviez: So now it's the responsibility of the opposing candidate to defend any competitor against false attacks from any source? If I were to insult McCain, say perhaps if I were Wesley Clark, does that mean that a failure to defend is "selling out"?

Wesley Clark made no false attacks. He was asked a question, which he answered both honestly and accurately: Being a low-ranking officer and a POW doesn't prepare you for being the Commander-in-Chief in any way, shape or form. Anyone who has a problem with what Clark said is either an idiot or delusional.

Neeek: Anyone who has a problem with what Clark said is either an idiot or delusional.

I just wish he would go away. He was a sub-par General Officer and has no business giving political advice to anyone.

azmoviez: Either way, no one can or should be responsible to defend their opponent for them at all times.

why wouldn't you expect mccain to "defend [his] opponent"... from his own words? the "rather lose a war" rhetoric came out of his own mouth, for example.

frankly, mccain has been shockingly cavalier about slinging the mud himself and not even bothering to leave it to surrogates.

Wet start. Boom! 134 servicemen dead. Thanks, John! You f*cking maverick you!

honestly, i want someone to ask mccain one simple question at one of his campaign events. i want to know if he can look his daughter bridget in the eyes after aligning with the very people who slandered her 8 years ago.

NewportBarGuy: John McCain sold out the second he stepped on stage at Falwell's University. He just got progressively worse from there.

He threw every independent who backed him under his Maverick Express and backed over them a few dozen times.

I just wanna throw the "thrown under the bus" meme under the bus for awhile. Jesus.

Neeek: Wesley Clark made no false attacks. He was asked a question, which he answered both honestly and accurately: Being a low-ranking officer and a POW doesn't prepare you for being the Commander-in-Chief in any way, shape or form.

Coming from someone who's never been Commander in Chief himself. Again it's just an opinion. But it really seemed to be designed, or egotism that he held a higher rank but never rose to be considered as a candidate. Either military experience counts or it doesn't. Come right out and say it, Wesley.

burndtdan: frankly, mccain has been shockingly cavalier about slinging the mud himself and not even bothering to leave it to surrogates.

I'll agree that McCain hasn't lived up to his promise as running a 100% clean campaign, but he really shouldn't be responsible for defending his rival.

Again, I'd rather not vote for either of them, but I'd think that a candidate should be responsible for defending their own image and not to rely on the other candidate to fight their battles.

Doesn't Obama have a rebuttal already on his website and a PR dept. that's fully capably of defending this?

azmoviez: Coming from someone who's never been Commander in Chief himself. Again it's just an opinion. But it really seemed to be designed, or egotism that he held a higher rank but never rose to be considered as a candidate. Either military experience counts or it doesn't. Come right out and say it, Wesley.

Being a General or Admiral and dealing with large-scale military operations that involve considerable diplomatic ramifications is not equatable with being a junior grade officer. Suggesting that "military experience count or it doesn't" is as ridiculous as saying running a McDonald's location is the same as being CEO of McDonalds.

azmoviez: robsul82: Again - 2004, McCain didn't think Kerry should laugh it off. 2008, Maverick McMaverickstein thinks Obama should laugh it off.

Ugh. Please don't make me dig up the quote. It was essentially, "Obama should laugh it off" as in "Don't give it any extra publicity, kid". Read into it something sinister and evil if that's what you want to see in it.

A candidate should be responsible for defending themselves against attacks and their opponent should not. I can imagine that McCain more vigorously defended Kerry because it's a veteran thing, not something else. And again, they weren't in a race.

I don't imagine that I should have to help my rival in ANY way and that if I should choose to do so, they should be thankful. I can't see an instance in politics or human history where someone has helped their rival in a head to head contest. But now I guess it's "selling out".

It's not about being responsible. It's about being decent enough not to want to win that way. Why was Kerry worth the defending and not Obama? The answer is not very Maverickian at all, I'm afraid.

azmoviez: Doesn't Obama have a rebuttal already on his website and a PR dept. that's fully capably of defending this?

Obama's problem is that the "liberal media" gives these things attention during prime-time.. while his rebuttal only ends up on DailyKos.

Neeek: Being a General or Admiral and dealing with large-scale military operations that involve considerable diplomatic ramifications is not equatable with being a junior grade officer. Suggesting that "military experience count or it doesn't" is as ridiculous as saying running a McDonald's location is the same as being CEO of McDonalds.

So he was opposed to Kerry and Gore right? Neither of them were Admiral or General last time I checked.

To paraphrase, I know that he implied that being a POW doesn't automatically make you a military expert. But does it help your Commander in Chief experience if you were actually a part of the military and know the system, policies?

This was skillfully and probably intentionally avoided when he spoke out on that considering Obama didn't serve.

His statement was designed to debunk McCain's experience and Obama's lack of experience with the military.

Again, I would love to ask Wesley what he thinks that ANY military experience brings to the table and watch him squirm to tow the party line.

Either way I don't give a shiat, but it's the same type of proxy slur that Democrats pretend aren't lobbed all the time.

