John McCain is an Asshole

And Sarah Palin is a moron.

19 Responses to “John McCain is an Asshole”

  1. ericsan Says:

    Thank you Captain Obvious… 🙁

  2. Alex Says:

    It’s sad that in an country which considers itself to be the premier example of democracy, and which purports to teach democracy to other countries at gunpoint, one candidate refuses to shake the hand of the other because what is left of the first candidate’s platform is the demonization of the other.

    It is sadder yet that in today’s America dissent is so often seen as treason. Actually, it’s fucking ridiculous. Here in Canada we have 3, (well, okay, 4) political parties jockeying for position and, as usual, none has anything good to say about the other. But no matter how heated the discourse, I can’t imagine any of the leadership candidates questions the patriotism of the others.

    What kind of example is America setting for the world?

  3. Sue Blue Says:

    I’d have to say that John McCain is actually what comes out of an asshole….the kind of dump that really stinks up the bathroom and lingers forever.

    Sarah Palin should have stuck to beauty pageants.

  4. ericsan Says:

    That would make Palin an upperdecker.

  5. Whoa Says:

    The even more disturbing thing is the comments on the handshake video.

    Even taking into account the usual trolls that’s still an alarming amount of insanity.

  6. S. Says:

    typical of McCain..can’t be a good sport,can’t shake hands.we do NOT need that jerk in D.C.!

  7. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Okay, seriously. McCain is an asshole but getting bent out of shape over his (lack of) handshake is really screwed up priorities. Now, don’t get me wrong, I hate McCain and I do personally believe this was deliberate, but let me play Devil’s Advocate here. What if it wasn’t? What if he was just trying to introduce his wife to Obama? Again, I don’t personally believe it, but let’s get some perspective here! There are millions of reasons to not vote for McCain other than a handshake!

    At a rally the other day, McCain actually defended Obama when his racist irate crowd was calling him a secret Muslim and so on. Now, that doesn’t excuse his massive amount of lies that whipped the crowd into the ferver it was in, but at the same time, it does show that there is a teeny tiny microscopic shred of deceny left in the man and maybe he feels a little bad for what he did.

    So, in conslusion, McCain = assholes, yes. No doubt. But let’s vote for Obama because he’s the better candidate with better ideas, not because McCain is a whiny bitter old man (which he is) who didn’t shake hands with his opponent.

  8. Ron Britton Says:

    I’m not saying “Don’t vote for McCain because he’s an asshole.” I’m saying “Don’t vote for McCain because of all of those other reasons. Oh, and look! He also happens to be an asshole!”

  9. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Indeed. That was more directed toward Alex/S than you, Ron. Damn these intertubes! 😉

  10. S. Says:

    oh that is the least of the reasons I refuse to vote for him..it’s just typical of him,overall.
    Yes,what’s more important is that if anyone can get us out of the mess the repubs have created,it will surely be Obama.

  11. ron Says:

    McCain only defended Obama in public for show. He’s the asshole behind the lies that Obama is a terrorist, traitor, etc.

  12. Richard Buchner Says:

    Can any one of these men running for President stop the name calling. Most of the crap they talk about has nothing to do with running this country. They should act like grown mature men with class and pride. Not assholes there both assholes face it. Are they supose to be profesionals ???????

  13. Brian Says:

    Richard,

    I wonder which election you are paying attention to. I’ll grant you partial credit for your correct assessment of John McCain’s “campaign”, but I’m afraid I must take issue with your disparagement of Barack Obama and his campaign.

    Can any one of these men running for President stop the name calling.

    On a rational level, I can’t fault the basic premise of your statement. I don’t care for the name-calling either. In fact, I take it as an insult to my intelligence whenever I hear a candidate use terms like “Muslim” or “socialist” to describe the other guy. But for better or for worse, this is how American politics is conducted, and as much as we might lament it, most other countries are no better, and at least here we possess the freedom to speak our minds, however disturbing the contents therein might be.

    Also, I’d point out that calling your opponent out over his positions on issues or his voting history does not constitute gutter politics. If Barack Obama really did advocate socialism, past or present, then the label would be appropriate. John McCain has (very sparingly) been called “erratic” by Obama, and while McCain supporters might bristle at the term, I would submit that “erratic” is actually a pretty fair description of how McCain’s campaign has operated.

