- ‹ previous
- 2375 of 2798
- next ›
McCain vs. Bush
McCAIN vs. BUSH....Atrios sez:
I've never been a fan of John McCain. I never had a mancrush on him as most of the "liberals" in the media once did. But there was a time not all that long ago when I thought that a McCain presidency would at least be a marginal improvement over the Bush presidency. Now I believe it would be much, much worse.
This pretty much describes me too. I was never a fan of McCain, even in his 2004 semi-liberal incarnation, but I did have at least some respect for his positions and his character. As Republicans went, especially compared to the sad sack crew they put up for the presidency this year, he wasn't too bad.
But now? If you put a gun to my head and forced me to pull the lever for either McCain or Bush, I'm not sure who I'd choose. Getting the Cheney/Addington crew out of the White House might be worth it no matter what, especially if I could convince myself that McCain is hale and hearty and Sarah Palin would never have any duty more important than attending foreign funerals. But then again, compared to McCain's barely suppressed rage and erratic, free-form bellicosity, the 2008 model George Bush almost seems like a statesman. It takes a very special talent to make people like Atrios and me come to that conclusion. John McCain is obviously a very special talent.
especially if I could convince myself that ? Sarah Palin would never have any duty more important than attending foreign funerals.
No, Kevin. We mustn't let her out of the country. If foreigners get a closer look at her, we'll get even less respect. Let's confine her to domestic funerals ? of pets.
especially if I could convince myself that ? Sarah Palin would never have any duty more important than attending foreign funerals.
No, Kevin. We mustn't let her out of the country. If foreigners get a closer look at her, we'll get even less respect. Let's confine her to domestic funerals ? of pets.
You and Atrios = Peas in a Pod...who knew?
For some reason, you fellows ignore--perhaps never got--the advice my ol' daddy gave me many years ago: Son, he said, never assume innocent ignorance when from the same evidence you may deduce malevolence. This is doubly true in business (the word he used was 'bidnuss'), and triply so in politics.
. . . compared to McCain's barely suppressed rage and erratic, free-form bellicosity, the 2008 model George Bush almost seems like a statesman.
Yeah, but probably Bush's more temperate behavior these days comes from the fact that he knows he's running out the clock. If Bush were actually running for a third term, he'd be doing a much better job of talking up 'reaching across the aisle' while sticking a knife in Obama's back, and were he to win a third term, he would come out of the gate as neocon as ever (remember the Social Security fiasco in 2005).
This isn't to say that McCain would be a better choice than a Bush threepeat, just that Bush's appearance as 'almost like a statesman' probably has more to do with circumstance than with temperament.
I must say I think I'd have to choose 2008 Bush over 2008 McCain. This Bush seems to keep the Cheney wing in check. Of course, that might all have something to do with the fact that they're out on their asses in a few months, so the comparison might not really be all it's cracked up to be.
I am convinced that McCain is even more unserious than is Incurious George.
They both are products of privilege whose families of wealth an influence secured their places in prestigious prep schools and universities, and rescued them from every adolescent jam into which they put themselves.
If I were forced to choose between the two, I'd take the bullet.
You and Atrios are claiming you might prefer Bush over McCain. What were you two snorting at your party last night?
This post of yours is mainly a mark of how silly both of you have become towards the end of this campaign.
Kevin, I completely agree. I used to think McCain was an honorable man. Not any more. Also, Bush seems to have mellowed with age or the pissiness is just not as evident. In any case, although both men are still reprehensible human beings, I almost think Bush is the lesser of two very great evils at this point in time.
My very liberal brother-in-law, who lives in Iowa claims that Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa once said of McCain - "the more you get to know him, the less you like him". I can't find this quote in Lexis/Nexis, but my brother-in-law swears that it is true. Given the fact that McCain has been observed shoving Grassley around and screaming at him (See this link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/20/john-mccain-charles-grass_n_976... ), it seems plausible.
The current dire circumstances have brought the barely-latent pathologies of both McCain and Bush to the surface at the same time.
