Off the Meds
So is this the real John McCain?
No question the man who turned up last night did a better job than he'd done at the previous two debates. But here's the problem for McCain: he's either last week's guy, who seems to be on medication, or he's this week's guy, who seems to have been abruptly taken off it.
He gave the game away in his first answer when, in talking about the economy, he said that Americans were angry. But Americans aren't angry, they're poleaxed. They're terrified. They're afraid they're going to lose their jobs or their homes or their pensions. They're worried they won't be able to send their kids to college. If John McCain thinks they're angry, it's either because he's projecting, or else he's simply been going to too many of his own rallies.
As he smirked and blinked and raised his eyebrows, I couldn't help wondering what tonight's McCain seemed like to all those conservative pundits who'd been hoping a different McCain would show up. Is this what they meant? Is this the John McCain of Bill Kristol's dreams?
Whichever McCain shows up, some things stay the same. He's a towel-snapper. He can't land a joke. He seems old. (As Martin Short said on Letterman just after the debate, "The only time he doesn't have to pee is when he's peeing.") And he's an absolutely terrible actor. Every time McCain went into his Joe-the-plumber-bit, those undecided voters on CNN were unmoved. They were probably not saying barf, like some of us were, but that's only because they're not allowed to talk amongst themselves during the debate.
At the Time Politics conference this week, New York Times columnist Frank Rich asked, "Was there any way that the Sarah Palin choice might have played out differently?" CBS' Jeff Greenfield gave a wonderful answer. He said the question reminded him of a woman friend who'd said of her divorce, "We would have had a wonderful marriage if he had been a completely different person." Isn't that great? It's practically a Zen koan, not that I know what a Zen koan is. But one of the most remarkable things about Barack Obama is that he's the same person every time he shows up. And as for John McCain, a completely different person showed up tonight, and it didn't seem to matter.
Read more reactions to the Obama-McCain Hofstra Presidential Debate from HuffPost bloggers
Loading comments…
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
Koan: A puzzling, often paradoxical statement or story, used in Zen Buddhism as an aid to meditation and a means of gaining spiritual awakening. I think the only awakening that needs to happen in regard to McPalin is that the fence sitters need to realize McCain is a washed-up has-been desperate to prove himself better than his father and grandfather, and Palin is a sociopath (which by definition includes pathological liar and without a conscience
Yes, and welfare was originally created to make damn sure there are poor people, and for no other reason. Get a life.
What a zinger, cbeenthere. What the f*&k does it mean?
It means you gotta have losers to have winners. C'est la vie! Viva capitalism! even it's dark side right. Actually, the pope should have addressed this issue as you gotta have money, but instead he said we did not have to have money. So you're right, what the hell am I talking about.
Actually, my response was out of context it was to a previous post, isabel 1971, so I appear as a lunatic. But thanks for asking what it means.
I'm no psychologist, but I remember learning somewhere that excessive blinking (if not caused by something in the eye, contact lenses or a faulty blink mechanism) may be a sign that someone is lying or insincere. It sounds like a cover for when the person doesn't even believe his own words. Well, I guess McCain is not totally without a conscience. Those type are called psychopaths and they can lie while looking at you without blinking an eye - I see Palin as more of that sort.
W blinks when he is lying! nuf said!
I noticed that last night and said something about it too. "Look at how much he is blinking, he is lying!" Insincerity seems more likely though. McCain has changed so much trying to win this thing that he probably feels insincere every time he speaks now. That came up last night too, how much all of us liked McCain at some point over the last however many years, and now can't stand him. He must realize how far he has sunk, and it subconsciously wears on him.
What we are seeing is not that he has changed. We are seeing the real McCain.
There is something to that. I recorded the Clarence Thomas Senatorial Lynching many years back and reviewed the tape and noted that the witnesses for Thomas were steady-eyed and almost nonblinking, quite honest and true and righteous in their testimony and their anger at the besmirching of their boss's and friend's reputation, while the witnesses for Anita Hill blinked away like a strobe light on methamphetamine.
