It's sad that you two have nothing with which to defend McCain's dementia.
you could try the old "but he was a POW" tack once more. Just don't say he was tortured. Apparently that's a big 'no no' in the gOP since Bush doesn't consider what was done to McCain as torture.
Apparently to G-Man, talking about how McCain sees to have these frequent bouts of confusion is being mean. Never mind the fact that John McCain is 71 years old and seeks the highest most powerful office in the entire world. Do we really want a guy that seems to be suffering from senility and dementia to have that kind of power?
Here's CNN being "mean" to John McCain as well.
Yeah, G-Man, I know... I know.. why oh why can't they just talk about how he was a POW and how he's a "maverick"?
Here's the AP being mean as well. It's all a Democratic Party "conspiracy" to attack John McCain apparently (oh yeah, G-Man, it' still the "Democratic" Party not the "democrat" party, numbnuts). The fact that John McCain appears to believe that Spain is in Latin America, and run by a dictator should be news and not dismissed as being mean:
Quote:
Jose Luis Rodriguez Who? John McCain either doesn't want to meet Spain's prime minister any time soon or isn't quite sure who he is.
In a radio interview broadcast in Spain and other Spanish-speaking countries Thursday, the Republican presidential candidate repeatedly dodged questions as to whether he would invite Socialist Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero to the White House if McCain wins in November.
"All I can tell you is that I have a clear record of working with leaders in the hemisphere that are friends with us and standing up to those who are not," he said. "And that's judged on the basis of the importance of our relationship with Latin America and the entire region."
He had been asked, however, about a leader outside the hemisphere.
McCain added, when that was pointed out: "I am willing to meet with any leader who is dedicated to the same principles and philosophy that we are for human rights, democracy and freedom and I will stand up to those that do not."
Responding to the first of four questions on whether he would confer with Zapatero, McCain said he'd talk with leaders who are cooperative with the United States. Then he discussed Mexican President Felipe Calderon and his work in fighting drug cartels.
AP fails to note that McCain had offered to meet with Zapatero in April, so there's a pretty major, and inexplicable, flip-flop from McCain here.
In response to this embarassment from John Mcain, the Atlantic's Marc Ambinder had a back and forth with the McCain campaign today, trying to get them to explain why, if the campaign now says it would be unwise to rule in or out any future meetings with foreign leaders such as Spain's prime minister, did McCain offer an invitation to just such a meeting to Spanish leader Zapatero just five months ago? Contradiction much? The McCain campaign's response, explaining why the sudden change? Gobbley-gook. Here's their response:
Quote:
In this week's interview, Senator McCain did not rule in or rule out a White House meeting with President Zapatero, a NATO ally. If elected, he will meet with a wide range of allies in a wide variety of venues but is not going to spell out scheduling and meeting location specifics in advance. He also is not going to make reckless promises to meet America's adversaries. It's called keeping youtr options open, unlike Senator Obama who has publically committed to meeting some of the world's worst dictators unconditionally in his first year in office.
That wasn't the question. The question was why McCain today thinks he shouldn't rule in or out any such meeting, but last April he offered such a meeting to the Spanish leader. If it's called "keeping your options open," then why didn't McCain "keep his options open" last April? And for that matter, why did McCain respond to a question about Spain - four questions about Spain, in fact - by answering with a non sequitur about Mexico and Latin America?
Answer the question, McCain campaign. You were for meeting Zapatero and McCain downright gushed about mending relations with Spain in April, yet today you claim it would be imprudent to be publicly in favor of any such meeting. (And to top it off, McCain seemed to suggest that he wouldn't meet with Zapatero, the leader of Spain, unless and until Spain embraced "democracy and human rights" - what does McCain think, this is the 1970s under Franco? That's crazy talk). So was McCain imprudent back in April when he publicly extended the invitation to such a meeting with Zapatero? Or are you just lying in order to hide what Ambinder calls "a senior moment"?
Back on the topic of the day.. *ahem* G-Man...
Wonder what time of the day this interview was held. He seems to do fairly well when giving his stump speeches earlier in the day. If this was later in the afternoon or evening, it could be "sundowning" a symptom of dementia. Could make for some very entertaining debates.
Or also I can see the fun: Palin can see Russia from her back window ("I'd swear you could see it if'n you look hard enough over that hill next to that dead moose..." as she pulls away the kitchen curtains) and McCain wants to meet with the Spanish President to finish the border fence along his home state AZ.
Now just get your reading glasses out and see if Zapatero sent you one of those 'texas' messages on the raspberry you invented.
Dodge. evade.
None of you have responded to McCain's dementia here.
