Login HereA number of people have noted that McCain is now trying to give Jim Webb the same treatment he has given General Clark.
If you didn't think this was a coordinated attack on John McCain's credentials before, it's clear now that it is. Barack Obama's surrogates are telling the McCain campaign to "calm down" about attacks on his military record? Seriously? Now somehow Wes Clark's attacks are John McCain's fault? It's absurd. If Barack Obama can't control his own surrogate operation, how can he be trusted to run the country?
I would respond to McCain's baseless attack on Webb by noting that someone in McCain's camp must be making a panicked effort to inoculate himself against any questions that getting shot out of an airplane doesn't automatically qualify you to be President.
But it's more than that, isn't it?
This attack on Webb (and Clark, for that matter) comes right on the heels of one of McCain's most cynical moves--out of many cynical moves--thus far this campaign season. After opposing Jim Webb's GI Bill (mostly because he thought it was generous enough that it might make it harder to keep people in the military because they don't have better options and because they can't get an education), Bush and McCain have been claiming credit for Webb's GI Bill.
Yesterday, House leaders in both parties struck a deal on a war supplemental bill that includes expanded college benefits for veterans. The GI Bill is Sen. Jim Webb’s (D-VA) version, as well as a provision allowing troops to transfer the benefits to family members. President Bush has promised to sign the legislation.
Now, however, Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) — the two most vocal opponents of Webb’s bill — are trying to take credit for it. They are claiming that they always supported the generous benefits — their main concern was just ensuring the benefits’ transferability:
At a time when (if we were really good at our jobs) we would be attacking McCain for opposing veteran benefits, he has, instead, turned and starting attacking Webb. Presumably, at least in part, to prevent any attacks on him for his cynical stance on the GI Bill.
Me, I've never served. I respect all three men--Clark, Webb, and McCain--for having done so. Like John Cole, I think not every fighter pilot would make a good President.
But even as a DFH civilian, I feel qualified to make one judgment. John McCain was wrong--badly wrong--when he opposed a good GI Bill for the men and women who are serving in Bush's wars.
And that's what we ought to be talking about.
Update: working on changing my phrasing--help welcome.
Share This 
Spotlight
This made me laugh.
“harder to keep cannon fodder in the military.”
I hate to see this. This election, we have a chance to bring veterans and active duty to the Democratic party. Servicemen and women join for many reasons, none of which is to be “cannon fodder.”
How about:
“harder to keep servicemen and women in the military.”
It does me, too, except that these attacks have been successful at:
1) getting McCain’s military service back into the news
2) inoculating him against a really stupid vote
3) moving the topic away from McCain’s inability to control his own lobbyist/staffers
I’m happy to change it, but that doesn’t describe McCain’s logic. What McCain wants is people to remain in the miltiary (because they have no better options) AND to remain less educated.
So I’m happy to change it–I was “quoting” what McCain and Bush are looking for. But I’d like it to communicate what McCain’s thinking.
And, significantly, not to mention that being the worst pilot in the Navy really doesn’t qualify you to be President.
(because it “over-generously” gave servicemen options besides reenlistment)?
Sen. John McCain opposed updating the GI Bill for the same reason company executives oppose labor unions. It’s to keep ‘em [insert group] dependent and to avoid any restriction on the leadership’s power. I also think it was because Bush opposed it, while spending billions to implement a missile defense [sic] system that hasn’t been shown to work yet.
McCain’s opposition wasn’t about money. This war’s supporters spend billions by the pallet-load to promote war without ever accounting for it. (Pretty much how George Bush has always dealt with other people’s money.) The several months it would take to withdraw troops and mercenaries from Iraq in an orderly fashion would cost far more. McCain’s opposition wasn’t about retaining the best of the best. The studies McCain failed to cite predict that providing updated GI benefits would enhance overall recruitment and retention, especially as other sources for financing college dry up as its costs escalate. McCain’s opposition wasn’t even about a principle he cared much about. He missed the vote on this bill, just as he’s missed more than two-thirds of all his votes this year - something the good citizens of Arizona should remember when it comes time to renew his license to inhabit the Senate.