Always love your posts, Ms Ephron!
It really was a bizarre display last night from McCain. It was uncomfortable to watch at times. I dropped my dislike for the guy and just felt sad.
Folks do not get over confident there are 19 days to go and the republicans are not going to go easy.
Make sure that you all get out ad vote and make sure your family and friends who support Sen. Obama get out and vote.
If you have any family and friends who are going to vote for McCain remind them to show up at the polls on November 5th. :-)
Lol !!
And that would be voter suppression, wouldn't it?
No, it would be a joke. Hence the :-)
John McCain has brought the anxiety level of the American people alive, got to give him credit for that, even though he doesn't even realize it. Poor fool. Thank you John McCain, we will never forget you for that. And thank you Nora for trying to point it out to him.
I laughed out loud when I saw the title of this blog. That was my first impression of McCain last night! Don't know which is worse -- the medicated or the unmedicated.
As Martin Short said on Letterman just after the debate, "The only time he doesn't have to pee is when he's peeing."
LMAO...exc
I guess this wouldn't be the first time John McCain went down in flames.
It is patriotic to pay more in taxes. Just like it was patriotic to donate your bikes, toy trucks and tractors and whatever else the government needed for WWII. Those that have more should pay more. We have become a nation of excess. Until we are more balanced, we will continue in these economic woes. The Bush tax cuts that McSame wants to continue were bad for America then and are bad now.
And who prey tell, will decide what is balanced? Equal opportunity is the goal, not equal outcome.
It is patriotic to work hard, give to others in need and be self sufficient.
Remarkable blog, Ms. Ephron! Love it.
A summary of the new ideas of Obama’s plan:
1. JOB CREATION: A New American Jobs Tax Credit. Calls for a temporary tax credit for firms that create new jobs in the United States over the next two years.
2. RELIEF TO FAMILIES: Penalty-Free Withdrawals from IRAs and 401(k)s in 2008 and 2009. Calls for new legislation to allow families to withdraw 15% of their retirement savings – up to a maximum of $10,000 – without facing a tax-penalty this year (including retroactively) and next year.
3. RELIEF TO HOMEOWNERS: 90 day foreclosure moratorium for homeowners that are acting in good faith. Financial institutions that participate in the Treasury’s financial rescue plan should be required to adhere to a homeowners code of conduct, including the moratorium.
4. RESPONDING TO THE FINANCIAL CRISIS: A Lending Facility to Address the Credit Crisis for States and Localities. Federal Reserve and the Treasury to work to establish a facility to lend to state/municipal governments, similar to the steps the Fed took to provide liquidity to the commercial paper market.
The plan calls for temporarily eliminating taxes on unemployment benefits; helping our automakers weather the financial crisis; the Fed and Treasury prepare for guaranteeing a broader range of liabilities of the banking system; helping unfreeze markets for individual mortgages, student loans, car loans, loans for multi-family dwellings and credit card loans.
Why do the automakers get a bailout. they continued to produce gigantic SUVs for the past ten+ years because the money was easy. they did not invest in green, did not anticipate a return to the high fuel, in short mismanaged their business. Do we bail out everyone who mismanages theri business.
I'm first generation American. My father never made more than $30,000. I paid my way through college and law school. Now I own a business that makes over $250,000. Thankfully, I rely on revenue from International payers. I never received funds from SBA , government or any other public organization to start my business. I had to go to an "angel investor" who decided to invest in my company after his taxes were reduced. My parents fled from dictatorships and socialist government so that I would have an opportunity not afforded by those governments. I don't believe it is my patriotic duty to pay higher taxes because I work harder. I donate more than 26% of my revenue to charities. I pay 100% health insurance to all employees and families. However, I will stop paying health insurance, I will lay off people, and STOP spending if I find out I am going to be taxed more. This is simple economics. Those making over $250,000 will stop spending money if you tax them. This will affect the economy when "the rich" stop spending. Also, why so much hatred for people who make money? Has it ever crossed anyone's mind that there will ALWAYS be POOR people and that it is better for charity to help them than for government?