Another publication caught on to the latest McCain bout of confusion and sees a pattern. Steve Benen over at Political Animal/Washington Monthly notes that McCain's recent confusion, thinking Spain was located in Latin America and run by a dictator, is on the most recent of McCain's increasingly odd foreign policy gaffes:
Quote:
Let's also not lose sight of the broader pattern. McCain thinks the recent conflict between Russia and Georgia was "the first probably serious crisis internationally since the end of the Cold War." He thinks Iraq and Pakistan share a border. He believes Czechoslovakia is still a country. He's been confused about the difference between Sudan and Somalia. He's been confused about whether he wants more U.S. troops in Afghanistan, more NATO troops in Afghanistan, or both. He's been confused about how many U.S. troops are in Iraq. He's been confused about whether the U.S. can maintain a long-term presence in Iraq. He's been confused about Iran's relationship with al Qaeda. He's been confused about the difference between Sunni and Shi'ia. McCain, following a recent trip to Germany, even referred to "President Putin of Germany." All of this incoherence on his signature issue.
I'm curious. What do you suppose the reaction would be from the political establishment if Barack Obama had made these mistakes over the course of the campaign? What would reporters, pundits, and Republicans have to say about Obama's ability to lead a complex world in a time of war and uncertainty?
I think an intellectually honest person would agree that if Obama had made these same mistakes he'd be labeled "clueless" on foreign policy. So, why the double-standard?
Consider it McCain's own personal bail-out plan for Wall Street. From David Corn at Mother Jones:
Quote:
[T]he Democratic National Committee, using publicly available records, has identified 177 lobbyists working for the McCain campaign as either aides, policy advisers, or fundraisers.
Of those 177 lobbyists, according to a Mother Jones review of Senate and House records, at least 83 have in recent years lobbied for the financial industry McCain now attacks. These are high-paid influence-peddlers who have been working the corridors of the nation's capital to win favors and special treatment for investment banks, securities firms, hedge funds, accounting outfits, and insurance companies. Their clients have included AIG, the newest symbol of corporate excess; Lehman Brothers, which filed for bankruptcy on Monday sending the stock market into a tailspin; Merrill Lynch, which was bought out by Bank of America this week; and Washington Mutual, the banking giant that could be the next to fall. Among these 83 lobbyists are McCain's chief political adviser, Charlie Black (JP Morgan, Washington Mutual Bank, Freddie Mac, Mortgage Bankers Association of America); McCain's national finance co-chairman, Wayne Berman (AIG, Blackstone, Credit Suisse, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac); the campaign's congressional liaison, John Green (Carlyle Group, Citigroup, Icahn Associates, Fannie Mae); McCain's veep vetter, Arthur Culvahouse (Fannie Mae); and McCain's transition planning chief, William Timmons Sr. (Citigroup, Freddie Mac, Vanguard Group).
John McCain is going to take them all on. All these "old boys".
We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to fix Social Security. We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to fix Medicare. We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to provide health care to ALL Americans. We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to help out Americans losing their homes. We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to help all our veterans returning from war. We don't have ENOUGH MONEY to rescue "no child left behind".
BUT...
We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to bail out Bears Stearns. We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to bail out AIG. We DO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY to pay for an unnecessary TRILLION DOLLAR war.
When the LITTLE GUY needs help, they scornfully say, "GET A JOB!" But when one of their BIG GUY CRONIES need a bailout, what do they say? SURE, NO PROBLEM. Where's the checkbook?
"But what about the debt we're leaving on the backs of our childen and their future?" "Children? WHOSE Children? OUR children won't have to pay for this. YOUR children will."
The Republicans have had their hands in our pockets for well over 8 years. Now they are robbing us blind IN BROAD DAYLIGHT and smiling about it!!!! The Republicans have shown their true colors and now they expect us to vote them back into office?
What's next? Should we bend over and spread 'em? Oh, I'm sorry, but we've ALREADY DONE THAT!! SEVERAL TIMES!!!
You know, this is the one time it would have been smart for you to hide behind one of your alts... Your political ads might actually have had a chance to convince someone if they didn't come from the stupid fuck who called the cops over an alt ID.
None of you have responded to McCain's dementia here.
In May of this year, McCain released medical records and statements from his doctors. None of which indicated that he suffered from dementia or senility.
Do you have medical documentation to prove he is senile?
I'm guessing not, unless you (a) hacked his medical records while your buddies were hacking Palin's family email accounts; (b) fabricated them at the same time you fabricated the AP story about New Orleans.
Captain Sammitch talkative Moderator tantillo taunter 10000+ posts Fri Sep 19 2008 11:12 PM Reading a post Forum: Politics and Current Events Thread: McCain in 08?
Yesterday, Adam Nagourney from the New York Times established the emerging story line that new John McCain is actually Bob Dole:
Quote:
These days, Mr. McCain sounds less like his old self than Bob Dole, another Republican senator who ran for president in 1996, sounded in the closing days of his campaign — speaking louder or repeating statements that he thinks might be overlooked.
I hope my lord and savior barack obama kills whitey soon, or I might have an aneurysm! 
