Here’s what I’ve seen in just the past 2 weeks (and I’d imagine I haven’t seen a tenth of what’s out there).
Implying Obama supports Fidel Castro by placing their pictures side-by-side.
Implying Obama is the anti-Christ.
Implying people who follow him are crazy sheep under a spell.
Implying terrorists want him elected.
What the HELL happened to the McCain that was full of integrity from 4 years ago? I am appalled at how he wanted to change campaign rules, clean up the campaign process, and now he’s the antithesis of that (plus accepting big bucks from special interests). Attack someone on their policies is fine. But what’s going on now is unforgivable considering what he preached just a short time ago.
McCain went from someone I respected a while ago, to someone that disgusts me today.
For some reason that conjured up an image of McCain on his back while a bunch of disgusting pseudo vampiric men in suits with name tags labeled GOP feast on his guts.
Thanks a lot for that. And I was just about to eat breakfast.
That’s my theory as well. I think that he made his political career on taking whatever viewpoint made him stand out. His “maverick” image is just a careful selection of issues on which to make some noise.
This theory makes sense with his current behavior. He’s picking issues based on whatever makes a good “narrative” and makes him stand out. His approach to the issues has been very venal, motivated by a desire to create situations where he gets to act and look like a leader. The actual issues themselves don’t seem to have ever mattered to him.
McCain is a terrible person and so are his followers. I’ve had the misfortune of running into a few hardcore neocons who refer to Obama as “Hussein” all the freaking time, or “Osama”, and talk about how the Hezbollah want him to win the elections and all sorts of other vapid crap.
They heartily endorse the new ads McCain’s been putting out, and McCain well knows that he’s pandering to these intolerant assholes because he’s already lost the liberal vote.
Or perhaps placing them side-by-side implies that Fidel supports Obama. It may be unfair to saddle Obama with this endorsement, but I’ll become more sympathetic to this argument when Democrats stop regularly wearing Che t-shirts.
I never saw the “anti” in this. It is leftists who are worshipping him as some sort of messianic figure. You expect Republicans to not to parody this?
Do you have a problem with them being called crazy or being called sheep under a spell. I’d rather be called crazy than evil or terrible, which are terms regularly thrown at the right by the left. See this blanket statement:
As far as sheep under a spell, it sure seems like fair game to me, particularly if it’s fair game to Krugman.
I suspect most terrorist do want him elected. It’s probably his funny name, his skin color, or even the perceived association with Islam. This doesn’t mean that he is a terrorist. I would submit that most white supremacists will go for McCain. If the left can cite that the world wants Obama, can’t the right cite that the world includes unsavory characters?
This. He’s basically been an opportunistic piece of shit for his entire political career, only he managed to trick some people into thinking otherwise for most of it. The John McCain you’re becoming acquainted with now is the real John McCain.
Yeah, welcome to P&R, Inuvix! Hold on whilst I don my Che t-shirt.
…
Hokay, I’m ready now. Basically, you’ve proven jpinard’s point - all of the things jpinard mentioned are typical barbs thrown back and forth between the right and left wingers. As you note, the right wing has every right to make those rhetorical points, as the left wing has often done exactly the reverse.
But McCain has made his career on being the maverick, straight-talking senator. He’s all about “the issues” - he’s the pilot of the straight-talk express, remember? For his campaign to wallow in personal attacks and right-vs-left rhetoric betrays everything he’s claimed to stand for his entire political career.
So, yeah, as a right-wing cheerleader, you might say “right on! stick it to those hippies!”, but as an American who had hoped for something more substantive in this campaign, aren’t you disappointed in him?
Wow, given that thoughtful and persuasive argument, I guess I’ll withdraw.
I was never a big fan of McCain’s maverick-ness in the first place, so I’m not disappointed in the least. I suspect jpinard is troubled because McCains attacks are from the right and they are showing a bit of success. It doesn’t surprise me that he liked him better when he was thumbing his nose at Republicans while hopping on Democratic crusades. My guess is that jp doesn’t show the same level of disappointment at Obamas attacks.
Why the shock when campaigns attack their opponents weaknesses? It WILL happen on both sides, because it’s effective.
Part of the issue for me is that Obama has built a substantial amount of his support because of his speaking ability and how he emotionally connects with some people, rather than on issues. If poking holes in that is disheartening, then the next few months are going to be a nightmare.
WASHINGTON - Democratic candidate Barack Obama on Saturday backed away from rival John McCain’s challenge for a series of joint appearances, agreeing only to the standard three debates in the fall.
In May, when a McCain adviser proposed a series of pre-convention appearances at town hall meetings, Obama said, “I think that’s a great idea.” In summer stumping on the campaign trail, McCain has often noted that Obama had not followed through and joined him in any events.
Obama’s reversal on town hall debates is part of a play-it-safe strategy he’s adopted since claiming the nomination and grabbing a lead in national polls.
If Obama really wants substance, really wants to actually debate issues with McCain, maybe he shouldn’t be “backing away” from holding more actual debates with McCain. I guess Obama would rather tackle the tough issues by proclaiming his controversial pro-hope stand in front of crowds of his adoring shee…err supporters.
Why the shock when campaigns attack their opponents weaknesses? It WILL happen on both sides, because it’s effective.
It’s a weakness to be diplomatic?
Part of the issue for me is that Obama has built a substantial amount of his support because of his speaking ability and how he emotionally connects with some people, rather than on issues. If poking holes in that is disheartening, then the next few months are going to be a nightmare.
That’s what I thought of Obama at the beginning of the primaries. He was hawking a book. At the time he sounded more like a motivational speaker than a candidate for office. However, that’s not Obama now, so I’m not sure what you’re poking holes into because if you even barely scratch his surface you’ll realize there’s much more than marketing behind his positions.
I don’t blame Obama. What is McCain going to challenge him on? Tire gauges and flag pins? If the democratic debates were any measure, he’d be walking into a mud wrestling match rather than a reasoned debate.