That Bush would claim credit for a bill he fought hard to kill is not surprising: it’s a signature method of his administration. Every public service group Bush has shared a photo-op with knew that it was a prelude to Bush cutting their funding. What is surprising is that McCain is so bad at emulating that hypocrisy. It’s as if he doesn’t take it very seriously and so doesn’t try very hard. (Perhaps that’s the bottom line in those military performance appraisals McCain continues to hide.) Maybe his shtick doesn’t work because he’s not President and the Goopers have falsely cried “Wolf!” too many times.
What about Obama? Will he pause for a moment in his 100 meter dash to the “center” to defend Webb and this bill — and expose a deeply cynical and hypocritical opponent who is fighting him with all he’s got — in order to praise doing the right thing? For a leader, that would be an easy call. That’s really the across the board question about Obama, an an observation made by Andrew Bacevich earlier today:
http://www.boston.com/bostongl.....h_wrought/
I don’t remember the exact words, but I saw the McCain statement and he was directly contemptuous of the bill for the specific and blatantly stated reason that it would encourage them to get an education as opposed to staying in the Army where “we need them”. It was pretty despicable.
i think you are serving EW .. when you stick up for the constitution .. when you rage against actions which belie our ideals and history as a nation .. yeah verily ..those who sit and type may also be patriots as well ..
i served also .. and i say you’re serving now .. in a different way perhaps .. but it’s a vital service nonetheless ..
Adding to the ’surrogate’ side of this:
Lanny Davis has shown up on Faux, attacking Clark. (from TPM)
(As if we needed any more evidence that he isn’t a Democrat.)
Damn, I can’t wait for the debates. If Obama doesn’t bludgeon McCane with this…
I can get on board with “let’s attack Mcsame for not supporting the troops”.
That’s probably the most powerful soundbite and does a complete discredit to the notion that his military status as pow somehow gives him an advantage.
Now if I were really evil, I might argue that his pow status might cause him to invalidate the suffering of others. (as a symptom of ptsd).
But that would be too rovian even for me.
He should start the bludgeoning now!! Instead of arguing about what mcsame said he should take control of the content and shift it. He who controls the discussion wins the debate.
Shift little obama shift. Don’t even discuss the issue simply say “You know we can’t prove or disprove Clarks assertion, however, let’s take a look at some facts about who is leading the support for these troops.” Who’s the leader? Who is supporting them. Who is making sure that your sons and daughters who risk their lives daily are being taken care of?
It’s not mcsame. (aka bushco)
The increasingly large MSM pile on Gen. Clark could really backfire, & soon- a lot of retired military officers have great respect for Clark, know him personally, & can start popping up on tv & in print themselves to defend him.
I’d give my opinion of Davis, but I promised my daughter not to swear anymore today “in that extreme manner you do when you get worked up. Mom.”
Can think it though…
My concern is that Obama has mistaken the Jim Lehrer/Bobo Brooks version of “polite gentlemanly conduct” for Bill Moyers’ gracious but articulate disdain for the indefensible.
There is no “center” for Obama to run to. Those who think he’s “uppity” or a DFH will never vote for him. Those who might, or who might stay home, expect him to articulate what Main Street is saying about Bush and McCain’s hypocrisy. Hypocrisy about whose interests they’re protecting. Hypocrisy about “supporting” our men and women in uniform while keeping them poor and subjecting them, their families and communities to multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hypocrisy about “defending us from harm” while shredding our Constitution and allowing his profiteering friends to grow as fat as their cartoon caricatures.
Now those would be truly bipartisan issues that most of America would back him on, even the ones who can’t bring themselves to vote for him, but who would accept him as their President.
Absolutely.
