25 Reasons Why John Sidney McCain III Sucks

[Matej]

Originally Posted by 98s14inaz

I don't have to. One thing that is nice about America right now is that you are innocent until proven guilty. If you are going to charge someone or accuse them of something the burden is on the accuser to prove it.

Hey it seems to be working fine for the government. WMD's in Iraq anyone? Saddam responsible for 9/11? Democrats blaming the economy on the republicans, and vice versa. Even the political campaigns are continuously spewing out accusations based on only rumors.

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by Matej

Hey it seems to be working fine for the government. WMD's in Iraq anyone? Saddam responsible for 9/11? Democrats blaming the economy on the republicans, and vice versa. Even the political campaigns are continuously spewing out accusations based on only rumors.

The court of public opinion works the other way around.

[Ryzin]

Originally Posted by 98s14inaz

How cute, did you get that in an email and then post it here?

How about citing some sources for some of those accusations instead of this liberal diarrhea of the mouth. Any idiot can cut and paste. Discuss.

Whats your email address? I have a great article from Rolling Stone by Tim Dickinson. Its too big to paste here, hope that doesn't scare you away.

[KA24DESOneThree]

Originally Posted by 98s14inaz

It's a common misconception that religion has a large hand in this. In all honesty they don't, they don't have the money to back such initiatives. The real bad guys here are the businesses that don't want to pay for benefits when civil unions are officially recognized. Religion is used as a disguise, no one would vote for this nonsense if they knew big business was behind it. Just ask yourself, "is this good for the company" and you will see the truth.

Religion has a huge part in it. The false morality taught by intolerant religions creates a feeling that being gay is either a mental defect or a choice, and regardless of which it is, being gay is immoral.

This false morality drives people to donate huge sums of money supporting what is, essentially, deprivation of rights because of religious difference.

If you want to see exactly how awful it is, visit this website:

Homosexual Stats

That is some hateful, bigoted stuff right there.

"One nation under god" was written in 1892 by a Christian Socialist. The words have no meaning to me.

"In god we trust" first appeared on currency (a two-cent coin) in 1864.

The Founders may have been religious, but their country is not. They understood the dangers of religion.

[98s14inaz]

Originally Posted by KA24DESOneThree

Religion has a huge part in it. The false morality taught by intolerant religions creates a feeling that being gay is either a mental defect or a choice, and regardless of which it is, being gay is immoral.

This false morality drives people to donate huge sums of money supporting what is, essentially, deprivation of rights because of religious difference.

If you want to see exactly how awful it is, visit this website:

Homosexual Stats

That is some hateful, bigoted stuff right there.

"One nation under god" was written in 1892 by a Christian Socialist. The words have no meaning to me.

"In god we trust" first appeared on currency (a two-cent coin) in 1864.

The Founders may have been religious, but their country is not. They understood the dangers of religion.

It's still a bunch of rich business owners not wanting to pay benefits. Yes religion is against the gays (something about not lying with another man) but it is all smoke and mirrors to hide a corporate agenda. Personally I could care less. Let them get married, it's obvious the straight couples can't get it right.

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by Ryzin

Whats your email address? I have a great article from Rolling Stone by Tim Dickinson. Its too big to paste here, hope that doesn't scare you away.

PM me that link, I need some reading.

[mRclARK1]

Originally Posted by 98s14inaz

It's still a bunch of rich business owners not wanting to pay benefits. Yes religion is against the gays (something about not lying with another man) but it is all smoke and mirrors to hide a corporate agenda. Personally I could care less. Let them get married, it's obvious the straight couples can't get it right.

People seem to forget there's a difference between opposing something, and simply not agreeing with it. Myself personally, do not agree with gay marriage. Would I OPPOSE it's legal passage? No. I would simply abstain on any vote either way. I may not agree with it for religious reasons, but I also know that religion and state do not mix. Not everyone follows my beliefs, and it's not my place to force them to. More religious people feel that way then you would think. You only ever hear about the "zealots" or "fundamentalists"

On the flip side however, there's a large crowd of people out there so opposed to religion for it being "intolerant" that they themselves are probably the most intolerant people in society. Usually the first thing that goes out the window with the proclamation of complete tolerance is zero tolerance for anyone who does not agree with you.