    Before responding to your comment I tried very hard to find any insulting comment toward McCain or Palin by the Democratic ticket. I could not come up with anything remotely acerbic save the example I referenced above. Perhaps it’s a matter of semantics in which I see valid criticism while you see a schoolyard insult.

    Most of the crap they talk about has nothing to do with running this country.

    Again, you only got it half-right. Obama has spoken cogently about taxes, the economy, health care, foreign policy, energy, and climate change, among other subjects to the point of wonkishness. I would contend that these issues about which he speaks have everything to do with running this country.

    They should act like grown mature men with class and pride. Not assholes there both assholes face it. Are they supose to be profesionals ???????

    Perhaps you did not see the debates. Via split-screens, we could watch Obama react to McCain, and visa versa. Whereas McCain looked exasperated, angry, and bellicose, Obama was as cool as the other side of the pillow (my thanks to Stuart Scott for that one). If you watch the video above, you can see one candidate attempting to be civil and gracious, and the other, well, not.

    Perhaps, Richard, you are one of the “undecided” voters we still hear so much about. I have to admit that I am curious as to how you could have managed to remain so uninformed about each candidate to this point that your only impressions are reminiscent of the typical stereotype most Americans apply to politicians. So while I think your comment is dead-on when describing John McCain, I think it must be accidental. Clearly you have not been paying attention. I do not say that because you might end up voting for McCain. I think his supporters have been paying very close attention (although I’d guess that most of them can’t bring themselves to watch the poll numbers anymore) even though I thoroughly disagree with their conclusions. I say that because the Barack Obama you describe is nothing more than a shadowy figment of the GOP’s, and your, imagination.

  14. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Fox News does a pretty good job of making Democratic candidates sound as “in the gutter” as Republicans. The fact is, on a national level, this is not the case in this election, as Brian so elloquently pointed out. On a local level, this is more common. Kay Hagan has been running as many negative ads as Elizabeth Dole, based on my observations while watching the teevee (NC senate race). There are policy ads from both candidates as well. I’d rather not see negative ads from either, but in a 30 second ad sound-byte, you are not exactly going to hear a lot of policy points anyway, even if policy is the main topic. Besides, if you vote based on teevee ads, you are an incredibly incompetent voter.

    If you want policy points, go to the candidates’ websites. If you are able to read and post here at BoF, you are more than capable of reading the detailed plans of each candidate on their websites! Short of that, you will actually hear a nice chunk of policy at rallies (inbetween hyperbole and cheerleading). Short of that, you can read your local newspaper for policy information. Short of that, you can watch your local teevee news reporter. Short of that, you can listen to your local morning show radio station. How on earth can you NOT know what each candidate stands for?

    I’m tired of the “nobody is talking about policy” ranting. It is absolutely NOT TRUE. I agree with Brian that McCain seems to be talking a lot less about policy at his rallies and in his interviews than Obama, but he still mentions policy, never-the-less. If you want policy, it’s out there! Look for it! Don’t expect it to be spoon-fed in the teevee commercials. If you are truly a policy-voter, you wouldn’t be complaining about how you don’t know what each candidate stands for, when they both have laid out very detailed plans and it is readily available for consumption at their respective websites.

    I’m Parrotlover77, and while I approve this message, Rupert Murdoch and Bill O’Reilly do not, because they know that a dumb and/or suppressed electorate favors their political views, whereas an educated and active electorate does not.

  15. Brian Says:

    Parrotlover,

    I’m not trying to derail the topic of this page, but you offered me an irresistible segue for this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/29/dole-ad-fabricates-audio_n_138874.html

    While I’d absolutely love for Hagan to win this race, I have to say I’m more than disappointed that she didn’t state the obvious: atheists are not a threat to America. Here we have two candidates trying to out-Jesus the other, making rational, critical-thinking people such as ourselves seem as if we’re the taint of human society. Not that any of this is new, of course, but one would hope a Democrat might be more ecumenical in his or her response to a charge of atheism.

    All of which has gotten me to thinking (again) about the future of religion in our politics. I read elsewhere today a blogger stating that liberals have won the culture wars, apparently letting an election that hasn’t happened yet go to his head. Naturally, I’d like to think he’s right, but I’m not so sure I can.