Wow...what a moving and poignant story, Isabel. I'm really choked up here. Although I cannot feel your pain in making $250,000 a year, perhaps if we gave the people like you a nice big tax break it will eventually trickle down to us in the proletaria
He called it Voodoo Economics for a reason.
You're in the minority (5% or less). Obama's tax plan reduces taxes on 95% of Americans. Lower taxes on upper income levels hasn't worked. This is about the greater good. (You know them as your customer base) If the ride's getting bumpy for you, wear a helmet.
Cutting off benefits and jobs for employees because you can't reconfigure your finances to match a new economic reality isn't simple economics, it's your simple mind.
Your excuse is a pathetic attempt to justify what was Bush's temporary tax cuts for the "wealthy". The McCain of 2000 voted against it. You mentioned both the rich and poor in your argument but failed to mention the majority the MIDDLE CLASS. Obama and the McCain of 2000 wanted to put an end to the temp tax cuts (that now many RICH want permanent) but it should be returned to the level during the Clinton administration. The republicans think of Companies First not family's, when the middle class does well they have more money to spend for services and products hence the Clinton administration compared to now.
I honestly don't believe that the issue is with those that make just around $250,000 - its about the multi millionaires who can't even tell you what they bring home in their paychecks who get the tax breaks that are the equivalent to lunch money in comparison to their incomes. That lunch money to us is an annual pay increase which - for the second year in a row, I'm not getting one. Next year doesn't look good either.
Just wondering too if the $250,000 made is gross or net of operating expenses. Makes a big difference.
You have a charming little story. Why don't I believe it? Perhaps because the numbers don't add up? It seems as phoney as Joe the Plumber suddenly showing up in time for the last debate with a small business and a huge income. If he was not a Republican plant, John McCain is remarkably lucky!
If your story is true, let me ask you a few questions: Why should your employees be held hostage to your personal whims? Is it not better for the vast majority of people to have reasonable rights and expectations of fair treatment? Is health care a right or a responsibility? Are you the first boss in history to actually work harder than your employees?
Selfish, selfish, analyze this...it was American taxpayers who built those schools, roads and other amenities you & your family so enjoy and benefited from long b4 your father arrived in America. Your father being a new immigrant, benefited from those taxpayers and those b4 them. It's time to give something back to help those less fortunate that you. You sound like a typical Republican who wants and expects to keep all to him/herself despite being the beneficiary of other peoples' sweat and hard work..sham
John Mc Cain is not all that complicated. He's a spoiled brat. He grew up a Navy brat. He became a bad fighter pilot. He screwed around a lot and still does. He has never never grown up. He is still a spoiled brat. At times he does an Eddie Haskell and pretends to be a grownup or a responsible person, but it's all a bad act. For people who got fooled in 2000 into thinking that the guy was a grown up, get over it. You were wrong. For people who actually think McCain/Feingold was a good bill, get over it. For people who thinks McCain is any different than most Senators who sit on their asses and argue with each other and then go out to eat, get over it. We just saw more of McCain's shadow than we usually get to see, but they've been talking about his temper for years.
I'm past anger. I'm on to retribution. Let's get at least one Republican acquaintance to put aside any worries and join us just once in getting real liberals elected. And if they don't behave, we can all get together to kick their butts together.
... that go out to eat and send the check to the lobbyist that is eating at the same restaurant for payment.
That is the way they "work".
I so love the Huffington Post.
I got the Daily Brief this morning and saw that every single writer parsed last night's performances just like me or as I would if I were a great writer.
Although I keep promising myself that I gotta watch, and although I was just one channel away watching a "Boston Legal" rerun, I couldn't but I did keep trying. The split screen, however, left no room for respite . The smirk and the blinks were something and like everything else, it comes down to that. Maybe it's me being superficial but maybe not. Maybe it's really telling or perhaps it's the lying and disrespect. And with a vice-president who's big on winking, maybe it is more telling than we know.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