They won't tolerate anyone who is intolerant, or anyone who tolerates intolerance. Anyone else see the problem there?

Mature and reasonable people can agree to disagree. Unfortunately today not many people with both those qualities seem to exist.

[Paul2x]

Here's some interesting Obama info...


2.) His Father Was A Goat Herder - NOT EXACTLY, he was a privileged, well
> educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan Government.

3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter - NOT EXACTLY, he was part of one of
the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has ever had.

4.) My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom - NOT EXACTLY, your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting to overturn a
> legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first widespread violence
> in decades. The current government is pro-American but Odinga wants to
> overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your half-brother, Abongo
> Obama, is Odinga's follower. You interrupted your New Hampshire campaigning
> to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out the following link for
> verification of that....and for more.
> Obama's cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and tried to get Sharia
> muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the elections, his followers
> have burned Christians' homes and then burned men, women and children alive
> in a Christian church where they took shelter.. Obama SUPPORTED his cousin
> before the election process here started. Google Obama and Odinga and see
> what you get. No one wants to know the truth.

5.) My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian - NOT EXACTLY, she does her
> daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own interviews. Not to mention,
> Christianity wouldn't allow her to have been one of 14 wives to 1 man.

6.) My Name is African Swahili - NOT EXACTLY, your name is Arabic and
> 'Baraka' (from which Barack came) means 'blessed' in that language. Hussein
> is also Arabic and so is Obama.
> Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he would be the first
> Arab-American President, not the first black President. Barack Hussein
> Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25%
> African Negro from his father's side. While Barack Hussein Obama's father
> was from Kenya, his father's family was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein
> Obama's father was only 12.5% African Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's
> birth certificate even states he's Arab, not African Negro).

7.) I Never Practiced Islam - NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it daily at
> school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that faith for 31
> years, until your wife made you change, so you could run for office.
> 4-3-08 Article 'Obama was 'quite religious in islam''
> Obama was 'quite religious in Islam'

8.) My School In Indonesia Was Christian - NOT EXACTLY, you were registered
> as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic Studies for making faces
> (check your own book).
> February 28, 2008. Kristoff from the New York Times a year ago: Mr.
> Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting
> them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully
> uncalculated (it'll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described
> the call to prayer as 'one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.'
> This is just one example of what Pamela is talking about when she says
> 'Obama's narrative is being altered, enhanced and manipulated to whitewash
> troubling facts.'

9.) I Was Fluent In Indonesian - NOT EXACTLY, not one teacher says you
> could speak the language.

10.) Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign Experience - NOT
> EXACTLY, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and couldn't even speak
> the language. What did you learn, how to study the Koran and watch cartoons.

11.) I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs - NOT EXACTLY, except for Africa
> (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have never been
> anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience with our closest
> allies.

12.) I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion - NOT EXACTLY, you were
> quite content in hi gh school to be Barry Obama, no mention of Kenya and no
> mention of struggle to identify - your classmates said you were just fine.

13.)An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office - NOT EXACTLY, Ebony has
> yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never
> did, exist.

14.) A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life - NOT EXACTLY, Life
> has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It doesn't, and never
> did, exist.

15.) I Won't Run On A National Ticket In '08 - NOT EXACTLY, here you are,
> despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have enough experience by
> then, and you are all about having experience first.

16.) Voting 'Present' is Common In Illinois Senate - NOT EXACTLY, they are
> common for YOU, but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.

17.) Oops, I Misvoted - NOT EXACTLY, only when caught by church groups and
> Democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.

18.) I Was A Professor Of Law - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior lecturer ON
> LEAVE.

19.) I Was A Constitutional Lawyer - NOT EXACTLY, you were a senior
> lecturer ON LEAVE.