    Maybe I’ll feel better about it if Prop 8 in California goes down in a well-deserved defeat, and if McCain doesn’t manage to pull this thing out and proceed to get medieval on the Supreme Court. But there are still millions of credulous dopes out there, clutching their bibles and praying to Jesus for someone – anyone – who might be electable enough to usher in the theocracy they so desperately crave. Perhaps only then will the culture wars end. Once the rights we’ve come to assume were inalienable become relics of the past, we might finally put our collective foot down to the clerics and tell them enough is enough. I fear that until the threat becomes a reality, we won’t take it seriously and will instead dismiss it as hysterical liberal ranting.

    Just because the good guys are on the verge of winning big, we cannot afford to think those who want to regress to the 12th century are going to go away quietly and peacefully. They’re in this for all eternity, literally speaking, so something as trivial as an election won’t dissuade them from their regressive goals.

    OK, I’m done now. My wife is yelling at me to start painting our boys’ room. I’d better get started if I know what’s good for me…..

  16. Parrotlover77 Says:

    While I’d absolutely love for Hagan to win this race, I have to say I’m more than disappointed that she didn’t state the obvious: atheists are not a threat to America. Here we have two candidates trying to out-Jesus the other, making rational, critical-thinking people such as ourselves seem as if we’re the taint of human society. Not that any of this is new, of course, but one would hope a Democrat might be more ecumenical in his or her response to a charge of atheism.

    I agree whole-heartedly. I didn’t vote for her in the primaries (far too middle-road for me). I would have prefered Jim Neal (can you imagine an openly homosexual senator from NC???), although there’s probably no way he would beat Dole.

    Hagan, with all her faults, is still a hell of a lot better than Liddy. The worst thing about the whole “atheist” commercial has been the response. I mean we expect Republicans to pull this kind of shit. But good Democrats are rallying to Kay’s side as if she had been called a nazi or some other equally repulsive label. I heard on the Bill Press show where Bill was talking about how awful and slanderous the implication was to such a good Christian as Kay. It made me so angry that being called an atheist is an insult. Imagine if when Bill Clinton was ribbed for being tongue-in-cheek called the “first black president” if everybody would have gotten offenseive for calling him black? Can you possibly imagine?

    So, yes, I’m disappointed in Kay’s response, but I also recognize the necessity of it, because most of my fellow North Carolinians do consider the word “atheist” an insult and would vote for Liddy instead of Kay on that reason alone, were it true.

    It’s very sad.

  17. Forbes Says:

    You guys are just mean and nasty! John McCain is a true patriot and deserves your deepest respect. Look at the facts: When he was rotting in a Hanoi prison he sacrificed and let his fellow prisoners leave before him. Now lately he has done some rather strange things and there are those people who are rushing to judge him – quite unfairly, I think.

    Let us be more generous in our praise of John McCain.
    Let us look more closely at this brilliant man (yes, we can even overlook that D average he got at military college).

    More important, we can simply consider the facts:
    John McCain ran in 2000 and was trashed by the Rove/Bush smear machine. He then had to endorse George Bush for president. He tried to push the Republican Party in new directions. They derided him. They called him a maverick. When he started his own run for the presidency they sneered at him and he had to come crawling to get their support. One can imagine the humiliation, the sacrifice of principles that he had to endure. But is he sinking so low? Perhaps he has a plan – a wonderful patriotic and grinch-like plan!

    The plan: PRETEND TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT BUT MAKE SURE YOU LOSE!
    Step 1: Avoid a solid platform with intelligent plans.
    Step 2: Suck up to the right-wing nutters.
    Step 3: Go negative and attack with strategies directly from the Rove play book.
    Step 4: Pick Sarah Palin as a running mate. (I rest my case).

    There we have it. Just like in Hanoi he sees that it is more patriotic to let the more deserving man go first. Hidden agenda: John McCain gets his revenge on the Republican Party and the USA gets a President who can actually bring it to the greatness to which it aspires. SO: John McCain IS A PATRIOT.

  18. Ron Britton Says:

    By Jove! I think you’re right!

  19. Andrew N.P. Says:

    Forbes, you forgot the last part:

    Step 5: ????
    Step 6: PROFIT!

    But I must admit, there’s a certain appeal to your suggestion. There’s a way McCain could have won this election. It would have been difficult — perhaps extremely so — but still possible. Instead, he’s embraced the same strategy that was responsible for the Great Ass Whoopin’ of 2006: energize the base and screw everyone else. It’s almost too incompetent. Even for McCain.