Posted on 10/14/2008 12:44:43 AM PDT by pissant
What happened to the Sen. John McCain we once knew? What happened to the jovial, optimistic war hero who promised a civil and elevating presidential campaign? Where's that campaign that would be based on real issues, not brainless emotions or partisan cheap shots?
Ah, those were the days.
That was long before the economy tanked and McCain's poll numbers went into a slide behind Sen. Barack Obama's like the Dow Jones industrial average.
These are the days in which McCain's attacks against the Democratic nominee have grown sharper and angrier. He unleashed his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, like an attack puppy. Together they pushed their conservative audiences farther right and, in some cases, right over the edge.
Of course, every campaign, even that of Obama, distorts quotes or pushes half-truths in the heat of a close campaign. Politics ain't beanbag. But the red-meat rhetoric thrown out at McCain's recent rallies stains his good name with a tinge of fearmongering, anger-baiting and xenophobia.
"This is not a man who sees America as you see it and how I see America," Palin said.
Her oratory has sparked lusty boos and jeers. Shout-outs from the crowd have included "terrorist," "socialist" and "treason."
A Washington Post report said a man yelled, "Kill him!" at a rally in Florida last week, and that an epithet was shouted at a black sound technician with a TV news crew.
(Excerpt) Read more at kansas.com ...
Okay, so some Hillary supporters showed up. They have a right to assemble just as everyone else does.
Who’s this worthless POS Clarence Page, and why should I care what he/she thinks? What an idiot.
< \horse dung>
Truth hurts, don't it, you leftist schill!
This has not been substantiated. I really think the Commies made this up.
Either made it up or planted an Obama hack.
Even on "our side" of the fence, Kristol, Brooks et al figured that the Republicans were going to lose this time around. They looked at the generic ballot numbers and the popularity rating of President Bush, and figured out early on that it was a Democrat Year, and the best thing the Republicans could do about it was to lose quietly.
So John McCain, 2000 Edition, was their ideal candidate. He could be counted on to be upright and positive, to not make any waves, and to lose with class. This was the country-club, blue-blood prescription for 2008 from the git-go. McCain was supposed to run a nice, quiet, centrist campaign, and move the center of the Republican Party over to the Left. In doing so, he would get pasted by whomever the Democrats ran, of course, but to the Centrist Wing of the Republican Party, moving their own party to the Center was the only thing they thought they were likely to achieve this time around.
But nobody told John McCain that he was supposed to lose. John McCain is out there trying to win this thing, and John McCain is no fool. McCain realized that the Center means defeat, and that the only way to win this thing was to give people a reason to vote Republican by promoting Conservative principles of thrift, strength and family values. So he skipped over all of the boring Centrist get-along types, and for his biggest decision, he tapped Sarah Palin.
Now, McCain is being soundly criticized for this choice. But when you hear this criticism, you should apply this simple test: Would John McCain be anywhere near competitive in this race if he had picked Tim Pawlenty for a running mate? Or Olympia Snowe? Or Mitt Romney? These picks would have signaled to one and all that McCain was happy to lose with class to Barack Obama, and would have been broadly acceptable for that very reason. But when McCain picked Palin, he signaled that he was not ready to lose with class, and that he was, in fact, not ready to lose at all. That is the real reason people got enthusiastic about the Republican ticket for the first time. Because with the choice of Palin, McCain signaled for the first time that he would not be happy to lose.
Now, I have a lot of Democrat friends, who have picked the name next to the (D) in every election all their adult lives, who are complaining that John McCain is not the John McCain of 2000. They say that they might have actually voted for McCain if he had run a Centrist, dignified campaign. This is complete nonsense, of course. In November, they are going to pick the (D) just as they have for the past 30 years, and just like their parents did the 40 years before that. Gaining their vote was always a mirage, and John McCain is smart enough to know that.
I’m sure that posting a picture of the author is racist. (/sarcasm)
By the way, I root for the New York Yankees. I have had just about enough of “Losing With Class”...
I don't know... The guy who posted that shot didn't even adjust the light balance! Lost opportunity, that...
Maybe he's tired of getting stabbed in the back by you people.
Of course, every campaign, even that of Obama, distorts quotes or pushes half-truths in the heat of a close campaign.
Clarence, the obamassiah? Really?
It’s always amazing how concerned liberals are about convervatives destroying themselves...
Clarence Page is a racist. Always has been. Just read his articles. His over-riding theme is the glory of blackness, and the evil of whites.
TRANSLATION: "He's not following the script".
I care not what his skin color is, I care what color his SOUL is....and Barack’s is a quiet black.
Apparently that is the latest RAT talking point. Biden is using it too.
You got it-and like that other cretin Charles Barkley, his hatred didn’t stop him from “reaching across the aisle” when it came time to look for a wife.
Clarence Page is a smug racist.
Let me help you here Clarence. You are squealing like the pig you are because the attacks are hurting YOU and the Democrats. Gee the truth hurts ‘eh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.