20.) Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill - NOT EXACTLY, you didn't
> write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.

21.) The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass - NOT EXACTLY, it took just 14 days
> from start to finish.

22.) I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill - NOT EXACTLY, your bill was rejected by
> your own party for its pandering and lack of all regulation - mainly
> because of your Nuclear donor, Exelon, from which David Axelrod came.

23.) I Have Released My State Records - NOT EXACTLY, as of March, 2008,
> state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be released, exposing
> all the special interests pork hidden within.

24.) I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess - NOT EXACTLY, you were
> part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld Gardens. You failed to
> mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.

25.) M y Economics Bill Will Help America - NOT EXACTLY, your 111 economic
> policies were just combined into a proposal which lost 99-0, and even YOU
> voted against your own bill.

26.) I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois - NOT EXACTLY, even your own
> supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.

27.) I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year - NOT EXACTLY, they were not
> YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their creation by a fellow
> Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher office.

28.) No One on my campaign contacted Canada about NAFTA - NOT EXACTLY, the
> Candian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your
> campaign had with them.

29.) I Am Tough On Terrorism - NOT EXACTLY, you missed the Iran Resolution
> vote on terrorism and your good friend Ali Abunimah supports the
> destruction off Israel.

30.) I Want All Votes To Count - NOT EXACTLY, you said let the delegates
> decide.

31.) I Want Americans To Decide - NOT EXACTLY, you prefer caucuses that
> limit the vote, confuse the voters, force a public vote, and only operate
> during small windows of time.

32.) I passed 900 Bills in the State Senate - NOT EXACTLY, you passed 26,
> most of which you didn't write yourself.

33.) I Believe In Fairness, Not Tactics - NOT EXACTLY, you used tactics to
> eliminate Alice Palmer from running against you.

34.) I Don't Take PAC Money - NOT EXACTLY, you take loads of it.

35.) I don't Have Lobbysists - NOT EXACTLY, you have over 47 lobbyists, and
> counting.

36.) My Campaign Had Nothing To Do With The 1984 Ad - NOT EXACTLY, your own
> campaign worker made the ad on his Apple in one afternoon.

37.) I Have Always Been Against Iraq - NOT EXACTLY, you weren't in office
> to vote against it AND you have voted to fund it every single time.

38.) I Have Always Supported Universal Health Care - NOT EXACTLY, your plan
> leaves us all to pay for the 15,000,000 who don't have to buy it.
> 'Qui non intelligit aut discat aut taceat'
> Who does not understand should either learn, or be silent.

Quite an eye opener.........remember this when you vote.

Humm...

[98s14inaz]

Originally Posted by Ryzin

Whats your email address? I have a great article from Rolling Stone by Tim Dickinson. Its too big to paste here, hope that doesn't scare you away.

I heard Rolling Stone and started rolling on the floor laughing. I'm sorry, we would like credible sources.

[240vision]

This coming from one of the most liberal magazines out there. I am so sure that there is a 85% degree slant on this one. The celebs back Obama and he is called "The celebrity senator", "The Rock Star candidate". The same goes for NBC,CBS,MSNBC, the Clinton News Network (CNN). These are all slant artists.

[Matej]

Originally Posted by Paul2x

Quite an eye opener.........remember this when you vote.

Humm...

Wow, I bet some people actually believe all that.

[RJF]

Originally Posted by Matej

Wow, I bet some people actually believe all that.

It's all factual and true. Do your homework.

[Phlip]

Factual and true, because everything in the comments from Fox News is factual and true.

And McCain being behind in every poll means they "got 'em right where we want 'em," I love it.