Both candidates are the same shade of bullshiat and it doesn't matter who we vote for in a few months. I wish people would wake up to realize that because McCain isn't ideal, it doesn't mean that Obama is infallible.

dameron:
I take it that the above quote doesn't actually exist.

, this, considering the topic at hand.

robsul82: It's not about being responsible. It's about being decent enough not to want to win that way. Why was Kerry worth the defending and not Obama? The answer is not very Maverickian at all, I'm afraid.

I'm not here to tell you that you are wrong about decency.

I'm here to tell you to apply the same standard to Obama. When you are looking for change and it doesn't happen, when you are looking for "not Bush policies" and it doesn't happen, when you are looking for new ideas and they are really old ideas, you should re-consider.

I'm not pro-McCain. I'm not pro-Obama. Both are shiat candidates and I wish more people would wake up that both (neither) are acceptable.

I don't have an alternative but they are both crap.

azmoviez: But does it help your Commander in Chief experience if you were actually a part of the military and know the system, policies?


Considering that all of the best Commanders-in-Chief in US history were never in of the military, I'd suggest the answer to that is "no"

Neeek: Considering that all of the best Commanders-in-Chief in US history were never in of the military, I'd suggest the answer to that is "no"

So I guess you are calling all of these people worthless right:

Link (pops of course)

azmoviez: Neeek: Considering that all of the best Commanders-in-Chief in US history were never in of the military, I'd suggest the answer to that is "no"

So I guess you are calling all of these people worthless right:

Link (pops of course)

No, I'm saying that their military experience has absolutely nothing to with their ability to lead as President. Certainly recently, not having military experience seems to be a boon for governence.

azmoviez:
So I guess you are calling all of these people worthless right:


Considering that list is of all presidents, and doesn't have any listings of their performance as CIC, I'd guess a cool, gentle breeze of FAIL just blew in....

azmoviez: robsul82: It's not about being responsible. It's about being decent enough not to want to win that way. Why was Kerry worth the defending and not Obama? The answer is not very Maverickian at all, I'm afraid.

I'm not here to tell you that you are wrong about decency.

I'm here to tell you to apply the same standard to Obama. When you are looking for change and it doesn't happen, when you are looking for "not Bush policies" and it doesn't happen, when you are looking for new ideas and they are really old ideas, you should re-consider.

I'm not pro-McCain. I'm not pro-Obama. Both are shiat candidates and I wish more people would wake up that both (neither) are acceptable.

I don't have an alternative but they are both crap.

Yes, I know, everybody sucks equally, but McCain gets a pass on holding different opinions of the literary work of Jerome Corsi depending on whether McCain's the presidential nominee. We've got a term for that around these parts. And I know you're not here to tell me I'm wrong about decency because you can't, because I'm not. The Maverick sold the fark out when he realized he was getting too old for this shiat and only had one shot at the Oval Office left, and this hypocritical bullshiat is only the latest example. Point blank and period, that's all it is. And considering it's Joe Klein who's saying it, and the absolutely laudatory things he's written about McCain in the past, it's good to see. Maybe the rest of the donut serving sycophants in McCain's "base" will start waking the fark up, who knows.

I haven't decided yet who I'm going to endorse, but it won't be McCain, and it won't be Obama. I won't feed the sickness.

Neeek: Considering that all of the best Commanders-in-Chief in US history were never in of the military, I'd suggest the answer to that is "no"

I don't think you can say something as stupid as that without naming the Presidents you think you're talking about.

Neeek: Considering that all of the best Commanders-in-Chief in US history were never in of the military, I'd suggest the answer to that is "no"

With his campaign's deep $$$$ ties to Georgia and his own irresponsible ravings one has to question exactly which country is McCain putting first?

azmoviez: I'll agree that McCain hasn't lived up to his promise as running a 100% clean campaign, but he really shouldn't be responsible for defending his rival.

It is not that he is not running a 100% clean campaign. It is that so far it has been 95% about smearing Obama. It is sad really.

azmoviez: So now it's the responsibility of the opposing candidate to defend any competitor against false attacks from any source? If I were to insult McCain, say perhaps if I were Wesley Clark, does that mean that a failure to defend is "selling out"?

the "Obama wants to lose the war to win an election"
and "Obama doesn't put country first" are directly from the horse's mouth.
the same mouth that decried these tactics when Bush did it to him in 2000. He went out and hired the people who smeared his family.
He's attacked Obama for being presumptuous for visiting with foreign leaders yet has his own dealings (where a lot of money is changing hands) with foreign leaders and acting as though he's the farking president sending personal envoys and Bush doesn't utter a peep.
If Obama had done this they would have crucified him.

*spit* this is as blatant an example of media bias you can have.

when the guy who wrote a book about McCain debuted his book he got zero attention from the media.

wake up people. your vote is being manipulated by the corporations.

Clark said absolutely NOTHING wrong.

He preceded his statement by giving a glowing, gushing praise of McCain's military service.

He then said, absolutely truthfully, that being shot down and held prisoner does NOT qualify you to be Commander in Chief. That doesn't mean that it doesn't give *some* perspective, but it doesn't automatically qualify you.

If I get mugged and stabbed, does that somehow qualify me to be a police captain?

