Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama outlines plans for race against McCain (Keating Five)
Yahoo News ^ | 11 May 08 | CHARLES BABINGTON and SARA KUGLER

Posted on 05/11/2008 6:40:55 AM PDT by Mr Rogers

Barely mentioning Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama said he was open to campaigning with McCain in "town hall" events. But he also warned that controversial issues such as McCain's ties to the Keating Five savings and loan scandal are fair game, and he called McCain's proposal for a temporary halt in the federal gasoline tax a pander and a gimmick...

Obama was asked Saturday if the fall campaign might touch on the 1987 Keating Five scandal, in which the Senate Ethics Committee said McCain used "poor judgment" for allegedly pressing regulators to go easy on the owner of a failed Arizona savings and loan who was also a campaign contributor.

Obama said there is no doubt the Keating Five case is "germane to the presidency."

"I can't quarrel with the American people wanting to know more about that," he said.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: 2008; keatingfive; mccain; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
To: inkling

Oh how little you actually know about your hero Juan.

There will be plenty of current ammo for the press to unload on McNasty. Watch out for the Vietnam Veterans against McCain. The scrutiny over his service record (Before he was captured.) will certainly become a national issue. Those 19 medals he received for only 23 absolutely lack-luster missions and the direct relation to his family Military associations. (How he got those medals) Will make John F’n Kerry look like Audie Murphy.


21 posted on 05/11/2008 8:00:27 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (Juan McCain....The lesser of Three Liberals.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

If Obama brings up Keating, McCain must bring up Rezko, and also Obama’s “earmark” for his wife’s employer. Obama is ore corrupt than McCain.


22 posted on 05/11/2008 8:07:01 AM PDT by devere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
McCain will probably apologize profusely if Obama brings up his past.
23 posted on 05/11/2008 8:07:27 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Bipartisanship: Two wolves and the American people deciding what's for dinner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Obama outlines plans for race against McCain (Keating Five)

putting b. HUSSIEN and race in the same sentence....is racist!!!


24 posted on 05/11/2008 8:15:53 AM PDT by nyyankeefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

He wants to bring up a 30 year old “scandal” where the very investigator is on the record stating McCain had no involvement at the same time one of his main backers is facing conviction.. yea... that’s sounds wise Fauxbama.. keep it up.

Fauxbama is bringing a tooth pick to a knife fight.. my god this man is so not ready for prime time.


25 posted on 05/11/2008 8:19:44 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Obama has his own crooked land deal and the guy involved is undergoing trial right now. You wouldn’t know it to read the daily headlines though.


26 posted on 05/11/2008 8:41:46 AM PDT by weegee (Osama Obama claims to have visited 57 states now. Can you say Potatoe Head?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Maybe McCain will continue to agree with Obama on all matters and say that Obama is right, McCain will step down and let someone else run for the Presidency as the GOP candidate.


27 posted on 05/11/2008 8:45:11 AM PDT by weegee (Osama Obama claims to have visited 57 states now. Can you say Potatoe Head?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Rezko, Ayers, The Most Lunatic Reverend Wright, and of course Michelle who has a problem keeping the hate oozing from her pores.


28 posted on 05/11/2008 8:45:57 AM PDT by jwalsh07 (El Nino is climate, La Nina is weather.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
McCain's press buddies are going to turn on him big time. Having tossed overboard every conservative he can find, who will rise to his defense?

Barrack Hussein Obama has flat out promised to bug out of Iraq and voluntarilly lose a war that over 4,000 American servicemembers have died to win. If Obama had had his way, the war would already have been lost.

**********

Published Jan. 30, 2007 ...... Obama wants troops home by spring ’08 ……. Illinois senator, presidential candidate introduces bill to force redeployment

**********

In 2006, by contrast, McCain was championing, almost by himself, the Surge strategy that has turned the war around when even Rumsfeld was dead set against it and Bush was just "staying the course" with Rumsfeld's losing strategy.