OT - Maher Arar’s lawsuit for the DOJ engineered shipment to torture: Tossed out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07.....ref=slogin
Go have a Pepsi and celebrate.
Maybe Obama can add to his Patriotism speech, a little blurb about how we are all safer when a President and the Dept of Justice can arrange a little extraterritorial torture for Canadians to keep a frat boy entertained.
Or not.
i’m surpised to learn JFK int’l isn’t part of the U.S. of A.
this is ..imo ..a pathetic ruling …
I loved this headline on TPM:
Nobody gets pissed off more than a hothead being told to “Calm Down” - and Webb knows it, being a hothead himself.
& can start popping up on tv & in print themselves to defend him
True, but then the problem is the TV itself. From what we’ve seen so far, does it look like the MSM would like this (or any other) drummed-up controversy to die or be smacked down for the bullshit that it is?
McCain should know a lot better than to keep coming up with this kind of crap every opportunity he gets. But then, this is all he’s got. His strategy seems to be to whine and moan about every non-flattering comment made by anyone, and try to confuse enough voters into voting for him.
His political record is indefensible, so the only thing he can do is attack. And the MSM (can we say McCain-Smitten-Media?) never fails to provide cover fire.
OT-
I don’t know what to say. Hope EW will be there to ask the questions…
McCain Smitten Media- I think that one’s got legs. Mind if I crib it?
Ahhh, Rove tactics at work:
1) Project your shortcomings onto your opponent;
2) Take credit for your opponent’s achievements/strengths;
3) Divert attention from substantive issues to bright, shiny objects, especially if they can be shortened into bumper-sticker slogans.
4) When all else fails, lie — in its many forms.
Wow, dangerous to land in JFK if you are a canadian…since it’s not technically in the USA.
Does that sound completely lame to neo cons or do they just think “whew” thank god the courts support us?”
How can anyone hear that opinion and not know that it’s our gov’t trying to cover for a horrendous mistake. What the hell kind of human beings can defend this stuff and sleep at night?
I just don’t get it.
I recommend we get a list of all the other pilots shot down over Vietnam, including McCain, and then start asking, “Are all these men equally qualified to be president?”
Bob in HI
I don’t think McCain was that great a fighter pilot.
According to the Globule, he ditched four or five planes, I think.
Teddy Ballgame was much better…
“What the hell kind of human beings can defend this stuff and sleep at night?”
The same kind that end up with top DOJ appointments and then head on ivy league teaching slots or pricey corporate counsel slots.
Fucking Cheney should be arrested when he touches down.. what does he know about the Fourth?
http://www.boston.com/news/loc.....to_vi.html
Today Obama’s saying that Clark’s remarks were ‘inartful’.
Whatever that means.
(At least he hasn’t apologized for them. Yet.)
I thought the same thing — the Webb attack is to take the focus off the dishonest grabbing of credit. I like the fact that Webb is responding by keeping the focus on the problem of politicizing the military — it’s good when you can both be substantively right and put your opponent on the defensive.
Last OT comment -
What this ruling really does:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/.....fer=canada
is make that little problem on GITMO a whole lot easier to solve. Parhat can be shipped off to China with no problems.
I guess I better put on my big girl pants, but your response did not make me feel any better.
We talked a bit about this yesterday a few threads back (EW has been active today) …
To my amateur mind, the two-person majority (three-judge panel, one dissenting) are saying that there is nothing beyond due-process rights for American citizens under the U.S. Constitution. (And apparently, there’s a small window for visitors legally admitted, as Arar was not when he was trying to switch planes.)
When I say “nothing beyond,” I mean that the judges seem not to have considered international law or what the rest of us call human rights. It’s as though they don’t believe those things exist. Or to put it another way, they are authorizing your government to treat all non-citizens as though they had no human rights at all.
