Say Anything Blog

McCain went on to say that he had the highest respect for Senators Obama and Clinton, and that he would campaign only on the issues and not personal attacks.

All of which left folks on both sides of the political spectrum - liberals and conservatives - in somewhat of a quandary.

And that is his right.  But I do not think that using a candidates middle name is a personal attack even if that candidate’s middle name is Goatfukker or McHitler or Hussein or Bin Laden.

These kind of statements are pretty common on Conservative talk shows, but really do not add value in attracting middle of the road independents and Democrats.  I don’t blame McCain from distancing himself from this, but in doing so, he is distancing himself from the Conservative base.  He shouldn’t have invited a Conservative to campaign with him in the first place.

But I do not think that using a candidates middle name is a personal attack even if that candidate’s middle name is Goatfukker or McHitler or Hussein or Bin Laden.

It’s not that it’s a personal attack, it’s that it’s childish. It’s what passes for clever among the dead-enders, the 19r;s.

19r;s.

That should read “19 percenters.”

Mea culpa

It’s not that it’s a personal attack, it’s that it’s childish. It’s what passes for clever among the dead-enders, the 19r;s.

Too true!  It’s right up there with “BushHitler”, “The Smirking Chimp”, “ChimpyMcHitlerBurton”, etc.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

Too true!  It’s right up there with “BushHitler”, “The Smirking Chimp”, “ChimpyMcHitlerBurton”, etc.

Typical made-up strawman bullshit. You never disappoint, bob!

Typical made-up strawman bullshit. You never disappoint, bob!

“The Smirking Chimp” is the name of a far-left blogsite.  Duh.
Are you really that ignorant, “jack”, or are you just in deep partisan denial?

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

No one says John Sydney McCain. 

The only reason to bring up Obama’s middle name is to compare him to Saddam.

It is typical righty bullshit.

McCain was right to call it a personal attack.

The only reason to bring up Obama’s middle name is to compare him to Saddam.

It is typical righty bullshit.

Let’s check the transscript of his speech at the DNC in 2004:

They would give me an African name, Barack, or ”blessed,” believing that in a tolerant America your name is no barrier to success. They imagined—They imagined me going to the best schools in the land, even though they weren’t rich, because in a generous America you don’t have to be rich to achieve your potential…

It’s the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker’s son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too.

If the skinny kid’s parents gave him a funny name believing that in a tolerant America your name is no barrier to success.  I would hate to deny the wishes of his parents and not call him openly and loudly by that name that they gave him.  It is no barrier to success in my mind, so why should he and others be afraid to call him by his full name?

I think Lestat believes in an America where using Barack’s name would deny him equality.  I believe in hope.  In change.  Isn’t Barack all about changing all these negatives of the world and getting us to sit around the fire and hold hands and sing together?

His parents named him Barack Hussein Obama.  The fact that you don’t like him being refered to by his name is something you should probably take up with his parents, though they are dead now.

I didn’t realize that Barack Hussein Obama was such a delicate flower.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

What’s really telling about this is that McCain has no regard for the conservative who introduced him, but falls all over himself apologizing to the Dems.  Very telling.

Leftie political philosophy, from a DU commenter:

It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH. The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet: Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

DUH!

Duh! Duh! Duh!

Hello McFly! (bonk bonk bonk)

There IS no quandary!

McCain is a Leftist.

A stealth Leftist, but only to the self-deluded. 

Here he is being true to himself and identifying clearly, to all with eyes who can see, who his true friends are.

He is just temporarily sucking up right now to anyone to the Right of Ted Kennedy to get your votes.

Mark my words, at this date and this hour—once he has won the election he will return to his Leftist ways.

God knows, I pray to be wrong in this instance, but there is nothing to show me that that will be the case.

All else is self-deluding hopefulness.

...for great justice

I love when McCain gets called a leftist, it shows just how ill informed and knee jerk partisan a commenter is. Hell, he’s not even all that much of a centrist if you consider his record by any objective standards.

Now if you wanted to say he was historically wrong headed on several key issues and less than diplomatic to his own base frequently, I’d give you a big “halleleuia brother!” But that’s not what you’re saying...you’re saying he’s cut from the same cloth basically as Obama and Clinton. Objective review doesn’t bear this observation out. Not even close.

If conservatives can’t get behind McCain, we’re likely to get something much less to our liking and policies that’ll be much harder to undo than anything McCain is likely to serve up. That last bit may be a bit of conjecture, but well based on history.

Alrighty then.