Bush, as is his pattern, has entered the phase where his screw-ups have become impossible to ignore, he's lost interest, and he's looking for someone to bail him out and clean up after him. That's why he seems subdued. He's still nuts, however, just predictably so.
The fighter-jock, Top Gun, let's-bomb-somebody McCain is aghast that he can't order up a victory. So, he does what has always worked in the past, ready, fire, aim, attack, attack, attack. He's nuts, too, just in a different, more erratic way.
McCain has some advantages over Bush: he's much more engaged, knowledgeable, and intelligent. But in other respects, he'd be our Boris Yeltsin, blundering from one policy inebriation to another. His rule would be, at best, a caretaker presidency until someone younger and stronger came along. Our last cold warrior is halfway gone and replaying the Vietnam War cannot save him.
especially if I could convince myself that Sarah Palin would never have any duty more important than attending foreign funerals.
No, Kevin. We mustn't let her out of the country. If foreigners get a closer look at her, we'll get even less respect. Let's confine her to domestic funerals of pets.
I would say that jrw nails it.
This is usually the point in Bush`s history where some of the all powerful family friends swoop in and rescue him from the consequences of his insane behavior. Rinse, repeat for McSameo.
*sheesh*
Guess it`ll be the clock this time around.
*sheesh*
(I am unable to express in words how frustrated I am by the easy going way people are willing to deal with this pack of low rent punks. I`m visualising the final crowd scene from "V for Vendetta" for a much more appropriate response but...)
"...A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to it's true principles. It is true that in the mean time we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war & long oppressions of enormous public debt...." - Thomas Jefferson
I think one reason people have seen McCain as a decent guy is that he has used independent or Democratic language while voting right-wing Republican. He can be a gregarious guy, but if the Grassley quote is accurate, then it's only a matter of time and the bright spotlight of a presidential campaign to reveal he isn't so likable and he isn't honest about his political positions.
As to which would be worse, Bush or McCain, I think it's a tossup because both will allow neocons into their administration and regardless of what they said/say during the campaign, once the administration begins and neocons weigh-in on foreign policy then things begin to change.
I remember one moment early in the Bush administration where he publicly said something which was very moderate and sensible. Almost immediately there was a statement from the "White House" which said Bush had misspoken and the real policy was the opposite. One can only wonder who wrote on behalf of the White House with the power to countermand the president.
One thing I think we must demand is that the president take full and complete responsibility for the major policies promulgated in the president's name. We can't let no-names and Vice Presidents and Yoo Hoos do things that destroy America and then not lay blame on the elected official -- the President -- who has all the power to allow or reverse any stupid policies. We live in a Democracy and we have to put blame where the power has been authorized, with the President.
Bush or McCain? Without neocons I think Bush would be better. With neocons it doesn't matter.
Kevin, In the run up to the Bush/Iraq war, it was only in the few weeks before the invasion that you woke up to the fact that it was a Really Bad Idea.
Now, after years of lying and right wing lunacy, you finally grok that McCain is a Bush-level or worse disaster.
Seriously, my friend, you should spend a bit more time listening to us shrill, hysterical, types. Perhaps we're not really so hysterical after all, just more sensitive to political, moral, and intellectual catastrophe than you.
When politics is normal, of course, you're very astute. But politics with rightwing Republicans is NOT normal.
Seriously, listen to us more often.
Did you have to do this, Kevin?
Mr. Somerby will be in a state for at least a couple of days.
All that "Worst.President.Ever" stuff, we don't actually mean that. Okay, that's good (sad) to know.
I think I'd ask for the bullet.