To any other Canucks around, happy Dominion Day (if you’re over 55), Canada Day (if you’re a Young Liberal), Memorial Day (if you’re in Newfoundland), and/or Moving Day (if you’re in Quebec).
We did receive one great gift today: Dr Henry Morgentaler has been named to the Order of Canada, over the shrieks of the usual suspects. He didn’t do it alone, but in the 1970s Dr Morgentaler played a role no one else could have in helping women to win reproductive freedom here. Everyone I know is in tears of joy at this news.
Matt Mahurin is suggesting (very seriously) that none of these clown touch down anywhere outside of the US.
He goes on to say:
Congratulations!
Bearden, Mahurin is the illustrator.
Thanx for relaying this wonderful news, skdadl. Remember Dr. Morgentaler well. That’s what I get for not reading the CBC site today.
Key moments in Morgentaler’s career, via the G&M:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....tory/Front
Mind if I crib it?
Of course I don’t mind!
I think the problem is, precisely, that JFK is in the U.S. (mostly), so to get from a Swiss flight to a Canadian one, Arar had to be admitted to and pass through U.S. territoire … and that’s how they got him.
The territorial thing is odd. At Pearson Int’l here, we have pre-clearance for U.S. flights, which means that when you step through that gate, you are on U.S. territoire even though you’re still in Toronto, and those agents have got you if they want you. There are stories.
And to Loo Hoo @ 37 — thanks. We still have battles going on — in some ways, things are getting worse. But it is great to have one success like this.
Heh. Marie, we all started watching for an announcement yesterday because the fetishists, who must have a mole in the government (ha!), began wailing on the weekend that Dr Henry was going to be honoured. These things are not supposed to be announced in advance, so we couldn’t figure out whether it was true or not. The GG’s list only came out about noon EDT, so people are still jumping up and down.
Yeah, you’d think that it was one of McCain’s strategists that sent Clark out there!
I have the same sense.
This suggests how deeply Gen. Clark’s remark ‘hit home’ with the McCain supporters. (FWIW, Clark seemed like he was speaking like a military strategist, which is presumably what he was paid to do all those years, which makes the McCain yelping all the more interesting.)
It’ll be interesting to see what the vets say when they chime in.
But Webb’s point that people don’t serve because they’re Dems or Repub’s is long overdue and needs a lot more repetition IMHO.
VoteVets have chimed in.
Hey, just saw a poll of Canadians. Asked who their favorite politicians were, it was in this order: Obama, Harper, Hillary Clinton. I think the percentages were 26, 19, 16. Hillary was within the margin of error of Harper, and Obama ahead by more than margin of error. Yikes!
i can’t believe harper scored better then hillary…
This from Think Progress:
I guess that means Obama will be adopting even more Gooper positions, and thumbing his nose even more at progressives in the process, so he can try to get that good Bush money.
Don’t despair, bmaz, John McCain scored 3%. The same poll found that 82% of Canucks (well, 1,000 of us) thought that the invasion of Iraq was the wrong decision (compared with 54% of Americans), while 12% of us thought it was the right decision(I’m guessing that these are in Alberta)compared with 40% in the US.
McCain was at the center of a lot of fuckups.
Too bad all his good luck charms don’t work for his fellow service men.
I always thought the successful pilots were the ones that WEREN’T shot down. Silly me.
If Harper had been PM in 2003, we’d be in Iraq and Arar would still be in Syria (if still alive). I wish those 82 per centers could make the connection between those horrors and Harper before they vote next time.
ditto… thank the hapless canwest global and etc, for the continued miasma.
Happy Canada Day!! Dominion Day for me went out with the Red Ensign, being the good Young Liberal that I was! Remember, Harper is fighting the 35% strategy, as long as the remaining 65% is split the right way among the Liberals, NDP and Bloc and Greens, he wins, although a majority is still hard to see. Hence Dion moving on the Carbon Tax, looking for NDP and Green votes - he only needs another 5% or so, and a Liberal minority is a far better thing for the country with NDP/Green support than the Mike Harris retreads with Harper….