Read’em and weep.

Although conservatives have not yet won the wars on political correctness, education, and culture, Americans nevertheless are now more skeptical than they were thirty years ago of big government, high taxes, entitlements, judicial activism and secularism. In these areas, conservatives have proven most successful. The word “liberal” has become a bad word in most states, and consequently many leftists hesitate to label themselves as leftists.

In many states it now rings popular to call oneself a conservative, even if one truly resembles a liberal. As with any popular movement, dilution occurs, opportunists blow with the wind, and pretenders abound. John McCain is one of these pretenders. He is a leftist in disguise, using his popularity and charisma to masque his liberal leanings. In reality, McCain resides as far to the Left as John Kerry. Anyone who thinks otherwise deludes himself.

McCain has most feigned conservatism in his militarism. McCain, a Vietnam veteran, is hawkish and patriotic.

These attributes support his political stump. As long as he can play the veteran card and remain pro-war, he can downplay all his other shortcomings. Appearing hawkish, however, does not necessarily constitute conservatism. (Recent history shows that leftists can be militaristic too: Stalin, Mao, Castro). Military force always will remain crucial in many cases, but willingness to use it does not incontrovertibly make one a conservative.

And when one gets beyond McCain’s bellicism, his true liberal character crops up. Outside martial matters, McCain sides with the American Left on most key issues. The greatest irony of McCain’s masquerade is that he packages himself as a principled conservative, one with character, who rises above partisan politics. In reality, however, he is as disingenuous as the Clintons and presently bends whichever the way the wind blows to bolster himself for 2008. Analyze him issue by issue.

First, regarding religion, McCain looms as no lover of Christians. Recall his comments about key religious leaders in 2000, calling them “agents of intolerance.” And McCain’s vitriolic vilification of Christians was not limited to a single occurrence, for he later said, “I must not and will not retract anything that I said in that speech at Virginia Beach. It was carefully crafted, it was carefully thought out.” (Hardball, 3/1/00). More recently, however, McCain, positioning himself for 2008, has repackaged himself as pro-Christian, lauding key religious leaders and duping the devout. (Is this not as reptilian as Bill Clinton’s waffling?)

Second, on the issue of gay marriage, in 2005 McCain opposed a federal gay-marriage ban (Los Angeles Times, 1/25/ and 3/8). Now, however, likely realizing that most Americans think otherwise, McCain says he supports a gay-marriage ban (Meet the Press, 4/2/06). Which is it? Given his penchant for progressive politics, we can only assume the former.

Then, regarding abortion, McCain most certainly is pro-choice. In the San Francisco Chronicle (8/20/99) McCain sided with the pro-abortion camp, suggesting that overturning Roe v. Wade would lead to illegal abortions. Realizing, however, that he could not inveigle the GOP nomination with such views, McCain more recently has resold himself as pro-life, even saying he would support the South Dakota ban on abortions. What are Americans to believe? He either is pro-choice or lacks any real conviction on the subject.

Furthermore, regarding campaign-finance reform, the McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act is perhaps one of the more left-wing acts of Congress in the past twenty years. As recently exposed by Brian C. Anderson, “The Plot to Shush Rush and O’Reilly” in City Journal, McCain-Feingold (which passed with overwhelming Democrat support) is a convenient contrivance to silence conservatives. As noted by a whole host of commentators (George Will, Jonathan Rauch, and even Justice Clarence Thomas), this act poses blatant restrictions on political speech. It especially affects AM Radio and political internet blogs—the only two spheres of popular media where conservatives can truly compete. Critics remain divided why McCain supported a dictate so damaging to conservatives. Was it perhaps so that he could silence many on the Right whom he laconically loathes?

Last, but not least, McCain’s liberal tendencies show in the immigration debate. McCain has proven to be farther Left on the immigration issue than even many Liberals. At the very basis of most conservative thought is the idea of law and order, which are essential for the continuity of society. Bypassing tradition and sanity, and slapping in the face those who have come here legally, McCain has sought to sweep aside law and order to engage in the unbecoming business of pandering to ethnicities. (Isn’t this the dominion of Democrats?) McCain’s radical views on immigration threaten numerous components of the wellbeing of the United States and, more generally, Western Civilization: national security, standards of living, and cultural homogeneity, to name a few. McCain has courted the cheap-labor lobby for some fast cash for 2008 and now attempts to convert the U.S. into a third-world country.

