ROTFL! Considering Al Qaeda was TRAINED by Ali Mohammed, a Mukasey/GOP insider CIA agent, what you THINK you KNOW is as WRONG as what you BELIEVE YOU HAVE FAITH IN!!! ROTFL, you people are STUPID ENOUGH to make a T*RD look SMART!!!

Comment by republicans hate facts — February 24, 2008 @ 1:17 am

Ok man-child, are you still denying that bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks? Even after he admitted it in October 2004?

He wrote an inappropriate letter urging officials to act on the matter – which would be beneficial to Paxson, either way it went: either he would move on to other targets and not have to waste any more money pursuing the deal, or they would approve it outright.

I’m surprised you couldn’t see that.

Comment by barfly — February 24, 2008 @ 1:39 am

The problem with this accusation is all of the times McCain went against Paxson. This just doesn’t stick, because voters match up one dubious act against a longstanding record of ethical behavior. You criticize the man that stuck his neck out for campaign finance reform, who went after Abramoff despite alienating his colleagues, who stalks pork barrel spending; I mean, what do you want from your politicians? I guess the empty rhetoric of Obama will suffice, even though he pays lobbyists to run his campaign also, and even though he has this shady Rezko deal lingering over his head. Not to mention the meetings he had with lobbyists for the health insurance industry while in Illinois and how he came down on their side on some issues in the health care debate. I guess in your black and white world, only Republicans can do wrong.

Both parties are corrupt, all politicians have their faults, etc. etc. McCain happens to be a rare exception, in that his record, despite a few blemishes, is not only exceptional in what he doesn’t do (like demand pork), but exception in what he does do, like crusade for responsible government. You’ll never accept that; too bad, because the American public does.

(Of course, Hillary Clinton may still win this race, seeing as the polls in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania are pretty favorable to her. Even if she sweeps it’s a tough road ahead, but if she’s your nominee, good luck. What with Mark Penn’s conflicts of interests, not to mention her high negatives, I’m not quite sure how you’ll handle yourself.)

Since you name no issues on which voters might possibly consider him an agent for change, logic would dictate that you cannot name any issues of this sort. So in other words, you’ve got nada.

Comment by barfly — February 24, 2008 @ 1:30 am

Haha, “logic would dictate,” really? Or, how about I just thought you were smart enough to know what I’m talking about. Alright, I’ll take the bait. How about campaign finance reform? Ethics reform? Going after Abramoff? Pork barrel spending? Immigration (didn’t change anything, but at least he took the lead)? Let’s not forget that he criticized the administration’s handling of the war, called for a troop surge, and may reap the benefits of increasing military and political progress in Iraq. And what has Obama done?

This whole thing has really helped McCain, to be honest.”

Comment by thirdparty

Strike two.

He wrote an inappropriate letter urging officials to act on the matter – which would be beneficial to Paxson, either way it went: either he would move on to other targets and not have to waste any more money pursuing the deal, or they would approve it outright.

I’m surprised you couldn’t see that.

Comment by thirdparty

Since you name no issues on which voters might possibly consider him an agent for change, logic would dictate that you cannot name any issues of this sort. So in other words, you’ve got nada.

Good. It will make his defeat all the more succulent. You’re not seriously thinking an electorate that cries for change will embrace a Bush synchophant, are you? Get ready for a hard landing.

Comment by barfly — February 24, 2008 @ 12:29 am

What I think is that there is plenty of polling data to indicate strong support for McCain. I think it’ll be a competitive election and Obama or Hillary comes in with an edge, but it’s still close. I also think McCain can make a case that he’s been an agent for change on a wide variety of issues, while Obama has a thin record and no real accomplishments to speak of.

Comment by thirdparty

Good. It will make his defeat all the more succulent. You’re not seriously thinking an electorate that cries for change will embrace a Bush synchophant, are you? Get ready for a hard landing.

Actually….Not! This underling RePugniScum suck up says the Paxson owner/CEO/boss is a liar and he knows more than him!! Phuck that shit thirdparty moron!!! Go Stupid somewhere else…’k?

Comment by dixie blood — February 23, 2008 @ 6:29 pm

LOL, to quote Billy Madison:

Mr. Madison, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Comment by thirdparty — February 23, 2008 @ 5:50 pm

Actually….Not! This underling RePugniScum suck up says the Paxson owner/CEO/boss is a liar and he knows more than him!! Phuck that shit thirdparty moron!!! Go Stupid somewhere else…’k?

ROTFL!! I don’t know anything about the keating situation? Says the TARD that makes EXCUSES for a CRIMINAL!!! HYSTERICAL!!

Comment by republicans hate facts — February 23, 2008 @ 3:47 pm

Right. OK, you still don’t address your “knowledge” of the Keating scandal.

This whole thing has really helped McCain, to be honest.
Comment by thirdparty — February 23, 2008 @ 3:19 pm

With whom? The Christians that don’t trust him already, and will trust him less now that they’re reminded what a philanderer he is? Or the non-special interest indy/republican mavericks that will appreciate him being run by special interests, despite his claim to the contrary? Or the ‘honesty’ republicans that appreciate that he was just CAUGHT LYING?