Seriously, people...
Look at Kwame Kilpatrick in Detroit... Hell, he was just the mayor in one of the physically shittiest cities in the country, and he fucked that off. This is all we need to know to show that you can't give them anything. Gave them jazz, they made "hip hop," gave them good food, they make "chicken and waffles," gave them drivers licenses and they make "donks."
If THIS, people does not keep you from voting for him, just remember to repeat "Barack Hussein Obama," and that he likes to pal around with terrorists, and think of what the terrorists did on 9/11. Ignore McCain's terrorist friends and that Sarah Palin knows approximitely jack shit about anything, just remember to vote for a maverick who puts country first and will keep us at war for at least 4 more years.

[RJF]

Originally Posted by PHLIP

If THIS, people does not keep you from voting for him, just remember to repeat "Barack Hussein Obama," and that he likes to pal around with terrorists, and think of what the terrorists did on 9/11.

William Ayers - Bombed Pentagon, US Capital, NYC Police Headquarters.

Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat

The L.A. Times Suppresses Obama’s Khalidi Bash Tape by Andrew C. McCarthy on National Review Online

Who are McCain's terrorist friends? Did he have lunch with Timothy McVeigh and I missed it?

[ESmorz]

Originally Posted by RJF

William Ayers - Bombed Pentagon, US Capital, NYC Police Headquarters.

Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat

The L.A. Times Suppresses Obama’s Khalidi Bash Tape by Andrew C. McCarthy on National Review Online

Who are McCain's terrorist friends? Did he have lunch with Timothy McVeigh and I missed it?

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by RJF

William Ayers - Bombed Pentagon, US Capital, NYC Police Headquarters.

Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat

The L.A. Times Suppresses Obama’s Khalidi Bash Tape by Andrew C. McCarthy on National Review Online

Who are McCain's terrorist friends? Did he have lunch with Timothy McVeigh and I missed it?

The fact that G. Gordon Liddy did time at club fed does NOTHING to trivialize his contact with McShame.
If "well, just because he knew him, and he did his time yaddayaddayadda" is enough, then you're going to have to produce better information yourself.
It's cool, though. I am not changing your mind, you're not changing mine... NEITHER of us are right, but that is only because NEITHER of us have a choice that is worth a shit. You're not changing anyone else's mind either, but I am not even trying to.

[RJF]

Originally Posted by PHLIP

The fact that G. Gordon Liddy did time at club fed does NOTHING to trivialize his contact with McShame.
If "well, just because he knew him, and he did his time yaddayaddayadda" is enough, then you're going to have to produce better information yourself.
It's cool, though. I am not changing your mind, you're not changing mine... NEITHER of us are right, but that is only because NEITHER of us have a choice that is worth a shit. You're not changing anyone else's mind either, but I am not even trying to.

Granted Liddy did time, but admitted guilt. But he didn't work with McCain and McCain's political career was not launched in Liddy's living room

Ayers got off on a technicality and is still unrepentant and in 2001 even said he wished he bombed more. His wife Bernadette Doerhne was actualy convicted.

Los Angeles Times sitting on a videotape of the 2003 farewell bash in Chicago at which Barack Obama lavished praise on the guest of honor, Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat.

Khalidi (PLO) advocates and works for the destruction of Israel.

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by RJF

Granted Liddy did time, but admitted guilt. But he didn't work with McCain and McCain's political career was not launched in Liddy's living room

Ayers got off on a technicality and is still unrepentant and in 2001 even said he wished he bombed more. His wife Bernadette Doerhne was actualy convicted.

Los Angeles Times sitting on a videotape of the 2003 farewell bash in Chicago at which Barack Obama lavished praise on the guest of honor, Rashid Khalidi — former mouthpiece for master terrorist Yasser Arafat.

Khalidi (PLO) advocates and works for the destruction of Israel.

Nope, not buying it.
Liddy hosted fund raisers at his house for McShame's reelection in 98, calls McCaint an "old friend," and apparently McLame is proud of Liddy's accomplishments as an American and that he since he has done his time, that all wounds are healed.
Things being equal, Ayers got off because of a technicality, is largely a non threat to this day and there should really be no reason that Obama should be taken to task for shit that happened when he was in elementary school if McCain is not similarly rapped for his connection to Liddy. Hell, if we're "getting off on a technicality," how many old people lost their entire life savings when Obama was "cleared of impropriety, but criticized for poor judgment"? Sure, you will say he was "exonerated," but that does NOTHING to UNfuck those people out of their shit.

