Appearing on Anderson Cooper 360 tonight on CNN, Time Magazine columnist Joe Klein said that John McCain's comments Tuesday that Barack Obama is willing to lose a war to win an election were the most scurrilous he had ever heard by a major party candidate.
On his blog on the Time Magazine website, Klein wrote that the comment "smacks of desperation."
[WATCH]
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Has anyone checked in with Cindy lately to ask her about her husband's pledge to forego any sort of negative campaigning? How's that working out? Does anyone else remember her saying this in a self-righteous way?
The last time Cindy spoke about negative campaigning in May, Cindy McCain said, “We'd rather not win than to have to do that,” Mrs. McCain said. “That's not worth winning for. This is about being a leader and a person that can be a good example for our children, and a good role model. There's many, many, many more things to this job than just being the president. You are an example. You have to — you have to be better than that. You have to be.”
Cindy said we'd rather not win than to have to use negative campaigning as a tactic. And that you have to be a good role model. Maybe she ought to share those thoughts with her husband. Oh, wait, they don't even live in the same house so maybe they don't speak.
But, I listened to the entire interview and while out of one side of her mouth she was saying the McCain's weren't going to use negative campaigning, the other side of her mouth was 'questioning' Michelle Obama's patriotism. Yeah, way to go Cindy!
How about Obama's pledge to use public financing? An issue liberals love to support, except when it doesn't work out to their advantage.
uh huh..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrV35C4UdSc
I am appalled at the way McCain is running his campaign. I have never heard such drivel that is coming out of his campaign on an every day basis. None of it is important; none of it matters.
It's the drip, drip, drip of water torture. I thought McCain passed legislation to outlaw torture.
It's like we are being water boarded.
newbridge--I think you have a misspelling there--McCain is "RUINING his campaign".
Joe, it's early in the campaign.
You ain't heard nothing yet.
Most scurrilous? Why, Captain America's just gettin' warmed up. Wait till that famous temper breaks loose after a few more weeks in the spotlight as the national laughingstock.
John McCain is so ignorant of world affairs. Wesley Clark was right on the money about MccCain not having any skill at foreign affairs. He doesn't even known where the countries lie. This McCain is even dumber than the moron that is in the White House now.
And that is sadly saying a LOT, since the moron that is in the White House now, is pretty bad...It's getting quite interesting, though, to wake up, and check the news to see what stupid thing McCain said since yesterday...Another day, another stupid McCain statement...I'm wondering if he can keep the streak up until November, or at least until the GOP convention.
If i could talk to Senator Obama i would tell him everytime McCain , the media, his surrogates, whomever brings up the word "surge" just say "i opposed the War from the beginning". If McCain wants to keep pushing this issue about the pass judgement then we have to talk about all of the past.
There would be no surge or whatever u want to call it if we didn't get involved in a "dumb" War.
Obama will not say "surge" because it was not a surge that help stop the fighting it was the Sunni's who decided to help America, oh and of course we paid for their assistance, we never learn.
If McBush wants Obama to say he was wrong about the surge then McBush will have to admit that it was wrong to take us into the immoral War. Has anyone heard him say that yet??....i thought not.
None of the neo-con right will ever admit that they supported and illegal War.
stick to ya guns Obama, they are tucking their tails in like little puppies right now.
Do you think the Sunni's would've "decided to help America" if they didn't believe we were going to win? It's a death sentence over there to side with "the infidels". Obviously they saw the writing on the wall, and made a wise choice.
But we can't give America's military any credit, can we? No, no, everything America does is bad. Right?
If Barack Obama had made a comment like that, the media would be playing it on a continous loop and we would hear about it for the next 4-5 days.
Or even longer! SICK of this media crap.
of obama had made a comment like that, it would be the new motto of the new york times, someone would make a campaign song out of it for obamagirl to sing on youtube, and the PuffHo would have melted down due to the heavy traffic of 'Spot On' comments from ther flock
Barry said he only opposed the surge because he had to disagree with George Bush. Is that sound byte on a loop somewhere?
Bush was right about something once, but I can't remember what it was.
Liar.
Sound bytes require sound. Since Senator Obama never said this, I doubt if there is a sound byte on a loop somehwere. But I wouldn't be surprised if McCain's campaign and Fox News tried to create one. Maybe they'll use you for the voice-over.
No, that's your brain going around and around.
The fallacy that almost everyone seems to ignore is the concept of winning a war on terrorism. Terrror is an emotion. Terrorism is a tactic. Every assault is a form of terrorism. Every murder is an even greater form of terrorism. As long as there are humans on this planet, there will be terrorism. There is absolutely no way possible to "win" a war on terrorism. You can declare war on a country, or even a specific group of people, but you can no more declare war on terrorism than you can declare war on rape or murder.
Good post, astro. I'd just add the war on drugs to that list.
add War on Gays... we're here n queer. get used to it.
Exactly! There is no way to "win" this war because there is no way to define what constitutes a win.
Flagged as too true to be controversial - therefore unsuitable for conservative-baiting.