McCain is trying to diminish the credibility of both Clark and Webb as Democrats with real credibility on military issues, who share progressive and populist economic positions. As a bonus, both are damaged as VP prospects (although I would prefer Clark by far, Webb has some baggage in his books, his Confederate statements, etc.). I don’t really understand Obama so far in the general - he cannot innoculate himself against the inevitable attacks by triangulating on them. For all he has pandered this week, there was a poll on CNN this afternoon on how “patriotic” the candidates were - naturally, McCain was a super Patriot, Obama not so much. Why would any “news” organization run a poll on this “issue”? i know, I know….
Well, I know the grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence, but things looked fairly stable and sound up there last summer when I visited. I know you have issues with Harper etc., but I was struck by the decency and informed state of almost all of the people I encountered, as well as the way the public things seemed to be not as neglected as here. Keep after it though, it doesn’t take long to put your country in the shitter; seven years zooms by in the process.
McCain is now demanding that Obama cut Clark loose and end all association. I predict Obama will publicly refuse and privately do just about that; i.e. Clark will be quietly taken out of play. Cause we always have to play by their rules and with their framing….
Exactly. All the effective Democratic voices are being attacked, Clark, Webb, Bill Clinton, soon it will be Hillary’s turn again. Perhaps Obama wants this to happen, but I can’t see it being effective for the election. This is right out of Nixonland…….divide and conquer the Democrats.
And when St. John makes his next demand for someone to be “cut loose,” perhaps Webb, what then?
And the time after that & after that…
Booyah ;-))
Thx for the link!
Great news:
Rosenberg reports no group kangaroo trial, and mental health exams.
This will slow down the show.
http://www.miamiherald.com/gua.....90247.html
Article with links documenting the actions and stated positions of various popinjays, hodcarriers, and reprobates with regard to the new GI Bill.
Update: working on changing my phrasing–help welcome.
here’s a hint, don’t change a thing
some days you gotta slap em in the face to get their attention
I don’t think the phrasing on a single blog in the innertubes is gonna have that much affect
when you think about all the other stuff that our soldiers have to worry about, I don’t think ew is gonna cause all that much resentment
Wow, it’s interesting to follow this later in the day as it plays out.
No idea what’s happening on Faux, but it’s the first time anyone has called b.s. on McCain’s qualifications while at the same time respecting his service.
FWIW, this is long overdue. Clark is talking about JUDGMENT. Not about ‘patriotism’.
It’s sure interesting to see how loudly the GOP bleats when the frame shifts to j-u-d-g-m-e-n-t.
hey, hod carrying is an honorable occupation
don’t blame hod carriers for what the popinjays and the reprobates did
I been a hod carrier before, and it’s hard fucking work …
Yes. I had an Obama event at my house Saturday with 27 people. Everyone was pissed about his position on FISA, and I let the campaign know about that….a Constitutional lawyer? Help us.
when ???
I kinda think we’re there
are you sayin the repuglitards can throw a BIGGER hissy fit ???
Someone should tell McSame that guys who finish at (or damned close to) the bottom of their class at Annapolis aren’t exactly shining examples of competence. Especially when compared to someone who is, say, on the Harvard Law Review, and didn’t get there based on their father or their grandfather.
Hell, yes, I think McCain is overrated.
Probably the closest 5 deferment Cheney has ever been to a re-enlistment proceeding.
Why should he do Mc(In)Sane’s bidding? He’ll be really dumb if he does.
Instead, he should take a page from Rove’s playbook and attack attack ATTACK! Besides, I think Clark should be his VP.
The real reason McInSane’s knickers are in a twist about this is that he FEARS Clark as Obama’s running mate, and is trying to take him out early, to prevent that.
Bob in HI
With apologies if this is repetitious:
Seems the reason Rove has instructed the campers to get up-in-arms over Wesley Clark’s comments is because they see him as a strong VP possibility, one whose own military record would out-match Sen. McCain’s.