Now please, fabricate some more unsubstantiated rumors about Obama and sell them as "true and factual," when anyone can see that McCain is clearly a bad person, and his vice president pick is even worse. We could talk about her as well, and how people who firebomb abortion clinics are "not necessarily domestic terrorists," but no one needs any more reasons to hate her. I look forward to her being scapegoated for a GOP loss, then NOT getting reelected in Alaska based on it. I honestly do look forward to the ruining of her life based on this shit.

[yokotas13]

but really, at least neither of them are good at public speakign without a teleprompter

such a simple skill, and they both fail

[Phlip]

Originally Posted by yokotas13

but really, at least neither of them are good at public speakign without a teleprompter

such a simple skill, and they both fail

Good point, neither seems to be able to handle the word "proliferation," not to mention that bitch Palin is having all kinds of trouble with "nuclear," as we've been captive audience to for 8 years now.

*EDIT*
(trying not to tack on a bunch of extra posts)
http://www.alternet.org/columnists/s..._think_we_are/

[40daws]

From New York News and Features:

Every day (or close to it) until November 4, a series of writers and thinkers will discuss the election over instant messenger for nymag.com. Today, Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi and New York's Michael Idov discuss why John McCain is “one of the worst” presidential candidates ever, Russian glee over American's problems, and what happens after a possible President Obama is hammered for what he doesn't manage to achieve (and how that relates to The Wire).

M.I.: So, will Ayers work? In terms of getting some "undecideds," of course, not just ginning up the rabid base.

M.T.: I don't think so. And I think they're working on other avenues of attack right now. They seem to be pushing this campaign-contributions story pretty hard now.

M.I.: Right, and that there's early-voting fraud in the states where Obama (coincidentally) leads the most.

M.T.: The thing is, Republicans in the last 40 years have ALWAYS gone the race route when things got tight. Nixon did it with his "law and order" commercials. Reagan used "welfare queens." Then there was Willie Horton, the immigration debate … so they're doing it again, but it won't work this time, and that's historic.

M.I.: I agree. I am most struck by the anecdotal evidence that the same people who don't hesitate calling Obama "n****r" also say they're leaning toward voting for him. That's pretty much it in the nutshell, isn't it?

M.T.: Right. This financial thing just wipes away all of the usual effectiveness of dirty politicking. People are more scared of being broke than they are of black people. In terms of "undecideds," this is a disaster for Republicans, because they picked Palin — had they gone the more moderate route, they might have had a chance to campaign against the Bush administration more. But now the ticket is firmly associated with the same kind of right-wing politics that got us here.

M.I.: The other truth that I think we haven't even realized yet is that people don't really give a shit about "terrorists" anymore. For most of America, 9/11 is just some historical thing that you're forced to remember once a year.

M.T.: Right on the terrorists thing. Again, it's all about fear. The typical election-season choice is between the candidate who plays on your fears (i.e., Bush warning about terrorists) and the candidate who plays on your sense of optimism (i.e., a Clintonian type). But now the crisis has taken the fear card away from the Republicans. Their tactics are trumped by circumstances. The real world, the crisis, is just more scary than their fake goblins.

M.I.: So let's look past the Obama victory. How vicious will the 2010 congressional race be, when the Republicans will be able to hit President Obama for FAILING to "deliver on his promises" (i.e., get us out of a massive depression in one year — the promise that no one's actually making right now)?

M.T.: That's hard to say on 2010. If Obama actually pulls us out of this somewhat — or if it just happens on its own, which I think is possible — he might do okay. But they're going to punish him hard in the advocacy media no matter what happens. It'll be like '94 probably.

M.I.: That's what I'm afraid of. Although, of course, with a Senate super-majority a not-unrealistic prospect, the Democrats should be able to ram some things through fairly fast.