I thought we were going to war against the "Nation of Terror," peopled by citizens known as "Terrorists," who have a great Army with the ability to cross a vast ocean unnoticed to harm us in our beds???? Isn't that what we've been hearing these last seven years? That is the fear message we've heard from the Republicans and it simply won't work this election, this time, or this year. We're on to you GOP, and we're going to elect Senator Obama to take us in a new direction. Obama '08
True. That's why it's so important that Bush, McCain, and all the other war fans define what they mean by "winning" and "victory."
Last night I watched Jim Lehrer interviewing Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Of course, Mullen repeated several times that U.S. military strategy would depend on "conditions on the ground." When Jim asked him who would decide when it was time to pull out - "the prime minister and the government of Iraq, or the president or to-be-president of the United States" - I said, obviously, the ground.
That's about as well as victory has been defined. Apparently, they'll know it when they see it. And this undefinable item, apparently, is worth more than all the lives lost or ruined and all the BILLIONS spent.
Reminds me when then Gov. Bush lambasted Clinton for not having an exit strategy in Bosnia. You remember Bosnia-Herzegovina. That's the conflict where we had zero US casualties.
The bald fact is that Bush and McCain have destroyed a country and will continue to lie about the whole enterprise for political reasons only.
They decided from the beginning that even reckless military adventures can be used to political effect and they will play that strategy out to the end, twisting the facts along the way.
It's McCain and Bush who have been willing to throw away lives, security, world peace and economic welfare to win elections.
The definition of scurrilous is to accuse your opponent of lowly tactics that you employ yourself.
Fearmongering is the only thing they have now. The notion that the region would break out in chaos, Al Queda would take over, World War 3 would begin if we don't "win"- all are obviously ludicrous and desperate.
Please read "General Karl Rove, Reporting for Duty":
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,356034,00.html
Copy and paste the entire address. Don't just click on the highlighted part.
Yes, they are willing to lose a war AND lose an election. Just so long as Halliburton and Exxon come out on top -- and the Dem majority is hobbled for the next four years.
It's scorched earth, baby.
O is answering questions live on MSNBC from Israel ... watch so you'll have facts and not fables!!
John McCain desperately wants to hang on to any flotsam the sinking campaign '08 brings his way.
mccain is part of the past and the republicans know it and they are just going along with it becuase they are scared of him too and that he is a dr.strangelove but want come out and say it mccain = danger for the whole world
For John George and the neo cons, winning is whenever the Iraqis quit hating each other so we can leave and they won't kill each other without us there to stop them. Last time I checked, the referee is never considered the winner when the game is over!
For George W. Bush and the Neocons, winning is getting Iraqi OIL. That is all it ever was about. . . OIL (Operation Iraqi Liberation)
Please allow me to disagree. Maybe I'm older than you, but check out covert-operations of the selected organisation of ours. Winning has been keeping those and many of ours at odds with one & other. South & North this and that country. It's called divide & concur, or, preservation of the American way of life.
It's still not winning. You can't go home again. You can't pull out. You just have to keep egging someone on ad infinitum. Our country always has to have an enemy.
It's called divide & concur.I think you meant divide and conquer...or were you being witty?
I'd like to see more done to preserve the American way of life right here on our own soil.
They've already won. They won the wars on education, homeownership, healthcare, the environment, wealth distribution, privacy, and energy policy. The only battle lost was the battle to give investment banks the Social Security fund, but they made up for it on the back end by allowing them to create REITs and Mc Cain has been mentioning "SS reform" during his townhall meetings.
I say we start a war on tracking down the treasury surplus.
Winning for them is subduing the population so that our 50 permanent military bases and the world's largest embassy can be put to use as a means to keep propping up the war industry, as a staging pad for blindly supporting Israel, and as the precinct stations for our oil field police efforts to ensure that the pre-1963 Gang of Four can drain Iraq dry of their oil, and to keep us in a perpetual war because the RNC thinks that's how you keep control of the population back home and continue to "win" elections.
It has absolutely nothing to do with doing anything at all for the Iraqis, who are just in the way of their plans for remodeling the Middle East.
How very very kind of Joe to take time off from his busy schedule of bashing Democrats.
Slow iron applause: clap ............clap ..............clap ............clap .................clap. Bra......vo.
Right! I very rarely agree with Klein ... but in this instance, he is absolutely correct! He would be correct if the players were different!! What Mc says can very well be considered accusing O of tyranny! It's really time for the US Congress to censor Mc, for verbiage unbecoming a US senator! O is still a US senator just as Mc is!!
What Mc said, IMO is libelous!
You mean censure, I think. Theoretically, at least, we don't censor people.
Cheney/Halliburton have actually won the war they went into win. They got most of the money
draining out of this country into the war. . . . . Iraq and America are the real losers here.
Cheney, didn't do it without monkey-puppet Bush, and the rest of the govenment saying
"yes suh", "anything you want suh" to Cheney.
Loading comments…
Huffington Post
First Posted: 07-23-08 02:32 AM | Updated: 07-30-08 05:12 AM