I couldn’t care less if he was a decorated war hero. He’s Bush III. That’s the main problem. The rest is all noise.

Ah, my cunning plan has obviously been foiled. You’ve rumbled my young padawan. If it wasn’t for those pesky kids etc etc etc…

Contrary to Sunny’s spin: “Kerry came within a whisker of beating Bush last time,” the more accurate statement is that despite standing against a bell-end who’d taken America into a dubious war, Kerry managed, despite the odds, to fucking lose. He lost. He lost to George Dubya Bush. And if Americans are thinking Bush is an idiot right now, they’re unlikely to fancy the one man (let’s not bring Gore into this) who came up second best to him. Sure, Bush is dumb as all us clever Euros like to think. But Kerry actually got slightly worse grades than him at college. DAMN. He failed before he even tried. He was for it before he was against it, and all that shite.

The minute Kerry gets mentioned, Fox will (rightfully) start dusting off all those Jane Fonda clips. “Strong attack dog“? 5 words: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Kerry ummed, ahhed and regardless of the truth looked a complete asshole over that whole affair. Didn’t affect his core constituency who stuck by him, but cost him a lot of floating voters.

Flip followed by flop followed by flip followed by flop followed by that Leftfield tune and Bush walking back into the White House.

No. It won’t be Kerry.

And as a Democrat that makes me very happy. As happy as when someone politely told Michael Foot to climb in a fucking hole and promise never to come out again.

Personally I think he is at his best as a senior senator

So, I have given you a link where it states that the guy has the worst absence record ever as a senator – including a senator who was recovering from brain damage – and you say he is at his best as a senator?
Words fail me.

I just object to the idea that is increasingly banded around by Obama’s supporters that the only ones opposing him are racists

I have never heard anyone defend this. But it is undeniable – that there is a considerable number of people – more than 15% – who will never vote for a black man, and that includes Democrats as well. Acknowledging that these people will vote for McCain because of Obama’s race does not mean that all people who vote for McCain are racists.

So, put that strawman in your pipe and smoke it.

37 spot on.

And it makes Obama look hypocritical especially when his campaign and surrogates try to build this image of a different politician transcending race and gender.

Yes, that is fair. For one, it implies that there’s no debate to be had.

Ben

I forgot that nobody in their right mind could vote for a decorated war hero who was tortured for years rather than abandon his men

When it was insinuated that McCain had been dishonest in the recent Saddleback event, his spokesperson stated “the insinuation from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous.”

“one of the few people who (correctly) backed the Surge.”

And yet his knowledge of it remains strangely deficient.

Obviously, people do like his policies. Jon Voight, for example (the arse).

“Personally I think it will be a woman.”

An interesting recent quote: “My vice-president also, by the way, will be a member of the executive branch; he won’t be one of these fourth branches of the government where he thinks he’s above the law.”

A slip or just the sexism of our beloved language?

one of the few people who (correctly) backed the Surge.

The “surge worked(tm)” is one of the most disingenuous boasts I’ve ever heard. If you add thousands more soldiers, you will decrease violence. That’s a given!
But that doesn’t mean that it is a long term solution, nor that once the soldiers leave, that the violence will strike back at pre-surge levels. And then what? You just spend millions of dollars for nothing! The real deal is that Obama in 2002 said that invading Iraq would bring about chaos and would unleash fight between Sunnis and Shiahs. McCain in 2008 doesn’t know whether Al Qaeda is Shiah or Sunni, and whether Iran is Shiah or Sunni. He has said in the past that he is clueless about the economy, and his absence in the Senate is even worse than a senator who is recovering from a brain haemorrhage.

Oh, but he is a freakin war hero. It is time Obama starts pounding McCain.

I don’t mean this in a perjorative way but basically he’s a loser – and one of Obama’s great strengths is… his great strength – he’s seen as a winner, and all the electino discussion whether you are for or against him is about Obama – with the occasional mention that there’s this old guy who’s the alternative.

Personally I think it will be a woman. If he doesn’t choose a woman McCain will and that would be difficult for him. Having said that I think it just cannot possibly be Clinton – it just wont happen.

Your Harvey Two-Face act where you slip into your alter ego, Morgoth, would be disconcerting if it were not so… hilarious.

I forgot that nobody in their right mind could vote for a decorated war hero who was tortured for years

Ironically, if one goes by Bush’s definition of torture – something McCain agreed upon – McCain was not tortured by the Vietnamese but subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques”.

Americans like to think that their country stands for something and that better times are around the corner. John McCain 2000 could have made this argument but despite his best efforts McCain 2008 is too closely linked with the failures of the Bush Administration.

What would stop me for voting John McCain is this idea of him trying to impose his religious beliefs on the nation– he would stack the Bench so that Roe vs Wade would be overturned and abortion could become illegal in many states. And, that would be social regression. And I find myself in tune with Obama here talks about reduction the number of abortions but not by forcing women — as if women makes these decisions callously. I dont mind people being pro-life but when the Constitution clearly prohibits the mixing of Church and state — stacking up the Supreme Court such that religious conservatism is given credence by enshrining their archaic beliefs within the rule of law would be one reason why one must be worried about voting for John McCain.

I worry about the same Supreme Court might keep supporting the doctrine of executive privilege and the executive’s power to determine “clear and present danger” to such an extent that it erodes the basic values and ideals of the the United States.

I also do not agree with this foreign policy stance of having a league of democracies — I think we need to reform the existing institutions that reflect the 21st century world — and McCain’s us vs them approach along with pushing the European Integration further gives me some more reasons not to vote for this very patriotic war hero.

And, I am no Obama fanatic… Good enough reasons Rumbold.

You are surely not suggesting that war hero status has any bearing on fitness for the office of POTUS? His anger management issues seem more relevant to me.

And Obamessiah? Come on, you’re better than that.

I forgot that nobody in their right mind could vote for a decorated war hero who was tortured for years rather than abandon his men, a senator with years of experience, one of the first senior politicans to roundly denounce Gitmo and who has consistantly pressed for the US army to conduct themselves liked civilised human beings, and one of the few people who (correctly) backed the Surge. All his fans must be racist, since no non-racist could ever vote against the Obamessiah. Which means that close to 50% of registered Democrats are racist, as they backed Hillary.