If they can make Clark look like a chump, then they’ll be a step ahead of the game should Sen. Obama name Clark his running mate.
Ahhh, Mr. Rove, your trademark has become so transparent that it’s way too easy to nail your strategy.
OK, a simple look at the comment directly above mine would’ve saved the repetition. My bad.
(To my credit, I did a “find” on vice president.
Sorry, bobschact.
It will slow things down, but as I read that report I don’t think it quite means no group trial … yet — it sounds as though there are just going to be individual hearings to discover whether any of the defendants was intimidated by KSM into rejecting counsel.
Anyway, hallelujah. I like to think that more than a few judges are looking over their shoulders and wondering what might catch up with them if they don’t stand up for the law.
Webb is riding high. The popular GI Bill is his baby. Great political metrics. Webb has Republican street cred. He was St. Reagan’s Navy Secretary.
I prefer liberals like Kucinich. Military guys don’t impress me, but low info voters would certainly prefer Webb over Clark.
Clark did some warmongering speechifying in the recent past that made me cringe.
astrologically biden is the best running mate for obama. not sure what his draw backs are…
But yours was such a *nice* echo! Thanks!
Bob in HI
Hacks, too, are marvelous craftsfolk, so long as the chopping of wood is what’s at issue.
Perhaps you can tell I’ve had quite enough. Back to silence.
His mouth?
Appreciation for your generous nature.
. . . slinking away now.
i repeat myself from FDL this morning.
George McGovern on John McCain:
(my bolds)
mccain:
War Hero?
yes.
qualified to be president?
not so much.
Why I said something:
Firstly, EW is not just a blog on the toobz.
Secondly, hyperbole does not always help.
McCain thinks giving them money for college will hurt reenlistment (probably true). He wants to trap them financially into reenlistment. Both these positions should piss off the individual serviceman. There is not a particular need to invoke hyperbole when the basic facts sell.
I would say too, as a teacher who has spent 14 years working on Camp Pendleton (and some 14 years off base), that military folks do not enjoy the perks that they are fighting for. This is the biggest farce republicans have had going for them. Complete and utter bullshit.
McCain’s constant reference to his POW status is silly. No one who thinks about it for more than one or two seconds would agree that being a POW is any kind of qualification for office, and in fact, in 2000, the Rovians were whispering that McCain was a traitor, or that the stay in the prison unhinged him.
Don’t let him rely on the statement, make him explain just what it is about that status that provides a reason to vote for him.
Is it like some kind of payback, like we have to reward him with high office because he spent 5 years in solitary in Viet Nam?
If he wants to do it that way, I’m sure we can find guys who have better ‘qualifications’ than his. He wasn’t the first one shot down, and there were guys who were POWs longer than he was.
McSame is a fool.
Wow, Artemesia writes just like masaccio.
Next time I’ll look before I hit submit comment.
Next time you won’t have to. Welcome home, les deux. Much enjoyed yr. travel log posts.
Likewise. It was a nice feel for those of us unable to travel to China right now. Thanks, masaccio.
I agree. EW has the sense to realize when criticism is constructive, and she responded appropriately.
Whatever I may think of Clark and Obama , who aren’t functioning as a team right now, statements distorting what Clark said and why should be rebutted. Clark should carry around a laptop or smartphone loaded with the audio/video of his being interviewed by Bob Schieffer, and carry a printout of the interview as well. In the conversation about qualifications to be President, Schieffer observed that Obama had not “ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down.” Should Clark have let that observation go without a substantive response?
George McGovern : qualified to be President in 1972? Hell, yes.
They should also piss off the rest of us. Making people so economically oppressed that the military is their only (or best) option is asking for trouble — any social structure that requires an armed rabble to remain in power is unstable.
Loved your travelogues. Really interesting.