Please, Please, Please-give bush the real credit he deserves-I know I'd like to but no one will listen to Kuscinich! Bush is the only President that has come up with a brand new choice! There's the right choice , the wrong choice and "the absolutely most disastrous choice" that Bush has patent on!Take the pleas of the Auto Industry, Trucking Industry, and Airline Industry for help from the President! Now he could have put a lot of pressure on the Oil Industry-Threatened them with progressively higher taxes, released oil from our Reserves-ANYTHING would have been a good choice but NOTHING and 2.2 million jobs left the Country! Then we have our recent encounter of Chicken Little Paulson screaming at the top of his voice that the U.S. Economy is facing the worst Economic Disaster of the Century! Boy, did he talk to the right President and the right Congress-Big Emergency Session-millions of gullible Investors are watching as Nancy Pelosi grins her idiotic smile and passes Paulson's Aid package that he needs to get his old job back with a big bonus at Goldman-Sachs and guess what-Big drop on the Stock Market! Another Disaster chalked up to Bush-Of course, He may have picked up a lot of prime stock along with Cheney and their rich friends but nobody bothers to check on that! Carl Weathers was "the Master of Disaster" in the first Rocky Movie but he has given his title without question to the biggest Master of them all-President G.W. Bush! I will admit if they can get all his disasters on a large diarama, he will have the most graphic Presidential Library in History!
While campaigning for POTUS in 2000 McCain said U.S. foreign policy should aggressively destabilize "rogue regimes".
McCain is a nut. He's been a nut since getting into politics.
Because he's erratic and a preening ass, he's sometimes helpful to causes you like. Erratic people aren't very consistent, right?
But the guy has never been remotely presidential in temperament. His U.S. Senate colleagues know it.
It's yet another strike against the U.S. media corps that they found McCain an attractive candidate for POTUS without noticing that he's erratic and a preening ass.
Agree that jrw nails this. McCain's pathology is even weirder than Bush's. It's the age, the anger, and hotheadedness. Never liked the guy. Never bought the maverick shtick. As for who's worse, Bush or McCain. Thank god, we'll never find out.
Bush/Cheney08 would be "getting the Cheney/Addington crowd out".
Remember that Rummy, Yoo, Ashcroft, Goss and Karl senior are all gone and Cheney is mostly fighting supeanas rather than countries these days.. But which well rested fresh new crazies would team MCain hire?
When McCains primary fundraising was in trouble because no nutty GOP loyalist millionaire is gonna donate to kerry's running mate, McCain proved his loyaltee and seriouness. He provided jobs for every piece of shadowy party machinary and lobbyist he could find. Yukos, CNOOC, The Saudi royal family, Saakasvilli everyone is represented in McCains team "America first".
(And those are just the client respected enough to bother with fara.gov filings)
So which secretary of state would be acceptable to such a diverse group? Well it won't be someone who knows the issues other then trough inside the beltway steak dinner briefings. Someone from the IRI perhaps?
DOJ will again go to someone who will goes after porn but not after misapropriated "faith based" funds. And it won't be someone who goes after wall street just because a nation of whiners demands it. Complete amnesty for anyone who followed constitutional advise from Addington/Yoo is a given.
DOD will go to some hawkish military guy who like KcCain loves to talk about honor but had less than stunning grades for military strategy.
The most frightening unanswerable question about John McCain is this: Who will run the government if he is elected? It won't be John McCain.
I think McCain combines the worst aspects of both W and Clinton, without either of their virtues.
Child of privelege who's failed upward without ever demonstrating much ability? Intellectually incurious? Bellicose black/white view of foreign policy? Intolerance of dissent? Check to all.
Lack of any core principles besides the pursuit of personal power? Lying adulterer? Narcissist? Check to all.
Meanwhile, he lacks W's consisntency and focus on goals, nor does he run a tight ship administratively. He also lacks Clinton's wonkiness, ability to rapidly absorb information, and his charisma.
I think I'd probably take McCain by a hair over Bush, just because I think McCain's lack of principle and his desire to get stuff done would lead him to compromise on most issues with a Democratic congress, while Bush would continue to be much more obstructionist. But that's a pretty thin reed to hang your hat on, in a comparison with the worst president in history.
Who would I vote for if it was between McCain and Bush?
Let me tell you what would happen:
I'd vote for Nader, and all these f-ing "liberals" would blame ME for getting McCain elected and taking votes away from BUSH!
Eh. Any partisan Democrat would predictably turn on whomever the Republicans put up, no matter who it was. Running against your guy has a way of raising hackles, but you wouldn't have voted for him no matter what anyway.