**********

Published December 27, 2006 ..... Novak: McCain's 'aggressive surge' stance backfiring ........ conservative columnist Robert Novak suggests that Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) "aggressive" push for a U.S. troop expansion -- or "surge" -- in Iraq may be costing the top 2008 GOP contender in the polls, especially when matched against another presumed front-runner, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY). "The decline in the polls of [McCain], as measured against [Clinton], reflects more than declining Republican popularity ......... "It connotes public disenchantment with McCain's aggressive advocacy of a 'surge' of up to 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq

"I understand the polls show only 18 percent of the American people support my position. But I have to do what's right, what I believe is right and what my experience and knowledge and background tells me is the right thing to do in order to save this situation in Iraq ... In war, my dear friends, there's no such thing as compromise. You either win or you lose." - Sen. John McCain's reaction to the Iraq Study Group Report, 2006

**********

Now, let's consider the consequences of bugging out and losing the War in Iraq:

1.) The fanatical Islamist mullahs of Iran will move into the power vacuum in Iraq leaving them with military hegemony of the Persian Gulf and 70% of the World's known oil reserves.

2.) With control of 70% of the World's known oil reserves, a fanatical Islamist Iran will have control of the carotid arteries of the economies of the Western World.

3.) Islamist Iran, like North Korea and Pakistan before it, is aggressively seeking nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them. With control of 70% of the World's known oil reserves, Iran will most surely achieve its nuclear goals in short order by bribery or economic blackmail of the European nations and/or the Japanese and/or the Russians.

4.) After Cutting & Running from Iraq, Obama will not do what it takes to stop Iran.

5.) At that point, in ten years, those of you who live in or near major cities of the East Coast could be obliterated in an Iranian nuclear strike if the Mullahs in Iran decide that the day for achieving Eternity in Paradise by striking at the Great Satan has finally come.

6.) The deterrence doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D.) worked fine with the pragmatic Soviets and the ChiComs, it will probably even work with the nutty North Koreans but M.A.D. means "Winning an Eternity in Paradise" to the fanatical Islamist Mullahs of Iran. M.A.D. will not work with them.


Fanatical Islamist Response to the old M.A.D. Doctrine: "Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. Now we want the Mother Of All T-shirts."

"Having tossed overboard every conservative he can find, who will rise to his defense?", you ask.

How about conservatives who care more about America's safety and their children and grandchildren's future safety than they care about the pettiness of having their sensitive feelings hurt because a politician did not kiss their collective arse as often as they wished he had?

How about them?

29 posted on 05/11/2008 8:51:54 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813

“but believes Wright & his association with terrorists is irrelevant.

Unfortunately, so does McCain”

But the 527’s don’t.


30 posted on 05/11/2008 8:56:01 AM PDT by moose2004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

I want to hear more about the Rezko 666.


31 posted on 05/11/2008 8:57:10 AM PDT by Malesherbes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polybius

What an incredulous display of Guilt and shame based rhetoric!

Could we at least have some mustard with that Guilt sandwich?

What on Earth does voting for McNasty have to do with us being attacked on 9/11? Wasn’t McNasty a Senator back then? And what, may I ask, did he do then to stop it? Or what would he do now, other than open our borders and give 30 million Illegal aliens citizenship? Will this stop those threats?

So many questions, so few real answers, only rhetoric and demagoguery.


32 posted on 05/11/2008 9:01:38 AM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (Juan McCain....The lesser of Three Liberals.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Obama counts on his minions to go into the gutter

That's the real story. Dragging up very old news. Obama was still smoking pot back when some of this stuff happened.

33 posted on 05/11/2008 9:11:49 AM PDT by WOSG (Conservatism is just an advanced form of patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
The scrutiny over his service record (Before he was captured.) will certainly become a national issue. Those 19 medals he received for only 23 absolutely lack-luster missions and the direct relation to his family Military associations

Nineteen medals, you say?

What an impressive number. Are you including the "Alive in '65" Medal and the Vietnam Service Medal to bolster your impressive sounding number?

Why don't you list the particular medals and their respective citations you have an issue with and say exactly why you have an issue with them?

"Only 23 missions", you say?

In World War II, 25 missions in the Eighth Air Force got you a one-way ticket back to the States.

But not just any missions, "23 absolutely lack-luster missions", you say.

Please explain to us how a particular A-4 Skyhawk mission over North Vietnam qualifies as "absolutely lack-luster" or "Not-lack-luster" in your book.

