McPresident
Getting to Know John McCain
By KARL ROVE
The Wall Street Journal
April 30, 2008; Page A17
It came to me while I was having dinner with Doris Day. No, not that Doris Day. The Doris Day who is married to Col. Bud Day, Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, fighter pilot, Vietnam POW and roommate of John McCain at the Hanoi Hilton.
As we ate near the Days’ home in Florida recently, I heard things about Sen. McCain that were deeply moving and politically troubling. Moving because they told me things about him the American people need to know. And troubling because it is clear that Mr. McCain is one of the most private individuals to run for president in history.
Retired U.S. Air Force Col. Bud Day, left, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam with Republican presidential hopeful, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., right, talk during a campaign rally
When it comes to choosing a president, the American people want to know more about a candidate than policy positions. They want to know about character, the values ingrained in his heart. For Mr. McCain, that means they will want to know more about him personally than he has been willing to reveal.
Mr. Day relayed to me one of the stories Americans should hear. It involves what happened to him after escaping from a North Vietnamese prison during the war. When he was recaptured, a Vietnamese captor broke his arm and said, “I told you I would make you a cripple.”
The break was designed to shatter Mr. Day’s will. He had survived in prison on the hope that one day he would return to the United States and be able to fly again. To kill that hope, the Vietnamese left part of a bone sticking out of his arm, and put him in a misshapen cast. This was done so that the arm would heal at “a goofy angle,” as Mr. Day explained. Had it done so, he never would have flown again.
But it didn’t heal that way because of John McCain. Risking severe punishment, Messrs. McCain and Day collected pieces of bamboo in the prison courtyard to use as a splint. Mr. McCain put Mr. Day on the floor of their cell and, using his foot, jerked the broken bone into place. Then, using strips from the bandage on his own wounded leg and the bamboo, he put Mr. Day’s splint in place.
Years later, Air Force surgeons examined Mr. Day and complimented the treatment he’d gotten from his captors. Mr. Day corrected them. It was Dr. McCain who deserved the credit. Mr. Day went on to fly again.
Another story I heard over dinner with the Days involved Mr. McCain serving as one of the three chaplains for his fellow prisoners. At one point, after being shuttled among different prisons, Mr. Day had found himself as the most senior officer at the Hanoi Hilton. So he tapped Mr. McCain to help administer religious services to the other prisoners.
Today, Mr. Day, a very active 83, still vividly recalls Mr. McCain’s sermons. “He remembered the Episcopal liturgy,” Mr. Day says, “and sounded like a bona fide preacher.” One of Mr. McCain’s first sermons took as its text Luke 20:25 and Matthew 22:21, “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s.” Mr. McCain said he and his fellow prisoners shouldn’t ask God to free them, but to help them become the best people they could be while serving as POWs. It was Caesar who put them in prison and Caesar who would get them out. Their task was to act with honor.
Another McCain story, somewhat better known, is about the Vietnamese practice of torturing him by tying his head between his ankles with his arms behind him, and then leaving him for hours. The torture so badly busted up his shoulders that to this day Mr. McCain can’t raise his arms over his head.
One night, a Vietnamese guard loosened his bonds, returning at the end of his watch to tighten them again so no one would notice. Shortly after, on Christmas Day, the same guard stood beside Mr. McCain in the prison yard and drew a cross in the sand before erasing it. Mr. McCain later said that when he returned to Vietnam for the first time after the war, the only person he really wanted to meet was that guard.
Mr. Day recalls with pride Mr. McCain stubbornly refusing to accept special treatment or curry favor to be released early, even when gravely ill. Mr. McCain knew the Vietnamese wanted the propaganda victory of the son and grandson of Navy admirals accepting special treatment. “He wasn’t corruptible then,” Mr. Day says, “and he’s not corruptible today.”
The stories told to me by the Days involve more than wartime valor.
For example, in 1991 Cindy McCain was visiting Mother Teresa’s orphanage in Bangladesh when a dying infant was thrust into her hands. The orphanage could not provide the medical care needed to save her life, so Mrs. McCain brought the child home to America with her. She was met at the airport by her husband, who asked what all this was about.
Mrs. McCain replied that the child desperately needed surgery and years of rehabilitation. “I hope she can stay with us,” she told her husband. Mr. McCain agreed. Today that child is their teenage daughter Bridget.
I was aware of this story. What I did not know, and what I learned from Doris, is that there was a second infant Mrs. McCain brought back. She ended up being adopted by a young McCain aide and his wife.
“We were called at midnight by Cindy,” Wes Gullett remembers, and “five days later we met our new daughter Nicki at the L.A. airport wearing the only clothing Cindy could find on the trip back, a 7-Up T-shirt she bought in the Bangkok airport.” Today, Nicki is a high school sophomore. Mr. Gullett told me, “I never saw a hospital bill” for her care.
A few, but not many, of the stories told to me by the Days have been written about, such as in Robert Timberg’s 1996 book “A Nightingale’s Song.” But Mr. McCain rarely refers to them on the campaign trail. There is something admirable in his reticence, but he needs to overcome it.
Private people like Mr. McCain are rare in politics for a reason. Candidates who are uncomfortable sharing their interior lives limit their appeal. But if Mr. McCain is to win the election this fall, he has to open up.
Americans need to know about his vision for the nation’s future, especially his policy positions and domestic reforms. They also need to learn about the moments in his life that shaped him. Mr. McCain cannot make this a biography-only campaign “but he can’t afford to make it a biography-free campaign either. Unless he opens up more, many voters will never know the experiences of his life that show his character, integrity and essential decency.”
These qualities mattered in America’s first president and will matter as Americans decide on their 44th president.
posted by John | 4:30 AM
58 Comments:
Love that John McCain!! Here's another li'l story about him:
"Instead of idly debating the precise extent of global warming, ... we need to deal with the central facts of rising temperatures, rising waters, and all the endless troubles that global warming will bring. We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great. The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge"
Said McCain, "We will add to current federal efforts to develop promising technologies. ... We will also establish clear standards in government-funded research, to make sure that funding is effective and focused on the right goals." S
Hahahahahaha...what's a poor,foolish climate denier going to do? I guess he could vote for Bob Barr (R-Impeachment Hypocrite)
We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great.
Ooooouch!! "...serious and credible scientists..." Golleee, what would that make those dentists and dead people on the Oregon farmer's list? Oh, I know, frivolous and un-credible...let's see if they can figure out if that's a word or not.
McSame as Bush on that score.
Of course, they're politicians, not scientists and, obviously, the political climate (no pun intended) hypes the hoax.
It's also a compromise of sorts since the political climate is also antiwar (congratulations) and they're not budging on that.
What they don't get is that you guys don't care about concessions. You want to be in charge.
Anyway, you're not reading between the lines:
"Instead of idly debating the precise extent of global warming..."
In other words, who cares how or when.
"...we need to deal with the central facts of rising temperatures, rising waters, and all the endless troubles that global warming will bring."
Well, we've apparently entered a cooling trend, but whatever. I'm still waiting for him to say that the cause is anthropogenic CO2 emissions.
"We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great."
Yeah. No one wants New York to be like Florida. New Yorkers love ice and slush on their roads and the farmers there a four month winter season (at least).
And everyone knows that Southern California and the Arizona deserts are inhospitable wastelands (except for the massive population migration--of crazy people, presumably-- that moved to the latter in recent years).
"The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge"
...Of imposing new regulations and finding a whole bunch of new things to tax, like leather and cheeseburgers because they come from greenhouse gas emitting (i.e. farting) cows?
The government?
No sweat.
"Said McCain, 'We will add to current federal efforts to develop promising technologies..."
Cool. Always a winner when the feds are involved in R & D (e.g. the Apollo Program, the Internet, the Manhattan Project...).
"... We will also establish clear standards in government-funded research..."
More research, McJohnny? I thought the science was "settled."
"...to make sure that funding is effective and focused on the right goals."
"Goals?" Isn't the singular goal to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions?
I suppose that, by the sheer massivity and complexity of the undertaking, incremental goals here and there would be required to get CO2 under control.
It's tricky to moderate, because there's not much in the air to work with to begin with, and not all of it is bad (quite necessary to sustain life, in fact, and vegetation loves it).
I mean, CO2 makes up .054% of all gases in the atmosphere.
Of that .054%, greenhouse gases make up a small percentage.
Of that small percentage, 95% is water vapor (a greenhouse gas).
Of that 95%, 99.999% is of natural origin.
Human beings cause .001% of remaining water vapor and a small percentage (if not percentile) of the remaining 5% of greenhouse gases.
Now I don't mean to belittle the percentile of a percentile the percentile of which is anthropogenic (I may have missed a percentile), what with chain-reacting radiative forcing and what not, but really now, fats.
We're a bit player. Our portion of it is jostled and shoved around by bigger players like a little kid in Penn station at rush hour.
And it won't make any difference if we trip over ourselves trying to incrementally lower our CO2 emissions while China's and India's keep spiking upward (and India doesn't kill cows, by the way, because they're considered divine over there). And when the sun starts flaring again. And when there's more CO2-belching forest fires the timing, size, and duration of which we can never predict (as we learned rather recently in San Diego). And there's always volcanoes coughing up greenhouse gases somewhere, big or small.
All of those things, alone, can wipe out, in a few days (if not overnight) any infinitesimal decreases in CO2 that we inconvenienced ourselves to lower.
It's a fool's game.
But then again, look who wants to play it.
Blossom said:
"Ooooouch!!"
Still sensitive back there, Blossom? You'll be alright. I'll take it easier next time. Just mind your manners, capice?
Wow. I hadn't heard those stories before. He's quite a guy.
Dan Kurt said...
Getting back to the fitness of McCain to be President of the USA:
From <://dickmcdonald.blogspot.com/>
who reprinted this from To The Point.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
How the Clinton's Will Destroy McCain
Jack Wheeler
The number of fellow Senators who think John McCain is psychologically unstable is large. Some will admit it publicly, like Thad Cochran who says, "The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine."
Others relate times when McCain screamed four-letter obscenities right in their faces in the Senate cloak room, like Dick Shelby, Rick Santorum, or Jim Inhofe. "The man is unhinged," one Senator told me. "He is frighteningly unfit to be Commander-in-Chief."
That John McCain is clinically nuts is scary enough. What worries a small group of GOP Senators and Congressmen even more is a deep and dark skeletal secret in McCain's glorified past to which they are privy, and which the Clintons will use to blackmail him.
They have been having discussions with a Russian whom we'll call "T" for Translator. T's father was the Soviet military intelligence officer who ran the "Hanoi Hilton" prison holding captured Americans during the Vietnam War. One of those prisoners was John McCain.
The GRU -- Glavnoje Razvedyvatel'noje Upravlenije or Main Intelligence Directorate of the Soviet (now Russian) Armed Forces - operated the entire North Vietnamese prison system holding American prisoners of war. GRU officers, all of whom were Russians, oversaw the interrogation of every American POW.
The interrogations themselves were conducted by Vietnamese who spoke some English. After each interrogation session, which could often include torturing the prisoners at the direction of the GRU officers, the Vietnamese interrogator would write a report of the session - in Vietnamese.
These reports had to be translated into Russian. T, a bright teenager living in the GRU compound in Hanoi, had become fluent in Vietnamese, and ended up translating many of the reports and interrogators' notes.
John McCain, flying his A-4 Skyhawk, was shot down over Hanoi on October 26, 1967. Badly injured from the ejection, he was beaten and abused by his captors. In July, 1968, his father, US Navy Admiral J. S. McCain, was made CINCPAC, Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Command, commander of all US military forces in the Vietnam theatre. Upon learning this, the Vietnamese offered - according to McCain - to release him.
McCain claims he refused, because he demanded all American POWs captured before him be released as well. He thus remained a prisoner when he could have gone home, and was subjected to constant brutal beatings and torture for years: that is the source of the "war-hero" saga making McCain a greater war-hero than any other American POW.
Yet the offer of release would had to have been approved by the GRU overseers of the North Vietnamese - and T does not recall any such offer being made. T admits, however, that this took place before McCain was transferred to Hoa Loa prison, nicknamed the "Hanoi Hilton" by the POWs. T had only direct knowledge of what happened at Hoa Loa, and not the other prisons, where T's father was in charge.
McCain was kept at the Hanoi Hilton from December 1969 until his release, along with all the remaining POWs, in March of 1973. During this time, T translated all the Vietnamese interrogators' notes and reports regarding John McCain.
According to T, they reveal that McCain had made an "accommodation" with his captors, and in exchange, T's father saw that he was provided with an apartment in Hanoi and the services of two prostitutes. Upon returning to his prison cell, he would say he had been held in solitary confinement. That may be why so many of his fellow prisoners said later they saw so little of him at Hoa Loa.
The notes and reports written in Vietnamese were sent to Moscow, where T was a now a college student, for T's translation into Russian, then placed into GRU archives. That's where they stayed until 1991. Late that year, as the Soviet Union was collapsing, the CIA and the GRU made a deal for a document swap.
All of what it involved, T doesn't know. What T's father, by now retired but still with substantial contacts within the GRU, did learn (and thus T learned) was that the swap included all of T's translations.
In other words, the CIA has in its possession the notes and reports of John McCain's interrogators at the Hanoi Hilton, in both the original Vietnamese and translated Russian, showing collaboration with his Communist captors.
Allegations of this nature have been made over the years, many by Vietnam veterans. There is an even an organization, Vietnam Veterans Against McCain. But they are based on suspicions and circumstantial claims. There has never been any hard direct evidence.
What T says the CIA has is such evidence. Its release would destroy McCain. The threat of its release could force McCain to take a fall, blow the election and lose on purpose. And just who do you suppose would know what the CIA has and work with them to release it?
Someone who has been a CIA asset since he was recruited by London station chief Cord Meyer while a student at Oxford in 1968?
(Back in the 90s years after he retired, if Cord drank a little too much Scotch, he would laugh derisively at those conspiratorialists who accused Bill Clinton of being connected with the KGB.
"They all darkly point to Bill's participation in anti-war peace conferences in Stockholm and Oslo, and his trip to Leningrad, Moscow, and Prague while he was at Oxford. Who could have paid for this?', they ask. It had to be the KGB!' they claim." Cord would shake his head. "What rot - we paid for it. We recruited Bill the first week he was at Oxford. Bill's been an asset of The Three Bad Words ever since." Cord passed on in 2001.)
The small group of Senators and Congressmen who have been briefed by T have been unable to confirm with the CIA any details of its document swap with the GRU beyond an admission that such a swap "may have happened." They are very nervous about pursuing the matter any further.
The Clintons are not nervous. They are utterly ruthless, and have buddies at Langley all too happy to help them.
It has been noted many times here in To The Point that while most folks think the CIA is a right-wing outfit, it is not. The CIA has been dominated by left-wing hyper-liberals for years.
The CIA is a left-wing, liberal outfit, and its main job for some time now is not attacking America's enemies but conservatives in general and George W. Bush in particular. The story is best told by friend, Ken Timmerman in his new book Shadow Warriors.
When the time is right, the Clintons will see to the leaking of the GRU archives on McCain to the media. Bet on it, just as you can bet they'll follow it up with media disclosures of the lady lobbyists in Washington having adulterous affairs with McCain. (There are at least three of them; I know the name of one but I'm not going to put it in writing.)
Maybe McCain will try to fight back by confirming Hillary's well-known bisexuality and her lesbian affair with her beautiful assistant, Huma Abedin. Google "Hillary" and "Huma Abedin" and you'll get almost 6,000 hits. Turns out Huma is a Moslem who grew up in Saudi Arabia and is strongly suspected of working for Saudi intelligence.
Or maybe he'll capitulate to Clinton blackmail. You never can tell what a psychologically unstable guy will do.
And that last point is why - be prepared for this, folks - I would not in any circumstances vote for John McCain, not if either Hillary or Obama were the alternative. Evil is safer than crazy. Leftie amateur inexperience is safer than crazy. So I agree with Ann Coulter who says:
"I'd rather deal with President Hillary than with President McCain. With Hillary, we'll get the same ruinous liberal policies with none of the responsibility."
How in the world can the Republican Party get saddled with a nutcase whack-job who knows nothing about economics, is so anti-capitalist he uses "profit" as a term of derision, has never run a business or had any job outside of government, will raise taxes, is so stupid that he believes "stopping global warming" is worth destroying the American economy, won't drill ANWR, won't appoint strict constructionist justices, won't protect marriage, will give amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens, is beloved by the New York Times, and lives in a delusionary world of vanity and rage?
Rush is right. A McCain presidency will be the destruction of the Republican Party. It needs to be rebuilt, not wiped out with the field clear for the fascists of the left to consolidate power and eliminate freedom.
Yikes. I hadn't heard ^THOSE^ stories before.
Of course there are BS stories... and then there's McCain's daughter for verification thereof...
Acta non Verba
It is interesting to me how many people that are disaffected from the Democratic party because of Obama are willing to vote for McCain instead.
The far right feels like they have no choice now, and they seem to be trying to rally to McCain in spite of his appeasement of the Al Gore branch of the Dems and the moderates in both parties. In light of his position as being the one that will run against the first african american presidential candidate (or, I guess, still possibly the first woman candidate) his response of moving with the GW crowd and the moderates may be a stroke of genius.
So far this is forming up to be an intensely interesting race.
Well, John....you seem to have lost your trolls.
I am sorry about that. I only thought to spank them a little bit, but they seen to have lost the taste for it.
It is getting harder and harder to find left wing trolls with any stomach for arguments. I wish to personally apologize to you if I have cost you an evening's entertainment. I have to admit that last night was a lot of fun, but they seem to have run away.
Dern it.
Just when things are looking fun they turn gutless again.....
Phelonius said:
"So far this is forming up to be an intensely interesting race."
Indeed.
And, if the swiftboating/crackpot hit piece about McCain above is any indication, an ugly one, too.
"Well, John....you seem to have lost your trolls."
I know. I see them and automatically switch into Terminator mode, and then I miss them after they're succesfully terminated.
And everytime I post something about Global Warming, attendance drops dramatically.
P.S. I use the word "swiftboating" ironically.
Oh John
CO2 may make up 0.04% of the atmosphere but it accounts for 20% of the greenhouse effect.
Human activity has increased O2 40% a forty percent increase of a 20% effect is what?????
Never mind ask John McCain - he figured it out, most other americans did to. Must be getting lonely under that GW denial rock your all under
Neo
Welcome back, Neo. Good arguments.
"CO2 may make up 0.04% of the atmosphere but it accounts for 20% of the greenhouse effect."
Okay, if you say so, but what percentage of that .04% is manmade?
Again, CO2 makes up .054% (not .04--most of the arguments hinge on percentile differentials, so be precise) and greenhouse gases make up a small percentage of that.
Of that small percentage, 95% is water vapor (a greenhouse gas).
Of that 95%, 99.999% is of natural origin.
Human beings cause an "artificial"--and nigh infinitesimal--.001% of remaining water vapor and a small percentage (if not percentile) of the remaining 5% of greenhouse gases, which, again, are a small percentage--if not percentile-- of the greenhouse gases that make up a percentage of that .054% of CO2.
Again, I don't mean to belittle the percentile of a percentile the percentile of which is anthropogenic (I may have missed a percentile), what with chain-reacting radiative forcing and what not (which is the missing link in my comprehension of your paradigm?), but, that being said, to say that "CO2 is 0.04% of the atmosphere but it accounts for 20% of the greenhouse effect" is a given, but to then suggestively--and entirely--blame the diminutive manmade, greenhouse gas portion of a percentile of C02 as solely responsible for the 40% increase of the entire pie of it and solely responsible for thickening the 20% contribution of CO2 to the greenhouse effect as if all of the other elements and factors determing the other 80% of the greenhouse effect are--and always have been before the emergence of fossil-fuel burning modern-man pushed them aside--perfectly balanced and static (which has a Creationist, pre-Fall ring to it, ironically enough), as are and were the CO2 levels apart from the fluctuating percentile of a percentile of a percentile of them that are manmade, can only work by an all-other-things-being equal controlled environment and a calculus of chain-reacting radiative forcing which--however feasible--is too riddled with other, uncontrollable variables to insist as "fact" that the manmade portion of all that is the Prime Mover, or that tweaking or suppressing it creates the kind of change and/or climate stability that justifies the fear-mongering and outrage hurled at those skeptical of man's role in it and have a "whatever" attitude about the tweaking and suppressing of a percentile of a percentile of a percentile in man's never-ending--and futile--desire to control the weather (and yes, Neo, I know the difference between climate and weather now, thank you very much).
...and btw, how can an enlarged percentile of (x) enlarge itself-- (x)-- by 40%?
That's right, man has always tried to control the weather, and, come to think of it, you guys remind me of American Indians who do a raindance by hop-hop-hopping around a totem pole and shaking rattles and chanting Hu-yuh-huh-huh, hu-yuh-huh-huh, hu-yuh-huh-huh," only instead of a totem pole, it's a windmill.
john - i'm going to do a write-in on election day - i CANNOT vote for mccain. people scattered when i said i wasn't voting for huckabee - this election will probably be the last.
o.t. honest debate regarding global warming? where are they going to find an honest leftist? ha!
"Well, John....you seem to have lost your trolls."
I wouldn't worry. They don't seem to go away for very long. John, nothing like a troll to bring out the best in you. They do make yummy snacks and great fodder for entertainment.
As for McCain...you've already heard my views on him. I would prefer someone else but this is what we have.
I'm with you on that Kelly, but I sympathize with Nanc.
As of November 2007, the CO2 concentration in Earth's atmosphere was about 0.0384% by volume, or 384 ppm (In 1999 it was 367 ppm). This is 100 ppm (35%) above the 1832 ice core levels of 284 ppm.
The present atmospheric CO2 increase is caused by anthropogenic (human activity)emissions of CO2. About three-quarters of these emissions are due to fossil fuel burning. Fossil fuel burning (released on average 5.4 ± 0.3 PgC/yr during 1980 to 1989, and 6.3 ± 0.4 PgC/yr during 1990 to 1999.
The present atmospheric CO2 concentration has not been exceeded during the past 420,000 years, and likely not during the past 20 million years.
Other greenhouse gases:
Water vapor accounts for ~3% of atmospheric gases H20- about 70% of greenhouse effect
Human effect on global atmospheric levels - none (global water vapor levels are directly linked to temperature)
Methane:
~9% of greenhouse effect
Methane- increased 150% since 1860due to human activity
John, I sympathize with her as well. I will say, that if he picks Huckabee as a running mate I will be RIGHT with Nanc. Because at that point this country will be going to a very hot place in a handbasket anyway.
Yeeeeeeah, those "trolls" are askeered to debate you on climate change...hahahahahafuckinha Does anyone bother to debate a flat earth moron? No, you give him the thumbs up and say, "You're damn sure right on that, good buddy, whatever you say." What a pack of dinks.
And speaking of blood,weenies, check out what Dick ToeSucker Morris has got to say...harhartoofuckingfunny...arf arf, arf, little puppies...
While Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) hangs in there, locked in a tough race with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), the Republican undercard is facing obliteration in the 2008 general elections for the Senate. Polling suggests that a massacre may be in the offing — and one that’s possibly even greater than the worst of previous GOP years: 1958, 1964, 1974, 1986 and 2006.
Scott Rasmussen, whose site, www.rasmussenreports.com, follows these races closely, is producing truly hair-raising polling data.
Of the open Republican Senate seats in contention, Democratic victory seems very likely in Virginia (Democratic former Gov. Mark Warner now has 55 percent, while fellow former Republican Gov. Jim Gilmore stands at 37) and New Mexico (where Democratic Rep. Tom Udall takes 53 percent to GOP Rep. Steve Pearce’s 37 and 57 percent to Republican Rep. Heather Wilson’s 36). In Colorado, Democratic Rep. Mark Udall has a narrow lead over Republican Bob Schaffer (45-42). Nebraska would seem safely Republican, but a humongous black turnout in Mississippi could elect former Democratic Gov. Ronnie Musgrove, just as it led to a Democratic congressional victory in a bi-election this month. Score them: two Democrat, one leaning Democrat, one leaning Republican, and one Republican. A net loss of two or three seats.
And then there are the endangered incumbents. Three GOP senators are actually behind their Democratic challengers. Alaska’s Ted Stevens is behind Mark Begich by 47-45. Elizabeth Dole trails Kay Hagan in North Carolina by 48-47. And Jeanne Shaheen is well ahead of John Sununu in New Hampshire, 51-43. Stevens’s legal problems and the likely huge black turnout in North Carolina make all three states lean Democratic at this point.
Even when GOP incumbents lead, they are perilously under 50 percent. In Oregon, as of this writing, Gordon Smith leads Jeff Merkley by only 45-42 and Steve Novick by 47-41. And in Texas, John Cornyn leads Rick Noriega by only 47-43. In addition, Norm Coleman in Minnesota is hanging on by his teeth against Al Franken, 50-43; Susan Collins is only narrowly ahead of Rep. Tom Allen in Maine, 52-42; and in Kansas, Pat Roberts holds only a 52-40 lead over Jim Slattery. Mitch McConnell in Kentucky may also be in trouble.
So, among incumbents, score it three leaning Democratic, two tossups, and three leaning Republican.
Overall, that’s a likely Democratic pickup of five seats, with an eight-seat gain possible, and, in a partisan wipeout, a 12-seat shift.
Mon dieu!
In all likelihood, the filibuster will still remain a theoretical Republican option, but, in practical terms, may be beyond reach, especially if Obama wins the White House.
Driving the GOP’s imperiled Senate situation, or course, is a massive shift in party identification. While the two parties are normally about tied in party ID, the Democrats now enjoy a 44-30 advantage in the latest Fox News poll of April 29.A combination of the Iraq war, gas prices, the credit crisis and a looming recession are dragging down the Republican Party, big time.
So is a president with a 28 percent approval rating. Bush needs to go out and tell America that things are bad, but not that bad. There are solid signs that the economy may not be tanking after all. Unemployment, while rising, is still at historic lows. The credit crisis has not led to a wholesale collapse of the financial industry and the instability appears to be easing. And, in Iraq, we are approaching a more stable situation with lower combat deaths. Bush, who has largely been hunkered down in the White House, needs to hit the trail and move his ratings up into the mid- or high 30s, not an insurmountable challenge.
Will the endangered Republicans recover? Most have prevailed, in the past, by lifting their personal ratings out of possible danger early in the race. But when long-term incumbents find themselves mired in the high 40s or low 50s in vote share, it indicates a massive voter desire for change that is not likely to abate.
And speaking of blood, check out what Dick ToeSucker Morris has got to say...
In the House, the incredible three Democratic bi-election victories, combined with the retirements of so many Republican incumbents, indicates that the GOP may be facing disaster there as well.
This is not a good year to be a Republican.
"Haha...I've just been lurking til now but it looks like everytime a troll kicks your pathetic asses on here, you just delete the post. That guy, was it Frankie, reamed the pompous ass, Phelonious, so bad I could smell blood...then all of a sudden ZERO posts ...wow, divine intervention...hahaha."
I have this set to send me an email each time an entry is posted. I get them even IF they were to be deleted. I have not seen an entry and found it to be deleted later with the exception of when John edits his own entries.
You show your ignorance with that comment. If you had been around this blog as long as I have you would know that John does not believe in deleting comments. I can only recall one instance where he deleted someone elses comments and that was when someone posted personal info on the owner of the blog.
also...Phelonius, pompous??? Just because he tells it like it is, you want to call him pompous. Sheeesh!! If he is anything, he is one of the most patriotic, civil minded, caring people I know.
OH...and one of the best educated people I know.
He deleted the entire bunch...not just one. You can't even get one fact straight...why do you think you're qualified to open your mouth on anything? Well, you're a good fit for this pack of ninnies.
You seem to know very little about the Libertarian party platform. While I do not agree completely with the LP I do know that personal responsiblity is the goal. Yes, I know that there are people who refuse to take it is something we could all strive for.
btw...I would much rather be grouped with these fine people here than with the likes of you.
We wouldn't want this buried, would we?
Check out what Dick ToeSucker Morris has got to say...harhartoofuckingfunny...arf arf, arf, little puppies...
While Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) hangs in there, locked in a tough race with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), the Republican undercard is facing obliteration in the 2008 general elections for the Senate. Polling suggests that a massacre may be in the offing — and one that’s possibly even greater than the worst of previous GOP years: 1958, 1964, 1974, 1986 and 2006.
Scott Rasmussen, whose site, www.rasmussenreports.com, follows these races closely, is producing truly hair-raising polling data.
Of the open Republican Senate seats in contention, Democratic victory seems very likely in Virginia (Democratic former Gov. Mark Warner now has 55 percent, while fellow former Republican Gov. Jim Gilmore stands at 37) and New Mexico (where Democratic Rep. Tom Udall takes 53 percent to GOP Rep. Steve Pearce’s 37 and 57 percent to Republican Rep. Heather Wilson’s 36). In Colorado, Democratic Rep. Mark Udall has a narrow lead over Republican Bob Schaffer (45-42). Nebraska would seem safely Republican, but a humongous black turnout in Mississippi could elect former Democratic Gov. Ronnie Musgrove, just as it led to a Democratic congressional victory in a bi-election this month. Score them: two Democrat, one leaning Democrat, one leaning Republican, and one Republican. A net loss of two or three seats.
And then there are the endangered incumbents. Three GOP senators are actually behind their Democratic challengers. Alaska’s Ted Stevens is behind Mark Begich by 47-45. Elizabeth Dole trails Kay Hagan in North Carolina by 48-47. And Jeanne Shaheen is well ahead of John Sununu in New Hampshire, 51-43. Stevens’s legal problems and the likely huge black turnout in North Carolina make all three states lean Democratic at this point.
Even when GOP incumbents lead, they are perilously under 50 percent. In Oregon, as of this writing, Gordon Smith leads Jeff Merkley by only 45-42 and Steve Novick by 47-41. And in Texas, John Cornyn leads Rick Noriega by only 47-43. In addition, Norm Coleman in Minnesota is hanging on by his teeth against Al Franken, 50-43; Susan Collins is only narrowly ahead of Rep. Tom Allen in Maine, 52-42; and in Kansas, Pat Roberts holds only a 52-40 lead over Jim Slattery. Mitch McConnell in Kentucky may also be in trouble.
So, among incumbents, score it three leaning Democratic, two tossups, and three leaning Republican.
Overall, that’s a likely Democratic pickup of five seats, with an eight-seat gain possible, and, in a partisan wipeout, a 12-seat shift.
Mon dieu!
In all likelihood, the filibuster will still remain a theoretical Republican option, but, in practical terms, may be beyond reach, especially if Obama wins the White House.
Driving the GOP’s imperiled Senate situation, or course, is a massive shift in party identification. While the two parties are normally about tied in party ID, the Democrats now enjoy a 44-30 advantage in the latest Fox News poll of April 29.A combination of the Iraq war, gas prices, the credit crisis and a looming recession are dragging down the Republican Party, big time.
So is a president with a 28 percent approval rating. Bush needs to go out and tell America that things are bad, but not that bad. There are solid signs that the economy may not be tanking after all. Unemployment, while rising, is still at historic lows. The credit crisis has not led to a wholesale collapse of the financial industry and the instability appears to be easing. And, in Iraq, we are approaching a more stable situation with lower combat deaths. Bush, who has largely been hunkered down in the White House, needs to hit the trail and move his ratings up into the mid- or high 30s, not an insurmountable challenge.
Will the endangered Republicans recover? Most have prevailed, in the past, by lifting their personal ratings out of possible danger early in the race. But when long-term incumbents find themselves mired in the high 40s or low 50s in vote share, it indicates a massive voter desire for change that is not likely to abate.
And speaking of blood, check out what Dick ToeSucker Morris has got to say...
In the House, the incredible three Democratic bi-election victories, combined with the retirements of so many Republican incumbents, indicates that the GOP may be facing disaster there as well.
This is not a good year to be a Republican.
That's funny...has there ever been a good year to be a loser?
hope the paste tastes good, anon.
*;[
Yes, welcome back NEO!
You are the only Man-made global warming advocate that has had the intelligence to debate point for point on the whole issue, and I have to say that I have respected your opinions because of that.
It is because of my Libertarian pompous-ass attitudes that I have to say something to the name-calling trolls that cannot debate point for point because they have to spend too much time using the MS copy and paste to write anything for themselves other than invective.
For you them, I have to once again re-iterate things that have already been said: namely, NO ONE is saying that the climate is not changing. Indeed, that has been the history of the planet from the very beginning of time. NO ONE is saying that living cleaner, living better and taking care of of our environment is a bad thing. The bad thing is when it is believed that the same government that has ruined our social security program can somehow save the entire planet by reducing our standard of living through government programs. Medicare and social security and the VA hospitals should be a red flag (pun intended) warning to those that think this same bunch or idiots in DC can now save the planet, run our health care system, tell us what temperature to keep our houses at, tell us what cars to drive and what we should eat?
There are places we can go to talk about realistic approaches to changing the habits of our country and others, but first I want to address this thing that calls itself "lurker."
Ok, Lurch, lets talk if you have the ability to do that. First, did your family raise you so poorly that you cannot speak with a civil mouth?
Secondly, you have the right to question other people that are not Communist, and that is fine. I believe, unlike your mentors, that you should have the freedom to say anything that you like.
Things like: "they think every individual should do whatever the fuck they want. The first branch of naive morons is the free market simppack...they think corporations should do whatever they want. And they're always loud, braying asses of the lowest order."
Well, EXCUSE me! I believe that the individual has the right to exist without government interference as long as he or she is not infringing on the rights of others to do as they please. I know you think that is silly, but I take that directly from this ancient document called the "Declaration of Independence," and you may have heard of that at some point. You should read it, as it is still considered a masterpiece of the doctrine of freedom unless you are a Marxist or a Fascist. This may sound strange to your indoctrinated ears, but I unapologetically support the idea that the free citizen of the US has the right to determine their own future, and to do so using their God-given talents and intelligence. You seem to hate that idea, but the families that I have descended from have all done that, and they did that quite well. They raised kind, christian and productive children that then did the same thing generation after generation to the present day. They owed no man nothing, and they built the most successful enterprise that has even been witnessed on this sorry globe.
I have a question for you, Lurch. Do you speak like that to people that you meet in person or do reserve your cowardice to an anonymous blogging personality? If I met you personally, I would like to think that in spite of our political differences, I could look you in the eye, shake your hand, and then sit down and have a civil discourse. You see, that is what civilized westerners DO when they meet strangers, regardless of the medium I should think.
The other response, I suppose, is that I could sit here at the computer and write perfectly awful things about you, without even knowing who you are and the quality of your upbringing.
Are you willing to debate WHY I am a Libertarian at all? You want to bring some IDEAS to the table, other than 3rd grade invective?
Oh, Kelly. I thank you. I do not deserve the compliments in toto, but I appreciate you coming to my defense. You are the best!
Fathead gets pummeled and leaves saying something to the effect of "I'm not going to waste my time anymore with you wingnuts! Adieu!"
Then he comes back as Lurch.
Like Kelly said, the only comments of others that I've deleted was when some troll who I went to college with posted personal information about me (like my address).
That's it when it comes to censoring others.
I've also deleted my own entries because of typos, slips in grammar, poor word choices, and second thoughts--before they're addressed by anyone.
Kelly, I must say, quite frankly, that I'm a little creeped out that you get alerted everytime a comment is posted and you get those first drafts which I take back.
Imagine trying on an outfit and leaving your home but reconsidering because you think it makes you look fat and going back inside to change.
Then you find out that someone's been taking pictures of you everytime you come out of the front door.
That's how I feel right now.
...other than that, I agree with Phelonius. :)
We're not talking about the same bunch in Washington. We're talking about changing the bunch in Washington...to some people who do have the brains to do what is necessary to start turning this around. If you think a bunch of unregulated idiots are going to do it of their own volition, lotsa luck. We've know exactly what to do about this forever...but we've had the sicko right wing in power for about thirty years now and they've obstructed every move. This will turn out to have been extremely unfortunate timing because it's probably just too fucking late...which is why I loathe you destructive simpletons and why I don't attempt to hide it. As for debating with you...well, we all (should) know what that is worth. I check on these idiot, reicho blogs now and then to remind myself just what the pack of losers who got us into this mess is really all about. I find it to be a strangely magnetic and chilling experience...as in the way that one is drawn, sometimes, to a freak show or really nasty horror movie...a kind of touchstone of oblivious evil. It's important that you remind yourself often that many people are not well meaning, far sighted and honest individuals and that we're really up against a lower order of being right here in our own country.
I'd start deleting THAT trolls anonymous posts just on G.P.'s if I were you, john. Nobody tells me who I can't censor on MY blog.
He stays. It's important to remind everyone that many people are not well meaning, far sighted and honest individuals and that we're really up against a lower order of being right here in our own country.
"G.P.'s"?
"As for debating with you...well, we all (should) know what that is worth. I check on these idiot, reicho blogs now and then to remind myself just what the pack of losers who got us into this mess is really all about."
That is because you should never bring a knife to a gunfight. You hea d of crap will never allow you to debate with any adult, and you make my point for me. If all that can come out of your mouth is vile stupidity, then that is what it is and it speaks for itself.
You cannot debate me because you do not have enough brain cells to do it. I challenged you and you cannot do it. So be it.
That has long been my experience with undereducated Marxists and their mouth-pieces. I talk about the meaning of freedom, and you avoid it. I talk about the meaning of personal responsibility, and you avoid it. I talk about the families that have built this nation, and you avoid it.
I expected that.
I also asked you why you had to be such a foul mouthed loser that cannot talk to me as a man. You avoided that too. Well, duh.
My guess is that you are not a man. You are not a student, nor are you a gentleman. You would not know how if your life depended upon it.
I gave you a gentleman's place to debated, and you threw that back at me along with your bubble gum understanding of politics.
I change my opinion of you. If you were to meet me face to face, I would just slap you down with the back of my hand and laugh at you, you child. You are a fool and an embarrassment to your family, supposing that you even know who your father is.
Since all you have are empty words and no argument, go do what you are best at, with Mr. Hand. Otherwise, please do not bore us any further with infantile whining about things that you do not comprehend at all.
Note: we will beat you at the election offices. Bet on that. It may take a while, but we have beat the likes of you before and we will do it again. All it takes is enough intelligent people.
Neo,
That last diatribe was not aimed at you, and I hope you understand that.
I have little patience for the cut-and-paste marxist ideologues that cannot argue their way out of a paper bag.
Now, we do not agree on the point that man-made pollution is "the cause" of any kind of global climate change, but I do agree that having a better life-style is a good thing even if it just means simple things like "do not pollute" and can we please be better about how much we drive and so forth.
I have a question for you.
What is your opinion about the alternative fuel fiasco that is being lived through the Al Gore sponsored legislation of using ethanol?
This is my opinion.....
We can feed people grain, but we cannot feed them crude oil. Would it not be better in the short run to feed people grain while we use our natural oil reserves here in the US as a short-gap measure while we develop market accepted alternatives over, say, the next 20 years or so?
Cane sugar is the way to go. Brazil is running well with it, and Americans could use a little less sugar in their diet!
Speaking of caning, that was a beautiful beating you gave up there.
It was like Bruce Lee in *Enter the Dragon* vs. Pauly Shore, or Shock & Awe vs. the peashooting Baathist Republican Guard..
Profoundly lopsided, but certainly justified.
Neo's a good man.
"Kelly, I must say, quite frankly, that I'm a little creeped out that you get alerted everytime a comment is posted and you get those first drafts which I take back."
See that little thing down below the place to make comments? It has a place to check if you would like to be alerted when other make comments after you have made a comment.
I am so sorry that it creeps you out!!!!!!!
Just don't expect me to keep up with your blog and take care of kids...just can't do it unless something is there to remind me.
Maybe I should take it off my rss feed too.
and I was defending you...
Thankee, John.
Most beatings I have ever witnessed just HAVE to be one-sided. However, I gave that dork a reasonable chance to respond, and he gave me stupidity. The really sad truth of it is that they cannot argue because they have so little to argue with. While I can sympathize to a point, the real problem there is that they will not debate the issues. I prefer talking to men or women of sound mind and body.
That being said, I DO very much agree that Neo is a cut above the normal there. I do not necessarily agree with him on every issue, but he is a man with guts and he will go toe-to-toe with conviction and he will do it without being a foul-mouthed moron at the same time.
Is it just a function of my age, John? I grew up before computers, and I always had expectations when it came to debates I guess, mostly because we had to look the debater in the eye. We had to be able to talk to them after the debate as humans. These trolls seem to have no honor at all. It bothers me, I guess, because I still am an optimist, and I want to believe the best in humanity.
John, I am sorry. Really! you probably said what you said in humor. I am sorry I took it wrong.
:)
btw...John, I never saw that entry about your personal info. I just remember you saying why you had deleted it. There wasn't an option to choose to have any notification back then.
C'MON LURCH!!
Have ye no no balls at all?
Debate me!
Question me!
Prove you have some worth after all!!
Ok, I guess that is a lost cause.
Neo said:
"As of November 2007, the CO2 concentration in Earth's atmosphere was about 0.0384% by volume, or 384 ppm (In 1999 it was 367 ppm). This is 100 ppm (35%) above the 1832 ice core levels of 284 ppm."
That's funny, Neo. You said earlier that it was .04. And last time I checked, it was .054 (before 11/07).
As I said before, the debate hinges on a lot of percentile differentials, so the datum really have to be precise (or make up its mind).
Of course, perhaps the three different--but official--figures referenced simply indicate an element in the atmosphere that's prone to flux, by percentiles of a percentile?
No biggie, Kelly. It's my own fault for posting before vetting.
John, all is good :)
Yes. :)
...It'd be a lot better, though, if McLiberal stopped pissing me off.
John, I know. I understand. I agree.
John,
In the interest of simplicity I rounded 0.0384 up to 0.04%
the CO2 concentration in Earth's atmosphere
May 2008 - 387 ppm
November 2007 - 384 ppm
1999 it was - 367 ppm
1832 - 284 ppm
From 1970 to 2000, the concentration rose by about 1.5ppm each year, but since 2000 the annual rise has leapt to an average 2.1ppm.
Lurch said:
"We've know exactly what to do about this forever..."
Nonsense. Your agenda was birthed in the Nineteenth Century with *Das Kapital.*
Neo, I understand that CO2 has risen, and that higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere trap heat (although I've come across assessments that deny that and even claim the opposite), but I'm not convinced that human undustry is driving it.
You're ignoring the contribution of a long season of increased solar flaring, fires that have been unprecedented in recent history in frequency and scale, and bovine flatulence, to name a few examples belch out a lot of CO2.
Do you count the huge herds of cows as part of the "manmade" paradigm?
How about the forest fires, since that huge one in San Diego last year was arson?
Furthermore, I find very dubious any "certainty" that can measure the CO2 emitted from the forest fires (and all the cows, no less) with exactitude, no less measuring human all the human activity from the Jersey Turnpike to a pick-up truck in the mountains of Honduras.
They can measure the CO2 content in the air with certitude, but that's it. The rest is "maybe" and "probably" and "98.4% definite" and what have you because they had to concede that the positive language in Kyoto was unjustified by the (often ambiguous) data at hand.
They admitted it. They apologized, and they themselves backed off from the kind of 100% certitude you hear from politicians like Gore and Clinton, and ideologues like the trolls here.
You know that.
And it's been too politicized.
The GW crowd likes to bat about the year 2000 as the demarcating point when CO2 started taking off--which just so happens to be the year Bush became president and withdrew from the Kyoto Treaty within a year or so, which *REALLY* caused invectives to fly and accusations that the Bush Administration--which pushed for the development of ethanol as an alternative energy (the success or failure of which is not the point here), christened manned missions to the moon and Mars, and championed SDI development--as "Anti-Science."
So I consider the harped-upon 2000 demarcation to be ideologically/politically/spitefully driven, especially since the Kyoto Treaty was determined to be flawed, anyway.
In other words, Neo, the data has been catered to create the consequences of Bush's rejection of Kyoto so it can be--after a little re-tweaking-- re-submitted to President McPussy for quick signing on Day One.
That's what it's all about, Neo.
Phelonius said:
"That being said, I DO very much agree that Neo is a cut above the normal there."
Neo's a good-hearted scientist, not a malicious, political ideologue, and we argue in good faith.
John, I have to agree with you about Neo, as well. He is respectful and gives an honest debate rather than personal attacks. :)
Post a Comment
<< Home