NewportBarGuy: John McCain sold out the second he stepped on stage at Falwell's University. He just got progressively worse from there.

He threw every independent who backed him under his Maverick Express and backed over them a few dozen times.

ZACTLY

All this and more in the latest issue of Duh Magazine!

What's funny is that anybody thinks McCain had anything to sell out.

Principles? John McCain?

The appearance of principles does not mean said principles actually exist.

Clark: Let's face it, being shot down and taken prisoner does not qualify you to be Commander in Chief.

US Media: OMGWTF, how dare you question his patriotism?

Obama: I will not tolerate anyone who questions John McCain's patriotism. I know John McCain, he is an honorable man. Obviously I disagree with many of his policies.

At this point, I will certainly support Obama. I would have supported any Democrat that won the primary.

I think that this is a defining moment in our country. The choice between the two candidates is obvious and no choice at all. Barack Obama is better than John McCain in almost any metric that you can measure. The question is whether or not enough people in this country can get past the fact that he is an African American.

I am not saying that everyone who votes for McCain is racist, but I am saying that there are enough people who would have an easier time voting for Obama if he were white.

If McCain wins, we will certainly get what we deserve.

flaEsq: With his campaign's deep $$$$ ties to Georgia and his own irresponsible ravings one has to question exactly which country is McCain putting first?

didn't you hear, we are all georgians

snkliquid: If McCain wins, we will certainly get what we deserve.the fark out of the hemisphere

i'll go teach english in asia for 4 years or something

if mccain wins these are going to be the low points of american existence, if not the end points

Neeek: azmoviez: So now it's the responsibility of the opposing candidate to defend any competitor against false attacks from any source? If I were to insult McCain, say perhaps if I were Wesley Clark, does that mean that a failure to defend is "selling out"?

Wesley Clark made no false attacks. He was asked a question, which he answered both honestly and accurately: Being a low-ranking officer and a POW doesn't prepare you for being the Commander-in-Chief in any way, shape or form. Anyone who has a problem with what Clark said is either an idiot or delusional.

I don't think Clark was referring to whether it prepares you or not. He was saying it was not a qualification for being President, like people try to make it seem. You know, like "35 or older" or "naturalized citizen".

azmoviez: So now it's the responsibility of the opposing candidate to defend any competitor against false attacks from any source? If I were to insult McCain, say perhaps if I were Wesley Clark, does that mean that a failure to defend is "selling out"?

/still undecided between "none of the above" and a potential mystery, miracle, last minute candidate

I, for one, am shocked that you pointed out how independent you were in your Boobies before going on to defend McCain for another 5 posts in this short thread. God forbid someone call him on being such a douchebag.

If you honestly think Obama would remain quiet if a bestseller was released full of lies about mccain, you are deluding yourself.

SilentStrider: So in other words, McCain's like Hillary?

Or like Obama or almost any toher politician you canmention. Yes, even Obama or has his pandering and flip flops gone unoticed?

azmoviez: and a potential mystery, miracle, last minute candidate

Oh god please let it be Bloomberg.

lolmadillo: flaEsq: With his campaign's deep $$$$ ties to Georgia and his own irresponsible ravings one has to question exactly which country is McCain putting first?

didn't you hear, we are all georgians

I hear the Georgians are infested with the "BigFoots!"

Trap-Door Spider: stebain: Being a low-ranking officer and a POW doesn't prepare you for being the Commander-in-Chief in any way, shape or form. Anyone who has a problem with what Clark said is either an idiot or delusional.


In the last election cycle, the left made the central issue John Kerry's three months of Vietnam service (as contrasted to George Bush's service in the National Guard).

Democrats made the entire election about Vietnam service. At the convention, Kerry 'reported for duty'. Dan Rather's forged 'surprise' was designed to help close Vietnam-service sale.

Therefore, by your logic, anyone in the democrat party in 2004 was either an idiot or delusional.

Dear dipshiat, why don't you learn how to read quotes. Please don't attribute things to me that I did not say.
Thanks.
Love, all the normal people.

Trap-Door Spider:
Therefore, by your logic, anyone in the democrat party in 2004 was either an idiot or delusional.

Hell, I'll even address your point, even though it retorts nothing I have said.

The Democrats in '04 weren't saying that you had to have military service in order to be president. How does that differ from whatever it was that neeek was saying?

Jeremy Bates: McCain will win because Americans will not be able to bring themselves to vote in a negro. Furthermore, Americans will deserve the suffering they will endure under McCain's reign.

What's sad id that I can see this happening, despite Obama's lead in seven different elecoral polls:

Election Projection (298-240)
E-V (275-250, 13 ties)
Karl Rove (260-194, 84 toss up)
538 (288-250)
270 (217-163, 158 undecided)
RCP (228-163, 147 toss up)
Pollster (284-169, 85 toss up)

He's got a plurality in all of them and a victory in four of them. Of course, it's still 2 and a half months until the election, polls this early are meaningless, etc. Take these numbers with a grain of salt, no matter who you intend to vote for.

__________________

burndtdan: his daughter bridget

Must... resist... urge... to....



....could not resist.