M.T.: Again, the problem they have right now is that even Rush Limbaugh has almost no material to work with. When there's an Obama administration, they'll be hammering every last thing. And of course mistakes will be made. What kind of things do you think they'll ram through?

M.I.: Energy. Probably not national health care: There's just not going to be the money for it. Bush will have spent it all on banks.

M.T.: Yeah, it'll be like the mayor in The Wire. Gets elected and finds out the government is fifteen trillion in debt, can't do any programs.

M.I.: Speaking of energy — here's something I'm surprised McCain is not hitting Obama on: Obama is more emphatic about weaning us off Middle Eastern oil and less enthusiastic about domestic drilling. That leaves Russian oil, no? So McCain can slip into his comfy Cold War shoes on that one. But I haven't seen him make that argument.

M.T.: And Venezuelan oil. The Obama people would argue the issue is (a) domestic consumption and (b) lack of investment in alternative energy. McCain's would be a bit of a tough argument to make — i.e., I think it's hard to argue that weaning us off Middle Eastern oil puts our balls on Russia's chopping block. The issue is being dependent on oil generally.

M.I.: I hope that's the case. Yesterday I had an interview with some woman from Komsomolskaya Pravda [a Russian newspaper] who was practically delirious with glee at "the end of the American hegemony."

M.T.: They wish. I remember being with Russian journalists during the Florida mess in 2000 and everybody was just so psyched that America was falling apart. I tried to explain that America never goes away; we just keep fucking up upward.

M.I.: That's what I usually say in these situations, too. Except Russia has become a political buzzword in this cycle, so it's harder to explain to them that Obama and McCain don't actually wake up at night in cold sweat thinking of Putin.

M.T.: The really embarrassing thing is that Bush has made Putin look like Bismarck. Putin has played things almost perfectly since 9/11. Russia was 50 years away from being a superpower again at the end of the last century, and now they're five years away. And the Russians are even going beyond just exporting resources now — they're manufacturing again, while our economy is just dying.

M.I.: They have earned a bit of Schadenfreude. Especially now that we're nationalizing banks, etc. Hey, GM is near bankruptcy — maybe by next year it will be Gosudarstvennoe Mashinostroenie [Government Machine Works — Rus.]. They can keep the acronym.

But let's bring it back to our dear friend Ayers. So we're in agreement that it won't work? And when the next week shows a slight bump for McCain, we won't have heart attacks about it, right?

M.T.: I don't think McCain gets a bump. I think he goes into freefall and it's a landslide.

M.I.: Ooh, tell me more.

M.T.: He's been a terrible candidate, one of the worst ever. And the press hates him. His people treat the reporters like cattle — even worse than usual. That revolt over the pool and Sarah Palin shows you where the heads of everyone in the media are. They're tired of McCain's bullshit, and they're going to let him have it in the last weeks. (For readers who didn't hear, the McCain camp tried to prevent a reporter from following Sarah Palin at the U.N., because they didn't want her exposed to questions. The traveling press refused to cover her if they didn't back off and go back to the usual policy on pool coverage.)

M.I.: So one last thing: The current inhabitants of the White House don't seem to WANT McCain to win. Obviously, Bush would be toxic as a campaigner, but they still have enough juice to manipulate an event or two to "validate" some of McCain's points. An orchestrated statement from Iraq or Afghanistan endorsing his positions. Something. Yet the Bushies won't lift a finger. What's your take on that?

M.T.: Bush's name is like the Marburg virus on the campaign trail. The McCain people won't even mention him, let alone appear with him.

M.I.: Sure, but I'm talking about more subtle ways of helping. Does Bush hate McCain enough to genuinely prefer Obama? That's a mindfuck the Palin base might not recover from pondering.

M.T.: I think Bush is just cooked and politically isolated right now and what he thinks is irrelevant. You might remember he once said something about how the presidency sucks because there's so much work that you don't have time to just stare at your portrait and worry about your legacy. Well, he's about to have that time now, and he's not loving it. I do think you're right, though — he seems to genuinely dislike McCain. As do a lot of Republicans. I talked to one congressman this summer, a Republican, who said to me, "McCain is an officious prick."