I gather you saw a lot of rain…?
Rachel Brand, OLC 2005-2007, is now on teevee, CSPAN, as panalist at Federalist Society re: SCOTUS.
Jeeze louise jim,I got a couple of bronze stars what are they worth,Vice president?
I’ve been supportive of the idea, from before Wesley Clark started saying it, that McCain’s prison experience was not a plus. The effects on his mind and body are somewhat undetermined, but the broader effect is that he was left behind as the world passed him by for five and a half years. I have the impression that he’s stuck in the past and still hasn’t caught up.
Bob, this is really late (been out all night at a Robert Plant/Allyson Krauss show) but I agree wholeheartedly; but i detect a distressing pattern in Obama of failing to see when he has cover and having the balls to not only take advantage of it, but parlay it into even bigger headroom. Instead, he seems to be angling to the playing it safe, moving to the center, triangulating whatever. I disagree that he is doing this because of the DLC, they have no leverage over him; heck, they aren’t even that attached to the Clintons any more. He is doing this because it is who he is and what he wants to do. I may be in the minority, but if this was to be the tact of the Democratic candidate, then I might would rather the candidate be Clinton, because if it gets down to a street fight (and if Obama keeps playing it this way instead of what supposedly brought him to the show, it very well may), then i trust the Clinton’s fighting skills a lot better. This tact was, and is, not Obama’s strength or promise. so, in conclusion, I second what you said totally.
Obama is no Feingold.
I’m guessing he is a centrist, especially with his “faith-based”
program.
Dammit, keep them separate.
My opinion was Obama was viewed as a “rock star”… in my
idealistic days, I would say go forth.
He is a good guy, excellent pol, but something is missing.
For the most part, I like what he stands for but why did he
put his lapel pin back on?
The play’s the thing to catch the king.
The Dark Lord is going to be on board the USS Constitution on Independence Day???
Hm-mm; What is he really up to? And. What are the ‘other activities’?
‘His visit will last a matter of hours, and could include other activities.’
Oh, look. Christopher Hitchens had himself waterboarded. At least he’s still capable of admitting that it is indeed torture, and it isn’t “simulated” drowning at all — it’s drowning.
What’s next — torture tourism?
I too have often wanted to see Obama take a more controntational route, particularly during the many proxy assaults of Hillary against him. Obama’s at-times passive approach seems to have played out well in the longer run, demonstrating one more reason why he’s the candidate and I’m not.
I think BO is very sensitive to the “angry black man” image and wants to avoid it. From reading his books, I also feel that his strength is in networking and building consensus - and that this is BO’s actual vision of how to govern.
Is he weak on the pit-bull side of politics? Yes. Is he less boldly progressive than you or I want him to be? Yes, in many respects. But I think this will have to play out further before we really know whether he actually has a “Cohones deficit”, or if he’s just a way smarter poker player than you or I sometimes think.
How do some of these guys sleep at night after writing this crap? Even they must have to laugh at themselves. Do they think they are being ’sly’ or ‘cute’?
Exactly.
Sign him up for an Illinois Hold “Em Poker gamerooo.
He could be bluffing on the river.
According to my reliable source, who remains anonymous cuz
he is not authorized to speak for Darth, says that Cheney will enlist in the Navy and serve in Iraq.
“I want to atone for my fucking weaseling out of Nam in the 60’s.”
He said, and I’m sick of pixie dusting around. The country needs me.”
Opps, sprayed coffee all over the cat….She is NOT a happy kitty at the moment….:)
OT, but too strange not to mention- Fredo attempts an op-ed piece in the L.A. Times this morning. Almost dropped my coffee mug when I opened the dead tree version this a.m.
Note to Alberto- using yr. middle initial does not make us all forget who you are & what you did:
What Latinos Want From Their President-
Any candidate who wants to attract this crucial voting bloc must address racial equality.
By Alberto R. Gonzales
July 2, 2008