Well perhaps you’re right, but don’t hold your breath! ;)

Comment by republicans hate facts — February 23, 2008 @ 3:55 pm

You’re right…I guess he hasn’t benefited. Oh, wait, not only is the right rallying to him, but he’s rolling in more cash now!

Comment by thirdparty — February 23, 2008 @ 3:19 pm

Only among the rabid right, the braindead rovots of the “base”, all 19%. that’ll be a big help in November!

Comment by thirdparty — February 23, 2008 @ 3:19 pm

Unless, of course, the NY Times has laid a trap for Sen. McCain. All those years in the Senate….shoes may be dropping all the way until November.Sen. McCain may start to regret those absolute denials soon.

From todays NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/us/politics/23lobby.html?ref=us

WASHINGTON — In late 1998, Senator John McCain sent an unusually blunt letter to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, warning that he would try to overhaul the agency if it closed a broadcast ownership loophole.

Comment by thirdparty — February 23, 2008 @ 3:25 pm

Well, I stand corrected. last time I checked, he wasn’t on that list. Now, your claim that Bin Laden took responsibility for the attacks is also a lie, as is the proof of guilt. I’m reasonably certain that there is no proof, and that Bin Laden has only shown up on the list because of official embarrassment and pressure, given the lack of morals of this administration, and its inability to stay within the guidelines of the law. he is still innocent until caught and tried (which will never be allowed under a bush regime, since they have been in business together for decades), so Dean’s comment is no “gaffe’, as much as you’d like to finish destroying the constitution and rule of law. I have no anger management problems, by the way, my anger is completely justified, especially when morons like you take the side of our enemies and supporte the state-sponsored terrorism of Bush and Cheney. As for pulling things out of your ass, you’re the expert here. Like excusing McCain for the Keating fiasco. You people have no shame, and no patriotism whatsoever. mcCain is a war criminal, and his POW peers hate him, calling him “Songbird” in honor of his cowardice. he’s another perfect failure as a Republican candidate.

yes, it’s a “gaffe” to assume innocence before guilt is proven. you do realiza, don’t you, 3rdpoopy, that Bin laden is not on the FBI’s Most Wanted list, right? that’s a “gaffe” too, right? you ignorant shit.

Comment by Lefty Patriot — February 23, 2008 @ 2:52 pm

You have anger management problems. Don’t worry, I’ll make them worse by the end of this post. But let me just say that it was a gaffe because bin Laden has taken responsibility for the attacks.

Now, why are you about to get angrier? Because you made a completely false statement. “Bin laden is not on the FBI’s Most Wanted list” you say? How do you explain this.

Do you usually pull nonsense out of your ass?

You’re defending MR KEATING FIVE as being ETHICAL when YESTERDAY A THREAD POINTED OUT HE’D ALREADY EXPLICITLY LIED about this INTERACTION? ROTFL you REPUBLICANS ARE DUMB!

Comment by republicans hate facts — February 23, 2008 @ 1:56 pm

The Democrat who was the lawyer who investigated this said that he wanted to get McCain cleared, but the Democrats wouldn’t allow it since there would be only Dems getting grilled for a month of hearings. So, they didn’t want to let McCain off the hook. You don’t know anything about the Keating situation, you just want to slam McCain no matter whether it’s truthful or not.

McCain’s imploding on Huffpo. He even lied to his lawyers – not that’s a definite no-no. Now the lawyers are saying – what’s the difference between McCain saying he did not have direct contact with Paxson and Paxson now stating that he did – the difference is ONE HUGE LIE.

Comment by satirev — February 23, 2008 @ 1:47 pm

That’s the problem. He’s “imploding on Huffpo”; too bad that Huffpo isn’t the Drudge Report, which actually drives news coverage. Huffpo can get worked up about this all it wants…the truth is this story lacks traction.

Maybe you only read their headline, but you should consider the entire “What’s the difference” explanation here. The point is that there never was a denial that Paxson wanted help. Also, what’s important here is whether McCain used his influence improperly. While I think this clearly looks “unusual,” we have to keep in mind that he never asked the FCC to act in Paxson’s favor. Unless he did, this won’t resonate with the public.

This whole thing has really helped McCain, to be honest.

gee, too bad that it’s exactly what McStain did. A traitor, giving up secrets in Viet Nam, an embezzler, and now a proven liar, and you think the left is afraid of him?

LOL!!!

New Hampshire’s Concord Monitor reported that Dean said he would not state his preference on a punishment for bin Laden before the al Qaeda leader was captured and put before a jury.

Comment by thirdparty — February 23, 2008 @ 1:21 pm

yes, it’s a “gaffe” to assume innocence before guilt is proven. you do realiza, don’t you, 3rdpoopy, that Bin laden is not on the FBI’s Most Wanted list, right? that’s a “gaffe” too, right? you ignorant shit.