A lot of Washington guys think he's a grandstander and an ego case. They remember stuff like the time he passed a bill yanking the special parking spaces for congressmen at Dulles.

M.I.: It's endlessly amusing to think Huckabee might have been a better bet. (At least he wouldn't need a Palin.)

M.T.: Huckabee wouldn't have won either. But at least he could have done a Goldwater, i.e., run a pure ideological race that sets the stage for something even bigger later.

M.I.: Right.

M.T.: But it would have been fun to see all those old fatty pictures on the Web.

M.I.: So our Wonkette-style takeaway is, Obama wins, things still suck for a while, the end.

M.T.: Sounds good.

M.I.: I can live with that.

[RJF]

The LA Times has no problem releasing videos of politicians it doesn't like

In 2006, the Los Angeles Times decided an audio tape it had obtained of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, an apologetic Republican, in which he said of latina Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia (R-80), "She seems to me like Cuban ... She maybe is Puerto Rican or the same thing as Cuban. I mean, they are all very hot. They have the, you know, part of the black blood in them and part of the Latino blood in them that together makes it,” was front-page news.

"The governor is heard on a six-minute recording, obtained by The Times, of a meeting with some members of his inner circle last spring," wrote Robert Salladay in the page A-1 story on the recording. "At the time, Schwarzenegger was struggling to persuade Republican lawmakers to embrace his plan to place billions of dollars in borrowing on the November ballot."

Now, I know commenting on heritage is, to our P.C.-police media, a far worse crime than palling around with terrorists (or even than committing terrorist acts, to judge by recent events like the LAT's call for a full pardon of "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh).

However, its history of baring all when it comes to tapes - both audio and video - that it obtains once again begs the question asked repeatedly here on RedState: Why won't the Times allow the public to see its video of Barack Obama, along with Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, toasting former Palestinian Liberation Organization spokesman Rashid Khalidi at a 2003 event honoring the Arafat disciple and his wife?

Peter Wallsten, writing in the Times about the video this past April, said speakers at the 2003 event celebrating Khalidi "recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians," threatened that Israel "will never see a day of peace," and "likened Zionist settlers on the West Bank to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been blinded by ideology."

However, wrote Wallsten, Obama "adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground."

On the latter, we are expected to simply take Wallsten's word for it, as the Times continues to steadfastly refuse to release the video of the event.

McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb today called on the Times to release the video, saying, "A major news organization is intentionally suppressing information that could provide a clearer link between Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi. The election is one week away, and it's unfortunate that the press so obviously favors Barack Obama that this campaign must publicly request that the Los Angeles Times do its job -- make information public."

Based on its decision so far not to let the public see what its staffers claim is a completely innocuous video of the Democratic presidential nominee at an event celebrating a former terrorist mouthpiece, it appears to be a pretty safe bet that this is going to continue to be kept under wraps until after next Tuesday at very least.

This video could very well have nothing on it that would hurt Obama's chances next week. If that is the case, then the LAT and the Obama campaign are doing their collectively-chosen candidate a disservice by allowing speculation to continue about what exactly is on the video.

Much like the Obama campaign could have nipped the lunatic fringe's obsession with his birth in the bud by simply releasing his birth certificate -- something it continues to inexplicably refuse to do -- the LAT would be best served, if this tape really is as innocuous as the public is expected to believe, by simply getting this over with and letting it be seen.

Likewise, the Obama campaign would seem to benefit more from leaning on the Times to go ahead and release the tape already, so as to end the mounting speculation about its contents and prevent more fallout from the perceived coverup of this event -- if, that is, the video's contents are as innocuous as we have been led to believe.

After all, they might not be, and until the LA Times and the Obama campaign deign to release the video for all to see, we will have nothing to do but continue speculating about just what it may contain that so many are so desperate that none ever see.