McCain’s liberal laundry list goes on and on. Senator Lindsey Graham, another liberal in disguise, comments correctly that the present is a defining moment for the Republican Party, although his underlying analysis is wrong. The choice is between a party of McCain’s vision, a party indistinguishable from the Democratic Party, or a party that at least maintains a modicum of conservatism. If McCain loses, hopefully he will depart for the Democratic Party (where he belongs); but if he wins, expect to see a mass exodus of conservative voters from the GOP, probably over to a third party.

...for great justice

More of Read’em and weep…

GOA On John McCain’s Record

Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP

His behavior through the years tells us all we need to know: he is a spoiled brat-turned adult who demeans people who dare to disagree with him; he has an explosive temper that can erupt on a nanosecond’s notice; he is a total liar who will tell you something one day and then totally deny it the next (more on that below); he is a political chameleon who is enabled by the so-called Main Stream Media; he is also a megalomaniac whose former POW status has allowed him to get away with things—i.e. the Keating Five Scandal—that others would have gone to jail for.

In sum, McCain is a disaster waiting-to-happen.

and

With presidential primaries just over two-and-a-half years away, John McCain is moving back towards Republican conservatives. On some issues, from campaign finance to illegal immigration to global warming, he isn’t even trying to convince conservatives that he agrees with them. But he realizes he can’t oppose them on everything. So, on other important issues, such as taxes, abortion, and guns, he’s brandishing his conservative credentials.

It is quite a contrast to his 2000 presidential campaign, when he openly criticized and needled conservatives. ...

Let’s consider just one of these issues: McCain’s claimed pro-gun record. This was true a decade ago, but since then, on issues such as regulating gun shows, banning less expensive guns and so-called assault weapons, and requiring gunlocks, McCain has supported central portions of the gun-control agenda. Indeed, in a couple cases, McCain authored the proposed legislation himself.

...for great justice

jack - That should read “19 percenters.”

The Congressional Democrat Congress is around 11%.

You thought you were being clever, didn’t you?

You’re a childish dead ender, jack. Your own words convict you.

There is nothing kneejerk about being sentient.

History can be a great teacher.  Self-imposed ignorance is just that. To quote Dean Wormer: Fat, drunk and stupid, is no way to go through life, son.

From column by George Will --- McCain’s Constitution:

... Which highlights the stark contradiction in McCain’s doctrine and the media’s applause of it. He and they assume, simultaneously, the following two propositions:

Proof that incumbent politicians are highly susceptible to corruption is the fact that the government they control is shot through with it. Yet that government should be regarded as a disinterested arbiter, untainted by politics and therefore qualified to regulate the content, quantity and timing of speech in campaigns that determine who controls the government. In the language of McCain’s Imus appearance, the government is very much not “clean,” but is so clean it can be trusted to regulate speech about itself.

and, of course, my favorite of all time:

Senator McCain has since refused to talk about his promise to defend his immigration proposals to the American public. The Senator’s “fear of FAIR” can’t be due to distaste for vigorous public debate, as he is one of America’s most prominent orators. So what makes John McCain (and Ted Kennedy) run? Answer: McCain doesn’t want the public to understand how horrific S.1033 really is.

Amnesty Legislation on a Massive, Historically Unprecedented Scale

If enacted, S.1033 would be amnesty legislation on a massive, historically unprecedented scale.  America faces an immigration crisis today because all previous amnesties have failed to stop and actually encouraged greater levels of illegal immigration. S.1033 incorporates the worst features of every failed amnesty program since 1986, but in numbers greater than all the illegal and legal aliens who entered the U.S. in the past fifteen years combined.

...for great justice

Shall I continue to inform you with regard to McCain?

There’s more of course,—lots more—but time will prove whether this voluminous history documenting that McCain is a Leftist, which has escaped you as of this late date, will make it past those perceptual filters.

Whether Hillary or Obama will actually be worse is doubtful.  I say this because if we have a clearly-delineated enemy, the Republican House at least can circle their wagons and wage a guerilla campaign to ensure that a Leftist White House and Senate don’t get much of their agenda made into law.

If McCain gets in on the other hand, he will be jawboning Republicans in the House and Senate to do the Dems bidding.  It would be as if Rommel had 20 Panzer divisions to run roughshod through Patton’s rear area. 

And when the Dems bone things up in a royal fashion, the way they always have done (see California as a microcosm of Dem management results) they WILL point their fingers at McCain and scream that the Republicans are to blame for:

- economic collapse
- massive fuel shortages
- sinking dollar valuations
- successful terrorist attacks

etc, etc, etc....

...for great justice