*******

On July 25, 1967, Forrestal reached Yankee Station in the Gulf of Tonkin[60] and thereby joined Operation Rolling Thunder, the 1965–1968 bombing campaign against North Vietnam during the Vietnam War.[43][62] The alpha strikes flown from Forrestal were against specific, pre-selected targets such as arms depots, factories, and bridges.[63] They were quite dangerous, due to the strength of the North Vietnamese air defenses, which used Soviet-designed and supplied surface-to-air missiles, anti-aircraft artillery, and MiG jet interceptors.

*******

REAR ADMIRAL JERRY C. BREAST, USN (Ret): Speech Given at the USS FORRESTAL Association 2005 Reunion ......... In October 1967 we hit the Hanoi Thermal Power Plant. This is the flight when your shipmate, John McCain was shot down. The leader of that Alpha Strike was my skipper, the very same Bryant Compton who led the fire party to CVA-59. For planning and leading the strike, which put Hanoi in the literal dark for three months, Commander Compton won the Navy Cross.

*******

While you're at it, enlighten us on how "Not-lack-luster" your own combat record was.

If Alpha Strikes against heavily defended hard targets such as arms depots, factories, power plants and bridges qualify as ""absolutely lack-luster" in your book, you must have gone into combat with a wheelbarrow just so that you could carry your own gigantic testicles around the battlefield.

34 posted on 05/11/2008 9:54:29 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
Please be specific as to what you mean by “lack-luster”. My recollection was that light attack guys in those days had to get close an personal to deliver their weapons... Any time they struck into NVA they faced an integrated air defense that was more than a match for A-4s. Unless you have factual data/info your comments are merit less and should be an embarrassment to you.
35 posted on 05/11/2008 10:06:02 AM PDT by RedEyeJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
What an incredulous display of Guilt and shame based rhetoric! Could we at least have some mustard with that Guilt sandwich?

What a perfect example of completely ignoring the issues presented and, instead, whining about how you feel about what I wrote.

I don't give a rat's ass how you feel about it.

Obama has promised to lose the war. THAT IS A FACT.

Losing the war will have the strategic consequences I outlined. If I am wrong about that point, prove it to me.

If you have a fact-based argument other that pathetically whining because your tender feelings were hurt, let's hear it.

I never mentioned "Guilt". I mentioned "Losing the war". I mentioned the strategic consequences of losing this particular war.

If the fact is that, deep down, you realize that working side by side with the likes of Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore and Barrack Obama to have America lose this particular war is something that you should be ashamed of, that is not my concern or my problem.

That is YOUR problem.

You do your best to protect your tender feelings.

I will do my best not to allow people like you to convince other American voters to lose this war at the ballot box next November.

36 posted on 05/11/2008 10:13:03 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: RedEyeJack; PSYCHO-FREEP
Please be specific as to what you mean by “lack-luster”. My recollection was that light attack guys in those days had to get close an personal to deliver their weapons... Any time they struck into NVA they faced an integrated air defense that was more than a match for A-4s. Unless you have factual data/info your comments are merit less and should be an embarrassment to you.

Be careful, RedEyeJack.

PSYCHO-FREEP is very sensitive about getting his tender feelings hurt. (See Post 36.)

In case he is too emotionally traumatized to respond right now, I will take the liberty of responding to your post for him:

"What an incredulous display of Guilt and shame based rhetoric! Could we at least have some mustard with that Guilt sandwich?"

Don't expect a fact-based response from him. He only whines about his feelings.

37 posted on 05/11/2008 10:23:35 AM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Alissa

It seems to me that the age issue should be off the table just like the race issue. Obama can’t help and had no control of the color of his skin and should be judged by his associations, actions, his wife etc. McCain cant’ help and has no control over his age therefore he should be judged in the same way as Obama. Age and race should not be issues.


38 posted on 05/11/2008 10:26:04 AM PDT by dandiegirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Robert Bennett, Chief Counsel to the Democrats during the investigation, said that McCain should not be included in the investigation and that their was no evidence of any wrongdoing by McCain.


39 posted on 05/11/2008 10:29:39 AM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
Obama’s is going to make inferences to McCain showing signs of senility.

LOL, Obama, who doesn't even know how many states we have. 

40 posted on 05/11/2008 10:34:09 AM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson