This question needs to be asked about McCain's foreign policy gaffes

One time is excusable.  Twice, maybe (but not if it is on the same thing in back to back days).  Three, four, five times?  That is the start of a pattern.  And when it is over and over and over again, well, I think that there really needs to be some further discussion on what has long since passed "pattern" and is now a big concern.

This isn’t like George W. Bush, who was clueless and needed to be coached on the foreign leaders’ names.  This is a man – a Presidential candidate – who has based a large part of his campaign on being more adept at foreign policy, on being more knowledgeable in world affairs, more, well, "everything" than Senator Obama when it comes to foreign policy issues.

And it is not the point as to whether McCain has more years under his belt, especially since those years and experiences include assaulting a foreign diplomat in 1987.  The point isn’t even that McCain is 72 years old, or that he may be....how shall I put this...."showing signs of advanced age" or that McCain doesn’t care about details like when countries ceased to exist.

Ok, so maybe it is all of those.

That being said, the point is, quite frankly, why is he making so many blunders and misstatements about foreign countries, foreign policy and related matters when this is supposed to be his "bread and butter"?

Now, some may want to stay away from directly questioning McCain’s age (not me).  And some may want to stay away from directly asking whether McCain is showing signs of senility or Alzheimer’s (not me).  And some may want to stay away from asking if he is unstable or loose with facts (not me).  And some may want to stay away from directly asking if McCain has suffered from or is suffering from untreated PTSD (again, not me).  While I don’t think any of those are over the line - especially for someone with as much history, as much of an aggressively hostile agenda and as much baggage as McCain - with the Presidency on the line, I still feel that it has to be done with support and not just as a hit job.

But none of the above has to be directly asked or even alluded to if we just simply ask why is John McCain repeatedly making gaffe after gaffe after misstatement after misstatement about every important foreign policy issue and matter that we face – EVEN MORE SO in a post-9/11 world?  (Couldn’t resist on that last part).

• He repeatedly talked about Czechoslovakia well after it ceased to be a country.
• He repeatedly conflated Sunnis and Shiites and Iran, even after being corrected numerous times.
• He said that Pakistan and Iraq share a border, when that is obvious to anyone with a working knowledge of the Middle East.
• He was off by tens of thousands when we was talking about the troop levels in Iraq.
• Of course, there was his 100 or 1,000 years in Iraq comment, that he later tried to "clarify" with some nonsensical explanation of something that was never said by him.
• He screwed up regarding Basra and the ceasefire there.
• He called Putin the President of Germany.
• He confused Somalia and Sudan just last month.

That is just over foreign policy with a very quick search.  Some people have been asking why he is not being held accountable for this.  And some people are wondering when the media will cover this.  But what I want to know is why he keeps making these "mistakes" over and over.  Even if they are innocent mistakes, they are something that cuts right to the heart of his supposed strength.

More importantly, it undermines his credibility on this very supposed strength, and also calls into question all of the other very important questions about McCain’s mental health and state of mind that those who are afraid to ask the most basic questions about McCain would never DARE to ask.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t there.  And it certainly doesn’t mean that it isn’t more than a pattern, and a potentially scary matter.  Our President should be of the highest mental fitness (and our current President certainly showed what can happen when the President is not).  Our President should be clear headed and should not be someone that is so prone to these types of "errors".  If McCain isn’t up to the campaign for President, how can he be up for the job itself?

Even if there is no answer to the question – even if nobody dares to give their opinion as to why he is making all of these foreign policy gaffes over and over and over – the question must be asked.

And even if nobody answers the question, it will still be in the back of people’s minds – without getting to the potentially ugly answers and areas that many people still want to avoid.  Even if it is only the highest and most important position in the country – more so at this time in history.

•  and before anyone lectures about

  "not going there", read my diary from Saturday, and remember that this is all true.  I am not accusing him of anything, but frankly, I don't need to.

  The perception is already out there enough, and if we reinforce it with numerous "McCain moments" and an overriding theme, then we win.

  Big time.

  by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:21:46 PM PDT

  •  We don't have to go there

    We are already there and its a very scary place.  The only way out of our mess is to begin with Obama and to continue for many, many years trying to repair the mess that we have gotten into during the last quarter-century of right wing rule.  It will tax all our good will and industry to just level off and stop the bleeding (real and figurative), and then we have to shift to a productive economy that spreads the benefits of industrialization and automation and decentralizes energy production and decision making.  

    We can't afford McCain moments at all.

    by NearlyNormal on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:27:20 PM PDT

    •  right and we can plant the seed

      without planting the seed.

      I take nothing for granted - especially if McCain starts to go down big in the polls.

      I firmly believe in the "kick em when they are down" - ESPECIALLY when "em" means republicans.

      by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:35:49 PM PDT

      •  in my dream world

        we don't make a fuss about any of this until after the R convention. Who cares about July polls anyway? If McSame goes too badly off the rails before the convention, they just might pull him for all their sakes. 'Course there's no one else on their bench who could sub for him. Even likable ole Huckster would wear pretty thin once folks got a closer look as we approached the general. Mitt's nuthin' but an empty haircut. Rudy's got soooo much baggage it would be al laugher.

        Nope. Just let him keep digging, let him have his glorious moment of being nominated on TV, then get him in ads and debates. It will (almost) be enough to make people feel sorry for the mean dude. Age has nothing to do with it, IMHO. Don't forget, he graduated 5th from the bottom of his 900 student class. He's a disaster waiting to happen. He could ALMOST be outsmarted by Bush, and man , THAT's sayin' something!

        by p gorden lippy on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:43:54 PM PDT

        •  I know that there is a concern

          and I felt that way too about him not ultimately being the nominee, but we aren't too far from the convention and he is a stubborn ass who has a chip on his shoulder against all of the republicans who wrote him off or trashed him.

          He won't give this up.

          by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:46:38 PM PDT

        •  But the media is a willing participant in this

          I really am hoping (expecting) that McCain will screw up royally in the debates, but then I remember the Gore-Bush ones in 2000. "Sighing" aside, Gore completely dominated but to hear the talking heads describe it, you would think that W had performed at an equivalent level.

          Unless McCain truly loses his temper, I have no doubt we are going to get the same kind of reaction, about how Obama was "uneven" and McCain really held his own, or some nonsense like that.

          by billssha on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:59:24 PM PDT

          •  McCain could lose his temper

            or, what I think more likely, he could just lose his train of thought and end up in a "What am I doing here/what am I saying" kind of situation.

            by Calouste on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:08:25 PM PDT

        •  remember last year? I do...

          ...just about everyone here to a man(woman) remarked how blessed our party was to have the field we had running for our nom. And just about everyone here talked about how lame the repub field was and is today. They got nothin' man! If we don't beat those assholes this year, something definitely "stinks in Denmark"! Nobody they got can touch anybody we got! Hands down. Case closed!

          by ImpeachKingBushII on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 03:53:07 PM PDT

    •  Bingo. In fact I support...

      ...the temporary nationalization of the energy and finance industry, and restoring the sovereignty of the United States back into its lawful hands-the PEOPLE! Why should the big oil and energy magnates have control over our energy policy? Why should a handful of fat cat financiers control our money supply and credit?

      They rape, pillage and plunder the American people at the pumps and the other things like homes and cars we buy every day, and no one seems to look-out for us anymore. No more talk. Talk is cheap. Talk and 5 bucks will get you a cup of Joe Latte at Starbucks, and get your country, jobs and financial security talked and sold down the river. America is no longer a sovereign nation, and I want my country back-NOW!

      We The People need to take this country back from the corporatists, starting this year at the ballot box, electing more and BETTER progressive Dems!

      by ImpeachKingBushII on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 03:44:36 PM PDT

      •  Amen.

        by NearlyNormal on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:23:47 PM PDT

  •  I have no idea --

    how the Republicans are going to rescue their candidate this time around.  Election fraud maybe?

    by Cassiodorus on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:41:31 PM PDT

    •  as opposed to

      2000, 2002, 2004 and some races in 2006?

      seems like their tried and true plan for every recent election.  That is why it has to be a blow out.

      by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:47:50 PM PDT

    •  Fraud in not easy with 20+ battleground states

      several with Dem governors and the mother of ground operations on your side.

      by IamTheJudge on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:52:51 PM PDT

      •  How does the Secretary of State situation look?

        Remember it was Ken Blackwell in Ohio who saved W.'s job last time around...

        by Cassiodorus on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:00:31 PM PDT

        •  much better this time around

          and like IamTheJudge says, there are many more states this has to happen in this time - where there was just one in 2000 and 2004.

          by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:08:40 PM PDT

  •  It's not even that

    he said that Iraq and Pakistan share a border, which is bad enough, it's that he answered a question about Afghanistan, which he just heard about 5 seconds ago, by mentioning Iraq and Pakistan, but not Afghanistan. Either he has a really short attention span or some wires have seriously come loose.

    People make mistakes all the time when speaking, but McCain's seem to be fairly serious. The same with the Czechoslovakia incident. The first time might be somewhat excuseable, but that he said it again the next day takes it beyond a normal slip up and into mental or memory issues territory.

    And for the above I'm taking a normal person as a point of reference, not a presidential candidate, 4 term Senator, supposed foreign policy expert.

    by Calouste on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:05:37 PM PDT

•  i couldn't possibly agree more.

  there's a pattern here and it's a disturbing one. it's long past time that questions begin to be asked.

  "after the Rapture, we get all their shit"

  It's time: the albany project.

  by lipris on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:22:56 PM PDT

•  It's ok...he will apoint advisors...

  to think for him.

  by David Kroning on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:23:25 PM PDT

  •  It's been working well so far for him.

    If his advisors get hired and resign as quickly as the last batch, he'll have a lot of new ideas continuously coming his way!

    by dennisl on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:24:27 PM PDT

•  John McCain on the issues:

  Diplomacy:

  "Our country has never had stronger ties with the people of Narnia, and that is as it should be."

  Trade Unions:

  "I respectfully disagree with the leadership of the Lollipop Guild, and submit that their collective bargaining tactics have hurt the pocketbooks of everyday Americans."

  Race Relations:

  "I believe that we are all equal, from the elves of Mirkwood to the Dwarves of Khazad-Dum to the Hobbits of the Shire."

  by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:23:38 PM PDT

  •  John McCain on the issues:

    Terrorism:

    "I want the people of Gotham City to know that we will not stand for the terrorist actions committed by The Joker and his henchmen."

    The Environment:

    "I have supported a $500 million luckdragon-based transportation program to get our country off of foreign oil.

    Missile defense:

    "My missile defense program consists of a net made of magic held in place by pixies."

    by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:28:04 PM PDT

    •  John McCain on the issues:

      Internet Traditions:

      "I am not aware of them."

      by dennisl on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:34:39 PM PDT

      •  You know

        He kinda looks like a Luckdragon.

        by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:35:37 PM PDT

•  He Seems to Have a Basic Confusion

  Regarding some very elemental things.

  For example:

  Which countries exist and which do not.

  Which countries are located where.

  Who inhabits these countries.

  Whether or not we are at war with these countries and, if so, which parties there are our enemies.

  I have to admit that on the last question, I am pretty cloudly myself.  Who are we fighting these days in Iraq, the Shi'a or the Sunnis?

  by bink on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:23:50 PM PDT

  •  to answer your last question

    yes.

    we are fighting both.  Or at least both are fighting us.

    by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:36:50 PM PDT

    •  Thank You

      That is much less confusing than when we kept switching sides.

      by bink on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:37:50 PM PDT

    •  makes sense to me...

      ...if the shoe were on the other foot, and we were invaded , uh, liberated, would they be attacked by Californians or Virginians? I would hope BOTH! Actually, all the 50 United States of America!

      by ImpeachKingBushII on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:34:58 PM PDT

  •  the one's who we aren't paying to leave us alone

    by p gorden lippy on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:49:16 PM PDT

  •  There's always the friend-foe problem --

    This comes up in Douglas Valentine's portrait of him --  he can't tell the difference there, either.

    by Cassiodorus on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:04:24 PM PDT

•  Hell, if anybody calls him on it...

  ...he'll just say, "Well, Liberal Media, there you go again," and the barbeque intoxicated Corporate Owned News (CONs) will all laugh hysterically and shout, "Hip, hip hooray!" and talk about what a mavericky maverick full of maverickness he is...

  by Ken in MN on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:23:59 PM PDT

  •  As Digby puts it...

    "the barbecue-stained media."

    Man, can she ever nail it.

    by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:24:33 PM PDT

    •  I hear it stains worse than...

      ...sappho juice, but instead of giving them mentat abilities, it just makes them look stupid...

      by Ken in MN on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:26:33 PM PDT

    •  Ugh

      Indeed.

      http://www.youtube.com/...

      by bink on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:26:42 PM PDT

      •  Ugh is right!

        A was waiting for a "Totally!" or a "Fur sure!" but could only make it halfway through before I had to turn it off.  Oh, the inhumanity...

        by Ken in MN on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:29:46 PM PDT

    •  If they don't launder their dresses

      we'll have them one day.

      by NearlyNormal on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:28:34 PM PDT

•  Don't you dare call him 'confused!'

  Because the truth makes him look bad and raises unflattering inferences.

  by Geekesque on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:24:08 PM PDT

  •  Reality kicks McCain's ass

    Every hour, on the hour.

    by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:24:55 PM PDT

    •  be nice to the 173 yr old guy.

      not only does he forget where he stashed his teeth, he can't remember if he is supposed to wet his bed or not anymore.

      by agnostic on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:28:23 PM PDT

      •  asdf

        I hear he never forgave his mother for that affair she had with President Taft.

        by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:28:54 PM PDT

      •  173?

        He may be a bit older than that. I seem to recall an Indian legend about "Man who shakes fist at clouds" about some "Insane" maniac who greeted the proto-Indians of 10,000 years ago coming over the land bridge with "GET OFF MY LAWN!"

        by alizard on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:35:00 PM PDT

•  Because "strong" doesn't mean knowing

  anything about anything; it means "willing to bomb the shit out of anyone (brown) who looks at us funny. And joke about it in that macho Republican way."

  by RickMassimo on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:25:25 PM PDT

•  He represents congealed danger...

  all of the wrong things sloppily molded into one horrid possible future for our Nation.

  We've gone down the fool's road and know where it leads. It's time now to return to using our noggins.

  :)

  :::::

  by nowheredesign on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:26:12 PM PDT

•  I agree with your question-raising.

  I've been thinking about some of these very questions. Let's also remember that he takes most weekends off from campaigning, and only has to deflect 50% of the media attention since it is a 2-person race. How would/could he stand up to the constant glare of the Presidency, 24/7 for 4 years. (Gives me the willies just thinking that thought)

  by beegee kochav on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:26:30 PM PDT

•  after ignoring it happily, I put

  the cable news stations on low in the background again.

  I note just how hysterical the mcCainians are about Iraq. They all have the same sad message, the same stalking points and they all talk over anyone else on the air. "Iraq must be allowed to win" & "We must achieve victory on the ground first" & "We need to allow the commanders on the field make all decisions."

  If I recall that tattered, old, worthless document called the constitution, under Article II, the president was the commander in chief and HE/SHE/IT was responsible to make the final decisions on the field.

  by agnostic on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:26:49 PM PDT

  •  you forgot

    "the surge worked"

    by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:41:50 PM PDT

    •  righto. that one, too.

      But I also noticed that the cable 'eads actually quoting Maliki AND stating that his words were not mistranslated.

      No wonder the McCainians are so upset.

      by agnostic on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:44:51 PM PDT

•  Still prefer my explanation that he's a

  stalking horse and that the Republicans will have that fabled "brokered" convention and come up with a younger more mentally agile ticket.
  They really have nothing to lose.
  Meanwhile, all the issues are tested and polled for the next guy out of the gate.

  by hannah on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:27:37 PM PDT

  •  He'll never step aside.

    And they've got nobody.  More likely they're throwing him to the wolves in an unwinnable year.  It's not like they like him.

    Though, truthfully, it would explain the fact that it doesn't look like he wants it very bad.

    by Bindle on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:31:26 PM PDT

  •  Not Sure

    I think he may just be a throwaway candidate for them all-around.  If/when he loses, they will be able to say "well, he was never really one of us anyway."  Difficult climate for any Republican to win, and the best ones likely stayed well away from this cycle.

    by huckleberry on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:32:13 PM PDT

    •  And I'm not sure

      that the GOP even wants to win this Presidential election. So much shit is going to be hitting the fan in the next few years that the best medium-term strategy for the GOP is not to be visibly in power when it does. Then Obama will get the blame for all the unpopular measures needed to clean things up and the GOP will try to pull a '94 in '10 or '12 (the typical voter's political memory is short enough that it would work).

      by ebohlman on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:11:37 PM PDT

  •  I thought so a few weeks ago

    but he will NEVER step aside.  He thinks he has earned it, and will not do anything for the good of those who trashed him over the past few years.

    by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:42:39 PM PDT

  •  Don't think so - they simply miscalculated.

    Guess they were already writing off 2008 - but to Hillary Clinton. They would have mercilessly gone after her, and in 2012 the real candidates would have stepped in.

    Not in their wildest dreams did they reckon with Obama. Oh the irony - kind of like what Clinton did to herself (skip 2004 and have a winner in 2008).

    What should they do? Who wants to replace McCain in 2008 and get buried? But who wants to risk waiting for 2012 and potentially running against a hugely popular president Obama?

    As I said: Even if that had been their calculation, they're pretty much stuck between a rock an a hard place.

    by RandomGuyFromGermany on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:37:38 PM PDT

•  Aside from possible age related memory loss ...

  ... why does he seemingly brag about graduating near the bottom of this class at the Naval Academy? It seems to be a badge of honor for him -- kind of like the way Bush snickers about being a C student.

  Does McCain have contempt for intellectual achievement? Is he such a tough, macho man that he doesn't need all that fancy book learnin'?

  Could this be why people like McCain and Bush easily disregard the findings of scientists and economists, those elitist intellectuals with their degrees and big words?

  Is this man a role model for our leaders of the 21st century?

  by DennisMorrison on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:30:11 PM PDT

  •  Yes.

    Does McCain have contempt for intellectual achievement?

    This strategery is the only one available to the Republicans these days.  Science hates them.  Information hates them.  Best to paint knowledge as an elite thing that we can do without.

    by Bindle on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:33:38 PM PDT

  •  This worked for Bush in 2000, because things were

    going pretty well, and in 2004 because people still wanted a raw instinctive response to 911 vs. a well reasoned balanced response.
    This year people realize stupid is expensive.  Just like generals planning the last war, McCain is running in the last election. This is the year for being smart, and we have a helluva smart candidate.

    by Nailbanger on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:02:05 PM PDT

  •  For what it's worth

    Our only other President to have graduated from the Naval Academy was Jimmy Carter (59th out of 820 students).

    McCain, meanwhile, graduated 894 out of 899.

    Both of those came from Wikipedia. McCain's entry includes an interesting quote about how

    He did not take well to those of higher rank arbitrarily wielding power over him

    So, does that mean McCain is the new Carter?

    by Casual Wednesday on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:44:35 PM PDT

•  I posted another theory on this earlier

  I posited

  a more likely explanation is that he tries to concentrate on his lies talking points so much that he gaffes with the filler.  This whole thing is filled with talking points and using Obama's message against him.  He certainly chose to use the word "judgement" at strategic times.

  And not being a bad actor like Reagan, he probably has a hard time memorizing his lines and focuses on talking points.  In contrast, Obama comes across so smooth because that is what happens when you are honest and sincere.

  Honesty is the best policy, Republican scripts not so much

  by Jeffersonian Democrat on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:32:17 PM PDT

  •  Bingo! McCain is "overscripted"

    And unlike some other Republicans professionally so prepared, he has no talent or skill whatsoever in the thespian department.

    by semiot on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:56:21 PM PDT

    •  yea

      it seems it is the ad lib filler that trips him up.  The stuff to bridge the talking points together coherently.  He has to stoke the main point of muslim enemies and Iran and fit it somehow into his speech that he misses the details of sunnis and shia.  The guy spent 30 years talking about Czechoslovakia, so when he concentrates on the main talking point, his old habit slips him up.

      Like I said, he probably doesn't have good memory for memorizing scripts so he knows what talking points are important to hammer and ad libs the rest.  That's when he slips up, perhaps making a joke to distract.

      by Jeffersonian Democrat on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:06:01 PM PDT

      •  PS and off topic

        great sig

        by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:10:21 PM PDT

•  Here here to this getting recommendations

  by sluggahjells on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:32:34 PM PDT

•  I don't blame the NYT to make McCain

  rewrite his op-ed.

  I want to know what the definition of "victory is" or what "winning the war" means and what "coming home in honor" means.

  Because right now, coming home PERIOD instead of in a coffin is a victory from Iraq and Afghanistan.

  I think this is a turning point, media wise, in asking the right questions of these candidates.

  I am tired of McCain and this "I know how to win wars" talk, so far he is uninspiring and uninformed on the reality of what is REALLY GOING ON in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  by icebergslim on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:32:52 PM PDT

  •  Eh, I sort of find it weird.

    They let Bill Kristol publish his equally vague drivel.

    by dennisl on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:42:48 PM PDT

  •  without commenting on the NYTimes aspect

    I have been asking what "victory" means for years and nobody - wingnut or other - has been able to give me any semblance of an answer.

    by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:44:01 PM PDT

    •  Because there is no victory.

      Not when you invade a country illegally.  Don't have a plan.  Totally clueless on the region and culture.  Have asshats shooting off the hip.

      Then you got what we got out of Iraq.

      FUCKED.

      by icebergslim on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:55:49 PM PDT

      •  Oh, they have a metric for victory, alright.

        It's just not one they ever dare reveal to the American public.

        Victory means getting to garrison Iraq forever, dictate to its puppet government, and monopolize its oil.

        by LanceBoyle on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:15:34 PM PDT

•  I think the bigger question is...

  Why isn't the Obama campaign capitalizing on this?  There should be commercials on this, like yesterday.

  by RichM on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:34:14 PM PDT

  •  I suspect they're saving them up

    Imagine all the gaffes clammy mentioned used in the same commercial spot, and released at just the right time...

    by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:35:06 PM PDT

  •  It's July

    Nobody except us junkies are paying attention. They don't want this to be old hat in September.

    Also, McOld is doing a fine job of digging himself a nice hole on this one. Why get in his way?

    by some other george on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:43:04 PM PDT

    •  Throw him an anvil for a Labor Day gift

      by semiot on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:58:20 PM PDT

    •  correcto mundo!!

      Can you imagine a 30 second ad with JMC's 60+ flip flops at high speed? finishing with Who is the Real McCain?

      by IamTheJudge on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:59:33 PM PDT

      •  My perspective would be...

        McCain is like the weather; if you don't like what he is saying, wait a couple days and he will say what you like.

        by RichM on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:04:04 PM PDT

        •  it would have been easier for him

          but no he is forced to pander out loud to the extreme right

          by IamTheJudge on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:15:36 PM PDT

  •  they may be afraid

    that if they give "Insane" McCain too much help in burying himself, the GOP will find a way to boot his ass off the ticket at the convention and a functioning human being not visibly connected with Bush will come out of a "smoke-filled" room as the new nominee in some VIP suite somewhere near the conventional hall.

    by alizard on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:42:28 PM PDT

•  John McCain Taboo Game

  John McCain would have to explain how he plans on getting out of Iraq without using the following words. He can not use the word condition. He can't use the word surge. He can not mention General Petraeus. I would love to see this.

  by teachingmathnow on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:35:04 PM PDT

•  Updated

  

  by timelad on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:35:09 PM PDT

  •  No more New Yorker Covers!

    Jeebus, weren't you here last week?

    by Bindle on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:37:03 PM PDT

  •  Wow

    That's... great.

    by droogie6655321 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:37:34 PM PDT

  •  I love this

    where did you get it?

    by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:44:55 PM PDT

    •  "Get" it?

      Just me and Mr Shop.

      by timelad on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:46:19 PM PDT

      •  even better

        that is very impressive.

        by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:47:05 PM PDT

        •  I posted one yesterday but

          he hadn't actually come out with the Iraq/Pakistan comment yet, so I was reinspired and redid it.

          by timelad on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:50:00 PM PDT

          •  oh wait yes he had

            but I was just reinspired anyway.

            by timelad on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:51:02 PM PDT

      •  You do good work timelad - timely

        by semiot on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:59:41 PM PDT

    •  You know the original though, right?

      I don't mean I created the whole thing

      by timelad on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:55:15 PM PDT

      •  Steinberg is a personal hero of mine.

        Nicely done.

        by Bindle on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:03:37 PM PDT

      •  yeah, I know the original

        but still, that stuff impresses me...

        by clammyc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:03:50 PM PDT

        •  Oh and thanks n/t

          by timelad on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:09:29 PM PDT

  •  You could change those cars in the foreground

    to resemble tanks a bit more. (They vaguely look like them with the open hoods/trunks as barrels.)

    And maybe add a crashed fighter jet somewhere in Arizona. :)

    by Calouste on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:17:38 PM PDT

•  This is why Obama should want more debates...

  It is best that the public sees his condition for themselves. This election may be, for many, voting for the lessor of two evils.

  Better these weaknesses are not pointed out by the Obama campaign, but left to commentators and the public. If handled without careful delicacy, it could be construed as a young guy beating up on an old man, and elicit sympathy.

  Of course we do have sympathy for those with declining cognitive abilities, but not when they presume to be the one to evaluate fast moving situations and decide on a potential military response.  At that moment it is important to know exactly where Iraq and Pakistan are located.  

  PS, According to Reagan's official biographer, Morris, he never, after being repeatedly corrected, changed his belief that an ICBM once launched could be destroyed in air.  We dodged the bullet once, do we take another chance with a superannuated Commander in Chief.

  by arodb on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:36:27 PM PDT

•  It is sad to me because I know many 70 somethings

  who still have it all. McCain is doing a disservice to them as he is who currently many might judge all elderly people as the one currently most visable. Thank your God for Teddy Kennedy
  Of course I know someelderly folks who have dementia of one kind or another and to varied degrees. McCain exhibits signs of early dementia. That does not disqualify him as from all public activities or service, but it damn well disqualifies him as a President of our country.

  by alasmoses on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:40:20 PM PDT

•  I feel sympathy for the guy

  actually. He hasn't done anything as bad as GWB did because he is not in power yet. I think is he is just a tool for the GOP. He can't think. He is senile. For god sake, he is that old and they force him to do campaigning. Unfortunately, he makes fool of himself.

  by iBlue on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:40:23 PM PDT

  •  Save it

    this is his dream to run and being elected president, that he is running an Alan Keyes' style campaign is nobody's failure but his

    by IamTheJudge on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:02:15 PM PDT

•  Now, now

  We all know that it is Obama who's foriegn affairs knowledge is on trial. McCain is widely recognized as a genuis when it comes to such things. That's what I hear on the MSM every day, it must be true.
  Snark aside, the reason for all this smoke and mirrors with regards to McSame, as well as why all the focus on Wright but nothing comparable on Hagee etc. is that the media wants desperately for this to be a tight race and they know, just like the Republicans, that it won't be unless the media helps McCain out, a lot.
  Blowout races don't generate ratings. No one listens to political pundits when the outcome is obvious. The MSM has to try it's best to paint McCain as a serious, qualified candidate instead of the washed up loser he really is.
  Even they won't be able to hide it forever, too many people are learning that there are other ways to get news.

  by fat old man on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:41:58 PM PDT

  •  they don't want a "tight race"

    the owners of the mass media want "Insane" McCain to win. As increasingly an impossible dream as it seems at this point. Though if higher ratings from a phony "tight race" is the best they can do with this, they'll settle for that.

    They're the people benefiting directly from GOP/DLC-DINO public policy supporting upward transfer of wealth to the Richistani and fear Obama might do something about this.

    by alizard on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 04:48:05 PM PDT

•  McCain's Mental Health

  McCain's thick health file that reporter's were allowed to peek at did NOT include any mental health tests. There was nothing in there to show whether or not he suffered from early senility, or PTSD or simply a decrease in cognitive function.

  McCain was never  the brightest bulb to begin with,  so when he fades, the light gets dim pretty fast.

  by chrisc on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:42:11 PM PDT

•  The over-riding problem

  Is that Senator McFails policies are all foreign. </snark>

  by MA Voter on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 01:54:28 PM PDT

•  well, here's the thing

  the Obama campaign can't go after this, obviously, but we can any time we have anything to do with a media appearance whatsoever.

  McCain's supposed strength is his foreign policy experience.  If he's going to alienate and piss off foreign countries and their leaders by making continual misstatements, then that invalidates his claim.

  My blog. Come visit.

  by hekebolos on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:05:45 PM PDT

•  The Best The GOP Has To Offer

  

  by Diogenes2008 on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:46:50 PM PDT

•  Could he pass a simple geography test?

  Now, I realize that there are sooo many more countries in the world now than there were just 20 years ago, but I have a proposal.

  My poli sci professor made us take map quizzes in every class. (By the fifth class I had with him, the quizzes had become a bit tedious.) The professor's argument was that a serious student cannot talk about Namibia if that student cannot even locate it on a map.

  My proposal is this. Both candidates should be given a map of the world without the countries labeled. They would have to fill in the names of every country in the world. I'll even give them a pass on the capitals, because I could probably only get about half to three-quarters correct.

  The one with the highest grade gets a bonus electoral vote.

  Conversely, any candidate who scores lower than 75% is disqualified from running.

  by Casual Wednesday on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 02:53:54 PM PDT

•  Let's Face It: Clownservatives Have Always

  been full of crap in a major way when it comes to their so-called foreign policy expertise.

  when challenged, they usually melt down in sixty seconds or less and reveal their true colors-- i.e. what passes for "foreign policy" is actually their long held philosophy that the U.S. gets what it wants by bullying the rest of the world, outright intervention in elections (installment of pro-U.S. puppets), covert financial intervention/operations, via the "World Bank" and other such tools, theft, etc.

  by Superpole on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 03:09:02 PM PDT

•  Tip'd & Rec'd...

  for being tactful yet blunt.  :)

  by PvtJarHead on Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 03:52:32 PM PDT